This generation

[Timtofly]

I went into detail about 70AD near the beginning of the thread. It can be found here in post 30 where I used more than 50 verses of scripture. This generation post 30

Still do not see it, as all wrapped up in 70AD. Your interpretation may.

 

[Hammster]

It is unreasonable because the following was never true anytime in the first century---till all these things be done(Mark 13:30)

Which includes this for one---until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled(Luke 21:24)

It’s reasonable because Jesus said those things would happen to that generation. It doesn’t matter if it doesn’t fit your narrative.

 

[sovereigngrace]

I can't remember every reply, but what makes you think just the moral law would apply today and not all of the law? After all, Jesus said "not a single jot, not a stroke of a pen, will disappear from the Law." Wouldn't that also include the ceremonial law?

So it's just a coincidence that the temple in Jerusalem was a mock of the heavens and the earth. A place where the Jews believed God literally dwelt on Earth; that the veils were representative of the elements. Earth, sea, fire, and air.

That is not biblical evidence but rather Preterist opinion. Once again, Preterists have nothing but personal opinion to support their theories.

 

[Hammster]

That is not biblical evidence but rather Preterist opinion. Once again, I Preterists have nothing but personal opinion to support their theories.

That, and all the biblical evidences.

 

[DavidPT]

It’s reasonable because Jesus said those things would happen to that generation. It doesn’t matter if it doesn’t fit your narrative.

Except I'm not the one disagreeing with Jesus in the OD, you are if you insist He was meaning the generation they were living in at the time, when He said this generation shall not pass.

Something that has crossed my mind before, if we employ a bit of Hebrew parallism, so to speak, that might mean Jesus is telling us what it that passes away in verse 34, that He is telling us that in verse 35.

Matthew 24:34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.
35 Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away

Between these two verses two things pass away, one doesn't. If we make two of those things one thing rather than two things, we then have one thing passing away and one thing not passing away. IOW, this generation, and heaven and earth, are meaning the same thing. This present heaven and earth is an age, which is also a definition of genea. What is meant by the heaven and earth passing away is that this present age passes away in order to make room for a new age, a better age, the new heavens and new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness, unlike this age wherein doesn't dwelleth righteousness.

 

[claninja]

Yes.

No, that's not correct. Though I'm sure Jesus was familiar with the multiple "ages" in the sense that Paul used the term and how it's used in Hebrews 9:26, that is not what He had in mind when He talked about the end of the age. In His mind, He thought of 2 ages. This temporal age and the eternal age to come (see Luke 20:34-36). So, His reference to the end of the age was in reference to the end of this temporal age.

Just read Matthew 13:36-43, Matthew 13:47-50 and passages like that. Did those things He talked about there happen already? I believe they clearly have not. He refers to the separation of the wicked and righteous for judgment there, which is the same thing He talked about in Matthew 25:31-46. That has not yet happened.

No, not at all. I'm saying that from Jesus's perspective, He had 2 ages in mind. This temporal age when people get married and die and the eternal age to come that will come when the resurrection of the dead occurs at which point people will no longer get married or die. Read Luke 20:34-36.

wow, I was actually going to say, that’s a really good counter argument if I had understood you correctly. I would say Jesus mentioning people marrying in “this age” wouldn’t preclude marrying past ages. But anywho….

Paul also makes mention of plural “ages to come”

Ephesians 2:6-7 6And God raised us up with Christ and seated us with Him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus, 7in order that in the coming ages (plural) He might display the surpassing riches of His grace, demonstrated by His kindness to us in Christ Jesus.

So, it seems it could be argued Paul believed he was living at the end of the ages(plural), and that there were “ages” (plural) to come. So i don’t see how this is different than this age and the age to come.

 

[claninja]

Except I'm not the one disagreeing with Jesus in the OD, you are if you insist He was meaning the generation they were living in at the time, when He said this generation shall not pass.

Something that has crossed my mind before, if we employ a bit of Hebrew parallism, so to speak, that might mean Jesus is telling us what it that passes away in verse 34, that He is telling us that in verse 35.

Matthew 24:34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.
35 Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away

Between these two verses two things pass away, one doesn't. If we make two of those things one thing rather than two things, we then have one thing passing away and one thing not passing away. IOW, this generation, and heaven and earth, are meaning the same thing. This present heaven and earth is an age, which is also a definition of genea. What is meant by the heaven and earth passing away is that this present age passes away in order to make room for a new age, a better age, the new heavens and new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness, unlike this age wherein doesn't dwelleth righteousness.

solid counter argument: Using parallelism to assert that “this generation” equals “heaven and earth” passing away.

However, I could argue the opposite, heaven and earth passing away means “this generation” passed away, Since heaven and earth passing away can be understood as metaphorical language for the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple, which would come upon the wicked and idolatrous generation of first century apostate Israel.

