Well, that certainly seems to clear that up. lol.
I’d like to point out that while they give the simple and most literal definition: “lasting for an age,” they also provide links to two more complex lexical entries.
“LSJ” is Henry George Liddell. Robert Scott. A Greek-English Lexicon. revised and augmented throughout by. Sir Henry Stuart Jones. with the assistance of. Roderick McKenzie. Oxford. Clarendon Press. 1940.
“Middle Liddell” is Liddell and Scott. An Intermediate Greek-English Lexicon. Oxford. Clarendon Press. 1889.
Sonia
It really is amazing how much evidence there is that *aionios *at least can, if not should, mean “indefinitely long lasting” and even has the sense of that which is in the distant future or distant past. And if one intended to specifically convey the concept of that which is endless or everlasting, other Greek words would have been better used such as *aidios *or aei. But of course, the more one examines what scripture actually says concerning the punishment of evil, the more one has difficulty “biblically” affirming ECT, and the more “important” it is to interpret aionios as endless or eternal so as to provide at least some “biblical” support for ECT.
And thanks Sonia and Paidon for the links.
What are you saying when you say the word “should mean ‘indefinitely long lasting’”?
I have looked at many instances of the word in Greek sentences in classical Greek, the New Testament, the Septuagingt including the Apocrypha. I have found NO unequivocal evidence that the word** EVER** means “eternal” or “everlasting”. As I have pointed out previously, the word is sometimes used of things which are everlasting, but the idea of evelasting is not inherent in the meaning ofthe word. Although the word is sometimes used to indicate the lifetime of a person, or to mean “age-long”, the most usual meaning seems to be “lasting”.
Here is an analagous example. Suppose I use the word “tall” to describe certain people as well as certain buildings. The buildings I describe as “tall” are over 100 feet high (but not the people). Would you say that “one of the meanings of ‘tall’ is 'being over 100 ft. high”? I think not. But it happens to be one of the applications of the word. Similarly “aionios” is sometimes used to describe things which are endless, such as life with the Lord, or the Lord Himself. But that doesn’t indicate that one of the meanings of “aionios” is “endless”.
Good point.
I think what Sherman was saying is that it seems to refer to an indefinite period of time. That seems to be supported by your research and of course, how it is used biblically.
Yep, that’s what I meant by “indefintely long period of time”; “indefinite” doesn’t mean “endless”, but not definite. Though when something is “indefintely” long it might “seem” endless when in it. Punishment and suffering in pain are especially vexing if there is no defined end, though you assume it will end some time. With my children, the threat of an undetermined amount of punishment was far worse emotionally speaking than even the severest possible penalty.
To me, aionios carries the same connotations as the Hebrew olam and olam haba, that which is on or over the horizon, vauge, indefinite, distant, not clearly in sight, and something having to do with the Messianic age to come. And of course the Messianic age to come is “over the horizon”, not clearly distinquishable, beyond our full comprehension! I suppose some people seem to think they have eschatology figured out; I know that I don’t and do not believe anyone else does either. I’m reminded of all the Jews who had all these testimonies of Christ and yet few, if any, understood the nature and purpose of His appearing. Though looking back on it we can understand the prophecies about His coming. Hind-site tends to be 20/20; even then I don’t know that we fully understand the significance and nature of His appearing. And if UR is correct, then most of Christendom has significantly misunderstood His appearing (to save only some instead of all). The older and the more knowledgeable I get, the more I realize how much I just don’t know. Aionian punishment - that which is beyond our understanding and potentially worse than we can imagine.
All that being said, I can see how “indefinte” would be easily misread as “infinite”.
In mark, we read Jesus say to the fig tree: “May no one ever eat fruit from you again.”
Are you saying that He meant “may no one eat fruit from you for an indefinite time period”?
Eis aion in the Mark passage literally means, into the age. But because it is strengthened with meketi just previously (meketi eis aion) It could mean forever, but it could also be translated “no longer for the age”.
I must be honest- I have no idea what “no longer for the age” even would mean literally? What age? It sounds like it means that Jesus pronounced a curse that the tree should be barren of fruit for here on out. What, after some “age” there will again be fruit? I don’t think so!
