Petros/Petras is a non-starter even in the Greek. There was no distinction in Koine Greek. You have to go back to Attic Greek at the time of Socrates to find a distinction.

Ultimately, appealing to the Greek is an unpersuasive argument, the number of people who are capable of both understanding the argument and determining it's validity in miniscule, and 99% of all appeals to the Greek are made by people unqualified to discuss it at all.

In addition, whenever a Protestant apologist makes an appeal to "the original languages" it accomplishes nothing except to convince me of the necessity of the Magesterium, as one should not have to spend decades studying a dozen ancient languages just to understand the Bible. I'm a mathematician, I have intention of spending my entire life re-inventing all theology from the ground up.

If you're at all interested in a relationship with Mary, it would behoove you to ask her Son about her, since that's the tradition from which you're now coming from. As for the scenes which you related, some of it may be a deep devotion to Jesus Christ which you are incapable of understanding in your present state (I mean no offense, this is simply the nature of almost any personal relationship; pastors, theologians, and psychologists alike can only give suggestions and labels via the language in which they were trained to practice), some of it may also be showmanship, ignorance, false piety or even outright idolatry, as you suspect. I say this as one who finds many protestant services to be blasphemous.




Here's a larger part of the passage, along with other mention in Deuteronomy...

1And the Lord spoke all these words:

2I am the Lord thy God, who brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.

3Thou shalt not have strange gods before me.

4Thou shalt not make to thyself a graven thing, nor the likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or in the earth beneath, nor of those things that are in the waters under the earth. 5Thou shalt not adore them, nor serve them: I am the Lord thy God, mighty, jealous, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me: 6And shewing mercy unto thousands to them that love me, and keep my commandments.

----
Duet 5

6I am the Lord thy God, who brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.

7Thou shalt not have strange gods in my sight.

8Thou shalt not make to thy self a graven thing, nor the likeness of any things, that are in heaven above, or that are in the earth beneath, or that abide in the waters under the earth. 9Thou shalt not adore them, and thou shalt not serve them. For I am the Lord thy God, a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon their children unto the third and fourth generation, to them that hate me, 10And shewing mercy unto many thousands, to them that love me, and keep my commandments.

The only non-graven image of the Father I adore AND worship is Jesus Christ at Mass and Eucharistic Adoration.



From Lapide's Commentary. Here's 1 Corinthians 4:15 for context; For if you have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet not many fathers. For in Christ Jesus, by the gospel, I have begotten you.

Verse 9. And call none your father upon earth, for one is your father, who is in heaven. He passes from the master to the father, because in the preceding verse He said that we are all brethren, that is, children of the same Father, God. He says therefore: “Do not call anyone on earth your father”, in the sense of the prime Author of life, who provides for and preserves His heritage, as though ye depended entirely upon anyone else, or even on someone else as well as God. This was what the gentiles and atheists did, and others who trusted in men rather than in God. That this is the meaning, is plain from the reason which He subjoins, for one is your father, who is in heaven, of whom all paternity in heaven and earth is named (Eph. 3:15, see commentary). God, therefore, is the only real Father of all, forasmuch as He only infuses a soul and life in each, creates, preserves, and gives growth. In comparison with Him, says S. Jerome, earthly fathers are fathers only in a figurative sense, and ought not, therefore, insolently to command their children, but ought to submit themselves together with their children to God, the chief Father of all. S. Chrysostom says, “For we do not have the beginning of life from our parents, but rather receive life through them.”




Hmm, it looks like that word (διηνεκές (diēnekes) is only found in Paul's letter to the Hebrews. From the translations I found, it means "continuously" or "in perpetuity." Paul is speaking to the Hebrews here who probably had the repetitive paschal sacrifice on their minds. Nonetheless, the "bread" we receive at Mass is the body of the RISEN Christ. So, Christ obviously isn't resurrected from the dead to be killed again, He's called down from Heaven. So what kind of Sacrifice is that? I remember asking a monk once, "at what point during the Mass does the mystical slaying of Christ occur?" :), he didn't have an answer I can remember. But, why do you attend Luthern services? Also, why do Catholics call the Mass a "Sacrifice of Praise?" Lastly, how come when Saul was knocked off his horse, Our Lord said, "Why do you persecute me?"