Benson commentary:
“Yet once more I shake not the earth only, but also heaven — Meaning, probably, the abolition of the civil and ecclesiastical constitution of the Jews, with the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple, Matthew 24:29;”

If this understanding is correct, I don’t need to twist the actual definition of genea

 

[Hammster]

Except I'm not the one disagreeing with Jesus in the OD, you are if you insist He was meaning the generation they were living in at the time, when He said this generation shall not pass.

Well, He did actually say that.

 

[Jeffwhosoever]

It isn't certain that the Olivet Discourse and the book of Revelations both refer to the same event. The Lord could have referred to the fall of Jerusalem in the AD 70 while John could have been referring to far future events. I personally think the Lord was referring to those born after the year 1948 AD, but I could be wrong. Add the life expectancy of a modern Israeli to the year Israel (fig tree) became a nation and you get 2030-2033 AD.

 

[Jeffwhosoever]

Well, He did actually say that.

Did Dr. Kenneth Gentry publish his new book yet? I emailed him once and he actually replied to me. We wanted to ask him to speak to our Revelation study group and he replied he was too busy but sent me a link to his web page, but when I asked I had no idea that Dr. Gentry as a leading scholar and major proponent or I would have been too scared to even ask, but shockingly he was kind enough to reply back. I'm still 90% sure of Futurism but I'm still leaving 10% chance that Preterism may be right in the end.

 

[Hammster]

It isn't certain that the Olivet Discourse and the book of Revelations both refer to the same event. The Lord could have referred to the fall of Jerusalem in the AD 70 while John could have been referring to far future events. I personally think the Lord was referring to those born after the year 1948 AD, but I could be wrong. Add the life expectancy of a modern Israeli to the year Israel (fig tree) became a nation and you get 2030-2033 AD.

I think you are wrong because there’s no language to indicate that the events were far off. Just the opposite, in fact.

 

[Hammster]

Did Dr. Kenneth Gentry publish his new book yet? I emailed him once and he actually replied to me. We wanted to ask him to speak to our Revelation study group and he replied he was too busy but sent me a link to his web page, but when I asked I had no idea that Dr. Gentry as a leading scholar and major proponent or I would have been too scared to even ask, but shockingly he was kind enough to reply back. I'm still 90% sure of Futurism but I'm still leaving 10% chance that Preterism may be right in the end.

He’s hoping that in the next month or two it will be published. I think it will be two volumes, at 2000 pages.

 

[sovereigngrace]

solid counter argument: Using parallelism to assert that “this generation” equals “heaven and earth” passing away.

However, I could argue the opposite, heaven and earth passing away means “this generation” passed away, Since heaven and earth passing away can be understood as metaphorical language for the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple, which would come upon the wicked and idolatrous generation of first century apostate Israel.

Benson commentary:
“Yet once more I shake not the earth only, but also heaven — Meaning, probably, the abolition of the civil and ecclesiastical constitution of the Jews, with the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple, Matthew 24:29;”

If this understanding is correct, I don’t need to twist the actual definition of genea

Your only argument is your opinion and that of those who advocate your beliefs.

It frankly doesn't add up, in my opinion.

 

[claninja]

Your only argument is your opinion and that of those who advocate your beliefs.

It frankly doesn't add up, in my opinion.

Ok…..

since this is a discussion debate forum, Please demonstrate how my understanding of the definition of genea is wrong with evidence, instead of just a generic “drive by” post.

Per forum rules:

• When you disagree with someone's position, you should post evidence and supporting statements for your position. This policy, sometimes referred to as "X means Y because of Z", must be followed especially when posting claims that are widely considered to be controversial.”

 

[sovereigngrace]

Ok…..

since this is a discussion debate forum, Please demonstrate how my understanding of the definition of genea is wrong with evidence, instead of just a generic “drive by” post.

Per forum rules:

• When you disagree with someone's position, you should post evidence and supporting statements for your position. This policy, sometimes referred to as "X means Y because of Z", must be followed especially when posting claims that are widely considered to be controversial.”

I'm already presented the evidence to you and you have already sidestepped it. Both the Greek words genos and genea refer to race - in this case the Jewish race. I believe it means “this race” - as in "the successive members of a particular genealogy." Notwithstanding, the detail before the references to “this generation” in the parallel passages describe the second coming of Jesus in the future, not the coming of Titus in AD70. So even if a limited physical generation was required of the text it would be one preceding Christ's return.

The word genea means:

1) fathered, birth, nativity
2) that which has been begotten, men of the same stock, a family
2a) the several ranks of natural descent, the successive members of a genealogy
2b) metaphorically a group of men very like each other in endowments, pursuits, character
2b1) especially in a bad sense, a perverse nation
3) the whole multitude of men living at the same time
4) an age (i.e. the time ordinarily occupied be each successive generation), a space of 30 - 33 years

As usual, you are selective in quoting the meaning in order to place a Preterist slant on the word. You avoided the main meanings of 1, 2, 2a, 2b and 2b1 in Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament. You have to in order for Preterism to fit. Preterists are typically very bias and selective in their quotes in order to sustain their position. This is not being fair or accurate. It is not being totally honest and transparent.