One count in context for a fig tree no longer bearing fruit does not subjugate the whole Bible to making every account of the use of an aion derived phrase mean “never ending”.
I did also point out that this specific case could be interpreted (for all practical purposes) as forever, due to the fact that aion in that passage is strengthened by meketi. Aion by itself does not possess the strength to indicate “never more” without being modified by another word that would lend it that strength.
Attempting to somewhat answer your question though: Scripture talks about God’s purpose for the ages (plural) indicating that there is more than one age to be dealt with in God’s overarching plan. We probably don’t need to worry about the eternal destiny of a fig tree, but for purposes of illustration, (should we be talking about a person, or I suppose a sentient tree if you’re in Narnia 
) no longer for the age here could mean “not until this age is ended”. If God indeed plans to redeem the whole of creation (ultimately) as scripture seems to indicate, then we could have a reasonable expectation that this tree would in some way be included in that.
It’s certainly stretching the point, as the curse on the tree is that it not produce any more fruit; so the analogy breaks down somewhat. Perhaps there are other interpretations of that passage that make more sense of why He would curse a tree that was already not producing any fruit to never produce any. But this is a tree we’re talking about here… 
Interestingly though, the fig tree is a symbol of Israel, so likely the picture here is the “cutting off” of Israel to make room for the fullness of the Gentiles, after which we are assured of Israel’s restoration. So symbolically, we can expect the “fig tree” (representing Israel) to be restored.
I’m sure it has been said before, but the definition of aion and its derivatives alone do not make or break the case for UR.
It seems James Coram of Concordant Publishing Concern (& the CLV) would concur with aion/ios speaking of what is lasting or duration:
"FROM THE EARLY TIMES OF CHURCH HISTORY, the words aion and aionios (“eon” and “eonian” in the Concordant Version) have been the subject of much controversy. This is because the question of their meaning is central to the issue of “eternal punishment.”
“Many holding our essential position will say that aion means “age,” not “[for] ever.” While this is a step in the right direction and in a loose sense is even correct, it is problematic, and leaves some legitimate room for objection.”
“For example, were we to use “age-” as our basis for representing aionios, it would depend on what we have in mind by “age” whether we should say “age-pertaining,” or “age-lasting.” In any case, uniform translation would be impossible and interpretation would be unavoidable. This is because some usages of aion are for only a portion of one of the scriptural, epochal eons. Yet it is true that aion itself is often used in reference to the entire duration of whatever “age” may be in view in any certain context. " Age-pertaining,” besides being awkward, assumes that the notion of “time-periodness” is inherent to aion, which is incorrect; “age-lasting,” adds the further problem of affirming that that which is eonian, always obtains for the entirety of an eon, which is also incorrect."
“It is best to use or at least conceive the word “duration” instead of “age” (or even “eon”) when we are considering these things, even if, in translation, “duration” would be too awkward…”
Good article:
thetencommandmentsministry.us/mi … e_eternity
Also a desertation on the topic:
books.google.de/books?id=l-Smsh … &q&f=false
It is usually argued that Plato invented the word “aionios”, prior to him only the noun existed, in the Septuagint it is definitly used in a limited sense in various instances.
Your theory that aion & aionios are always defined as ‘eternal’ everywhere in the Scriptures and never defined as finite duration does not have the support of a single lexicon, Church Father, commentator or dictionary. You’ve been unable to give one source in the past 2000 years that agrees with your definition.
This appears to contradict what you said above. And why repeat the word αἰώνιος twice?
biblehub.com/interlinear/1_timothy/1-17.htm
Young’s Literal Translation
and to the King of the ages, the incorruptible, invisible, only wise God, is honour and glory – to the ages of the ages! Amen. (1 Tim.1:17)
The information that God is “King of the ages” is different info (not redundant info) from God being “immortal” & “invisible” & the “only wise God”.
Nothing in this verse says “the ages” referred to are endless. Nothing there says the phrase “to the ages of the ages” means endless. If you are
doing something up “to” a certain time (e.g. ages of the ages"), that leaves it an open question whether or not you keep doing it afterwards.
Additionally, if the ages have an end (1 Cor.10:11; Heb.9:26), then “King of the ages” cannot mean King for endless time.