We do cast our anxieties on the Lord, why do you think we pray?



We absolutely do not affirm universalism, only demons, and perhaps those who serve them, might make you think that. To declare that the Catholic Church affirms it, is demonic in itself. That being said, if the Devil is real, whom do you think his "biggest fish" would be? As a protestant, you do have some familiarity with Spiritual warfare, I can tell from your post.

Born, bred, raised non-Catholic. My daddy was a full time evangelist, my grandaddy was a preacher. I'm also an adult convert and Mary was one of my biggest hurdles, so, I get it.

I'm only going to speak to this one thing for now, okay?

At my advanced years, I recall when Astronauts who returned to earth were given a ticker-tape parade. Same thing for champion athletes/sports teams, and in the past for soldiers, etc. Parades to honor people have been part of human history for a very long time.

Marian processions are in the same light. A parade to honor someone we love.

Bloody knees etc? Well, we all know people who go super overboard with devotion to something, like that dude who gets his favorite sports team logo tattooed on his flesh. Does this over the top devotion mean I should not wear a Razorbacks T-shirt and call the hogs at the game?

I agree with everything you said.

Father -
In "call no man father" Jesus was referring to the Sadducees and Pharisees who loved attention and praise from common people.

Statues; Thanks for the info on that. I've always believed that Catholics do NOT worship statues. They are used to remind us of any of the 'holy ones.' We admire the person - not the statue.

Protestants enjoy building themselves up by tearing others down in the faith. That's why I'm out - I'm sick of it. They think nothing of dumping on one another.

You better take all the pictures and paintings off your walls.



Do you call your 'boss' the boss? This passage can easily be taken out of context. Read the chapter! Jesus is referring to the Pharisees! - NOT common people!

"Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples, Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat: All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not".



'Once for all' is the same as saying 'forever'. It's in there - the word...

1336. dienekes dee-ay-nek-es' neuter of a compound of 1223 and a derivative of an alternate of 5342; carried through, i.e. (adverbially with 1519 and 3588 prefixed) perpetually:--+ continually, for ever.

Many words were added by the PROTESTANT KJV translators - NOT the Catholics. They were later corrected by later translations using the Dead Sea Scrolls, etc. The KJV is NOT the most accurate translation.

Peace always,
Stephen

Jesus spoke that pericope during His ministry on earth. The Church came into existence on Pentecost, about 50 days after the crucifixion.

Now did Jesus mean, "Hey, y'all, I'm fixin' to start me a church with priests an' all an' don't be callin' them priests 'Father'"?

No, allusions to the structure and organization of the Church that did not yet exist would have meant nothing to His listeners. He meant "God is more truly your Father than the man who sired you."

Peace always,
Stephen

quote="James 1:5-6"
1. Mary

I'm sorry, but this sector of Catholicism seems so idolatrous to me. I hope you understand why it would feel this way to someone raised in a protestant tradition. I'll say it again, I'm open to Catholicism, and I wish I could get past this, but I really feel that I can't. I've said a rosary with some friends -- my conscience was unsettled for the rest of the day until I confessed to the Lord this action which was, to me, a sin. I'm around Catholics a lot (I work at a Catholic cemetery) and I often think "Just be open to Mary, say the rosary with everyone else -- it's Christian!" -- but I simply can't convince myself that it really is. Why -- seriously, why -- did Christians ever start praying to entities other than God? Don't we trust that God hears our prayers?

I know, I know, Catholics believe Mary intercedes for us. "Mary is like the moon -- hers is a reflected glory." But when I see the processions at Lourdes, the masses in honor of the Lady of Fátima, all the Marian images, Catholics devoutly and tearfully praying to Mary, approaching her image on bloody knees -- when I see all these things, the complicated, mystical arguments of Catholic theologians start to feel like a smokescreen. What is really going on, in practice? How did these traditions evolve out of the monotheistic faith of the ancient Israelites? Our Lord had such little patience in the Old Testament for devotion to anyone other than himself.

The Covenant of God will help you understand why Mary is so exalted in the apostolic faiths (Roman Catholic and Orthodox).

