Does the Bible discuss the end of the world or the end of the age?
I’d like to show you why studying is crucial by pointing out one word in the Bible that, if taken incorrectly, can make a BIG difference in your beliefs.
Let me start by stating the obvious way to go a bit deeper in your Bible study: by getting more than one translation.
Look at this famous verse in the King James Version:
Matthew 24:3 KJV
And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?
Now, consider the English Standard Version:
Matthew 24:3 ESV
As he sat on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately, saying, “Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?”
Would you agree that “the world” differs significantly from “the age?”
I would, especially if you look at the words “world” and “age” in Greek. They’re clearly different.
One way you can identify this is by using different translations. Most translations render this verse as “the end of the age.”
The two popular translations that say “world” are the KJV and the New Living Translation (NLT). Other less popular versions that say “world” are the CEV, GW, ASV, and ERV.
So, why do some say “age” and others say “world?” Which one is right? And is there really a difference?
Putting the “End of the World” in Context
First, know that Matthew 24:3 is the beginning of the famous passage called “The Olivet Discourse.”
It’s the popular chapter in which Jesus discusses wars and rumors of wars, false Christs, and signs that happen before his coming.
Most Christians believe that this chapter is about Jesus’ second coming, which will occur at the end of the world.
Many believe this because of our verse, where the disciples ask Jesus, “What will be the sign of the end of the world?”
Today, when we hear “the end of the world,” we think of the destruction of our physical planet Earth.
Maybe comets will fall from the sky, the heavens will thunder and roar, and the ground will break up, with lava shooting out from it.
But wait. Let’s ask the question again. Did they ask him about the end of the “world” or the “age?”
The answer: Neither. They asked him about the end of the “αἰῶνος.”
What Does “αἰῶνος” Mean?
As you know, the Bible was written in Greek.
So, the real question we should be asking is this:
“What does “αἰῶνος” mean in English?”
The word, in its basic form (its “lemma”), is αἰών (pronounced aion).
Its primary meaning is “age, era, period of time.”
For example, the word is also used in this famous verse:
Matthew 12:32
And whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come.
The meaning of “age” is clear. Whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven in this “era/time” or the “era/time” to come.
As you can see from the above picture, αἰών is primarily translated in the Bible as “forever and ever.”
When you see verses that say something like, “To our God be glory and honor forever and ever,” the word there is usually αἰών.
Again, the meaning is pretty straightforward. It’s saying something like, “To our God be glory and honor for all ages.”
Now, αἰών can mean “world.” But there are three things we need to keep in mind about this translation:
1. Αἰών is only translated as “world” 7 times in the ESV out of 121 appearances of “αἰών.” This means that it’s not a very significant, common translation.
2. We should know that the English word “world” can mean many things. It doesn’t always mean the physical planet Earth.
3. Most of the time, when αἰών is rendered as “world,” a translation of “age” would have still sufficed. For example, Romans 12:2 says, “Do not be conformed to this world (αἰών), but be transformed by the renewal of your mind.” If we put “age” there instead of “world,” it would still make sense.
In summary, the best translation for αἰών is “age.”
Why Does the KJV Say “World,” Then?
Some might be tempted to say, “The KJV has a bad translation of Matthew 24:3.”
But this really isn’t true.
In short, the KJV translated αἰών as “world” because the English word “world” did mean “age” during their time. So, it was the best translation for them… in the year 1611.
If you do a little study of the origin of the Old English word “world,” you’ll find that it was something like “weoreld.”
It was probably the combination of the two words wer (“man”) + eld (“age”). [1]
Sounds like “werewolf,” right? (wer (man) + wolf = man-wolf)
The literal translation is something like “the age of man.”
So, somewhere along the line, “world” had some ties to, and even the same meaning as, “age.”
The translators of the KJV rendered it as the "end of the world" because, at the time, the word "world" was often used in English to refer to a period or age, not necessarily the physical globe.
In Old English, "world" could be understood as a "system of things" or an era, which was how they interpreted the Greek term.
William Tyndale was the first person to translate significant portions of the Bible directly from the original Hebrew and Greek into English.
You can read the Tyndale Bible of 1526, which records Matthew 24:3 as:
And as he sat vpon the mout Olivete his disciples came vnto hym secretely sayinge. Tell vs when these thinges shalbe? And what signe shalbe of thy comynge and of the ende of the worlde?
