"Clearly, if we even grant you your point on the "until" "unto" issue (which I do not think we are obligated to do)..."
Unless you want to make up a new meaning for "eos", you have to grant the point.
As to which presumption about the future is correct, neither of us will be able to prove our point to the other. Which one is "strongly discredited" depends on whether or not one believes that the Church would consistently and unanimously pass down a history that was false.
If Jewish or secular histories say something extra-biblical, Protestants have a tendency to believe them to be true. If an extra-biblical history is passed down within the Christian Church, Protestants have the default setting of believing it to be false. It is that simple.
Or, as Cardinal Newman observed, to be deep in history is to cease to be Protestant.