Don wrote:
PART THREE
PROOF OF THE ERROR OF THE CLNT
BY THE UNIVERSALISTS OWN DEFINITION
OF
IMMORTALITY AND INCORRUPTIBLE
WHICH IS ENDLESS LIFE

IMMORTAL {aphthartos} Strong’s #862 uses of [862, aphthartos] in the King James Version.

    Tony’s reply: It is hard to rely on Strong. Concerning Don’s beloved King James Version he has, for instance, for Strong’s number 861 he has “incorruptible,” “immortal” and “sincerity” (Eph.6:24; Titus 2:7). For 862 he has “immortal.” For 861 and 110 he has “immortality.” Kind of confusing if you ask me. How something that is “sincere” can mean “incorruption” is beyond me. Will believers receive sincerity or incorruption? Maybe Don can illuminate us on this puzzle.
    I don’t know where Don gets his information. Incorruptible is not defined as “endless life” as Don falsely accuses us of believing. Rather, “incorruptible” according to the American Heritage Dictionary means: “1. incapable of being corrupted morally. 2. Not subject to corruption or decay.” I guess if I go by number 2 of the dictionary then Don could accuse me of believing incorruptible means “not subject to decay” and hence is meaning “endless life.” However, Don would be correct to state that we believe that one who puts on immortality would be receiving an endless life.

Don continues: Romans 1:23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible[862] God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.
    1Corinthians 9:25 And every[3956] man that striveth for the mastery is temperate in all things[3956].  Now they [do it] to obtain a corruptible crown; but we an incorruptible[862].
    1Corinthians 15:52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump:  for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible[862], and we shall be changed.
    1Timothy 1:17 Now unto the King eternal[165], immortal [862], invisible, the only wise God, [be] honour and glory for ever[165] and ever[165]. Amen.
    (note: Strong’s Concordance #165 is “aion” which is rendered “eon” in the Concordant Literal.  Major error since God is immortal, God is clearly not “for a period of time.”)

    1Peter 1:4 To an inheritance incorruptible[862], and undefiled, and that fadeth not away, reserved in heaven for you,
    1Peter 1:23 Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible[862], by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever[165]. (note: Strong’s Concordance #165 is “aion” which is rendered “eon” in the Concordant Literal.  Major error since God is immortal, God is clearly not “for a period of time.”)
    1Peter 3:4 But [let it be] the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible[862], [even the ornament] of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price.
    Romans 2:7 To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality[861], eternal[166] life: (note:  same thing here again with #166{aionios}, except it is not #165{aion}Strong’s Concordance #165 is “aion” which is rendered “eon” in the Concordant Literal.  Major error since God is immortal, God is clearly not “for a period of time.”)

    2Timothy 1:10 But is now made manifest by the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ, who hath abolished death, and hath brought life and immortality[861] to light through the gospel:
    Tony’s reply: I wonder why it is that everyone who understands that the eons are not eternal do not believe that God is therefore for a period of time? Could it be that Don is just making a straw man argument? It does not logically follow that if the eons are not of an unending duration that God therefore must be for a period of time.
    Also, where in all the verses above which Don quotes would lead one to believe that God would be for a period of time should aion be brought directly over into English in its Anglicized form as “eon”? If I live for the month, and I live through a week, should we re-translate “week” to be “month” so that one would not think my life would be shortened should I live for a week in spite of the fact that I will live for the duration of a month as well? Of course not. And why, when we are aware that God has immortality and incorruptibleness that this should cause us to re-translate “aion” into something foreign to its basic meaning? Since we know that God’s life will never end and at the same time we know that the eons do in fact all end, it must be that when the eons end that God continues to live.

Don continues:

“THE PROOF THAT UNIVERSALISM CONTRADICT’S
IT’S OWN DEFINITION OF “ENDLESS LIFE”


GOD:
     John 10:18 No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father.
     1Timothy 1:17 Now unto the King eternal, immortal[862](aphthartos), invisible, the only wise God, [be] honour and glory for ever and ever[165](aion). Amen.
     Jeremiah 10:10 But the LORD [is] the true God, he [is] the living God, and an everlasting king: 1Timothy 6:15 “...[who is] the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords;”
     1Timothy 6:16 Who only hath immortality[110](athanasia), dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom [be] honour and power everlasting. Amen.
     2Timothy 1:10 But is now made manifest by the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ, who hath abolished death, and hath brought life and immortality[861](aphtharsia) to light through the gospel:
Revelation 17:14 “...the Lamb shall overcome them: for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings...”

