The finiteness of "eternal life" (aionion zoe) in John's gospel

[Origen]

The following was originally posted on Christian Forums Dot Com. It’s a wee bit long, but any comments, suggestions, corrections, opinions, and especially well reasoned scathing critiques, are welcome, as this is a “work in progress”.

@Der Alter

……In these 9 verses, Jesus defines “aionios” as “eternal.”
Jesus used the word “aionios” 29 times, He never used “aionios” to refer to something mundane which cannot be eternal.
[1]John 6:58
(58) This is the bread that came down from heaven. Your ancestors ate manna and died, but whoever feeds on this bread will live forever.[αἰώνιος/aionios]
In this verse Jesus contrasts “aionios life” with “death.” If “live aionios” is only a finite period, a finite period is not opposite “death.” Thus “aionios” by definition here means “eternal.”

1. The Greek word there is not aionios, as you state, but aiona meaning age, eon.
2. So your conclusion is, therefore, wrong.
3. Jesus contrasts the bread eaten by those who died with the bread that will make those who eat it live EIS “the age”. EIS: to, into.
4. In light of 1) above, “forever” is a misleading, erroneous, deceptive translation.
5. A more literal & less misleading translation is found in a number of more literal Bible versions, such as, for example:
   Jn.6:58 This is the Bread which descends out of heaven. Not according as the fathers ate and died; he who is masticating this Bread shall be living for the eon (CLV)
6. Of course an “age”, i.e. “eon”, can be finite.
7. That doesn’t mean believers live only for a finite period. (There is no “only” in the verse). 8) The verse doesn’t address the question of how long they live or eternal destinies of anyone. Other Scriptures do that, such as when we are told we will be “immortal”, cannot die anymore, will always be with the Lord, all will be saved eventually, each in their own order, etc.
8. The verse doesn’t address the question of how long they live or eternal destinies of anyone. Other Scriptures do that, such as when we are told we will be “immortal”, cannot die anymore, will always be with the Lord, all will be saved eventually, each in their own order, etc.
9. You say: "If “live aionios” is only a finite period, a finite period is not opposite “death.” But you err, as life is opposite(antonym) to death: Thesaurus results for DEATH
10. Moreover those who are believers during church age history who obtain “life eonian” in the finite millennial age will also receive immortality, i.e. endless life.
11. So their life will be eternal, but not due to the word “aionion”.

@Der Alter

[2]John 10:28
(28) I give them eternal [αἰώνιος/aionios] life, and they shall never [ου μη/ou mé] [αἰών/aion] perish; no one will snatch them out of my hand.
See note on ou mé at bottom. In this verse Jesus pairs “aionios” and “aion” with “[not] snatch them out of my hand.” If “aion/aionios” means “age(s), a finite period,” that is not the opposite of “[not] snatch them out of my hand’” “Aionios life” by definition here means “eternal life.”

1. In this verse once more the word aiona (eon, age) occurs and your translation left it out! It didn’t even bother to translate it!
2. A number of more literal translations differ, for example:
   Jn.10:28 And I am giving them life eonian, and they should by no means be perishing for the eon, and no one shall be snatching them out of My hand." (CLV)
   https://studybible.info/CLV/John%2010
   3)“Definition of eonian…variant spelling of aeonian”
   https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/eonia
   “aeonian, from Greek aiṓnios “lasting an age, perpetual” (derivative of aiṓn eon) + 2-an; aeonic from eon + 1-ic”
   https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/aeonian
3. Concerning the alleged claim: "If “aion/aionios” means “age(s), a finite period,” that is not the opposite of “[not] snatch them out of my hand’”
   a) Aion most certainly means an age, e.g.: Strong’s Greek: 165. αἰών (aión) – a space of time, an age (Biblehub).
   b) Obviously an “age” (eon) can be a finite period.
   c) Just because no one shall be “snatching” a believer out of Jesus’ hand does not necessarily mean that the believer has “eternal security” or that the believer cannot - jump - out of His hand, i.e. fall away, backslide, & reject Him thereafter.
   d) In the larger context of the passage i suggest that Jesus is not addressing final eternal destinies at all, but contrasting destinies in the eon to come.
   e) Scripture speaks of multiple eons to come, so arguably the eon to come is finite.
   f) “And I am giving them life eonian”. As long as they believe in Him till they die “in Christ” or until His return. If they believe only “for a while” (Lk.8:13) then all bets are off, including remaining in His “hand”.
   g) “they should by no means be perishing for the eon”. If they have believed till their death or His return, then they won’t perish for the millennial eon. Unlike some others who may (or do) die then (Isa.65:20).
   h) They will also have immortality & be always with the Lord.
   i) By virtue of having immortality they will have endless life, not because they obtained eonian life, life in the eon to come.
   j) So the passage has an alternate interpretation without requiring eonian mean “eternal” as you claim it does there.

