(June 29, 2013 at 7:50 pm)popeyespappy Wrote: Please include in your next reply a reason why I should accept an interpretation that differs from that of Orr, James, M.A., D.D. General Editor. "Entry for 'ETERNAL'". "International Standard Bible Encyclopedia". 1915. who wrote the passage quoted above.

Because you should accept only your own, now do your research?
(hint: the Greeks had a word that does mean "eternal" and is also used in the NT, so can you figure why an ambiguous word would be used when a valid, more precise word was available?)

---

BTW, I asked you politely to NOT use the Bible as an example... (= circular reasoning)

Well Cat, are we or are we not discussing the use of the word in the Bible? The source I quoted would have us believe its meaning is dependent on use. Sometimes it means eternal. Sometimes it refers to a limited time. My source included references to both Plato and Aristotle that indicated they used the word to represent different things. Being Greek I can only assume their use of the word is more correct than any spin you might put on it.

I don't know what to say if you won't question your "source". Baaaaa?

I invited you to give me a reason to question my source. I also asked you to explain why I should accept your interpretation above his. The later being something you are apparently unable to do.

Your "source" is circular reasoning. C'mon, a Biblical dictionary to support the translation of aeonian to eternal?
This isn't an "interpretation", this is straight facts about the word aeonian. Besides, I don't want you to "believe" me, I want you to learn some facts and then perhaps you might agree with me.

Any online Greek to English translator will give the meaning of the word.

It can mean everlasting or it can refer to a geological eon.

(June 29, 2013 at 8:28 pm)catfish Wrote: Your "source" is circular reasoning. C'mon, a Biblical dictionary to support the translation of aeonian to eternal?
This isn't an "interpretation", this is straight facts about the word aeonian. Besides, I don't want you to "believe" me, I want you to learn some facts and then perhaps you might agree with me.

The problem with your claims is everything I've seen says the word can be used with multiple meanings. The meaning is dependent on context. Plato and Aristotle used the word with different meanings. The group of scholars that wrote the NIV Bible interpreted the word with different meanings. Merriam-Webster agrees with them that it has multiple meanings. You claim they are all wrong. I'm still waiting on you to back up your claims, and show me why you are right and they are wrong. Go ahead, be context specific if you can...

(June 29, 2013 at 1:44 pm)Godschild Wrote:

(June 29, 2013 at 12:02 pm)CleanShavenJesus Wrote: What's the evidence in favor of Yahweh as opposed to Allah?

Yahweh has proven Himself to me as the loving God He says He is.

Allah has shown he is a destructive force of the human mind, without consideration for anyone except the self of man.

(June 29, 2013 at 9:09 pm)popeyespappy Wrote:

(June 29, 2013 at 8:28 pm)catfish Wrote: Your "source" is circular reasoning. C'mon, a Biblical dictionary to support the translation of aeonian to eternal?
This isn't an "interpretation", this is straight facts about the word aeonian. Besides, I don't want you to "believe" me, I want you to learn some facts and then perhaps you might agree with me.

The problem with your claims is everything I've seen says the word can be used with multiple meanings. The meaning is dependent on context. Plato and Aristotle used the word with different meanings. The group of scholars that wrote the NIV Bible interpreted the word with different meanings. Merriam-Webster agrees with them that it has multiple meanings. You claim they are all wrong. I'm still waiting on you to back up your claims, and show me why you are right and they are wrong. Go ahead, be context specific if you can...

Now I find it humurous that you can't even decide which "literal" interpretation to use....