Aionios in 2Tim 1:9, Titus 1:2 and Rom 16:25

[Paidion]

“I had to wait in the queue for ages.” Or “I had to wait in the queue for lasting times.”

Yes, I think your idea makes sense. In that case, there would certainly be a “before lasting times.” Or today we might refer to “lasting times” as “a long time” although “before a long time” doesn’t seem to fit present English usage—perhaps “before a long time had passed.” Indeed this may be the answer!
Let’s see how this would fit in the three passages you brought up:

In 2 Tim 1:9
God saved us according to his purpose and grace before a long time had passed.

In Titus 1:2
God promised lasting life before a long time had passed.

In Rom 16:25-27
The gospel, leading to the obedience of faith among the Gentiles, was kept secret for a long time, but has now been made known by the lasting God.

This seems to fit well. Thank you, Craig, for sharing your thoughts on this matter. As a result, these three passages make sense to me for the first time!

[Craig]

I am really pleased you found the discussion helpful, Paidion. I likewise always find your thoughts helpful. Indeed, I was only really trying to build on the thoughts you have expressed concerning aionios meaning “lasting" to see if there was any way that it might be the meaning here in these passages as well.

I think the sense of “before a long time had passed” that you have suggested may be a little different to “a long time ago” that I had in mind, but that is OK. I am glad that in pursuing “lasting” as the meaning for aionios we are seeing some viable options for what “before aionios times" may mean.

I haven’t totally ruled out other meanings such as “before the times of the coming age” (but my friend would have to be wrong about the Greek in Rom 16:25), or "before the times of all the ages” (but the word “promise” would have to include “plans”, and it has the problem of time not existing “before” creation).

The main thing in the overall picture is that aionios can’t really mean “eternal” or “everlasting” in these passages, and we have some other viable options for what it can mean.

I found a quote from Sonia (SLJ) very helpful from a long time ago (before aionios times? )

When I was first looking into UR, I spent a lot of time on aionios, trying to answer the question: Does the word have to mean “endless” in all instances? And it seems clear to me that it does not.

These passages from the OP demonstrate this.
Sonia continued,

Another question to ask is: Is something which is described as “αἰώνιος” or “eternal” necessarily and immutably fixed in that state? To that I would also answer “No.” One quick illustration of this is the “everlasting priesthood” of Aaron and his descendants and the everlasting statues and covenant, which were superceded by the priesthood of Christ and the new covenant. Those “everlasting” things are described in the book of Hebrews as old and obsolete and in the process of disappearing.

[Melchizedek]

Since the ages have been discussed in this thread; here is an interesting take on the ages:

martintrench.com/the-ancient-bib … es-series/

[anon47460357]

An interesting use of the word is found in the Homily of the Epistle of Saint Paul to the Ephesians, written by Chrysostom. He wrote that the kingdom of Satan “is αἰωνιος (agey), in other words it will cease with the present αἰων (age).” So Chrysostum apparently believed that “αἰωνιος” meant exactly the opposite to “eternal”! ---- that is “temporary.”

Thanks for sharing that.

[davo]

@Melchizedek

Since the ages have been discussed in this thread; here is an interesting take on the ages:

martintrench.com/the-ancient-bib … es-series/

Hi Melchizedek… it was interesting and firmly in the ‘covenant eschatology’ aka prêterism camp, and bang on the money IMO; take these quotes for example…

I discovered that the Bible speaks about:
• the end of the age – NOT the end of the world
• two main ages are discussed – the passing Old Covenant age, and the new age which arrived in Christ, and the transition period between those two ages

So, why is it so obscure?
Why would the authors of the Bible not make it clearer? Well, clearer to whom? It was very clear to them and to their hearers/readers. They were very familiar with the meaning of the terms “Age” and “Age-enduring” and so they never stop to explain exactly WHAT they mean by those terms, because their readers KNEW what those terms meant.