     Revelation 19:16 And he hath on [his] vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.
     Daniel 4:34 “...and I blessed the most High, and I praised and honoured him that liveth for ever, whose dominion [is] an everlasting dominion, and his kingdom [is] from generation to generation:...”
     Psalms 90:2 Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever thou hadst formed the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, thou [art] God.
     1Kings 8:27 But will God indeed dwell on the earth? behold, the heaven and heaven of heavens cannot contain thee; how much less this house that I have builded?

BELIEVERS:
     1Corinthians 15:42 So also [is] the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption[861](aphtharsia):
     1Corinthians 15:50 Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption[861](aphtharsia).
     1Corinthians 15:52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible[862](aphthartos), and we shall be changed.
     1Corinthians 15:53 For this corruptible must put on incorruption[861](aphtharsia), and this mortal [must] put on immortality[110](athanasia).
     1Corinthians 15:54 So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption[861](aphtharsia), and this mortal shall have put on immortality[110](athanasia), then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.
     Romans 2:7 “...To them who by patient continuance in well doing...immortality[861](aphtharsia),eternal life:...”


Don wrote:
CONCLUSION:  By the Universalist’s own definition of there own eternal, “endless” life by the substantiation of God becoming “all in all” in 1 Corinthians 15:28, by virtue of the incorruptible(aphtharsia) body being raised “immortal, incorruptible” are identical words, also substantiated by the Greek word’s used to define “immortal, incorruptible” are identical to those Greek word’s to define the attributes of God  (1 Timothy 6:16: immortality[110](athanasia) and 1Timothy 1:17: “immortal[862](aphthartos)” and 2Timothy 1:10:  “... immortality[861](aphtharsia) and eternal life....”)
Hence, this disproves the “for a period of time” definition of the Greek word’s “aion and aionios”  by virtue that God himself is “immortal, incorruptible, without end and everlasting.

Tony’s reply:   Don is confused. We DO NOT believe the “incorruptible” body is raised immortal and incorruptible but that our MORTAL body puts on IMMORTALITY and the CORRUPTIBLE body puts on INCORRUPTION, (see 1 Corinthians 15:53,54).
    Also, we DO NOT believe “aion” and “aionios” mean “for a period of time.” I go into detail on this below. Also, the noun “aion” and it’s adjectival form “aionios” do not morph into a different meaning due to God or Christ having attributes of immortalness and incorruptibleness. That is just nonsensical! The noun, according to grammatical rules, should never modify the adjective.
    Immortality and incorruption are not equated with aion/aionion. For instance, there have already been two epochal eons which have come and gone already. Were they eternal? Were they to be equated with immortality and incorruption? Every major eon is ended by a world-wide catastrophe. The first was when the world became chaos and vacant in Genesis 1:2. The second eon began when God made the earth habitable again beginning in Gen.1:2 and that eon ended with the flood in Noah’s day. We are living in the third eon. This eon will end with the world devastating earthquake when all the cities of the nations will fall and then Christ comes back (Rev.16:18,19). Is this eon eternal? Is it to be equated with immortality or incorruption? Were any that went before? No.
    The next eon or age will be called the millennium. It will last 1000 years. Does that sound like eternity to you? The eon/age after that will be the new earth eon. As eons go, I doubt it will be eternal as well for the Bible tells us that all the eons end (1 Cor.10:11; Heb.9:26), so how, according to 1john57, can they be equated with immortal and incorruptible?

    Also, aionion is just an adjective. It modifies the noun. A noun is just a person, place or thing. In William D. Mounce’s “Basics of Biblical Greek, page 25, he states this: “Adjective. An adjective is a word that modifies a noun.” (end quote). The basic meaning of “eonian” is “pertaining to the eon(s).” So in Romans 16:26 where eonian modifies the noun, “God,” as “the eonian God,” it is not telling us how long God lives. Rather, it is telling us God’s relationship to the eons. He is the eonian God. He is the God pertaining to the eons. He is over them, directing them, subjecting all mankind to the goals He has for each eon. When the eons end God will cease to be the eonian God. He will then be God Who will be “All in all” (1 Corinthians 15:28). Anywhere in the new testament where “eonian” is used, just think of it as something pertaining to the eon or eons.
    By the way, Don says we believe aion and aionios means “for a period of time.” This is incorrect. The basic historical meaning of aion is just “duration.” We know if that duration has an end by specific, definitive Scriptures. Aion and Aionios do not mean the same thing as Don suggests. One is a noun, the other an adjective. They have two different functions.