1.“God exists today”
2. Today “is finite”
3. Therefore God exists during finite days [years, centuries, eras, epochs, milleniums, ancient times/olam, eons & ages]
4. God is also immortal.
5. Therefore God exists both during finite days & immortally.
6. Both are true at the same time.
Therefore when Scripture speaks of One Who is both immortal and King of the ages in the same sentence (1 Tim.1:17), ages can refer to finite periods of time. Whether of finite individual ages or finite corporate ages [of at least two ages].
Thus your argument is refuted.
Actually the opposite of a “moment” can be an “age” of a “finite period”:
merriam-webster.com/thesaurus/moment
en.konjugator.com/moment/
www2.powerthesaurus.org/moment/antonyms/3
en.konjugator.com/aeon/
Also a “moment” is usually a ‘short’ period of time.
An “eon” or “age” can be a ‘long’ period of time.
And ‘long’ is the opposite of ‘short’:
myenglishpages.com/site_php_ … sites2.php
First, in this verse it says “aionios in the heavens”. Scripture says the heavens which now are will pass away. So if these heavens are temporary,
so also can aionios be temporary in 2 Cor.5:1.
Secondly, that the house is not dissolved for an aionion (eonian) period of time does not necessarily mean that eonian means eternal in this verse. For example if something is not dissolved for the eon of the millennial age eon, that doesn’t mean the millennial eon is eternal.
biblehub.com/interlinear/hebrews/7-24.htm
“hath an unchangeable priesthood] Rather, “hath his priesthood unchangeable” (sempiternum, Vulg.) or perhaps “untransmissible;” “a priesthood that doth not pass to another,” as it is rendered in the margin of our Revised Version.” biblehub.com/commentaries/hebrews/7-24.htm
“This may be explained either as inviolable, or which does not pass over to another. Comp. Exodus 32:8; Sir. 23:18. Usage is in favor of the former meaning, but the other falls in better with the course of thought.” Vincent @ biblehub.com/commentaries/hebrews/7-24.htm
Will the office of priesthood be even needed or last forever? If not, then it will cease & aion in this verse cannot refer to an endless duration.
After God becomes “all in all” (1 Cor.15:28) priesthood may no longer serve any purpose. Likewise with kings (cf. 1 Tim.1:17 above).
"The most ancient manuscripts omit the words, “for ever” ", i.e. they omit the Greek word aion:
biblehub.com/commentaries/1_peter/1-23.htm
As do the NASB, NIV, ESV, ASV, DBY, ERV, & most at:
and also this:
Greek-English Interlinear:
Index of /interlinear/1_peter
Actually God can be (and is) both immortal & existing “for a finite period at the same time”. For God lives both “today” and is “immortal”. Today is finite, so God will be for a finite period, namely “today”. Additionally, God is “immortal”. So when the finite time period “today” ends, He does not end, but lives on. That God will be living “today” and also at the same time be “immortal” are two distinct and different facts, not redundant facts telling us the same thing. Likewise the fact God is both aionian (eonian) & immortal in 1 Tim.6:16 do not require they be redundant or that eonian mean eternal or endless time.
Aionios is related to time in the Scriptures, not eternity:
in expectation of life eonian, which God, Who does not lie, promises before times eonian (Titus 1:2)
Who saves us and calls us with a holy calling, not in accord with our acts, but in accord with His own purpose and the grace which is given to us in Christ Jesus before times eonian,(2 Tim.1:9)
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 (Rom.16:25-26)
but we are speaking God’s wisdom in a secret, wisdom which has been concealed, which God designates before - before the eons, for our glory (1 Cor.2:7)
If time ends, the “times eonian” (Titus 1:2; 2 Tim.1:9; Rom.16:25) end & eonian ends with the beginning of eternity, then in Scripture eonian can never mean endless or everlasting.
The eons had a beginning (1 Cor.2:7, etc) & may also have an end (1 Cor.10:11; Heb.9:26).
Young’s Literal Translation (1 Tim.6:16)
who only is having immortality, dwelling in light unapproachable, whom no one of men did see, nor is able to see, to whom is honour and might age-during! Amen.
Concordant Literal Translation
Who alone has immortality, making His home in light inaccessible, Whom not one of mankind perceived nor can be perceiving, to Whom be honor and might eonian! Amen!