As we shall see later on, the term “Age” was connected to their calendar, (it was a specific period of time which they could calculate) and there are a whole series of “Ages” mentioned in the Bible, however, lets start (in the next few posts) by simply looking at the two Ages we have mentioned already (the End of the Old Covenant Days during the “Last Days” and the beginning of the New Covenant Age) and how they relate to Jesus prediction in his Olivet Prophecy (his explanation to his disciples, as they sat on the Mount of Olives, where he explained what would happen within one generation).

The “End of the Age” was going to happen within one generation of Jesus prediction, and the people who lived during that final generation were living in the “Last Days” of that “Age” which was coming to an “End”. And what “Age” was that which was coming to an “End”? It was the Old Covenant Age. From the time of Abraham to the time of Jesus the descendants of Abraham had lived under a Covenant with God. That Covenant was to last for an “Age”.

Part 3 – Kiss my Left Behind! : Matthew 24 Fulfilled!
Matthew chapters 23-25 contain the only major prophecy delivered by Jesus. It is often misapplied to our generation – many people thinking that the things predicted (including a great tribulation etc) are going to happen either in our lifetime or in our future – however it is ignorance of history and shallow reading of the passage itself that leads to that belief. If we knew history, we would know that everything Jesus predicted has already happened.

Well, there is more to Matthew 24 and in fact the prophecy continues in Matthew 25 – but you get the idea: This passage has nothing to do with global events in our time or in our future. The Old Covenant was rendered obsolete at the cross, and it finally passed away in AD 70. The Age had ended.

The beginning of Revelation – The revelation from Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show his servants what must soon take place. (1:1)
The end of Revelation – “Do not seal up the words of the prophecy of this book, for the time is near.” (22:10)
And multiple “soon” verses throughout the book. Revelation was also about events about to be fulfilled in the first century AD. And the structure of the book parallels Jesus Olivet prophecy exactly, but with some added detail and extra meat on the bones.

[Paidion]

The beginning of Revelation – The revelation from Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show his servants what must soon take place.(1:1)

“εν ταχει” does not necessarily mean “soon”; it can mean “speedily.” With the latter meaning, it could simply indicate that the length of time from the beginning of the events until the their end will be short. It does not necessarily indicate that the events will occur soon after the time in which the author wrote the words.

[Nicholas]

“εν ταχει” does not necessarily mean “soon”; it can mean “speedily.” With the latter meaning, it could simply indicate that the length of time from the beginning of the events until the their end will be short. It does not necessarily indicate that the events will occur soon after the time in which the author wrote the words.

Rev:001:003 Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words
of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written
therein: for the time is at hand.
Rev:022:010 And he saith unto me, Seal not the sayings of the
prophecy of this book: for the time is at hand.

OK, soon can mean speedily. What does “at hand” mean?

Nicholas

[davo]

The beginning of Revelation – The revelation from Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show his servants what must soon take place.(1:1)

“εν ταχει” does not necessarily mean “soon”; it can mean “speedily.” With the latter meaning, it could simply indicate that the length of time from the beginning of the events until the their end will be short.

Yes that’s fair enough… and that indeed fits the prophesied time-frame AD66-70 i.e., the apocalyptic 3½yrs – 42mths – 1260 days etc; or as Jesus put it…

Mt 24:22 And unless those days were shortened, no flesh would be saved; but for the elect’s sake those days will be shortened.

…IOW, when these things begin it will all happen “quickly” – which in their day on their horizon would indeed be “shortly” or “at hand”.

[Paidion]

So … taking it a “speedily”, that is, that the duration of events from beginning to end are short, fits both the preterist and futurist paradigms.

[davo]

So … taking it a “speedily”, that is, that the duration of events from beginning to end are short, fits both the preterist and futurist paradigms.

Relatively speaking… however, IMO prêterist assumptions follow more faithfully the intent of prophetic texts, viewing such in the light of the historic events that imminently ensured in that biblical period; thus leave little to no space for the wild and exaggerated exuberance of futurism’s ever-evolving “yet to happen” scenarios.

[Agnostic_Gabe]

So … taking it a “speedily”, that is, that the duration of events from beginning to end are short, fits both the preterist and futurist paradigms.