    I wonder if Don would try to make “chilioi” (thousand) become “eternal” since it is related to Christ and those with Him as reigning and living for a thousand years (Rev.20:4) who have immortality and incorruption? Are they going to die when the 1000 years ends? We should not make “thousand” be “eternal” any more than we should make “eonian” to be “eternal” just so Christ and God can have immortality and incorruption. Get it?
    What I’d like to add to the thought is that, very often, word smiths, such as W.E. Vine, will say concerning aionios, that it can mean one thing in one setting and quite another in another setting. For instance he states:
     “Aionios describes duration, either undefined but not endless, as in Romans 16:25; 2 Tim 1:9; Titus 1:2; or undefined because endless, as in Rom 16:26, and the other 66 places in the NT. The predominant meaning of aionios, that in which it is used everywhere in the NT, save the places noted above, may be seen in 2 Cor 4:18, where it is set in contrast with proskairos, lit. ?for a season,’ and in Philemon 15, where only in the NT it is used without a noun. Moreover it is used of persons and things which are in their nature endless, as, e.g., of God, Rom 16:26.”
    But is Vine correct? We are taught that the adjective modifies the noun or modifies another adjective. A good example would be: “The black suitcase is mine.” The adjective “black” modifies the the noun “suitcase.” The size, or quality of the suitcase or its durability should not cause “black” to morph into a different meaning. Likewise, neither should the noun “God” cause the adjective “aionios” to morph into something altogether different from its basic meaning even if God does have attributes greater than that of humanity.

    Vine stated that “it [aionios] is used of persons” which in their nature are endless as of God” is, well, sort of correct, BUT it is incorrect to make their endlessness cause aionios to mean something other than “pertaining to the eon(s).” By “sort of correct” the Bible never states that God is a “person”. It does however state that “God is spirit.” But I don’t want to get off on a rabbit trail here.

    Does the term “the timely God” cause “timely” to mean something different than if it is used in the context of “the timely girl”? Should “timely” morph into something eternal when used of God but of limited duration when connected with “girl”?
    Vine states this concerning aionios: “The predominant meaning of aionios, that in which it is used everywhere in the NT, save the places noted above, may be seen in 2 Cor 4:18, where it is set in contrast with proskairos, lit. “for a season.”
     What Vine is trying to state is that the predominant meaning of aionios is “eternal” because it is contrasted with proskairos which means “for a season.” But is this correct? Can something which means “for a week” if it is contrasted with something that lasts much much longer such as “decade” cause “decade” to morph into “eternity”? No. Well, that which is eonian is that which pertains to the eons. The eons are much longer than a season but surely the eons are not endless since the Bible states they all come to an end.
    The rule is this, and I’m going to capitalize it and make is larger so no one misses it:

THE NOUN DOES NOT MODIFY THE ADJECTIVE!
THE ADJECTIVE MODIFIES THE NOUN!

    If these people could get this grammar law set in their minds, they would not make the ludicrous mistakes like Vine and others make.

    Also, is Vine correct that “aionios describes duration”? Being the adjective of “aion” it tells us that which pertains to its noun, aion, eon or age.

    Does the adjective “American” describe the noun “America”? No, of course not.
    For instance, the adjective “American” in: “Bush is the American president” tells us that his presidency, being American, pertains to the noun “America.” Likewise, “the heavenly angel visited Mary” tells us that the adjective “heavenly” modifies the noun angel by telling us that the angel’s realm is that of heaven.

    In “the eonian God,” of 1 Corinthians 16:26, the adjective “eonian” is modifying the noun God and telling us that God is the God pertaining to the eon or eons.

    In Matthew 25:46 the nations which treated Christ’s brothers correctly get “eonian life” (KJV has “life eternal”) and the nations that treated them badly get “eonian chastening” (KJV has: “everlasting punishment") Both the life and the chastening are modified by the adjective “eonian” and is telling us they both get that which pertains to that specific 1000 year durative eon.

    Many are the theologians and word smiths who state that “aionios” must mean “eternal” or “everlasting” in Matthew 25:46 because, they state that since the life of the believer is endless, therefore the punishment must be endless also. But, again, they are making the mistake of making the noun modify the adjective. That is wrong.
    We don’t get endless life because we get aionion zoen (eonian life). We get endless life because we will put on immortality.

    It is my sincere prayer that this little exchange will be of benefit to those who so often have written to me asking me what I think concerning what Don wrote against the Concordant Literal New Testament. May God and His Christ be glorified.

Tony Nungesser

Copyright Saviour of All Fellowship
P.O. Box 314,
Almont, MI 48003, U.S.A. 810-798-3563
This publication may be reproduced for personal use
(all other rights reserved by copyright holder).