Rotherham’s Emphasized Version
Who alone hath immortality, dwelling in light unapproachable,—Whom no man hath seen—nor can see: unto whom, be honour and might age-abiding. Amen.
Emphatic Diaglott NT
the only one having deathlessness, light dwelling in inaccessible, whom saw no one of men, nor to see is able; to whom honor and might age-lasting; so be it.
Emphatic Diaglott (margin)
…to whom be Honor and Might aionian. Amen
quod.lib.umich.edu/m/moa/AKR176 … view=image
studybible.info/CLV/1%20Timothy%206
scripture4all.org/OnlineInte … f/1ti6.pdf
Re Greek scholar Deissman:
"Adolph Deissman gives this account: “Upon a lead tablet found in the Necropolis at Adrumetum in the
Roman province of Africa, near Carthage, the following inscription, belonging to the early third
century, is scratched in Greek: ‘I am adjuring Thee, the great God, the eonian, and more than eonian
(epaionion) and almighty…’ If by eonian, endless time were meant, then what could be more than
endless time?” "
tentmaker.org/books/asw/Chapter9.html
The Greek text is on p.275ff of the following url. The English translation follows.
“I adjure thee by the great God, the eternal and more than eternal and almighty, who is exalted above the exalted Gods.” (p.277)
“The tablet, as is shown not only by its place of origin (the Necropolis of Adrumetum belongs to the second and third centuries, A.D.; the part in which the tablet was found is fixed in the third), but also by the character of the lettering, is to be assigned to the third century,1 that is— to determine it by a date in the history of the Greek Bible — about the time of Origen.” (p.279)
ia800300.us.archive.org/4/items … isuoft.pdf
The “corruption” is not stated to be endless, so it does not necessarily follow that the life or eonian or life eonian must be endless.
Be not decived, God is not to be sneered at, for whatsoever a man may be sowing, this shall he be reaping also, 8 for he who is sowing for his own flesh, from the flesh shall be reaping corruption, yet he who is sowing for the spirit, from the spirit shall be reaping life eonian. (Galatians 6:8; Concordant Literal Version).
Origen, the Early Church Father, speaks a number of times of after aionios (eternal) life, thereby making it finite in relation to a coming age or ages, such as, e.g.the millennial kingdom eon age. Christ also speaks of aionios life in the age to come (Mk.10:30; Lk.18:30). And Daniel 12:2 refers to olam life followed in verse 3 by “olam and beyond”, thereby making olam life in this context finite.
John 10:28 is a repeat of the same verse addressed below at verse #15 on your list of 19 verses (actually only 18, & just 17 that have aion/ios in them).
In John 6:58 death is not contrasted with aionios, but with live. Aionios is not the opposite of death.
And the world is passing by, and its desire, yet he who is doing the will of God is remaining for the eon. (1 Jn.2:17, CLV)
and the world doth pass away, and the desire of it, and he who is doing the will of God, he doth remain – to the age. (YLT)
For the eon or age here can certainly refer to a finite eon such as the millennial age eon kingdom of Christ, or also the eon
of the second death (lake of fire) until death is abolished (1 Cor.15:26) & God becomes “all in all” (v.28), even all who
were ever in Adam (v.22).
Actually aion (and therefore aionios) can be the opposite of a “little while”. See previous comments above re 2 Cor.4:17-18 & “moment”.
Those who “in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality” will be given “aionios life”. Aionios (eonian) life is the special reward for those who believe. They get life in the eonian period called the 1000 years in Revelation, i.e. the millennial age eon. Unbelievers will not get eonian life in the age to come. As we see in 1 Tim.4:9-11, God is the Saviour of all men, but specially of them that believe. For believers get the special gift of grace of eonian life. Others will lose out on that & be punished. But even they shall be eventually saved (Rom.5:18-19; Rev.5:13; 1 Cor.15:22-28; etc).
biblehub.com/interlinear/luke/1-33.htm
studybible.info/ACVI/Luke
studybible.info/IGNT/Luke
Darby Bible Translation
and he shall reign over the house of Jacob for the ages, and of his kingdom there shall not be an end.