Relatively speaking… however, IMO prêterist assumptions follow more faithfully the intent of prophetic texts, viewing such in the light of the historic events that imminently ensured in that biblical period; thus leave little to no space for the wild and exaggerated exuberance of futurism’s ever-evolving “yet to happen” scenarios.

Amen to this.

[Eaglesway]

What things it behooves to take place in quickness. (Biblehub interlinear).

en tachei Definition: quickness, speed; hastily, immediately- Strong’s

Of course, if it is understood as IMMEDIATELY or right NOW and it is written for those who have “ears to hear what the Spirit is saying to the churches”, it is a message in spiritual pictures concerning spiritual realities that are always concurrent for any reader in any generation of this age among the ecclesia, hence elevating the spiritual messages above ANY historic considerations and rendering…

“Look, I am coming soon! Blessed is the one who keeps the words of the prophecy written in this scroll.”

…as very immedite.

Come quickly Lord Jesus.

The Lord is always coming. The wedding fest is always happening, and the invitation is sent- the highways and the hedges are invaded., is your vessel full of oil O ye virgins? The end of the age is when you die(as far as “you” are concerned in any generation). No man knows the day or the hour. The thief will take the sleeper unaware but those who walk as children of the day will keep the words of the scroll whenever they are on the stage of time.

“AWAKE O SLEEPER AND ARISE FROM AMONGST THE DEAD AND THE LIGHT OF CHRIST WILL SHINE ON YOU”.

[davo]

…it is a message in spiritual pictures concerning spiritual realities that are always concurrent for any reader in any generation of this age among the ecclesia, hence elevating the spiritual messages above ANY historic considerations and rendering…

IMO… that’s the sort of “theological blancmange” that reduces the text to the level of one’s own creativity to have it saying just what you want.

[Eaglesway]

Not at all. It takes a lot of interpretation from any view to read the apocalypse of John. If you see how the prophets spoke to Israel, there were some historical images, but most of them were visions that pertained to the current spiritual state of the nation. Hosea, Jeremiah, Isaiah, Ezekiel… many, many similar picture images of spiritual reality in their time that apply through out time to anyone with ears to hear and eyes to see.

A dirty rag hidden in some rocks… a watchman’s hut in a cucumber field… a beloved wife become a harlot in chains…

As a matter of fact, most of the prophecies that had any historical context past or future were tied to the current spiritual state God was speaking to through the prophet.

That is clearly a primary method of speaking throughout the prophets.

Then you have Jesus… His parables were often images speaking to contemporary spiritual conditions and images expressing various elements of the Kingdom of God and the nature of it and life in it- corporately and individually.

Why it would seem “blancmange” to read the apocalypse of John in a similar manner to that which YHWH has used to express Himself to His people for thousands of years seems to me a surprisingly quick knee jerk reaction from your own doctrinal jail-cell, and an unwillingness to listen to anything that does not reaffirm your own narrow position.

[davo]

Why it would seem “blancmange” to read the apocalypse of John in a similar manner to that which YHWH has used to express Himself to His people for thousands of years seems to me a surprisingly quick knee jerk reaction…

It’s not a “quick kneejerk reaction”… we’re reading someone else’s mail. To extrapolate as you have in your previous post above is to ignore the audience to whom such was written and to over-ride such by interpolating your own (or whomever else’s) story into or onto the text, THUS reading right over what was being said AND understood (let him who has ears… etc) by those to whom SUCH WAS written.

For example… your “The Lord is always coming. The wedding fest is always happening” is bunkum, i.e., they were one off events and there is NO scriptural warrant for saying otherwise. What YOU are postulating (and you’re free to do it) is YOUR OWN theological spin, which again is fine so long as you own it yourself and not have Scripture saying what it plainly does NOT say.

Finding ‘spiritual applicability’ from the truths of Scripture and making ‘personal relevance’ from this to one’s life is fine and good; BUT to imply this is that by your blanket statements (which seems to me what you are saying… pardon me IF I’m wrong) goes “beyond what is written” – something even Paul cautioned against.

[davo]

OT passages were taken out of their original, apparent context and given new meaning.