About 100 years later, in 1611, the authors of the KJV also translated it as “world.”
But again, it’s not that Tyndale and the authors of the KJV used a “bad translation” that totally violates the Greek word aion.
All it means is that they used the word that best meant a “period of time” to them in their day, which was “world.”
Words Change Over Time
The word “gay” does not mean the same thing today as it did many years ago.
Maybe that’s why a bunch of our Christmas songs (written many years ago) sound so strange to us: “Don we now our gay apparel.”
I have a subscription to the Oxford English Dictionary, which is great because it allows you to trace the origins of words through the centuries.
I was fascinated to see that “world” was used in hymnal books and old writings of the 1500s and such in the exact way we would use the word “age.”
For example:
“Adam and all the fathers before Christ, till Christ's coming, were for so many worlds together detained.” [2]
This writer, a theologian and philosopher from 1554 to 1600, says that all the patriarchs of the Bible who existed before Christ’s coming were “detained for so many worlds.”
Clearly, he means “ages” (periods of time).
Another writer from a few years after this time, a doctor, says this about their present-day usage of the word “world”:
“We are then to understand, That the word [World] though we now take it for that bulk of bodily beings we see, yet of old it was as well, and oftner too, taken for ages and lastingness time out of mind… From all which 'tis as clear, that we meant in the dayes of yore by the word World, time, ages, all the while that has been here∣tofore or is to be hereafter boundlesly, as that we mean by it now adayes, that frame of bodies in which we live and speak it.” [3]
He’s saying that the word “world” in his day (1674) was evolving to mean “bulk of bodily beings” or “frame of bodies.”
I’m guessing he’s saying it means “the world we live in.”
This resembles a “system of things,” as if we were to say, “The new world we live in” or “The technology world.”
But in the past, he says that “world” meant “ages.”
In summary, when Tyndale and the KJV authors read αἰών, they said, “It refers to the end of the world, which is a period of time.”
When modern translators read αἰών, they say, “It refers to the end of the age, which is a period of time.”
They both probably got the same meaning, but they used different words.
However, “world” isn’t really a good translation for us because we typically don’t say “world” when referring to an “age.”
Today, when we hear the phrase “the end of the world,” almost everyone universally understands it to mean “the end/destruction of the physical planet Earth.”
The danger comes when we read “world” and think it refers to our physical planet. It doesn’t.
Why “Age” is a Better Translation (For Us)
A great writer says this about Matthew 24:3:
“The phrase, συντελείας τοῦ αἰῶνος, translated in our English version, ‘the end of the world,’ should be, ‘the close of the age.’ Tittman observes: συντελείας τοῦ αἰῶνος, as it occurs in the New Testament, does not denote the end, but rather the consummation, of the αἰών, which is to be followed by a new age… It was the belief of the Jews that the Messiah would introduce a new αἰών: and this new αἰών, or age, they called ‘the kingdom of heaven.’ The existing αἰών, therefore, was the Jewish dispensation, which was now drawing to its close.” [4]
What exactly is the “end of the age” the disciples were asking about?
It was simply the end of their Jewish system (temple Judaism) for their many wrong-doings over the centuries and for rejecting Christ.
Remember, in Matthew 24, Jesus had just told them their temple would be destroyed. (Matt. 24:1-2)
The disciples then ask, “When will this happen, and what will be the sign of the end of the age?” (Matt. 24:3)
The “end of the age” would happen when their temple and city were destroyed about 40 years later in AD70.
They were asking, “What will be the sign that this time, this Jewish age is ending and the new age (New Heaven, New Covenant, New Jerusalem, New World) would begin?
And guess what? It’s the age we’re living under today!
This translation kind of makes you see the whole chapter in a new light.
Maybe we should rethink some of our beliefs about the “end of the world.”
Sources:
[2] Hooker, Richard. The Works of Richard Hooker, vol. 3. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1888. 640. https://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/keble-the-works-of-richard-hooker-vol-3.
[3] Nathaniel Fairfax, A Treatise of the Bulk and Selvedge of the World (London: Printed by J.M. for J. Kidgell, 1674), 198-201. https://quod.lib.umich.edu/e/eebo/A39789.0001.001?rgn=main;view=fulltext.
[4] James Stuart Russell, The Parousia: A Critical Inquiry into the New Testament Doctrine of Our Lord's Second Coming (London: Daldy, Isbister, & Co., 1878), 23.
Comentários