This is what it actually literally says:
Luk 1:33 and He shall reign over the house of Jacob for the eons. And of His kingdom there shall be no consummation. (CLV)
It is about reigning over the house of Jacob and the time limit is “for the eons.”
Here is the full verse with context:
Luk 1:32 He shall be great, and Son of the Most High shall He be called. And the Lord God shall be giving Him the throne of David,
Luk 1:33 His father, and He shall reign over the house of Jacob for the eons. (here is the second half of the verse you allude to And of His kingdom there shall be no consummation."
Christ eventually hands over the kingdom to His God and Father (1 Cor.15:24-28) and quits reigning (1 Cor.15:25).
So His reign “for the eons” over the house of Jacob (Lk.1:33) is not forever, but finite. Therefore the phrase
“for the eons” in Lk.1:33 is of finite duration & the translation “forever” is wrong, misleading & deceptive.
If someone said to me “I have had no rest day or night”, this could mean for a period of 24 hours. Not forever and ever.
If someone said to me “I’ve had no rest day or night for ages”, this could mean for a finite period of days, weeks or months. It doesn’t mean forever. BTW the phrase ‘forever and ever’ in Rev.14:11 literally translates as “to ages of ages”. So having no rest day or night for “ages” can mean for a short or long time of finite duration, not forever.
Here is the literal translation from a Greek-English Interlinear:
biblehub.com/interlinear/revelation/14-11.htm
Many other similar examples could be given with a literal translation.
Scripture also speaks of night being “no more”. So can “day and night” be forever?
For 12 arguments re “ages of ages” ending, see posts 130 & 131 @
christianforums.com/threads … 864/page-7
This includes everyone in the universe, including the dead and demons:
Rev.5:13 And every creature which is in heaven, and on the earth, and under the earth, and such as are on the sea, and all that are in them, heard I saying, Blessing, and honour, and glory, and power, be unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb for ever and ever.
John speaks of “every creature” & to emphasize this again he repeats “and all that are in them”:
Rev.5:13 And every creature which is in heaven, and on the earth, and under the earth, and such as are on the sea, and all that are in them, heard I saying, Blessing, and honour, and glory, and power, be unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb for ever and ever.
This worship (v.13) uses the same worshipful words as the redeemed of vs 9-10 use in v.12:
12 Saying with a loud voice, Worthy is the Lamb that was slain to receive power, and riches, and wisdom, and strength, and honour, and glory, and blessing.
All this being in the context of salvation - “the Lamb that was slain” (v.12 & 13).
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. (Jn.10:28, CLV)
Evidently this may refer to a future eon & not the disciples time in the first century A.D., since they did perish or die. The coming eon will include the millennium or 1000 years of Revelation 20. Even during that millennial age eon some will die (Isa.65:20), but Jesus says here in Jn.10:28 that believers will not perish “for the eon”.
Never again will there be in it an infant who lives but a few days, or an old man who does not live out his years; the one who dies at a hundred will be thought a mere child; the one who fails to reach a hundred will be considered accursed. (Isa.65:20)
Unbelievers will not enter the millennial age kingdom of Christ, but perish, according to verses in John above. It is noteworthy that it doesn’t
say they perish “without end” or “endlessly”. They are raised at the great White Throne judgement of Revelation 20 & ultimately saved. For Jesus
is the Lamb Who takes away the sin of the world (Jn.1:29) & their Saviour (Jn.4:42) Who will draw them to Himself (Jn.12:32).
For neither is the Father judging anyone, but has given all judging to the Son, 23 that all may be honoring the Son, according as they are honoring the Father. He who is not honoring the Son is not honoring the Father Who sends Him." 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. (Jn.5:22-25, CLV)
Here we see that all judging has been given to the Son for a positive end, that all may be honoring the Son.
Believers have life eonian, as long as they don’t lose their salvation. Then they would lose this gift of grace of eonian life and come into condemnation again.
Actually in that verse death is not contrasted with aionios. Death is contrasted with its opposite life. Aionios life is the gift of God (Rom.6:23)
to those who believe. Eventually all will recieve life (verses 18-19 of the same chapter).
None of these sources support your aionios theory. Greek scholar Marvin Vincent, whom you quote, opposes it, saying:
“The word always carries the notion of time, and not of eternity. It always means a period of time. Otherwise it would be impossible to account for the plural, or for such qualifying expressions as this age, or the age to come. It does not mean something endless or everlasting.”