What would you say of a man who was given a wrecked car and told to restore it to the same condition as it was before the wreck, only to return to you half-done? You certainly wouldn’t think very much of his workmanship and you would probably warn your friends and co-workers to avoid his shop at all costs. A job half-done is a job not done at all.

Yet this is exactly what Protestantism teaches about the Redemption of our Lord in denying the Queenship of our Lady and Her right to our honor. This problem comes from the highly individualized view of salvation extant in Protestantism. Everything is viewed from the aspect of “what’s in this for me?” instead of the overview of God’s salvific work in all of Creation. It is a very truncated and narrow view of God’s redemptive work.

What exactly was lost in the Garden? Were a couple of vassal slaves tossed out on their ear to beg forgiveness and hope they could get back in? Oh, no! The damage was far more deep and pervasive than that. Remember, Adam was created as son of the Great King. Therefore, the first thing that was lost was his potential rulership one day as king of Creation. That is what sons of kings do - they mature into kings themselves one day, and in a large kingdom, they will take rule themselves as subordinate kings to their father.

Adam forfeited his priesthood and the future possibility of being the great high priest over Creation to intercede for any of his posterity who would sin.

His nature was corrupted, and that corruption was handed down to every generation which came from his loins. Because of this corruption, Adam and Eve were separated from the Father into a state called “death.” This separation came because Adam’s corrupted nature could not share in God’s divine nature. The divine nature of self-donative love would have found itself incompatible with mankind’s corrupted sin nature, which seeks only its own pleasure and good.

He lost covenant headship over the family of God on earth which is mankind. In losing the authority of covenant headship, his position of fatherhood over mankind was forfeit, for the appellation of “father” describes one who is a covenant head over a covenant unit called the family. And likewise, his wife lost her position of covenant motherhood. It is not just Adam who is affected. This was a disaster on many levels!

What did Jesus accomplish as perfect Man? As the Last Adam, He regained kingship and rules now as King over all Creation. As a man He is the Great High Priest in the tabernacle made without hands in the heavenlies. As a man He perfects man’s nature in His body, being totally obedient to His Father and then performing for us the greatest act of self-donative love ever seen in the cosmos. The Creator of all allows those whom He created to spit upon Him, mock Him, scourge and beat Him, and send Him to death on a cruel cross. And He does this so that the very men who do it to Him can be saved from the evil that drives them to do such a heinous act. It is the ultimate display of the nature of God - cruciform, self-giving love for the good of the other.

The Last Adam as man does what first Adam failed to do. The first Adam, through his sin, forfeits the possibility of becoming everything that the Last Adam does become. In Christ Jesus, every effect of the Fall is reversed and all that mankind possesses in the Garden is restored. Rev. Ralph Smith, a Reformed writer, states the same thing:

“It is what salvation is all about because salvation is restoration – not merely restoration to the original state in Eden but to the attainment of the goal of Eden.” (Rev. Ralph Allen Smith ❘ Eternal Covenant-How The Trinity Reshapes Covenant Theology, Page 59 ❘ Canon Press ❘ 2003)

This is an amazing statement, but Rev. Smith has not followed his thinking to the logical outcome. There was another person in the Garden. The covenant helpmeet. What of her? If Eve is not restored in full, then the work of God’s redemptive plan is only half done. Everything must be restored completely to the condition that it was in before the Fall. Before the Fall, there was a human mother of all with a nature uncorrupted by sin and the possibility of becoming a queen next to her king husband. If God restored Adam as male human being, then in order to fully restore that which He created in the Garden, He must also restore Eve in the person of a female human being. To leave Eve out of the equation would be to leave the redemptive work of the Father incomplete. There would be no regeneration. Certainly the Early Church Fathers understood this, for they referred to Mary as the New Eve.

Let’s look at some of the parallels between Eve and Mary, beginning with their creation as human beings.

