TonyN

Dear Ethn,
Thank you for your inquiry. A certain historic event comes to mind in which a nation in fact did persecute the Jewish people. That nation was Germany. The German government orchestrated the persecution and destruction of the Jewish people. Sure, not every individual person within that nation participated in the pogrom. Some people believe that ethnos in Matthew 25:32 could more properly be translated "Gentiles."

Why is a nation not capable of suffering? Cannot the nation of Africa suffer drought year after year? During the millennium the Lord will punish whole nations by withholding rain from their country should they not bring their yearly allotment or gift to Jerusalem. He will rule over certain nations with an iron club thus showing the adversative nature thereof.

I don't know why you state it is one of the highest state of Christian morality. During this time of "Jacob's trouble" A.K.A. the great tribulation, the anti-christ will go against the Jews in the latter 3 1/2 years of his reign. During this time, should a nation succor those Jewish brethren I'm sure that the anti-christ will make that nation pay dearly. Those who side with the anti-christ will receive blessings by him, I'm sure. When Christ comes back He will discard the anti-christ and then judge those nations as to how they treated His brethren. Most likely only representatives of the nations will appear before Christ at this judgment. The goat nations will enter into eonian chastening for what the did and failed to do to help His brethren. Likewise the sheep nations will enter into that life of blessing regarding the millennial kingdom as it pertains to that eon.
It is not about heaven and hell. It is about either being in the earthly kingdom or being outside of it where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth. Does this help?

Ben C Smith

Thanks, and likewise.

Liddell-Scott has period of existence, lifetime, life, age, generation, destiny, lot, long space of time, age (again), perpetually, forever, eternity, epoch, present world, age (again), and so forth. I do not find duration.

Where does the Bible call the millennial kingdom an age?

Let me explain why I ask. The relevant Jewish texts do not call the millennium an age. It sits uneasily between this age and the age to come, but it is not its own age.

4 Ezra 7.50 affirms that God has created, not one age, but two ages (propter hoc non fecit altissimus unum saeculum sed duo). 4 Ezra 7.112-113 states that the present time will end with the great day of judgment, at which point the future immortal time will begin. We know from 4 Ezra 6.7-10 (for example) that this author uses time as a synonym for age, and thus we learn that the dividing line between the present age and the future age (and remember, there are only two in 4 Ezra) is the great day of judgment. 4 Ezra 7.26-35 describes the messianic period (which this book puts at 400 years) as also coming before the great day of judgment. In other words, the messianic period precedes the age to come; it is the tail end of this present age.

The rabbinic literature agrees. Midrash on Psalm 90:17:

Make us glad according to the days wherein you have afflicted us. [According to the days that you have afflicted us in Babylon, in Media, in Greece, in Edom.] Make us glad according to the days of the messiah. And how long is the day of the messiah? Rabbi Eleazar asserted one thousand years. Rabbi Joshua said two thousand years. Rabbi Berechiah and Rabbi Dos the Elder said six hundred years. Rabbi Jose said sixty years. Rabbi Akiba said forty years. The rabbis said four thousand years. Rabbi Abba said seven thousand years.

Recall that Revelation 20 settles on the first option above, 1000 years.

Targum on Exodus 17:16:

...from the generation of this age, and the generation of the messiah, and the generation of the age to come.

Notice that the generation of the messiah is not the age to come.

Shabbat 63a:

...for rabbi Hiyya ben Abba stated: All the prophets prophesied concerning the messianic era, but as to the age to come, no eye has seen it, only you, God, alone.

Here the messianic era was what the prophets were talking about, but the age to come is a different timespan altogether.

Right. But the millennium is not, IMHO, supposed to be the age to come.

Point taken; it was not a very clear example. What about Daniel 4.31, where God lives for the age and his kingdom endures for the age? Daniel 6.21 affirms that the kingdom will not be destroyed.

How long does the new earth eon last, in your opinion?

I, on the other hand, regard all such pluralities of ages as instances of hyperbole. Some of the hyperbolic expressions do not even make much syntactic sense.

Can it be forgiven, then, in the eon after that (what you are calling the new earth eon), in your judgment?

That was never in the offing.

Where is that?

Again, likewise.

Ben.

Amaleq13

In addition, I would like to know why and how it ends.

