I was just looking at the use of “forever” as a translation of Olam. This is one of the first texts used in Hope Beyond Hell to suggest that Olam does not mean forever because Jonah was in the fish for 3 days and nights, not forever.
However, it seems to me that “forever” could be a correct translation. The context is a prayer of Jonah to God …
Given certain contexts “forever” can mean endlessness BUT THAT is not always its sole understanding. In verse 6 it obviously means “completely” – thus it is as I have mentioned elsewhere used and to be understood QUALITATIVELY… just as Jesus does in Jn 17:3.
I only bring up that verse when I’m dealing with people who are inclined to be overly literal. 
I think ‘olam’ can include the idea of ‘forever’ but it doesn’t strictly mean forever in the absolute sense that we often take it.
What I might use this verse for is as evidence that God is Lord over forever. Jonah was hopelessly lost – thus the bars of the earth closed over him forever. Yet, out of that forever lostness, God was able to save him.
So that takes care of the ‘forever’ problem from a different angle – by saying that God can revoke a sentence of ‘forever.’
Sonia
Along the same lines:
[Eze 33:14-16 ESV] 14 Again, though I say to the wicked, ‘You shall surely die,’ yet if he turns from his sin and does what is just and right, 15 if the wicked restores the pledge, gives back what he has taken by robbery, and walks in the statutes of life, not doing injustice, he shall surely live; he shall not die. 16 None of the sins that he has committed shall be remembered against him. He has done what is just and right; he shall surely live.
Sonia
Well that sums up a few of the guys in the group lol
Thanks for your insights, Sonja.
Thanks, Davo.
I guess what I was expecting from v6 was an absolute “this word does not mean …”, which is what I imagined I’d get while reading HBH.
What I get is more like Aion - I don’t think I should be surprised 
I think the most compelling argument for me is in the NT rather than the Old. Why? Because I think its quite easy to prove that the Old Testament does not mention or speak about hell or everlasting punishment (many Christian scholars admit this today, even staunch ECTers). So the battle is waged in the New Testament definitions and man are there some very literal and good verses for “aionios”. A typical argument for “aionios” always meaning eternal is Matthew 25:46, where eternal punishment is paralleled with eternal life. For Augustine this was the ace in the hole for ECT, and ever since it has been what mostly silenced the idea of UR. Here’s the cool bit, there are a few verses that parallel two uses of the word “aionios”, and in each passage one “aionios” has to mean “of the ages”. Here let me lay it out so you can understand what I’m saying:
Matthew 25:46
And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.
καὶ ἀπελεύσονται οὗτοι εἰς κόλασιν αἰώνιον (kolasis aionios), οἱ δὲ δίκαιοι εἰς ζωὴν αἰώνιον (zoe aionios).
Titus 1:2
in hope of eternal life, which God, who never lies, promised before the ages began
ἐπ’ ἐλπίδι ζωῆς αἰωνίου (zoe aioniou), ἣν ἐπηγγείλατο ὁ ἀψευδὴς Θεὸς πρὸ χρόνων αἰωνίων (pro chronon aionion)
Here we have eternal(aionios) life in the same sentence where a second use of aionios cannot mean eternal. Pro chronon aionion, this literally means “before the times of the ages”, and the translators cannot help but conclude that this is the only sensible translation, only in a few is it translated “before times eternal” but again this is an impossible meaning, there are not before times eternal. And even if someone wanted to say, "Oh he’s talking about eternity in the future after the ages are done, the context disproves it. In the next sentence it says that this eternal life “was at the proper time manifested”, meaning what was promised before the times of the ages (or ‘before times eternal’ if people want to be consistent) was manifested in Jesus Christ. So here we have a parallel just like Matthew 25:46, only this time its clear that aionios does not mean eternal even when set beside aionios life.
Thank you.
Please excuse this basic of Greek questions …
From your post:
ζωὴν αἰώνιον (zoe aionios).
χρόνων αἰωνίων (pro chronon aionion)
the two aionian-type words have different spellings (the 2nd ω in the second example).
Have they the same meaning? Are you comparing like with like here?
Thanks,
Mike
Yes, forgive me for any confusion. The simplest way of putting it (I wrote the above late last night) is that the adjective “aionios” (which most says “must” be translated eternal) is translated different in the same sentence by most every major translator. Aionios, aionion, aioniou, etc. are all the adjective meaning “of the ages”
Here is a metaquestion which I can’t get around involving Bible translation and exegesis - why does God allow the vast majority only a confusing text?
I think many here are brilliant exegetes, and are apt in demonstrating that the traditional reading of the Bible (i.e. the one that supports ECT) is likely incorrect; nevertheless, that doesn’t answer the larger question: if Scripture is authoritative and all we have to go on, why does God allow the vast majority to labor under these miscontruals? Most will never have adequate time to study the Bible or the Biblical languages - most have to go with the translation in their own language, which can be seriously misleading (and perhaps the Gk and Hb are misleading of what the Bible writers actually thought in some matters). To me, this is a very difficult theological question. It seems wrapped up in the POE, and why God stays hidden, but, the more I consider universalism, the less I can understand why could would want to be (or allow translations to) obscure about it. On universalism, it might not ultimately matter if we are wrong in defining say olam or aion, but it still has seriously thisworldly consequences of despair, doubt, loss-of-faith, misrepresentation of God, etc…
My view is that if you’re a parent, you usually start with simple principles when you’re teaching them, and then build on those, and sometimes even discard the simple ideas as they are outgrown. It could be that our simplistic views of God, which were often based on anthropomorphised pagan dieties rather than on the Source of All Life. The Source, being patient and wise, has allowed us to learn slowly.
Also, in science, it’s necessary to start with simple universal laws and build up…as we have seen in history. We find that laws we used to think were absolute break down under certain conditions…which enables us to reformulate the laws or even come up with better explanations.
what matters to God most is not whether we have perfect understanding of Scripture, but that we have a relationship with Him. We can be totally wrong in every way doctrinally, but if we know God, that’s all that matters.
even if a child believes in fairies or a monster under the bed, as long as the parents and child love each other and get along, what does it matter if the child is wrong? yes, the former may make them neglectful of real things, and the latter might cause them fear and torment…but as long as they know their parents are there for them, all is good.
What about the person who rejects God due to this confusion? Or becomes a Deist?
Well, I’ve done both those things, but I’m back. I’m sure there are many with the same experience. And that gives me sufficient reason to believe that making a wrong choice, even in important things, is not the end, and may be just what we need.
Olam literally means something like “on the horizon”, or “as far as the eye can see”. It’s a perceptual concept word that denotes how things seem, rather than how they are. From the perspective of Jonah in the belly of the fish; as far as he could see, he’d be in there ‘forever’. Until 3 days later… 
But it’s true that it is a qualitative vs. quantitative word, since its usage proves there is no fixed amount of time attached to it. Actually, this isn’t too different from how the modern English word “forever” is often used: “Man, I stood in that line forever!”. Obviously, we wouldn’t interpret that statement to literally mean forever; that was just how it seemed to the speaker at the time.
You do need to be careful of the spellings, as they are different grammatical forms of the word, and that is important.
Sonia