Eve was created by the work of God in splitting open Adam’s side. The Theotokos was created in the same way, by the splitting open of the side of the Last Adam. Both were created sinless. There was no need for an “Immaculate Conception” because Augustine’s idea of all people bearing the guilt of Adam’s sin does not exist. All children are born innocent. In order to sin, you must have three things which a baby cannot have: knowledge of good and evil, choice to do evil, commission of that evil. A baby can do none of this. The only thing that human beings experience from Adam’s sin is the death which is the consequence of Adam’s disobedience. That comes to us all.

Eve was the wife of a prince. As son of the Great King, Adam had the potential of kingship and rulership, which means that Eve would have become a queen to rule with him.

Building on the biblical image of Christ as the "Last Adam," early Christians spoke of a "New Eve," a feminine cooperator with Jesus in the economy of the redemption. Second century writers Saints Justin Martyr and Irenaeus of Lyons perceived Mary as this second Eve, who undid the sin of the first one:

“Christ became man by the Virgin that the disobedience which issued from the serpent might be destroyed in the same way it originated. Eve was still an undefiled virgin when she conceived the word of the serpent and brought forth disobedience and death. But the Virgin received faith and joy, at the announcement of the angel Gabriel...and she replied, "Be it done to me according to your word". So through the mediation of the Virgin he came into the world, through whom God would crush the serpent and those angels and men like him, who delivers from death those who turn from their evil ways and believe in him.” (Justin Martyr ❘ Dialogue with Trypho ❘ ch.100.)

“The seduction of a fallen angel drew Eve, a virgin espoused to a man, while the glad tidings of the holy angel drew Mary, a Virgin already espoused, to begin the plan which would dissolve the bonds of that first snare...For as the former was led astray by the word of an angel, so that she fled from God when she had disobeyed his word, so did the latter, by an angelic communication, receive the glad tidings that she should bear God, and obeyed his word. If the former disobeyed God, the latter obeyed, so that the Virgin Mary might become the advocate of the virgin Eve. Thus, as the human race fell into bondage to death by means of a virgin, so it is rescued by a virgin; virginal disobedience is balanced in the opposite scale by virginal obedience.” [/i] (Irenaeus of Lyons Against Heresies III:22:4.)

In like manner, the Blessed Virgin, as the new Eve to the Last Adam, is the helpmeet. She bears rulership with Him, not of herself intrinsically, but of God, in the same way that Adam and Eve would have borne the authority of God had they not fallen. When titles such as Intercessor, Mediator, and others which drive Protestants just wild, are given to her, they are given because she, as helpmeet, equally bears that authority that her human son, the Last Adam, has been given in heaven.

Remember, it is a man who rules in heaven. Yes, a special man who is, in a mystery both human and divine, two natures not comingled, yet existing in one person - a man. A man and a woman - a human king and queen in heaven ruling as the covenant heads of the family. This was exactly what God had planned for Adam and Eve and exactly what He restored in Jesus and the Virgin Mary - Kingship and Queenship over the created world. (From the book THE DANCE OF ISAIAH - CHAPTER FIVE "RESTORING OUR MOTHER")

I was a dedicated Calvinist for thirteen years and, like all Calvinists, highly opposed to anything Catholic. The Covenant of God, properly understood, will help you immensely. Unfortunately, the Covenant of God is something almost unknown in Protestantism.

quote="James 1:5-6"]

2. Biblical Interpretation

I'm well aware that Catholics read the Bible in accordance with Sacred Tradition and the Church's teaching authority. But why do Catholics take the Bible so seriously in some instances, only to blur the meaning of or, I'd argue, outright ignore, certain verses? We hold so fast to the doctrines of Creation, the Trinity, the simultaneous humanity and divinity of Jesus, and Jesus' sacrifice for our sins. But what about, for example, the following verses?

Exodus 20:4 "Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness [of anything] that [is] in heaven above, or that [is] in the earth beneath, or that [is] in the water under earth:"

Like all Protestants, and I'm going to sound rather harsh here, you have not thought this through. You take this out of context of the rest of the chapter and then sit on it as a cudgel with which to beat Catholics. Doesn't work. The context here, if you read the following verses, is Exodus 20:3 and the idea of a "graven image" and "bow down before them" is that the graven image is considered to be THE God of heaven and earth. NO ONE in Catholicism or Orthodoxy is saying that the statues or icons ARE God. Yet Protestants blow right by that and insist that we are saying that these aids to worship represent and are God when they are not. They are not idols like the pagans surrounding the Jewish nation had. Protestants also say that statues and icons are "idols" when they don't even know what an idol is. An idol is a representation of God treated as if it were God, that is, worshipped. We are not doing that.