5. Der Alter states: "If “aion/aionios” means “age(s), a finite period,” that is not the opposite of “[not] snatch them out of my hand’” " Why should they have to be the “opposite” of one another & not instead just separate pieces of info Jesus gives in the verse re blessings to be obtained by those who continue in faith?

@Der Alter

[3]John 3:15
(15) That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal [αιωνιον] life.
[4] John 3:16
(16) For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting [αιωνιον] life.
In the above two verses Jesus pairs “aionion” with “should not perish.” Believers could eventually perish in a finite period, thus by definition “aionion life” here means eternal or everlasting life.

1. No, there is at least one other explanation that refutes your claim. Namely that believers who are promised aionion(eonian) life - if aionion(eonian) life is in a finite period, such as the millennial eon - could not perish because they will have immortality when Christ returns at the beginning of the millennial eon. Assuming they keep on believing till Christ’s return or they died “in Christ” - in which case they will obtain immortality when He returns (1 Cor.15:51-56) - and do not merely believe “for a while” (Lk.8:13).
2. So your argument is not only unsound logically but also unscriptural.
3. A better translation is not “believeth”, but “is believing” since the requirement is a continual believing, not a temporary believing just “for a while” (Lk.8:13).
4. Your quoted version is misleading, unlike a number of more literal versions such as:
   John3:15 that everyone believing on Him should not be perishing, but may be having life eonian." 16 For thus God loves the world, so that He gives His only-begotten Son, that everyone who is believing in Him should not be perishing, but may be having life eonian." (CLV)
5. “Definition of eonian…variant spelling of aeonian”
   https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/eonia
   “aeonian, from Greek aiṓnios “lasting an age, perpetual” (derivative of aiṓn eon) + 2-an; aeonic from eon + 1-ic” https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/aeonian
6. The next verse states the purpose of Love Omnipotent’s - divine will - in sending His Son:

The next verse in the passage says:

For God did not send His Son into the world that He might judge the world, but that the world would be saved through Him. (Jn.3:17)

The IVA (“that”) is used in Jn.3:17 above. BDAG says “In many cases purpose and result cannot be clearly differentiated, and hence ἵνα is used for the result that follows
according to the purpose of the subj. or of God. As in Semitic and Gr-Rom. thought, purpose and result are identical in declarations of the divine will…”
https://translate.academic.ru/ἵνα/el/xx/

The “result” of God sending His Son into the world will be to save it (Jn.3:17).

@Der Alter

[5]John 5:24
(24) Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting [αἰώνιος] life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.
In this verse Jesus pairs “aionios” with “shall not come into condemnation” and “passed from death unto life.” “Aionios” does not mean “a finite period,” by definition here it means “eternal,” unless Jesus lets His followers come into condemnation and pass into death.