Oh, and where in the Bible this information can be found.

TonyN

When canvasing olam/aion in all of its occurrences it seems to me that "duration" fits the best. For instance, when Jonah was in the belly of the fish, he was not in it for an age nor forever but for duration. The duration happened to be three days and nights. One could also have "periodness" for olam/aiwn.


I'm glad you asked for it shows you really are looking at what I'm writing. In Luke 1:33 it is stated: ". . . and He shall reign over the house of Jacob for the eons. And of His kingdom there shall be no consummation."

We know He has not been reigning over the house of Jacob during this eon. Therefore the next two eons is when He accomplishes this, those eons being the 1000 year long eon and the new earth eon. These two eons are called "the eons of the eons" in that they are the two greatest eons in relation to all the eons that went before.
If you will please note on my chart I have shown above, each eon comes about by a world-wide catastrophe. The first eon ended with the disruption. The second by the flood. The third eon in which we are living called "the present wicked eon (Gal.1:4) will end with an earthquake in which all the cities of the world will fall and the islands will be moved. the fourth eon ends by th earth being destroyed by fire and a new earth eon emerging therefrom.

That's nice that they have their opinions on this matter but I believe that the Sacred Scriptures carry more weight. I don't see where the final eon is called an eon in the Scriptures. It must be deducted from other scriptures such as Christ reigning for the eons (more than one) to come. The only two eons to come that I can see is the 1000 years eon and the new earth eon. The Bible speaks of eons in the past, this eon, and eons in the future. Therefore the rabbinical sources are not in line with the Scriptures.


You have a right to your opinion.


Is it possible you meant Dan.4:34?
Dan 4:34 And at the end of the days, I, Nebuchadnezzar, lifted my eyes to the heavens, and my knowledge is returning to me. Then I blessed the Supreme, and I lauded and honored Him Who is living for the eon, seeing that His jurisdiction is an eonian jurisdiction, and His kingdom is with generation after generation."

Is it possible rather than Daniel 6:21 you meant Daniel 7:14? . . .
Dan 7:14 to Him is granted jurisdiction and esteem and a kingdom, and all the peoples and leagues and language-groups shall serve Him; His jurisdiction, as an eonian jurisdiction, will not pass away, and His kingdom shall not be confined." This passage is referenced by Luke in 1:33.

He lives for the eon. In Revelation 20 He lives for the 1000 years. Just because eon and 1000 years end does not imply that He dies. His kingdom shall not be confined. In other words it will have world-wide sway. It is in that sense that it is meant it will have no consummation in Luke 1:33. In other words, it will not end in Jerusalem nor Israel but it will continue through the whole world.

I believe that the next eon will be approximately 1000 years (it will exceed that a little). I believe the eon after that will be much longer. The Psalmist talks about the "thousand generations." It is my opinion (not that it really matters) that the last eon will be at least seventeen thousand years in duration.

Maybe if you gave some instances of where they do not make systactic sense?
For me they make perfect sense. If we are living in "the present wicked eon" and the Bible speaks of eons prior to this one and eons after this one, what is so difficult about that?


It will not need to be forgiven or pardoned in or after that eon. They will already have served the penalty for that offense in this eon and in the impending eon prior to the new earth eon. Does a criminal need pardoned if he has already fulfilled the time for the crime and is released?


Good.


Heb 9:26 "since then He must often be suffering from the disruption of the world, yet now, once, at the conclusion of the eons, for the repudiation of sin through His sacrifice, is He manifest."

He was manifest for the repudiation of sin when the eons conclude. In other words, when the eons end, sin will then be repudiated.

1 Cor.10:11 Now all this befalls them typically. Yet it was written for our admonition, to whom the consummations of the eons have attained." Each eon has a specific consummation.

Ben C Smith

How did Liddell and Scott missed that best-fit definition?

Well, yes and no. The Hebrew versification has 4.31 where our modern Bibles and the LXX have 4.34. It is the same verse differently numbered. I should have used the modern versification for clarity. My fault.

No, and my apologies for the confusion. I really meant Daniel 6.27, in which the kingdom is not destroyed.

In Isaiah 45.17 the Hebrew has unto the ages, plural. But the LXX translation has unto the age, singular. I think this discrepancy comes about because both of these expressions mean the same thing. The plural is simply hyperbole.