And finally, is God schizophrenic when He tells the Israelites to then turn around and make graven images - cherubim covering the Ark of the Covenant? THINK MAN!!!!

Matthew 23:9 "Call no one on earth your father; you have but one Father in heaven."

Someone should have told Apostle Paul this, for he says that he is father to his converts.

Hebrews 10:12 "But this one offered one sacrifice for sins, and took his seat forever at the right hand of God;" (Why do so many Bibles say that this sacrifice was "once for all" or something to that effect -- but not the Catholic Bible? This seems questionable in the very least.)

Because Protestant Bibles are misinterpretations of the original Greek and are horrendous. Because they don't want to admit what the Bible teaches, that the Sacrifice of Christ in the Cross took place before time and is a timeless, eternal Sacrifice. (Revelation 13:8 And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.) Do you get that? BEFORE THE FOUNDATION OF THE WORLD! That means that before the kosmos (world) was created, in God's timeless eternity, the Lamb was slain.

You also have no covenant understanding of what it means that there is "one sacrifice." The "one sacrifice" is speaking about the Yom Kippur offered by Christ (Hebrews 7-10) for all the sins of the world, and especially for the congregation of God - i.e., the CHURCH. That is what is being spoken of when one speaks of the "one sacrifice." But YOM KIPPUR does not cover our personal sins and failures which we commit on a daily basis. For that, we must have the covenant sacrifice of renewal, which is the Eucharist. If you understood covenant and how it works, you would realize that there is a procedure by which we maintain our covenant relationship with Christ. Just as in marriage, there is a covenant ceremony between the man and woman which seals the union. When a man or woman does something offensive to the other spouse, there must be a restoration of the union, just as when we walk away from Christ by choosing our sin over Him.

The process is going to the offended spouse and asking forgiveness (Sacrament of Confession) and then reuniting in the marital union (the nuptial bed) (Sacrament of Eucharist). You don't just offend someone and then go along as if everything is hunky-dory. It ain't, and steps need to be taken to restore covenant, both in marriage and in our covenant with Christ.

I've read arguments by Catholics saying that these verses don't really mean what they seem to mean. I'll be the first to admit that, sometimes, it's hard to figure out what the Bible really means. But honestly, why would someone read what these verses clearly seem to say, and then do the opposite thing?

Protestant exegesis, especially in the more Anabaptist traditions, is very wooden and literal. They want to take the words of the Bible at face value rather than understanding that there are metaphors, analogies, and parables which must be understood. Of course, when it comes to "This IS my Body . . . ha ha ha . . . literalism of verse gets tossed right out the window. So much for hermeneutic consistency!!

The Catholic church is apparently plagued by debates over universalism (which the Catholic church affirms)

WHAT??!!??!!

NO.
THEY.
DO.
NOT!!!

Go get a Catechism of the Catholic Church and read the section on hell. Then Google "Dogmas of the Roman Catholic Church." The Roman Church in no way believes that Christ's sacrifice will result in the salvation of all people. You are maybe thinking of the Orthodox writer David Bentley Hart? There is no debate on this in the Roman Church. The Catechism and the dogmas of the Roman Catholic Church settle this. Dude, if you are going to come in here and argue, you better KNOW what you are talking about, and on this one, you are really wrong.

as well as over the sanctity of human life and sexual morality. If the Catholic church affirms universalism, WRONG!!! SEE ABOVE!!! why would anyone become Catholic anyway? Wrong question. Why would anyone become Protestant when you cannot find it taught in the writings of the first Christians and first pastors of the Christian faith? Why would anyone become Protestant when that religion was invented 1700 years after the Christ and the Apostles went out and taught the world the faith? The whole thing becomes too nebulous. I fear that, given another 1000 years, the Catholic faith will devolve into a form of universal "religion", where anything goes, where worshiping whatever false deity we want is equivalent to praising and following our Lord Jesus Christ.