1. Much of what i’ve already pointed out above re other verses in John applies here as well.
2. So once again your argument re aionion fails.
3. Re the comment above “unless Jesus lets His followers come into condemnation and pass into death.” Of course that can happen when one His followers believe only “for a while” (Lk.8:13) or makes shipwreck of their faith (1 Tim.1:19) or does not continue in faith (Col.1:21-23).
4. A more literal & less misleading translation is found in a number of more literal Bible versions, such as:
   John 5:24 Verily, verily, I am saying to you that he who is hearing My word and believing Him Who sends Me, has life eonian and is not coming into judging, but has proceeded out of death into life. (CLV)
5. The “not coming into condemnation” in the verse is conditionally dependent on the “believing”. If one eternally believes then one will eternally never come into condemnation.
6. Believing continually also results in eonian life, but that doesn’t mean eonian life, life in the coming eon, or the eon itself, is eternal.
7. Although those who obtain life in the coming eon will have immortality, which is eternal life.
8. And as they will be always with the Lord (1 Thess.4:17) & God will be “all in all” (1 Cor.15:28), they will be blessed & never come into condemnation.
9. Der Alter states: "In this verse Jesus pairs “aionios” with “shall not come into condemnation” and “passed from death unto life.” " They are in the same verse, but it is continual belief until one has immortality - not aionios - that results in “shall not come into condemnation” & “passed from death unto life”.
10. Der Alter says: ““Aionios” does not mean “a finite period,” by definition here it means “eternal,” unless Jesus lets His followers come into condemnation and pass into death.” That is not necessarily the case. The reason being that not coming into condemnation does not have to be dependent on aionion life meaning eternal life. Something that you appear to assume. Jesus doesn’t condemn the person, not because they will attain to eonian life (life in the millenial eon), but because they believe in Him! So your argument fails.

@Der Alter

[6]John 3:36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting [αἰώνιος/aionios] life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.
In this verse Jesus contrasts aionios life with “shall not see life.” If aionios means an indefinite age that is not opposite “shall not see life” By definition aionios means eternal.

1. Again much of what i’ve pointed out above re other verses in John applies here as well.
2. So once again your argument re aionion fails.
3. A more literal & less misleading translation is found in a number of more literal Bible versions, such as, for example:
   John 3:36 He who is believing in the Son has life eonian, yet he who is stubborn as to the Son shall not be seeing life, but the indignation of God is remaining on him." (CLV)
4. The fact is we all have been “stubborn”, so if your reasoning were correct, then no one could ever be saved!
5. But the wrath or “indignation” is only on the “stubborn” unbeliever as long as he remains stubborn. Once we ceased being stubborn & believed, God’s wrath was no longer on us.
6. Nothing in Jn.3:36 states that the stubborn cannot turn to God postmortem.
7. The verse speaks of one who “shall not see life”. What “life”? The eonian life of the context that the believer will obtain? The life of God?
8. What’s to say that this “eonian life” is not life in the next & finite eon, e.g. a 1000 year eon? Jesus says much the same in Mk.10:30 & Lk.18:30, that believers will receive “in the coming eon, life eonian”.
9. Yet Scripture often speaks of multiple eons to come, so the coming eon must be finite. So why would the “life eonian” obtained in it (Mk.10:30) also not be finite?
10. Der Alter’s states: “If aionios means an indefinite age that is not opposite “shall not see life By definition aionios means eternal.” What the premises are for his conclusion are not properly laid out, so who knows what he’s thinking. Does anyone? Maybe he should try laying it out something like this, so people can understand what he’s trying to communicate:

“Premise 1. The world is an organized system.
Premise 2. Every organized system must have a creator.
Conclusion. The creator of the world is God.”

@Der Alter

[7]John 4:14 But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting [αἰώνιος/aionios] life.
In this verse Jesus contrasts aionios with “shall never thirst.” If aionios means an indefinite age that is not opposite “shall never thirst.” By definition aionios means eternal.