“…The adjective aionios in like manner carries the idea of time. Neither the noun nor the adjective, in themselves, carry the sense of endless or everlasting.”
“… Aionios means enduring through or pertaining to a period of time. Both the noun and the adjective are applied to limited periods.”
“…Words which are habitually applied to things temporal or material can not carry in themselves the sense of endlessness.”
“…There is a word for everlasting if that idea is demanded.”
Not in Greek. A Greek adjective’s meaning can’t be greater than it’s noun equivalent.
In every instance of the Greek word “αιωνιος” (aiōnios) in both the New Testament and the Greek Septuagint translation of the Old Testament, the translation “lasting” or “enduring” fits every context perfectly.
How does eonian or aionian fit?
Translation of the New Testament from the Original Greek Humbly Attempted by Nathaniel Scarlett Assisted by Men of Piety & Literature with notes, 1798: “And These will go away into onian punishment: but the righteous into onian life.”
The New Testament by Abner Kneeland, 1823:
“And these shall go away into aionian punishment*: but the righteous into aionian life.”
The New Covenant by Dr. J.W. Hanson, 1884:
“And these shall go away into onian chastisement, and the just into onian life.”
Youngs Literal Translation of the Holy Bible, 1898:
“And these shall go away to punishment age-during, but the righteous to life age-during.”
The Holy Bible in Modern English, 1903
“And these He will dismiss into a long correction, but the well-doers to an enduring life.”
The New Testament in Modern Speech, 1910:
“And these shall go away into the Punishment 1 of the Ages, but the righteous into the Life 1 of the Ages.”
- [Of the Ages] Greek “aeonian.”
A Critical Paraphrase of the New Testament by Vincent T. Roth, 1960
“And these shall go away into age-continuing punishment, but the righteous into life age-continuing.”
The Restoration of Original Sacred Name Bible, 1976
“And these shall go away into age-abiding *correction, but the righteous into **age-abiding life.”
The Twentieth Century New Testament, 1900
“And these last will go away into onian punishment, but the righteous into onian life.”
The People’s New Covenant, 1925
“And these will depart into age-continuing correction, but the righteous, into age-continuing life.”
Emphatic Diaglott, 1942 edition
“And these shall go forth to the aionian 1 cutting-off; but the RIGHTEOUS to aionian Life.”
The New Testament of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Anointed, 1958
“And these shall go away into agelasting cutting-off and the just into agelasting life.”
The New Testament, a Translation, 1938
“And these will go away into eonian correction, but the righteous into eonian life.”
The New Testament, A New Translation, 1980
“Then they will begin to serve a new period of suffering; but God’s faithful will enter upon their heavenly life.”
Concordant Literal New Testament, 1983
And these shall be coming away into chastening eonian, yet the just into life eonian."
Rotherham Emphasized Bible, 1959
“And these shall go away into age-abiding correction, But the righteous into age-abiding life.”
Look Origen, you said:
Some say… The evidence of the two covenants overlapping is the “deposit” or “downpayment” (KJV “earnest”) mentioned in 2 Cor. 1:22, 5:5 and Eph.1:14. We take this today to refer to this invisible, either felt or unfelt influence of the Spirit, which is supposed to be the “downpayment” on heavenly bliss after death or the return of Christ. Or some might take it as a sense of “assurance” (admittedly limited) we have now.
But this “promise” in these passages is redemption itself in the first place. All of this shows entrance to the Kingdom was not completely secure yet, so they had this “downpayment” on it until the time had come (Hence, Rom.8:16). But this surety itself is the promise they were waiting for.
The period of Law was finally ended when the Temple was destroyed (AD70), and Jerusalem basically transformed into an antetypical “Gehenna” (the lake of fire and brimstone, fulfilling the prohpecies of Jer. 7:31-33, 19:2-13 and Isa. 34:4-10 cf. Rev. 14:11, 20:10).
This was in their lifetimes, and the only event that could fulfill “the end” spoken about in the prophecies.
