Page 9 of 13

Re: Something I have Noticed

Posted: Mon Dec 30, 2013 4:48 pm
by Roberto
backwoodsman wrote:
Roberto wrote:From this angle, Jesus could be speaking of an age not adjacent to the age that He was speaking in, but there could be an age or ages in between, rather than the angle that insists that the age to come (adjacent age) is the resurrection age.
Does that make sense?
Yes, that's exactly what we've been saying. :)

(In the passage in question there's no reference to how many ages may be in between, but it seems clear elsewhere that there's one, and only one.)
Well, that all hinges in that NIV issue under discussion. I didn't realize that that translation had been rejected. So don't get smart :)

Re: Something I have Noticed

Posted: Mon Dec 30, 2013 5:03 pm
by steve
Roberto,

The NIV is generally recognized as a less-literal translation than many. The translators commonly interpret and paraphrase, rather than translate. Not everyone knows this, and some churches use the NIV exclusively. I think this is damaging to the overall biblical literacy of their congregations.

Re: Something I have Noticed

Posted: Mon Dec 30, 2013 5:11 pm
by Roberto
Homer wrote:But what did "this age" and the "age to come" mean to Jesus who spoke the words concerning blaspheming the Holy Spirit? He seemed to know of only "this age" and that age when speaking of marriage:


Luke 20:34-36, New American Standard Bible (NASB)

34. Jesus said to them, “The sons of this age marry and are given in marriage, 35. but those who are considered worthy to attain to that age and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry nor are given in marriage; 36. for they cannot even die anymore, because they are like angels, and are sons of God, being sons of the resurrection.


There doesn't appear to be an age A & B in Jesus' mind. This age runs until the resurrection.
Homer, your interpretation hinges upon the NIV rendering "age to come". If it doesn't mean that ( many translations, perhaps most on Bible Gateway) do no not render it such. Looks like you have to discard that, unless you can give good reasons for such a translation, no?

Re: Something I have Noticed

Posted: Mon Dec 30, 2013 5:16 pm
by backwoodsman
Roberto wrote:Well, that all hinges in that NIV issue under discussion. I didn't realize that that translation had been rejected. So don't get smart :)
LOL (...wasn't actually meaning to get smart..)

In addition to Steve's comments, I'd add that as easy-reading (i.e. aimed at a very low reading level) translations go, NIV is arguably better than most; but unless one really needs the low reading level, there are much better choices. This is a good illustration of why it's good to check several translations, and use some other well-chosen study aids, whenever possible.

Re: Something I have Noticed

Posted: Mon Dec 30, 2013 6:26 pm
by john6809
I believe that “the age to come” is here the age in which we now live. We have received this aionios life through the regeneration of the Holy Spirit. Remember, “aionios life” can mean “life pertaining to the age.”
Thanks, Steve. Makes sense. The jury is still out (and may always be), but I find the theory at least plausible.

Re: Something I have Noticed

Posted: Mon Dec 30, 2013 7:12 pm
by Paidion
In what way would B and C not be adjacent? I just don't understand, Roberto.

My own view is that John the Baptizer introduced a new age.

“The Law and the Prophets were until John; since then the good news of the kingdom of God is preached..." (Luke 16:16)

So prior to John, was age A, which included the law and the prophets (unless it would be better to make that TWO ages, pre-law and law). When the Kingdom of God appeared (Jesus the King and His disciples, the subjects), the new age of the Kingdom began—Age B. John the Baptizer's message was "the beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ" (Mark 1:1). That special day of Pentecost did not mark a new age, but a new phase in which the Holy Spirit was given, but still in age B. For even the apostle Paul preached the Kingdom (last verse of Acts). Age C begins with Christ's return and the resurrection of the righteous and ends when the 1000 years is up (yes, I'm a millenialist), and "The kingdoms of this world will have become the kingdoms of our Lord and of His Messiah, and He shall reign for ages and ages!" (Rev. 11:15). Then begins age D. During this age God and perhaps His saints will work with the lost until all are reconciled to God. Then Jesus the Messiah will turn the Kingdom over to God that God might be all in all! (1 Cor. 15:28).

Whether D is the final age or whether the ages continue to roll forever, I don't know, but I'm inclined toward ages continuing forever.

Re: Something I have Noticed

Posted: Mon Dec 30, 2013 10:14 pm
by Roberto
"In what way would B and C not be adjacent? I just don't understand, Roberto?"

They would not be so if the NIV is correct.....

Re: Something I have Noticed

Posted: Mon Dec 30, 2013 10:19 pm
by Homer
Backwoodsman,
Homer wrote:
If the Pharisees are not forgiven in ages "A" and "B", but will be forgiven in age "C", why would they be concerned with Jesus' threat? What is the risk for them?

Homer, you keep saying you know and understand the evangelical universalist position, but you keep demonstrating that you don't.
It has been acknowledged by some of UR persuasion that post-mortem repentance might happen immediately at the judgment or immediately after. So explain to me what their risk consists of. Thanks

Re: Something I have Noticed

Posted: Mon Dec 30, 2013 10:22 pm
by Homer
Where is the response to this:


Seems the "never be forgiven" is the only understanding that makes practical sense of Jesus words. Especially since in Luke's telling of it:

Luke 12:10, New American Standard Bible (NASB)
10. And everyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man, it will be forgiven him; but he who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit, it will not be forgiven him.

"not be forgiven him" is literally "will not be forgiven" and the verb is "indicative-future-passive-third person-singular". The person will not be forgiven in the future which takes care of all ages imagined, and is consistent with all three gospels.

Re: Something I have Noticed

Posted: Mon Dec 30, 2013 11:18 pm
by Roberto
Homer wrote:Where is the response to this:


Seems the "never be forgiven" is the only understanding that makes practical sense of Jesus words. Especially since in Luke's telling of it:

Luke 12:10, New American Standard Bible (NASB)
10. And everyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man, it will be forgiven him; but he who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit, it will not be forgiven him.

"not be forgiven him" is literally "will not be forgiven" and the verb is "indicative-future-passive-third person-singular". The person will not be forgiven in the future which takes care of all ages imagined, and is consistent with all three gospels.
That's a good challenge. Someone will have to drag out the Greek.