1. Again much of what i’ve pointed out above re other verses in John applies here as well.
2. So once again your argument re aionion fails.
3. In this verse once more the word aiona (eon, age) occurs and once again (as in John 10:28 above) the translators misled people and left it out! They didn’t even bother to translate it! As shown here: https://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/NTpdf/joh4.pdf
4. A more literal & less misleading translation is found in a number of more literal Bible versions, such as, for example:
   Jn.4:14 yet whoever may be drinking of the water which I shall be giving him, shall under no circumstances be thirsting for the eon, but the water which I shall be giving him will become in him a spring of water, welling up into life eonian. (CLV)
5. In the above translation “life eonian” is paired opposite to “for the eon”.
6. If the eon in view is the coming eon, then the coming eon may be finite, for Scripture speaks in many passages of multiple future eons.
7. In light of 5) & 6) above, arguably the “life eonian” referred to in Jn.4:14 is finite.
8. Der Alter’s conclusion here is dismissed as it is based on the misleading translation “shall never thirst.”
9. If anything, with the proper translation, “under no circumstances be thirsting for the eon”, the opposite conclusion is more warranted.
10. No wonder the Early Church Father, Origen, in commenting on this verse spoke of “after eonian life”:

“And after eternal(eonian) life, perhaps it will also leap into the Father who is beyond eternal(eonian) life.”
https://books.google.ca/books?id=DWdG34yT05wC&pg=PA73&lpg=PA73&dq=And+after+eternal+life,+perhaps+it+will+also+leap+into+the+Father+who+is+beyond+eternal+life&source=bl&ots=k8w2xrhCrs&sig=ACfU3U3no0lSCiQSCx_IdyjXaz2jUrld3Q&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjvjM2alZzpAhXFFTQIHcQ_DRoQ6AEwAHoECAcQAQ#v=onepage&q=And%20after%20eternal%20life%2C%20perhaps%20it%20will%20also%20leap%20into%20the%20Father%20who%20is%20beyond%20eternal%20life&f=false

@Der Alter

[8]John 6:27
(27) Labour not for the meat which perisheth, but for that meat which endureth unto everlasting [αἰώνιος/aionios] life, which the Son of man shall give unto you: for him hath God the Father sealed.
In this verse Jesus contrasts “aionios meat” with “meat that perishes.” If aionios means an indefinite age that is not opposite “meat that perishes.” By definition aionios means eternal.

1. Again much of what i’ve pointed out above re other verses in John applies here as well.
2. So once again your argument re aionion fails.
3. A more literal & less misleading translation is found in a number of more literal Bible versions, such as, for example:
   Jn.6:27 Do not work for the food which is perishing, but for the food which is remaining for life eonian, which the Son of Mankind will be giving to you, for this One God, the Father, seals. (CLV)
4. You evidently think “etenal” is an opposite for “perish”. However Websters’ Dictionary lists “age” as a near antonym(“opposite”) for “perish”, but it doesn’t list “eternal” at all:
   https://www.merriam-webster.com/thesaurus/perish
5. Jesus says “Do not work for…food”, but Paul says to work, & if you don’t work, you don’t eat (2 Thess.3:10). So what, really, is Jesus saying there? Is He contradicting Paul or does His statement have a deeper meaning?
6. Der Alter says "In this verse Jesus contrasts “aionios meat” with “meat that perishes.” " But the verse doesn’t even use the words “aionios meat”. He made that up out of thin air.

@Der Alter

[9]John 8:51
(51) Very truly [αμην αμην/amen amen] I tell you, whoever obeys my word will never [ου μη εις τον αιωνα/ou mé eis ton aiōna] see death."

1. In this verse once more the word aiona (eon, age) occurs and once again (as in John 10:28 above) the translators misled people and left it out! They didn’t even bother to translate it! As shown here: https://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/NTpdf/joh8.pdf

2. A more literal & less misleading translation is found in a number of more literal Bible versions, such as, for example:
   Jn.8:51 Verily, Verily, I am saying to you, If ever anyone should be keeping My word, he should under no circumstances be beholding death for the eon. (CLV)

@Der Alter

……According to noted Greek scholar Marvin Vincent,
● The double negative [ου μη/ou mé] signifies in nowise, by no means. Θεωρήσῃ[theōrésé], denoting steady, protracted vision, is purposely used, because the promise contemplates the entire course of the believer’s life in Christ. It is not, shall not die forever, but shall live eternally.

