After reading a very well written explanation of Matthew 25.46 here in the forum, I have a question.
My question assumes the following:
---Christians are not promised "eternal" life in heaven, but are only promised "age-abiding" life, given that a proper translation of "aion" would be "age-abiding" not "eternal."
---"Age-abiding" life is not infinite in duration, but is of finite duration.
I think its a mistake to think that
aionion life is describing the
duration of life in Christ and therefore must mean either [1] infinite or [2] finite duration. That's a trap.
Christ defined
aionion life like this: "And this is life
aionion, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent."'
That is not a duration of life, it is a kind of life.
---Christians are promised "immortality."
Given the above premises, my question is this: Is the immortality promised to Christians of infinite duration? That is, if I possess immortality, will I live for an infinite, endless duration of time with God in Heaven?
Immortality means we can not die, so yes we live forever and yes we will be with God always:
1 Thesselonians 4:17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.And secondly, when Hebrews 13.8 says that Jesus is "the same, yesterday, today, and forever," the word "forever" is translated (at least in the NASB) from the Greek word "aion." So I assume Hebrews 13.8 is an example where "aion" was correctly translated "forever," if "forever" means "an infinite duration of time into the future," as opposed to meaning "a finite age of time."
No, it's not an example where "forever" would be a correct translation of the word
aion. The word
aion in that verse is plural and means "ages". Here are two literal translations:
Hebrews 13:8 Jesus Christ yesterday and to-day the same, and to the ages;
Robert Young Literal Translation 1862, 1887, 1898 Info
Hebrews 13:8 - Jesus Christ [is] the same yesterday, and to-day, and to the ages [to come].
J.N.Darby Translation 1890 Info
If "aion" in Hebrews 13.8 should be translated "age-abiding" (i.e., finite time), then Hebrews 13.8 would be telling us that Jesus Christ is the same, "yesterday, today, and for some finite age of time to come." In this case, the writer would no longer be affirming the immutability of Christ for all future time. What then would be the point of this statement?
It should be translated "ages" not "age-abiding".
The verse as a whole IS affirming Christ's unchangingness. Look, if I said to you "Christ is the same today as He was yesterday, and the same tommorow as He is today" wouldn't you gather that Christ never changes? I think so - even though each time-word in the sentence is finite and the sentence deals with just three days. You would not gather that on the day after tommorow, Christ changes.
None of this is intended as an argument against universalism. But I'm trying to affirm that:
(1) Even if the word "aion" should always be translated "age-abiding" and refers to a limited, finite time period, the Christian nevertheless may await an infinite duration of time in Heaven with God, based on the promise of immortality, and
(2) There are in fact occasions where it is proper to translate "aion" as "forever" or whatever equivalent word would convey the idea of an infinite, unlimited duration of future time, as in Hebrews 13.8.
As far as I know the word
aion should never be translated "age-abiding" or "forever". It should be translated "age" or if plural "ages". I know of no verse where it does not make perfect sense to tranlate
aion as "age" or "ages".
It is the word
aionion which is the adjective form of
aion that is translated "age-abiding", "age-during", "eonion" and in the ET translations "eternal" or "everlasting". English does not have adjective form of "age" other than "eonian" so it becomes more difficult to translate than translating
aion.