Nebulous? You joke. The Roman Catholic Church has a catechism which runs to over 700 pages and is very detailed in outlining what you must believe and obey to be Catholic. The fact that the Catholic Church is plagued with unbelieving bishops and priests has nothing to do with being nebulous. I'm not Catholic, and for reasons that I defer to discuss here, but your charges are so much bologna. I'm not Catholic, but when I see a Protestant attacking my Catholic brothers and sisters in things that we as Orthodox mutually believe in, I will LEAP to their defense.

If you wish further discussion I am certainly open. I hope you will meditate upon the things that have been said here, and especially do some good reading on the Covenant of God. That will answer a LOT of your objections.

I'll take this one. When Jesus said that, He was still on Earth. His church was not yet in existence (the birthday of the Church is Pentecost, about 7 weeks after the Crucifixion.)

So I'll suggest He had one of two meanings here:

"God is more truly your father than the man who sired you."

OR

"Hey, y'all, I'm fixin' to start a church an' it'll have priests an' all that. Don't be callin' the priests 'Father' now, y'hear me?"

Which do you choose?

Peace always,
Stephen

If you want to drive the "Man is justified by Faith alone" crowd nuts, quote the Judgement of Nations to them.

Matthew, 25, 31-46

31 f “When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit upon his glorious throne,
32 g and all the nations* will be assembled before him. And he will separate them one from another, as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats.
33 He will place the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.
34 Then the king will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father. Inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.
35 h For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, a stranger and you welcomed me,
36 naked and you clothed me, ill and you cared for me, in prison and you visited me.’
37 Then the righteous* will answer him and say, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink?
38 When did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you?
39 When did we see you ill or in prison, and visit you?’
40 i And the king will say to them in reply, ‘Amen, I say to you, whatever you did for one of these least brothers of mine, you did for me.’
41 * j Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you accursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.
42 k For I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink,
43 a stranger and you gave me no welcome, naked and you gave me no clothing, ill and in prison, and you did not care for me.’
44 * Then they will answer and say, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or ill or in prison, and not minister to your needs?’
45 He will answer them, ‘Amen, I say to you, what you did not do for one of these least ones, you did not do for me.’
46 l And these will go off to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”

Very clearly, both the sheep and the goats have faith -- they call Jesus "Lord" -- but the sheep are going to Heaven for what they did (feeding the hungry, etc.) and the goats are going to hell for what they did NOT do.

quote="Vern Humphrey" 46 l And these will go off to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”

Very clearly, both the sheep and the goats have faith -- they call Jesus "Lord" -- but the sheep are going to Heaven for what they did (feeding the hungry, etc.) and the goats are going to hell for what they did NOT do.

25:46 καὶ ἀπελεύσονται οὗτοι εἰς κόλασιν αἰώνιον οἱ δὲ δίκαιοι εἰς ζωὴν αἰώνιον

Except I can't find the words "eternal" or "hell" in there anywhere?

Wow so the righteous aren't going to have eternal life then?

Peace always,
Stephen

Did you miss this part?

"46 l And these will go off to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”

Light of the East, influenced by the universalist David Bentley Hart, is laboring under the belief that αἰώνιον means "a really long time," not "eternal". So he interprets this passage as

"and these will go off to be punished for a really long time, but the righteous to really long life"

Context. Jesus is speaking about the coming age (aion) and He is promising those who are the righteous that they will not enter into the punishment which the wicked will suffer in the coming age.

Curious. Have you actually READ anything written by Hart or any other person who believes in God's all-saving, universal love?

And BTW - ainious means "age-lasting," NOT eternal, so you have to work a proper understand of what Jesus is teaching into the whole context of the Bible. For instance, most people think of life in two stages - this life and the next (the age to come). But in Apocalypse, we hear John speaking of αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων aion to aion (ages unto ages). There is more than one age yet to come. Christ's view is speaking of the next age and the destiny in it of both the wicked and the righteous. The righteous will be blessed in the coming age. The wicked . . . meaaaah . . . not so much!

St. Paul also speaks of multiple ages that are yet to come: Ephesians 2:7 That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus.