The Evangelical Universalist Forum

Paul's use of 'aionios' in Romans 16

Theology Biblical Theology
#1

I’m convinced that ‘eternal’ is often a pretty bad rendering of ‘aionios’, and have become interested in Paul’s use of the word in Romans 16:25-27:

Now to him who is able to establish you in accordance with my gospel, the message I proclaim about Jesus Christ, in keeping with the revelation of the mystery hidden for long ages (aionios) past, 26 but now revealed and made known through the prophetic writings by the command of the eternal (aionios) God, so that all the Gentiles might come to the obedience that comes from[f] faith— 27 to the only wise God be glory forever through Jesus Christ! Amen.

I’ve seen this passage used to argue that ‘aionios’ generally has a connotation of endlessness, because God is endless. Of course, it works at least as well to translate this as meaning ‘God of Ages,’ and the use of ‘aionios’ here doesn’t necessarily connote finitude or infinitude. That doesn’t mean God is finite…it just means that the word ‘aionios’ here is used to talk about something other than God’s endlessness.

However, I’m fascinated by the possibility of going one step farther, because I think there is a considerable exegetical gain to be had by considering the Aramaic/Hebrew background here as well. Presumably, Paul had the background words alam/olam in mind, and these words carry a connotation of ‘hiddenness’ and ‘ancientness.’ When you realize that, it starts to look like Paul is deliberately drawing out the full semantic range of 'alam/'olam in this passage. After all, the notion of the “'alam God” can quite nicely be expanded as the God of “mysteries hidden from long ages past.” So, far from making the point that God is endless, here, it seems that Paul is expanding on these themes of hiddenness, revelation, and God’s stewardship of the long ages of history when he refers to God as ‘aionios’.

I have two main questions about this:

  1. Do any Greek or Biblical scholars here have a critique or suggestions about this, as a possible reading?

  2. Is anyone aware of any scholarly work that has already put forward this argument? If someone has already made this case, I have a project that I’m working on in which I’d like to give them credit.

#2

In my opinion, the best translation of the Greek word “αἰωνιος” (aiōnios) is “lasting” (not specifying the duration of this lastingness: it could be a short time, a very long time, or even an eternity). This meaning fits every instance of the word I have ever encountered.

The word was used in koine Greek (the Greek spoken from 300 B.C. to 300 A.D.) to refer to anything which is enduring. The word was used by Diodorus Siculus to describe the stone used to build a wall.

Josephus in “The Wars of the Jews” book 6, states that Jonathan was condemned to “αἰωνιος” imprisonment. Yet that prison sentence lasted only three years.

Here is as literal a translation as possible of the relevant phrase from the Rom 16:25

… in keeping with the revelation of the secret kept in silence for lasting times…

#3

Somewhat agreed with Paidion – there are several ways “eonian” can be read (we may actually disagree on that) but “unseen” or “invisible” isn’t one of them. I don’t recall reading any scholar going that route either.

But the concept might not be foreign to Paul: earlier in Romans 1 he uses one of the NT docs’ only two occurrences of {aidios} to describe God, and he may have a double-meaning pun in mind with ai-dios for eternal and a-idios for invisible (and related to hades which apart from its punitive connotations simply means unseen). Jude demonstrably has the ‘invisible’ idea of a-idios in mind in his version of the material he shares with Peter on the chains keeping rebel angels in Tartarus.

Anyway, if Habbakkuk can use olam (later translated as {aiônios} in Greek) in two different though related ways to refer to something which does really last, namely God and God’s ways, compared to something which seems lasting but ultimately isn’t, namely the hills; then Paul can compare and contrast a non-eternal lasting situation, the times of the secret, with that which actually does last eternally, God.

He might also be using “eonian” either way to refer to something which comes uniquely from God; God uniquely from God in the latter case. (Which is a concept binitarians or trinitarians would be familiar with, but which modalist or most unitarian Christians could also agree with in different ways.)

I don’t strictly disagree with Paidion about the basic meaning of the term being “lasting”, by the way, without necessary reference to the duration of lasting; it’s an elegantly brief solution. However, precisely because of its broad possible connotations there can be more particular meanings per usage, too: authors might well not have a vaguely broad notion of “lasting” in mind.

This topic has important connections to the two main double-usages of eonian by Jesus in Matt 25 and John 5. Neither example seems to fit the idea of “hiddenness” for eonian; but both examples can fit the idea of “lasting” in either broadly undefined or in multiple discreet senses (or for that matter being uniquely from God both ways in either set of verses). I have some trouble seeing {aiônios} in Rom 16:25 referring to hiddenness either, since Paul already described the mystery as hidden – but by the same token, obviously he did have that idea in mind! :slight_smile:

I might be pressing too hard on what you were trying to get at by this use of the term, however. :confused:

#4

Thanks to you both! The pushback is helpful in itself.