“The world” (usually aeon; “age”) referred to the Old Covenant. “New Heavens and New Earth” refers to the final fruition of the new covenant, when death [spiritual, that is, and the one that was our biggest enemy; much more so than physical death] was abolished. (“Heaven” in prophetic language represented the government of Israel; while “earth” represented, originally, the land of Israel. “The whole world/earth” meant the Roman Empire, which then encompassed the land of Israel. Evidence of this is the fact that Col.1:23 and Rom.10:18 say that the Gospel had ALREADY spread “to the ends of the earth”! Col.1:6, 16:26, Rom.16:25-27, Acts 2:5, 11:28 also show this taking place, and that there were already “devout men, from every nation under heaven”).
After the destruction in AD70 (which may have included some sort of visible appearance of Christ alluded to by Josephus, and the actual “rapture of the saints” —we are still waiting for), the proverbial “left-behind” then went on to comprise the new Church. Yet they did not understand what had just occurred, and thus continued to look for something in the future, and then began developing (corrupting) into Catholicism, as leaders sought a stronger organizational system to deal with ongoing persecution and schism.
It is pointed out that there were two major groups of dissension in the Church before the destruction of Jerusalem: the Judaizers and the Gentile separatists. The Judaizers of course lost all their power, but the Gentile separatists (who would be the ones we can see Paul warning in Romans 11) are then the ones who gained power in the Church, and what did they do, but teach exclusion? (e.g. antisemitism took hold among many of the early fathers)
All of this makes all of Christian history finally make sense now! (Church historians had mentioned a so-called “lost century” between the last apostles, and the first Church fathers, in which the Church was clearly becoming more “Catholic” in doctrine, practice and organization).
The whole century surrounding AD70 would become “lost” because of the events and the sudden rapture of the Church.* The “church” was afterward no longer guided by the Spirit, and rapidly fell into purely human error and confusion of doctrine with no divine authority to resolve them (except for their own claims of authority.) 
If that is supposed to be an argument in support of what follows, i.e. your theory/interpretation re Romans 1:20 & 16:26, that is circular reasoning…it assumes what it needs to prove & can’t.
Again, circular reasoning. Assuming what it needs to prove but can’t. You’re reading your opinion into the texts and ignoring context completely. The word or idea of how long God has existed from eternity past to eternity future is no part of the context of Romans 16, nor implied there anywhere. Instead it is talking about a finite time long ago, a “mystery hidden for long ages past” (v.25), not eternity past or eternity future. The same word, aionios, is used twice & applied to finite ages past & to God Who was God during those ages. That’s a more probable understanding of the passage, if context means anything to you at all.
Moreover aion/ios is equivalent to olam. Yet when Scripture says God is from olam to olam (Psa.90:2; 103:17), the first olam cannot be eternal or endless. For the olam/aions had a beginning (1 Cor.2:7). This proves that aion/ios in reference to God need not necessarily mean eternal, e.g. as in Romans 16:25-26. Even your favorite translation, JPS, translates olam as “of old” [not “eternal”] when applied to God’s goings (Hab.3:6).
The argument is aionios & aidios both refer to God. And since aidios means eternal, so must aionios. That’s silly. If that were true then dozens of other Greek terms applied to God also mean eternal, such as the Greek words for “King”, “Lord”, etc. That is ridiculous.
Aionios is related to time in the Scriptures, not eternity:
in expectation of life eonian, which God, Who does not lie, promises before times eonian (Titus 1:2)
Who saves us and calls us with a holy calling, not in accord with our acts, but in accord with His own purpose and the grace which is given to us in Christ Jesus before times eonian,(2 Tim.1:9)
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 (Rom.16:25-26)
but we are speaking God’s wisdom in a secret, wisdom which has been concealed, which God designates before - before the eons, for our glory (1 Cor.2:7)
Those verses show that eons (ages) & times eonian had a beginning. They can’t be eternal in the past. Can they be eternal in the future, according to Scripture?
If time ends, the “times eonian” (Titus 1:2; 2 Tim.1:9; Rom.16:25) end & eonian ends with the beginning of eternity, then in Scripture eonian can never mean endless or everlasting.
The eons had a beginning (1 Cor.2:7, etc) & may also have an end (1 Cor.10:11; Heb.9:26). If so, then arguably that which is eonian must end as well.
