Joe: Lexicons prove UR is wrong!

[Alex_Smith]

talkingchristianity.blogspot.com … icons.html

We have covered this before, but someone may feel in the mood to explain to Joe why Thayer’s is wrong, at least on this word

Is there a modern, respectable lexicon that does give a fair definition?

To the King of ages [G165], immortal, invisible, the only God, be honor and glory forever [G165], and ever [G165],[a] Amen.

ESV Footnotes: a. Greek to the ages of ages

Where did the ESV get their information?

[SLJ]

Hi Alex,

ESV’s footnote is the literal translation. G165 is aion. G166 is aionios.

He found a real bargan! I use Thayer’s at Blueletterbible.org, but I’d love to have a hard copy.

Lexicons are tools, but hardly authoritative and inspired. The Wikipedia article on Thayer states:

Rather unfortunately, Thayer’s Lexicon became obsolete quickly as Gustav Adolf Deissmann’s work with the Egyptian papyri was soon to revolutionize New Testament and Koine Greek Lexicography with the publication of his Bible Studies: Contributions Chiefly from Papyri and Inscriptions to the History of the Language, the Literature, and the Religion of Hellenistic Judaism and Primitive Christianity, published in 1901 (2nd edition 1909) and also Light from the Ancient East the New Testament Illustrated by Recently Discovered Texts of the Graeco-Roman World London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1910. These books and similar ones that followed helped confirm and sometimes correct inadequate definitions of many words in the Greek New Testament. With this new and valuable information for studying the Greek of the New Testament, Thayer’s Lexicon became a victim of history, being published less than a decade before this papyri revolution.

I seems a little too much to call it “obsolete” – it’s still very useful, but we need to remember that these tools are man-made, reflecting the ideas and biases of the men who write them and constrained by limited understanding, thus are always open to examination and question.

If you want another source that says “aionios” doesn’t mean never-ending, I can refer you to the newer Packer article Joe gave you in which he states:

‘Eternal’ in these phrases [Matt 25:41,46] is aionios, meaning, as has often been pointed out, not ‘endless’, but pertaining to the ‘age to come’…

Packer does go on to argue that aionios must imply “unending continuance” based on the idea that the Jews conceived of the age to come as being endless, which is a construct that I would disagree with. But the point is that Packer affirms that aionios does not by definition mean “never-ending.”

Sonia

[Alex_Smith]

ESV’s footnote is the literal translation. G165 is aion. G166 is aionios.

I totally agree, however, I want to find out why they think it’s the literal translation or where they found that information?

Thanks for the other points, I’ve written Joe another response, after he implied I was just reading stuff back into the text!

He’s got two full double-columned pages on ‘aion’ where he’s got plenty to say about that. That’s why I say you need a good Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, because understanding what a Lexicon is, it can help to fulfil an important role where a dictionary may be more limited.

There is a great danger in ‘word studies’ where we can isolate words from their history, evolution and most importantly, their use, and instead derive our means purely by reading back into the text our own linguistical understanding that we formulate from the components of the word itself, and even interposing that back into the context and other analogous array of texts.

To quote Wikipedia: “When linguists study the lexicon, they study such things as what words are, how the vocabulary in a language is structured, how people use and store words, how they learn words, the history and evolution of words (i.e. etymology), types of relationships between words as well as how words were created.”

[SLJ]

ESV’s footnote is the literal translation. G165 is aion. G166 is aionios.

I totally agree, however, I want to find out why they think it’s the literal translation or where they found that information?

Oh, I see. I’m sure there are other folks here that can answer that for you! My impression is that there’s no argument that “age” or “eon” is our most literal translation of “aion”. But words are not always used in their most literal sense, so they’re translated according to the translator’s best understanding of usage, given the context. This necessitates that interpretation is also happening during translation–and that same applies as well to word definitions.

Sonia

[amy]

Sonia said…
If you want another source that says “aionios” doesn’t mean never-ending, I can refer you to the newer Packer article Joe gave you in which he states:
Packer wrote:
‘Eternal’ in these phrases [Matt 25:41,46] is aionios, meaning, as has often been pointed out, not ‘endless’, but pertaining to the ‘age to come’…

Ok, this is a bit off topic. This was one of many points Packer made that lent itself to a case for EU. I was surprised at how much he bolstered our view.

[Alex_Smith]

Ok, this is a bit off topic.

I don’t mind at all

This was one of many points Packer made that lent itself to a case for EU. I was surprised at how much he bolstered our view.

I agree. I almost got a chance today to write my reflections on his articles, but Joe side tracked me