That exactly how the version of Jn.10:28 i posted above translated it, “by no means be perishing for the eon”. But as you can see, it is limited by “for the eon”. Which your translation completely failed to translate!

@Der Alter

● ④οὐ marker of reinforced negation, in combination w. μή, οὐ μή has the effect of strengthening the negation (Kühner-G. II 221–23; Schwyzer II 317; Mlt. 187–92 [a thorough treatment of NT usage]; B-D-F §365; RLudwig: D. prophet. Wort 31 ’37, 272–79; JLee, NovT 27, ’85, 18–23; B-D-F §365.—Pla., Hdt. et al. [Kühner-G. loc. cit.]; SIG 1042, 16; POxy 119, 5, 14f; 903, 16; PGM 5, 279; 13, 321; LXX; TestAbr A 8 p. 85, 11 [Stone p. 46]; JosAs 20:3; GrBar 1:7; ApcEsdr 2:7; Just., D. 141, 2). οὐ μή is the most decisive way of negativing something in the future.[1]
Arndt, W., Danker, F. W., Bauer, W., & Gingrich, F. W. (2000)A Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament and other early Christian Literature.(3rd Ed). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

If it’s the “most decisive way of negating something in the future”, why didn’t God use it to say something like "unbelievers will never (ou me) be saved? You shot your own doctrine in the foot with that one.

If Jesus wished to express endless punishment, then He would have used expressions such as “endless”, “no end” & “never be saved” as per:

http://www.city-data.com/forum/christianity/2937070-how-scripture-expresses-endless-duration-not.html

Jesus didn’t use the best words & expressions to describe endlessness in regards to punishment, because He didn’t believe in endless punishment.

ENDLESSNESS not applied to eschatological PUNISHMENT in Scripture:

could an 'eternal punishment' simply mean that once instituted it will not...

Why didn’t you list the page number for that BAGD entry?

@Der Alter

● The combinations with οὐ μή also be noticed as, ουδεν οὐ μή (Lu. 10:19); οὐ μή se σε άνο ουδ ου σε εγκαταιπο (Heb. 13:5); ουκετι οὐ μή (Rev. 18:14). There is no denying the power of this accumulation of negatives. Cf. the English hymn “I’ll never, no never, no never forsake.”
Grammar Of The Greek New Testament In The Light Of Historical Research
By A. T. Robertson, M.A., D.D., Ll.D., Litt.D. p.1165.

Powerful negatives never used of the damnation of the lost.

I rest my case.

[Origen]

koine_lingua replied:

I genuinely considered whether it was even worth replying to at all. Generally speaking, it’s pretty clear that the person writing this hasn’t engaged the issue academically before. It’s kind of just a mish-mash of disorganized, stream of consciousness ramblings, bad etymologizing approaches to lexicography, and other stuff — for example they transliterate ἵνα as iva (which no one who has even a modicum of Greek knowledge would do).

Almost everything they write seems like it can be explained by non-academic theological motives; and really, they seem to repeat some stuff that you’re likely to see from Unitarians or Seventh Day Adventists. For example, they clearly subscribe to millenniarianism, and instead of seeing genuine everlasting fates meted out at the final judgment, they see a more literal thousand year reign here.

They take John 3.17 completely out of context to support a blanket universalism, giving this a veneer of scholarly support by appealing solely (and irrelevantly) to the BDAG entry for ἵνα.

They mention εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα a number of times, and over and over again they say that translators completely “ignore” this — themselves ignoring that a negative + verb + εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα is something like a logical negator, a la “never” (compare 1 Corinthians 8.13; Mark 11.20)

For people like this, theological biases pretty much completely almost override any academic objectivity, and it’s impossible to have any sort of scholarly dialog with them.

r/AcademicBiblical - the finiteness of "eternal life" (aionion zoe) in John's...