Here in post #'s 130 & 131 are 12 arguments that the phrase “ages of the ages” is finite in Scripture, including some re all ages (eons) ending:
christianforums.com/threads … 864/page-7
Re Greek scholar Deissman:
"Adolph Deissman gives this account: “Upon a lead tablet found in the Necropolis at Adrumetum in the Roman province of Africa, near Carthage, the following inscription, belonging to the early third century, is scratched in Greek: ‘I am adjuring Thee, the great God, the eonian, and more than eonian (epaionion) and almighty…’ If by eonian, endless time were meant, then what could be more than endless time?” "
tentmaker.org/books/asw/Chapter9.html
The Greek text is on p.275ff of the following url. The English translation follows.
“I adjure thee by the great God, the eternal and more than eternal and almighty, who is exalted above the exalted Gods.” (p.277)
“The tablet, as is shown not only by its place of origin (the Necropolis of Adrumetum belongs to the second and third centuries, A.D.; the part in which the tablet was found is fixed in the third), but also by the character of the lettering, is to be assigned to the third century,1 that is— to determine it by a date in the history of the Greek Bible — about the time of Origen.” (p.279)
ia800300.us.archive.org/4/items … isuoft.pdf
Similarly we have the words of Greek scholar & Early Church Father, Origen.
Here is Origen’s commentary on John where in chapter 13:
13:19 “And after eternal life, perhaps it will also leap into the Father who is beyond eternal life”.
Commentary on the Gospel According to John, Books 13-32
By Origen
books.google.ca/books?id=TuHTu3 … &q&f=false
More examples showing aion & aionios, often deceptively mistranslated as ‘eternal’, as being used of finite duration, could be multiplied many times (as in the urls below). Here is another example of aionios used of finite duration, from early Church Father, Chrysostom:
“For that his[Satan’s] kingdom is of this age,αἰώνιος] i.e., will cease with the present ageαιώνι] …” (Homily 4 on Ephesians, Chapter II. Verses 1-3).
newadvent.org/fathers/230104.htm
hopebeyondhell.net/articles/ … /eternity/
According to your own theology many things are unseen, yet not eternal, e.g. Satan, demons, etc.
Satan’s kingdom is unseen, yet not eternal. Compare this quote by Early Church Father Chrysostom:
“For that his[Satan’s] kingdom is of this age,αἰώνιος] i.e., will cease with the present ageαιώνι] …” (Homily 4 on Ephesians, Chapter II. Verses 1-3).
CHURCH FATHERS: Homily 4 on Ephesians (Chrysostom)
The Greek text is here:
ia801309.us.archive.org/27/item … _vol_4.pdf
Compare also the very next verse of the context:
For we know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, an house not made with hands, eonian αἰώνιος/aionios] in the heavens. (2 Cor.5:1)
First, in this verse it says “aionios in the heavens”. Scripture says the heavens which now are will pass away. So if these heavens are temporary, so also can aionios be temporary in 2 Cor.5:1.
Secondly, that the house is not dissolved for an aionion (eonian) period of time does not necessarily mean that eonian means eternal in this verse. For example if something is not dissolved for the eon of the millennial age eon, that doesn’t mean the millennial eon is eternal.
Furthermore, Aionios is related to time in the Scriptures, not eternity:
in expectation of life eonian, which God, Who does not lie, promises before times eonian (Titus 1:2)
Who saves us and calls us with a holy calling, not in accord with our acts, but in accord with His own purpose and the grace which is given to us in Christ Jesus before times eonian,(2 Tim.1:9)
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 (Rom.16:25-26)
but we are speaking God’s wisdom in a secret, wisdom which has been concealed, which God designates before - before the eons, for our glory (1 Cor.2:7)
If time ends, the “times eonian” (Titus 1:2; 2 Tim.1:9; Rom.16:25) end & eonian ends with the beginning of eternity, then in Scripture eonian can never mean endless or everlasting.
Also the eons had a beginning (1 Cor.2:7, etc) & may also have an end (1 Cor.10:11; Heb.9:26). If so, then arguably what is eonian also must end.
Here in post #'s 130 & 131 are 12 arguments that the phrase “ages of the ages” is finite in Scripture, including some re all ages (eons) ending: