takes its meaning in this case, as in all others, from the subject, thing or person to which it is joined ; and when applied to infinite time, takes the sense of eternity is immortal or ever-enduring, because it is so applied.

And this position is singularly affirmed by Aristotle in another passage from the De Mundo, where he has the expression ἐξ ἀιῶνος ἀτέρμονος εἰς ἕτερον αἰῶνα, "from one interminable aion to another aion.” Now, if the radical meaning of the word is endless, or absolute eternity, why did he add another word to increase the force of it? What sense is there in saying "from one endless eternity to another endless eternity?" And even with the adjective "interminable," he does not express the idea of absolute eternity, duration without limit or end; otherwise there could not be "another" such period, which the sentence affirms!

So much, therefore, for Aristotle's famous definition, of which so great use has been made by theologians. His own usage is against his definition, and shows that however he wrote as a scholar and critic, he talked like other people, and used words in their popular sense.' And this is the real object of inquiry; the sense which the people put upon these words, the meaning attached to them in the ordinary

There is another passage from ARISTOTLE curiously confirming the above. He is showing that "there are some difficult questions which we cannot with certainty answer," as for example-" whether the world is eternal or not,”xóoμos äidios y ¿√. Now if Aristotle regarded aionios as the only proper word to express eternity, why did he not use it here? No doubt he is speaking here of absolutely endless duration; and yet, instead of employing aionios to express it, he selects a different word altogether, aidios. - Tropic, Lib. i. cap. xi., in Grotius de Veritate, Lib. i. § vii. Note.

business, social and religious conversation of the multitude.

That the popular sense of aion and aionios is that. of indefinite time, limited and determined by the sub ject or connection, can be abundantly demonstrated. Every one familiar with Greek and Ecclesiastical literature knows this to be the case. The words constantly occur in this sense. Homer, Herodotus, Isocrates and Xenophen employ aion in the sense of the Latin aevum, the life of a man, his age, an age. Herodotus and Sophocles both have the expression telutesai ton aiona, "to end one's life," or die. In a poem, or Hymn to Jove, is found the phrase o megistos aion, "the greatest age or duration"; certainly not "the greatest eternity." Plato speaks of methe aionios, "constant drunkenness," not surely drunkenness lasting through eternity.1 Diodorus Siculus has the phrase "ton apeiron aiona," "unlimited," or "indefinite time." But if aion is itself infinite time, where is the need of apeiron? It is the same with Aristotle's atermonos, both showing that aion requires the addition of an adjective, or its equivalent, to express absolute eternity. Lexicographers universally recognize this every day sense of the words, some of them not even mentioning eternity as a meaning at all; while others give "age," or any complete period of time, without regard to its length, for the primary signification. As an example, Donnegan defines the words thus: "Aion-time; a space of

'STEPHENS' Thesaurus Græca Lingua; ROBERT CONSTANT'S Lexicon. See, also, Grotius de Veritate, pp. 39, 315, and the notes and citations scattered through the book.

2 Diod. Sic. i. 51. See the whole passage, where "the sepulchre," aidious oikous, is synonymous with apeiron aiona en adou—hades.

time; life-time and life; the ordinary period of a man's life; the age of man; man's estate; a long period of time; eternity; the spinal marrow; (eis ton aiona,) to a very long period, to eternity; (apo aionos, from, or in the memory of man.) Aionios — of long duration, eternal, lasting, permanent."

Schleusner, in his Lexicon of the New Testament, defines Aion as follows: "Any space of time, whether longer or shorter, past, present, or future, to be determined by the persons or things spoken of, and the scope of the subjects; the life or age of man; any space in which we measure human life, from birth to death." This is precisely our position; that the meaning of the word is to be determined by the scope of the subject, by the nature of the things or persons spoken of. If we speak of the Aion or "life time," of God, it takes on the meaning of absolute eternity, takes it from the very nature of God; but when we speak of the aion or life time of man, its meaning is bounded by his "three-score years and ten." Hence that Orthodox scholar and commentator, Macknight, says, "these words being ambigu ous, are always to be understood according to the nature and circumstances of the things to which they are applied." And though he compels them into the service of endless punishment, he frankly says, "At the same time, I must be so candid as to acknowledge that the use of these terms, forever, eternal, and everlasting, in other passages of Scripture, show that they who understand them in a limited sense, when applied to punishment, put no forced interpretation upon them." Olshausen is to the same point; that

"Truth of the Gospel History," p. 28.

the word is ambiguous, and cannot be relied on in the argument for endless punishment.' And John Foster says, that "the terms do not necessarily and absolutely signify an interminable duration." "

These authorities prove that the central and common signification of the words is indefinite, and not endless, time. And I repeat and enforce the important point, that this is the meaning with which we have to do, if we would understand the New Testament. We are to inquire, not how Aristotle defines them, but how the people employed and understood them; for, as remarked, the sermons and addresses of Jesus were in the popular language of the day; and the New Testament was not written to scholars by scholars, but to the common people, by men mostly from their

1" Commentary on sin against the Holy Ghost." See also the Lexicons of ROBINSON, PICKERING, GROVE, and others.

2" Letter to a young Minister, on the duration of Future Punishment." DR. DODDRIDGE, so well known among "Evangelical" sects for his piety and learning, says: "We cannot pretend to decide a priori, or previous to the event, so far as to say that the punishments of hell must and will certainly be eternal;" by which he meant endless. Of course he did not believe that aionios meant endless, nor that the Bible revealed the doctrine; otherwise we could " pretend to decide." "Before the event"-what a curious idea! in other words, we cannot decide that they will suffer endlessly, until they have suffered endlessly -and as that time will never come, the doctrine can never be proved! Theological Lectures, Prop. 163. Dr. ISAAC WATTS, so celebrated for his hymns, was in doubt regarding the absolute eternity of punishment. He says: "I do not think we ought usually, when we speak concerning creatures, to affirm positively, that their existence shall be equal to that of the blessed God, especially with regard to the duration of punishment."- World to Come, in his Works, i. 732. Edit. 1753. There is a look in this toward annihilation. SOUTHEY, in his Memoir of WATTS, thinks he agreed with ORIGEN and the Universalists in regard to punishment.- Biblical Repos. v. 253. Sacred Classics, ix. 59. See WHITTEMORE's excellent Modern History for more concerning these eminent men, i. 211-216.

own number. And the next step will bring us still

closer to this point.

SECTION II.

JEWISH-GREEK

USAGE.

By the expression here employed, "Jewish-Greek usage," is intended, the use of these words by authors who were Jews by birth and religion, but who wrote in Greek. Of this number were Philo and Josephus, who, like Paul and Peter, and the Evangelists, were born and educated in the Jewish faith, but spoke and wrote in the Greek tongue. Josephus was contemporary with the apostles, and, therefore, is unquestionable authority for the popular usage of aion and aionios, in the times, and among the people of the New Testament. They occur frequently in his works, and are applied generally to the things of this life, to things or periods of comparatively short duration. Thus, he speaks of the everlasting (aionios,) reputation of Herod; of the everlasting memorial he raised to his name in re-building the temple, which "everlasting memorial" was destroyed when he wrote; of the everlasting worship of the temple, which he says, in the same sentence, had come to an end; of the everlasting name the patriarchs left behind them; of the everlasting glory of the Jewish nation; of the everlasting imprisonment to which the tyrant John was condemned by the Romans, &c. And he calls the period from the giving of the Law to the time he was writing a long aion.

1

1 Expositor, vol. iii. 7-10, & vol. i. 440, Against Appion, Lib. i., Grotius de Veritate, Lib. iii. § 16.