I do have some notes from my reading of Ramelli and Constan’s “Terms for Eternity,” that touch on this, although they are more in line with your suggestions, Jason Pratt. I don’t have the book anymore or I would look it up, but my notes suggest that they point out that “musteriou cronois aioniois sesigamenou” necessarily implies a kind of temporariness, because ‘mystery’ implies unveiling. Something can’t be a mystery forever, so it would be odd to talk about mysteries hidden ‘from eternity’ or ‘eternally.’ That might be the stronger, direct response that draws on the immediate context, for those who want to suggest that even in this case, you have an immediate, adjacent example of ‘aionios’ that can’t really be carrying the meaning ‘endless.’ If anyone has the actual book handy, and wants to check my notes, that would be cool.

I rather like my reading (since it apparently really is my own reading)…because I’m quite taken by the notion of Paul working to express in Greek the kind of wordplay that is available here in Hebrew. It isn’t that ‘aionios’ generally carries a meaning of hiddenness, but that ‘olam’ does, and that Paul wants to convey the layered meaning of “'olam/'alam” to a Greek audience. But he can’t do that with a single word, since ‘aionios’ doesn’t work that way, so he unfolds the meaning of “’'olam” and connects it with ‘aionios’ before he refers to God as ‘aionios.’ The pushback reminds me that this is, at best, a pretty speculative reading. Still, it is a speculation that I like quite a lot :slight_smile:

#5

Dan,

I think your interpretation makes a lot of sense.

Caleb

#6

It seems that the Hebrew “owlam” and the Greek word “αἰωνιος” (aiōnios) are synonyms and that no distinction can be made between them.
Every occurence of “owlam” that I have checked (and I checked many) has been translated in the Septuagint as “αἰωνιος”.

#7

Paidion, you’re right that olam was consistently translated with the word aionios. However, that doesn’t mean the words are identical in their meanings or semantic ranges. For example, ‘aionios’ also has some specialized Platonic meanings in Greek that wouldn’t really be present in Hebrew, except arguably through Hellenistic influences. And ‘olam’ derives from a root that means ‘hidden,’ which makes wordplay possible with it in Hebrew and Aramaic that is simply impossible in Greek, no matter how much the two meanings influenced each other. Puns can’t really cross over like that. There is no equivalent root word connoting a secondary meaning of ‘hiddenness’ in Greek. By the same token, the word “eternal” is quite consistently used to translate ‘aionios’ and ‘olam’, but it carries a necessary connotation of ‘endlessness’ that isn’t really there in Greek, Hebrew or Aramaic. The Greeks had other words to connote ‘endlessness,’ and ‘olam’ was generally used in constructions like ‘from age to age and generation to generation,’ when someone needed to clearly connote endlessness (or something resembling endlessness).

All of that to say, the consistent use of a word to translate another one does not mean they have the same meaning. In fact, it is usually impossible for two words to have identical semantic ranges and room for linguistic play…especially in languages that aren’t very closely related.

#8

I’m thinking the idea of hidden-ness in the eternal “might have” (??) some associated sense of meaning in terms of “mystery” reaching both far backward or far forward; but not directly with that specific word as Paul used it. IOW “eternal (aionios) God” or “God of Ages” means… from time immemorial on into the far reaching future and can possibly be demonstrated accordingly:

Antiquity <-- = ETERNAL = --> Perpetuity

In capturing this thought the Psalmist so simply and succinctly says:

…even from everlasting to everlasting, You are God. Psa 90:2b

And as for “endless”… the likes of ἀπεράντοις aperantois (1Tim 1:4) or ἀκαταλύτου akatalutou (Heb 7:16) could have been used had THAT been the intent.

#9

I think that is accurate, in so far as aion comes from olam, and olam has all of that- the broader thoughts you stated and the hiddeness/mystery, sometimes meaning “of old” (Gen 6), sometimes meaning the far distant future (Psalm 78:66), sometimes meaning forever (Psalm 119:142).

Olam was usually an indefinite adjective modified by the subject it was connected to, it’s definition changeable, but always incorporating something unknown or unknowable. it could stand alone as a reference to itself, “from olam to olam” from the far distant past to the far distant future or perpetuity past to perpetuity to come, or from age to age- hence aion. But aion is not quite as modifiable as olam. thats why i like olam better ;o)

olam 5679
Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance
always, ancient time, any more, continuance, eternal, for, everlasting, long time,

Or lolam {o-lawm’}; from alam; properly, concealed, i.e. The vanishing point; generally, time out of mind (past or future), i.e. (practically) eternity; frequentatively, adverbial (especially with prepositional prefix) always – alway(-s), ancient (time), any more, continuance, eternal, (for, (n-))ever(-lasting, -more, of old), lasting, long (time), (of) old (time), perpetual, at any time, (beginning of the) world (+ without end).

#10

Thanks, Davo and Eaglesway.