Yes indeed… aka ‘prophetic recapitulation’, but that wasn’t what Eagles was saying/doing, and thus not what I was pointing out.

OT prophecy was more than mere predictive foretelling, but more so prescriptive forth-telling, telling forth the Word of God. Certain “events” were foretold, while on other occasions the prophet’s utterance told forth or was instructive of God’s will to be followed, and or their response to it etc.

In relation to “events” – prophecies were fulfilled in that OT setting – however, it was not unusual for Jesus to use such past fulfillment as a “type” of whatever it was that Jesus was speaking to, and thus it became the antitype. So it wasn’t so much a case of “multiple fulfilments” but the reapplying of the meaning of such a fulfillment.

One way to understand this is Jesus’ words in relation to the Scriptures or OC tradition when he said – “you have heard it said… but I say to you…” Jesus’ reinterpretation or reapplication is the recapitulation of what has gone before – but with a renewed and somewhat fulfilled or completed meaning i.e., its ultimate end – and that always in light of the NC, of which all of OC history was ultimately pointing. And we know that all redemptive history of which much was expressed through the prophetic came to fruition and fulfillment within Jesus’ “this generation” timeframe AD30-70, culminating with ‘the Day of the Lord’ circa AD70.

Consider this… IF “prophecy” is seen in terms of popular “multiply fulfillments” then it is only natural to ask – how many times does prophecy get fulfilled before it is really fulfilled? Prophecy just becomes an endless loop slavishly bound to the next imaginative theory or timetable espoused. So you see what western Christianity has done? It’s made us think metaphorically about simple time statements but then think very literally about symbolic metaphors. It’s all backwards, i.e., the cart before the horse.

[davo]

In relation to “events” – prophecies were fulfilled in that OT setting – however, it was not unusual for Jesus to use such past fulfillment as a “type” of whatever it was that Jesus was speaking to, and thus it became the antitype. So it wasn’t so much a case of “multiple fulfilments” but the reapplying of the meaning

of such a fulfillment.

What you’re saying sounds like a roundabout way of concurring that prophesies could have double fulfillment. You don’t believe in double prophecy?

You’re right, I don’t believe in “double prophecy”… but that isn’t prophetic recapitulation. Daniel for example prophetically speaks of Antiochus Epiphanes, and yet Jesus uses or borrows and reapplies the same prophetic language in speaking of the coming conflict with Rome.

Biblical prophetic fulfillment (NOT double) can be found in the likes of Peter’s this IS that motif of…

Acts 2:16-17ff But this is what was spoken by the prophet Joel:

‘And it shall come to pass in the last days, says God,…

Peter’s “this is what” means THEY NOT WE were living in the living in “the last days” – which many a passage (as you would know) in the NT rightly affirms.

I’m no saying there definitely will be a future end times, just that i don’t think it can be ruled out given that Jesus and the NT writers showed that the grammatical-historical hermeneutic is not the only valid way to interpret scripture.

I tend to go with of the ‘narrative-historical hermeneutic’ espoused by Andrew Perriman.

[Paidion]

I tend to take our Lord’s predictions in the literal sense, if that sense makes sense. Matthew 24 seems to be the preterist “stronghold.” But I have major problems with assigning the events therein described, to the fall of Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple around 70 A.D.

For as the lightning comes from the east and shines as far as the west, so will be the coming of the Son of Man. Wherever the corpse is, there the vultures will gather. Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. Then will appear in heaven the sign of the Son of Man, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And he will send out his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other (Matthew 24: 27-31 ESV)

Did the coming of the Son of Man occur around 70 A.D.? Did He gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other? Was the sun darkened? Did the moon not give its light? Did the stars fall from heaven?

I don’t know why translators render the word “αστραπη” as “lightning.” It should be translated as “lighting.” It refers to the lighting of the sun that appears to come from the east (at sunrise) and shines to the west (later in the day). Everyone sees the sunrise and the sunset. So it will be when Christ returns. Everyone will see Him. Jesus Himself warned against those who claim a secret coming.