It is the same in English. We can say either forever or forever and ever. Which is longer? If by forever we mean for all time, how can one get any longer than that? Answer: It is just hyperbole.

There are all kinds of these hyperbolic expressions in the Bible; unto the age, unto the ages, unto the age of the age, unto the age of the ages, unto the ages of the ages, and some others. The use of these expressions is largely a matter of style. For example, the form that I call the compound plural (unto the ages of the ages) usually appears in doxologies (Galatians 1.5; Philippians 4.20; 1 Timothy 1.17; 2 Timothy 4.18; Hebrews 13.21; 1 Peter 4.11). Yet the author of Revelation uses it as his only form of this kind of expression; he never uses any other term for it, doxology or not.

1. Because the usual background texts are explicit that there are only two ages in the eschatological structure. On this we will just have to agree to disagree, since I cannot even imagine not looking to the background texts for information on these things.

2. Because these kinds of expressions are so, so susceptible to hyperbole. Even in English, is there a word used hyperbolically more often than forever?

[QUOTE]It will not need to be forgiven or pardoned in or after that eon. They will already have served the penalty for that offense in this eon and in the impending eon prior to the new earth eon. Does a criminal need pardoned if he has already fulfilled the time for the crime and is released?

This is your key verse, it appears, for your assertion that all good ages must come to an end. But how did Jesus appear now, once, at the conclusion of the eons, when there were yet two eons to go?

Jesus was (past tense) manifest when the eons conclude (present tense, with future meaning?). This I do not understand. When Jesus was made manifest, there were still at least two ages left to go, right? How does the expression the consummation of the ages, then, mean that all ages must have an end?

According to the verse, the eons in question ended nearly two millennia ago. It says: Now, once, at the consummation of the ages, for the setting aside of sin through his sacrifice, he has been manifested (perfect tense, action already completed). 1 Corinthians 10.11 is similar; Paul writes that he and his readers are those upon whom the ends of the ages have fallen. But Paul was writing nearly two millennia ago. How could the ends of all the ages have happened back then?

Ben.

Ben C Smith

Hi, Tony. Two, quick questions about your chart.

First, you have death being abolished at the end of the new earth period. But does not Revelation 21.4 mean that death has already been abolished at the beginning of the new earth period? Death has already been cast into the lake of fire.

Second, what is that first eon? You have Hebrews 1.2 down as your reference, but that verse talks only about creating the eons. What places this creation an entire eon before Adam?

Ben.

TonyN

I am editing this because I didn't really answer your question above:
Death in 21:4 was no more for the habitants of the New City Jerusalem. Death is still in force for those outside the city who still need the leaves of the tree for the healing of the nations in Revelation 22:2 not to mention that the second death is still in operation till the end of the new earth eon.
Notice also in Revelation that Christ is still reigning, not all of humanity are yet subject to Christ, sovereignties, authorities and powers are still in force on the new earth. In 1 Corinthians 15:22-28 Paul shows death being abolished when Christ quits reigning, when all sovereignty, authority and power are annulled and all are then subject to Christ. God will then be All in all, not just All in some of humanity.

Remember when I wrote that every eon ends with a major cataclysm affecting the world? Let's look at Genesis 1:1,2:

Gen 1:1 [this is the first eon] Created by the Elohim were the heavens and the earth.
[This is the ending of that first eon] Gen 1:2 Yet the earth became a chaos and vacant, and darkness was on the surface of the submerged chaos.
[This is the beginning of the 2nd eon] Yet the spirit of the Elohim is vibrating over the surface of the water.

According to Isaiah 45:18, God did not create the earth a chaos. It became that way:
Isa 45:18 "For thus says Yahweh, Creator of the heavens; He is the Elohim, and Former of the earth, and its Maker, and He, He established it. He did not create it a chaos. He formed it to be indwelt. "I am Yahweh, and there is none else."

The cataclysm ended the first eon. The second eon is making the earth habitable again starting with Genesis 1:2b. Adam lived in the 2nd eon that ended with Noah and his family by the earth destroying flood. We are still in the 3rd eon. The eon in which we now live started after the flood in Noah's day after the waters abated off the earth.