I appreciate the more in-depth discussion of the meanings of aionios and olam. That is what I’m assuming with my speculative theory, here. The idea is that Paul is really thinking about the ''olam" or “'alam,” and trying to communicate the force of something like “Adonai L’Olam” to his Greek-speaking audience. This can’t be done directly, with a one-for-one translation, because of the reasons you both summarized. “'olam” often carries a connotation of hidden-ness and the ancient past (in particular) while ‘aionios’ does not. So Paul uses the phrase “musteriou cronois aioniois sesigamenou” to try to communicate the semantic complexity of ‘olam’ in Greek. In Hebrew or Aramaic, he could simply use wordplay to do the same, drawing on the different meanings of ‘olam.’ Something like: Baruch Adonai L’Olam has revealed what was 'olam. The second 'olam means “ancient hidden things.” The first one plays on this meaning, and means something like “The Blessing Lord of the Ages.” But you can’t do that in Greek, so instead you talk about “myseriou cronois aionios sesigamenous” and echo it as best you can with “aionios theos.” The playful capacity of the Hebrew/Aramaic is lost, but they’ll still get the general idea.

The summaries of the meanings from you are helpful, and I appreciate it. What do you think of the speculative theory I’ve built on those meanings? My current assessment is that the theory is built out of good bricks…meaning the linguistic claims that underly it are well-founded. However, it is still just speculation…we can’t get that clear of an idea of what Paul was thinking. Nonetheless, because it is one way of making sense of the basic linguistic facts, it is still a decent way to illustrate those facts … even though we can’t really read Paul’s mind with this level of precision 2000 years later, and we probably couldn’t have read it that well at the time, either.

#11

I personally have a great deal of confidence that Paul spoke from a hebrew mindset. I personally think he used the language of the Pharisees to discuss the scriptures and concepts of the ages and eternity, although many would disagree with that. Even if paul spoke/wrote in greek- the seed-bed of the faith he was illuminating was, and still is Hebrew in its origins. Following olam through over 450 usages in the OT I think a we can get to a pretty clear place concerning the aions so I think you are standing on solid ground- moving in the right direction.

The whole point of translation is to render the thought of the speaker/writer in the time he spoke, into language representing the same thought in the time of the hearer, but ultimately I think, the Holy Spirit leads us through the fuzzy places because facts alone diverge into many interpretations :slight_smile:

Also, because of the distance of time we just dont have all the facts. But we will always have the context of the scriptures themselves with which to dig into the bedrock and clarify where facts fail to do so.

#12

For everyone’s edification, here is the Concordant translation of Rom 16:25-27:

25 Now to Him Who is able to establish you in accord with my evangel, and the heralding of Christ Jesus in accord with the revelation of a secret hushed in times eonian,
26 yet manifested now and through prophetic scriptures, according to the injunction of the eonian God being made known to all nations for faith-obedience –
27 to the only, and wise God, through Christ Jesus, be glory for the eons of the eons. Amen!

#13

Thank you both. Much appreciated :slight_smile:

#14

Hi Dan,

Yes, it is true that the Hebrew word “owlam” is derived from the root “alam” which means “to conceal” or “to hide”.
But is there any evidence that “owlam” itself is used in that way?
The Online Bible’s Hebrew lexicon give the following meanings of “owlam”.

  1. long duration, antiquity, futurity, for ever, ever, everlasting, evermore, perpetual, old, ancient, world
    1a) ancient time, long time (of past)
    1b) (of future)
    1b1) for ever, always
    1b2) continuous existence, perpetual
    1b3) everlasting, indefinite or unending future, eternity
#15

Yes. I think if you go through the usages of it you find that evidence is frequently there, to the extent that it refers to a time so far back it is beyond recall(Gen 6:4), or a time so far forward it cannot be seen, or the duration of the life of God which is beyond knowing(Is 40:28), or even the time of indenture of a bond servant, which is the duration of his life- which is not known “He shall be your slave olam (forever Ex 21:6 kjv)”. Also it is used of the 'world to come" , which also is hidden from our view- which is why aion is sometimes translated world instead of age. Even today “olam habah” means the world to come(britannica online, CJB). You run into some interesting stuff by googling olam habah or olam hazeh.

Eph 2:22 You walked in the ways of the ‘olam hazeh’ and obeyed the Ruler of the Powers of the Air, who is still at work among the disobedient.(Complete Jewish Bible)

EPH 1:19… It works with the same mighty strength he used when he worked in the Messiah to raise him from the dead and seat him at his right hand in heaven, far above every ruler, authority, power, dominion or any other name that can be named either in the 'olam hazeh or in the ‘olam haba’. (Complete Jewish Bible)

Matthew 12:32 CJB
One can say something against the Son of Man and be forgiven; but whoever keeps on speaking against the Ruach HaKodesh will never be forgiven, neither in the olam hazeh(present age/world) nor in theolam haba (age/world to come).

2 Corinthians 4:4 CJB
They do not come to trust because the god of the 'olam hazeh has blinded their minds, in order to prevent them from seeing the light shining from the Good News about the glory of the Messiah, who is the image of God.

Neither olam or aion are as simple as we would like them to be in my opinion :slight_smile:

Isaiah 40:28 is a puzzle i love.

Do you not know?
Have you not heard?
The Lord is the everlasting God,
the Creator of the ends of the earth.
He will not grow tired or weary,
and his understanding no one can fathom.

elohe owlam yahweh bowre seems to refer to God as everlasting and unfathomable in one breath

He will not grow weary(endures forever)
His understanding no one can fathom(hidden full of mystery)