Except for 6), this is pretty much the range of meaning my Hebrew dictionary (Alcalay) gives for olam: "world, humanity, space, community, existence, assembly, pleasures of life [cf. "the world, the flesh and the devil" -- just my note], eternity, ages, distant future."
"World" seems to be the most basic meaning (whatever "world" meant to the ancient Jews!). In the Midrash, a very common periphrasis for God is "Mi she'amar v'hayah ha-olam" -- He Who spoke and the world was," which sounds as if it encompasses all Creation. Ha-olam ha-ba is also in Rabbinic Hebrew for "the world to come."
Just a note on sæcula -- the phrase in sæcula sæculorum (lit. "in ages of ages") is very, very common in liturgical Latin for "forever." I don't know if a construction like "olam olamim" occurs in the Bible, but I think it's likely, since it's a common Hebrew structure, as in shir ha-shirim, Song of Songs. In fact, I believe the structure appears in English only because it was lifted from the Bible.
The humongo question here is about the relationship between philosophy and the Bible.
I think Aristotle makes a very good case for time being "the measure of motion (or change)."
So you don't have time without things that change.
God does not change.
So you don't have time when all there is is God.
Also, God is not subject to anything; He is Lord of All. So he is not subject to time.
Berishith Bara ha Elohim eth hamayim we eth ha'aretz (from memory, I'm tired, be gentle about errors.) In the beginning, God create the heavens and the earth. Unless God "began" in the beginning, we must predicate a "being of God" (speaking loosely: God does not "be"; He makes all else "be" -- He is the source of being) outside of time (colloquially, "when there was no time" or even more loosely, "before time".)
And as an aside, God is not especially "in heaven"; He MADE the heavens. He is, by this reckoning not bound by time OR Space or anything in creation. But the heavens were made, So He is not bound by the heavens.
We may find some "joy" from the contemplation that time and space are interrelated mathematically in our attempt to find an adequate description or account of the sensibly perceived world.
Further, St Peter says that a thousand ages are in His sight as an evening, AND an evening as a thousand ages. We may say that time is "plastic and elastic" to God.
When WE think of "slo-mo", we think of being able to discern things in slow motion that go by too quickly for us to see them in "real time". But God is not saying, "Wait, what WAS that? Play it back again in slo-mo so I can dope out what happens when a supersonic bullet hits a balloon. God does not need strobe lights.
I wouldn't guess that Peter read Aristotle, but I'm confident that God knows that some people have read both Aristotle and Peter.
Anf this comes down to: when we have considered carefully what the BIble says of God and what time seems to be, we end up concluding that God is "outside" of time.
Our language falters because we are not outside of time and are also, for the present (little joke there) bound by space. So we say "'Outside' of time," but we know that's not exactly right.
But that "outside" we call "eternity". Eternity, by this reckoning, is not "unto ages of ages" but something wholly over than duration.
It is not as if someone stood on solid ground, and then plunged into the rapids of a mountain river. God does not "leave where He was" to involve Himself in time, either when He interferes with personal, national or cosmic history or when He becomes incarnate. So we must, since we are bound to use spatial and temporal images, think of eternity as comprehending time.
Therefore we say that when a prophet speaks, he foresees and foretells, because he and his hearers are in time and space. But God does not foresee. He sees. He sees Adam's fall and the Cross and Resurrection and the end of the ages for all are before Him, prae-(s)-ent to Him in His eternal Now.
So it seems to me.
And as to "Athens and Jerusalem", I think that part of the "fulness" of time that led to the Incarnation's happening when it did was precisely that because of the Roman Empire, the Gentiles and learned Jews who converted were amply prepared to "make as much sense as possible" of the Gospel of Christ. They could say much about what it meant, never detracting from God's self-disclosure in Christ or in the Word, but never saying that you have to park your brains in the popcorn stand if you want to believe in Him.
Except for 6), this is pretty much the range of meaning my Hebrew dictionary (Alcalay) gives for olam: "world, humanity, space, community, existence, assembly, pleasures of life [cf. "the world, the flesh and the devil" -- just my note], eternity, ages, distant future."
Not bad. However, that dictionary contains modern words that were added to the definition over a long period of time. The Hebrew of the first century, the time that the Christian era started, did not use "olam" to designate the English words listed in your quotation above - other than the term "space" connected to "time". Let me bring out what a couple of Lexicographers have found:
Schleusner defines the noun aion as: "Any space of time, whether longer or shorter, past, preent, or future, to be determinded by the persons or things spoken of, and the scope of the subject - the life or age of man; and space (of time) in which we measure human life, from birth to death." (Preliminary Discussions, Chapter 6, part 2).
Another lexicographer, Schrevelius says, "Aion: an age, a long period of time; indefinite duration; time, whether longer or shorter, past present or future; life, the life of man. Aionios: of long duration, lasting, sometimes everlasting, sometimes lasting through life." Note: his use of "everlasting" is in reference to an unknown duration, but covering a "very long period of time."
I quote from Ken's book again: "We could add multiple quotes, enough to fill a book in itself, to show that the meanings of the Greek words translated 'everlasting, forever, eternal,' etc., does not mean 'endless,' but simply mean an indefinite time, longer or shorter, past or future - and that they take their duration from the subjects or persons to which they apply. 'Endless' is not an idea put forth in the noun aion and its adjective aionios, but becasuse the subject demands it or is of itself endless, i.e., God. Just as in ancient times, people today often say things like 'His speech went on forever', and 'It took forever to get my house painted.' These same types of expressions were also used in the Bible for events that lasted a long time, but not actually endlessly, eternally, or forever. But we do see that the events using the term 'forever, eternal, endless' ended, but had everlastng consequence." - [the meaning of the late Latin "aeternum" in part. For it is now thought to have the meaning of "never ending". My addition.]
"World" seems to be the most basic meaning (whatever "world" meant to the ancient Jews!). In the Midrash, a very common periphrasis for God is "Mi she'amar v'hayah ha-olam" -- He Who spoke and the world was," which sounds as if it encompasses all Creation. Ha-olam ha-ba is also in Rabbinic Hebrew for "the world to come."
I take it the above is something you are quoting, right? This is a late addition of language to the terms used. The Midrash is a commentary on the Talmud which was originated in Babylon by the Pharisees sect of Judaism. The OT does not contain any references to a "world to come."
Just a note on sæcula -- the phrase in sæcula sæculorum (lit. "in ages of ages") is very, very common in liturgical Latin for "forever." I don't know if a construction like "olam olamim" occurs in the Bible, but I think it's likely, since it's a common Hebrew structure, as in shir ha-shirim, Song of Songs. In fact, I believe the structure appears in English only because it was lifted from the Bible.
No, "olam olamim" does not occur in the Hebrew Scriptures, or at last my search program does not find it. However what you bring up is interesting. Please continue...