TonyN

It is possible that they were only giving what the English translations had for that specific Hebrew/Greek (olam/aiwn) word? I don't know. No one is perfect. How did the Christian world miss justification by faith until Luter brought it to light?

Tony replies:
This is what I have:
Dan 6:26 From before me is promulgated this decree:In every authority of my kingdom be they stirred and terrified before Daniel's Eloah:He is the living Eloah and is set up for the eons. His kingdom shall not come to harm and His jurisdiction is till the terminus.

If you look again at my chart you will see "for ever and ever" and that this corresponds with "for the eons of the eons." The English translation for "for the eon" is "for ever" and "for the eons of the eons" is "for ever and ever." There are two evers remaining: the 1000 year ever and the new earth ever. No ever is eternal. Today we use "for ever" hypobolically when stating "I stood in line for ever!" but it might have only been 15 minutes. In the Bible, however, when it states that one shall live for the eon or for ever, this is not hyperbole. When it is stated that Christ will reign "for the eons of the eons" this too is not hyperbole but is a literal statement. He will reign for the next two eons which are the greatest eons of all the eons that went before. A similar concept is the tabernacle. There was the holies of the holies which were the final two holy places in which the high priest went each year to meet God. There were 5 holy parts to the system. The holies of the holies were the two holiest parts of the former holies the priest had to go through. This is not hyperbole either.

If you wish to read why I do not believe these are hyperbolic statements you might want to visit these two web pages:
The eon of the eons: http://www.godstruthfortoday.org/Lib...nOfTheEons.htm
The eons of the eons: http://www.godstruthfortoday.org/Lib...sOfTheEons.htm

"For the eon" was not ever used hyperbolically in the Scriptures. At least I have not found a verse yet. Just because we, today, 2000 years removed, use the English word "forever" hyperbolically does not mean that the Greeks used "for the eon" hyperbolically. Furthermore, forever is not a correct word for "for the eon" anyway because it comes loaded with all sorts of philosophical, theological concepts not found in the Sacred writings.

Dear Ben, I thought I had cleared that up earlier knowing you would probably say something. Jesus did not appear at the conclusion of the eons. Here is the verse again:

Heb 9:26 "since then He must often be suffering from the disruption of the world, yet now, once, at the conclusion of the eons, for the repudiation of sin through His sacrifice, is He manifest."
In Matthew 24:3 the disciples asked Jesus when the conclusion of the eon is. He did not say it is when He dies. Notice the earth shattering events Jesus speaks of that will end this current eon in which we live. Those events have not occurred yet.
The Concordant Commentary by A.E. Knoch has this to say about Hebrews 9:26: "It is evident that Christ did not appear at "the end of the world", nor, indeed, at the conclusion of the eons. Neither has sin been completely eliminated. Such, however, is the efficacy of His sacrifice, that we know that sin must eventually be banished from the universe. And we know also that this will be at the conclusion of the eons. Hence this somewhat complicated sentence has been rendered to this effect."

If you wish to know more about Hebrews 9:26 I'd be more than happy to share with you brother.

No,
I guess it is just best to stick with the verse itself.
"is manifest" is Perfect Passive Indicative
"at the conclusion of the eons" is the Dative case
Jesus is manifested (so that) at the consummation of the eons sin would be repudiated.

Yes, the sacrifice is action already completed. Do to that action sin will be repudiated at the conclusion of the eons.

Let's put it in modern lingo:
At the conclusion of two years, for the extermination the African beetle the spraying of the field is manifest.

The spraying of the field by insecticide came first. The spraying did not happen at the end of the two years but prior to them. It is long acting. It will fully eradicate the African Beetle at the end of the two years.

Ben C Smith

I suspect, rather, that they took their cue from passages such as Psalms of Solomon 14.4, where unto the age parallels all the days of heaven, which sounds a lot like forever.

Not going to go there, my friend. You may not wish to know what I think of Luther (both good and bad).

In your ensuing discussion, I think you missed what I was trying to say. Daniel 6.26 says that the kingdom will not be destroyed; I am presuming that, if it is not destroyed, then it will last forever (in our usual sense of the term). Yet Daniel 4.24 says that the kingdom will last unto the age. Why say that the kingdom is going to last an age when it is really going to last at least two more ages, and even then keep going?

Also, another question for you. When in the OT we encounter the expression unto the age (singular), which age is it? Is something that is going to last unto the age going to last until the millennium begins (that is, the rest of this age), or is it going to last until the millennium ends (that is, the rest of this age and the entire 1000 years)?

I hear you saying that Jesus was not made manifest at the conclusion of the eons, and I see Hebrews 9.26 saying that Jesus has been made manifest now, once, at the conclusion of the eons.

The author of Hebrews called the consummation of the age now. If he did not mean that the consummation of the age was now, I do not know what he meant. Ditto for Paul in 1 Corinthians 10.

You say that the consummation of the ages has not yet transpired. I say that we ought to read the text for what it says, hang the consequences.

Actually, this is the one thing that the verse does not say had already happened. It is part of an εις clause that does not have to indicate an immediate result; there can be a delay between the action and the intended result. What cannot be wrenched out of the verse is a delay between now and at the consummation of the ages.

Yes, I would like to know how you parse the syntax.

Correct. Meaning that Jesus had, at the time of writing, already been made manifest.

Correct. As the object of the preposition επι, it has to take one of the objective cases; επι plus the dative, when used of a time, means at that time. In Daniel 4.34 Nebuchadnezzar finally blesses God at the consummation of the seven years.

The εις clause does not include the επι clause; the latter precedes the former.

You forgot the now. Now, once, at the conclusion of two years, for the purpose of exterminating the beetle, the field-spraying has been made manifest. In this sentence the speaker is speaking at the now moment, at the conclusion of the two years, and the field has just been sprayed.

Ben.

TonyN

"Do" in the sentence above should be "Due." I don't know why sometimes I can edit a post and sometimes not.

Also, Ben, I am curious why you did not comment concerning what the disciples asked the Lord and His reply in Matthew 24:3 and its relation to Hebrews 9:26:

Heb 9:26 "since then He must often be suffering from the disruption of the world, yet now, once, at the conclusion of the eons, for the repudiation of sin through His sacrifice, is He manifest."
In Matthew 24:3 the disciples asked Jesus when the conclusion of the eon is. He did not say it is when He dies. Notice the earth shattering events Jesus speaks of that will end this current eon in which we live. Those events have not occurred yet.
The Concordant Commentary by A.E. Knoch has this to say about Hebrews 9:26: "It is evident that Christ did not appear at "the end of the world", nor, indeed, at the conclusion of the eons. Neither has sin been completely eliminated. Such, however, is the efficacy of His sacrifice, that we know that sin must eventually be banished from the universe. And we know also that this will be at the conclusion of the eons. Hence this somewhat complicated sentence has been rendered to this effect."

I think it is pretty clear that Chrst did not appear at the conclusion of the eons just by what Christ said would have to happen in Matthew 24 and 25.

By the way, you stated you believe in only two eons/ages?
There is yet more than one eon to come in the future according to the Sacred Scriptures:

Eph 2:7 "that, in the oncoming eons, He should be displaying the transcendent riches of His grace in His kindness to us in Christ Jesus."

We are living in "the current wicked aiwn" (Gal.1:4)
I don't believe that is hyperbole. There are at least two more eons to come in spite of what your Jewish and Christian sources say.

You do the math:
Current wicked eon
+ eons to come
______________
= at least 3 eons

Oh heck, while I'm at it, I'm wondering why you did not respond to this which I think is paramount to the discussion at hand which I wrote:

If you look again at my chart you will see "for ever and ever" and that this corresponds with "for the eons of the eons." The English translation for "for the eon" is "for ever" and "for the eons of the eons" is "for ever and ever." There are two evers remaining: the 1000 year ever and the new earth ever. No ever is eternal. Today we use "for ever" hypobolically when stating "I stood in line for ever!" but it might have only been 15 minutes. In the Bible, however, when it states that one shall live for the eon or for ever, this is not hyperbole. When it is stated that Christ will reign "for the eons of the eons" this too is not hyperbole but is a literal statement. He will reign for the next two eons which are the greatest eons of all the eons that went before. A similar concept is the tabernacle. There was the holies of the holies which were the final two holy places in which the high priest went each year to meet God. There were 5 holy parts to the system. The holies of the holies were the two holiest parts of the former holies the priest had to go through. This is not hyperbole either."