So, if they say to you, ‘Look, he is in the wilderness,’ do not go out. If they say, ‘Look, he is in the inner rooms,’ do not believe it. For as the lighting [of the sun] comes from the east and shines as far as the west, so will be the coming of the Son of Man. (Matthew 24:26,27)

The fact that everyone will see Him at his coming is also verified in Revelation:

Behold, He is coming with clouds, and every eye will see Him, even they who pierced Him. And all the tribes of the earth will mourn because of Him. (Revelation 1:7 ESV)

Thus we can be sure that when Jesus returns, everyone will know it. But no one knew of any coming of Christ in 70 A.D. Josephus who wrote in detail of the events concerning the fall of Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple around 70 A.D. never referred to that coming. The Christians of the second century never mentioned it, and there is no historical record of it. So if He came in 70 A.D. one may say that “no eye ever saw Him.”

[maintenanceman]

I tend to take our Lord’s predictions in the literal sense, if that sense makes sense. Matthew 24 seems to be the preterist “stronghold.” But I have major problems with assigning the events therein described, to the fall of Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple around 70 A.D.

For as the lightning comes from the east and shines as far as the west, so will be the coming of the Son of Man. Wherever the corpse is, there the vultures will gather. Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. Then will appear in heaven the sign of the Son of Man, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And he will send out his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other (Matthew 24: 27-31 ESV)

Did the coming of the Son of Man occur around 70 A.D.? Did He gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other? Was the sun darkened? Did the moon not give its light? Did the stars fall from heaven?

I don’t know why translators render the word “αστραπη” as “lightning.” It should be translated as “lighting.” It refers to the lighting of the sun that appears to come from the east (at sunrise) and shines to the west (later in the day). Everyone sees the sunrise and the sunset. So it will be when Christ returns. Everyone will see Him. Jesus Himself warned against those who claim a secret coming.

So, if they say to you, ‘Look, he is in the wilderness,’ do not go out. If they say, ‘Look, he is in the inner rooms,’ do not believe it. For as the lighting [of the sun] comes from the east and shines as far as the west, so will be the coming of the Son of Man. (Matthew 24:26,27)

The fact that everyone will see Him at his coming is also verified in Revelation:

Behold, He is coming with clouds, and every eye will see Him, even they who pierced Him. And all the tribes of the earth will mourn because of Him. (Revelation 1:7 ESV)

Thus we can be sure that when Jesus returns, everyone will know it. But no one knew of any coming of Christ in 70 A.D. Josephus who wrote in detail of the events concerning the fall of Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple around 70 A.D. never referred to that coming. The Christians of the second century never mentioned it, and there is no historical record of it. So if He came in 70 A.D. one may say that “no eye ever saw Him.”

Says You. There is more scriptural evidence of a 70 AD Parousia than any for a future one. Everyone in that time did see Him coming and it was an awful terrible thing. And yes EVERYONE did know it. You don’t have to like or agree but the evidence is there. YOU WERE NOT THERE!!!

But I still love you

[anon47460357]

Matthew 24:27-31:

For as the lightning comes from the east and flashes to the west, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be. For wherever the carcass is, there the eagles will be gathered together. Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. Then the sign of the Son of Man in heaven will appear, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And He will send His angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they will gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.

For what it’s worth, I have the following understandings:

“the tribulation of those days” = Jesus Christ’s Passion in A. D. 30, beginning with His struggles in Gethsemane and ending with His death upon the Cross

“the sun will be darkened” = “Now from the sixth hour until the ninth hour there was darkness over all the land.” (Matthew 27:45)

“the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory” = Christ’s Ascension into Heaven in A. D. 30 (cf. Daniel 7:13, in which the Son of Man comes from earth to Heaven.)

The “angels” (Greek “messengers”) are the Apostles, sent by Christ to gather the Church from all lands and places.

In short, I think that Christ’s Olivet Discourse refers to events that culminated in A. D. 30. I do not think in this discourse Christ was talking about things that would happen in the far future, not even 40 years in the future. I believe this discourse was given at the beginning of His ministry (circa A. D. 28), and that it was fulfilled by A. D. 30. It took only two years to fulfill. I think that the only references to the Second Coming are in Acts and in the Epistles.