The reality is: Preterists insist on a secondary meaning of the Greek word genea to support their beliefs. This shows the fragility of the whole doctrine. It is manifestly not built on solid ground.

 

[JosephZ]

Both the Greek words genos and genea refer to race - in this case the Jewish race. I believe it means “this race” - as in "the successive members of a particular genealogy.

You avoided the main meanings of 1, 2, 2a, 2b and 2b1 in Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament. You have to in order for Preterism to fit. Preterists are typically very bias and selective in their quotes in order to sustain their position.

Thayer's uses the definition of people living at the same time period for the verses found in Matthew 23 and 24.

Thayer's Greek Lexicon
STRONGS NT 1074: γενεά

γενεά, γενεάς, ἡ (ΓΑΝΩ, γίνομαι (crf. Curtius, p. 610)); the Sept. often for דּור; in Greek writings from Homer down;
1. a begetting, birth, nativity: Herodotus 3, 33; Xenophon, Cyril 1, 2, 8, etc.; (others make the collective sense the primary significance, see Curtius as above).

2. passively, that which has been begotten, men of the same stock, a family;

a. properly, as early as Homer; equivalent to מִשְׁפָּחַה, Genesis 31:3, etc. σῴζειν Ρ᾽αχαβην καί τήν γενεάν αὐτῆς, Josephus, Antiquities 5, 1, 5. the several ranks in a natural descent, the successive members of a genealogy: Matthew 1:17 (ἑβδόμῃ γενεά οὗτος ἐστιν ἀπό τοῦ πρώτου, Philo, vit. Moys. i. § 2).

b. metaphorically, a race of men very like each other in endowments, pursuits, character; and especially in a bad sense a perverse race: Matthew 17:17; Mark 9:19; Luke 9:41; Luke 16:8; (Acts 2:40).

3. the whole multitude of men living at the same time: Matthew 24:34; Mark 13:30; Luke 1:48 (πᾶσαι αἱ γενεαί); ; Philippians 2:15; used especially of the Jewish race living at one and the same period: Matthew 11:16; Matthew 12:39, 41f, 45; Matthew 16:4; Matthew 23:36; Mark 8:12, 38; Luke 11:29f, 32, 50; Luke 17:25; Acts 13:36; Hebrews 3:10; ἄνθρωποι τῆς γενεάς ταύτης, Luke 7:31; ἄνδρες τῆς γενεάς ταύτης, Luke 11:31; τήν δέ γενεάν αὐτοῦ τίς διηγήσεται, who can describe the wickedness of the present generation, Acts 8:33 (from Isaiah 53:8 the Sept.) (but cf. Meyer, at the passage).

4. an age (i. e. the time ordinarily occupied by each successive generation), the space of from 30 to 33 years (Herodotus 2, 142, et al.; Heraclitus in Plutarch, def. orac. c. 11), or ὁ χρόνος, ἐν ᾧ γεννωντα παρέχει τόν ἐξ αὐτοῦ γεγεννημένον ὁ γεννησας (Plutarch, the passage cited); in the N. T. common in plural: Ephesians 3:5 (Winers Grammar, § 31, 9 a.; Buttmann, 186 (161)); παρῳχημέναις γενεαῖς in ages gone by, Acts 14:16; ἀπό τῶν γενεῶν for ages, since the generations began, Colossians 1:26; ἐκ γενεῶν ἀρχαίων from the generations of old, from ancient times down, Acts 15:21; εἰς γενεάς γενεῶν unto generations of generations, through all ages, forever (a phrase which assumes that the longer ages are made up of shorter; see αἰών, 1 a.): Luke 1:50 R L (דּורִים לְדור, Isaiah 51:8); εἰς γενεάς καί γενεάς unto generations and generations, ibid. T Tr WH equivalent to וָדור לְדור, Psalm 89:2; Isaiah 34:17; very often in the Sept.; (add, εἰς πάσας τάς γενεάς τοῦ αἰῶνος τῶν αἰώνων, Ephesians 3:21, cf. Ellicott at the passage) (γενεά is used of a century in Genesis 15:16, cf. Knobel at the passage, and on the senses of the word see the full remarks of Keim, iii. 206 (v. 245 English translation)).

 

[claninja]

Both the Greek words genos and genea refer to race -

this is not true. Genos and genea have completely different definitions. They are completely different words used in different contexts and are not interchangeable.

genos means “race” as in nation of those that come from common ancestor.

genea means “race” as in contemporaries who share common characteristics or biology.

I believe it means “this race” - as in "the successive members of a particular genealogy."

and I countered this argument already. I’m still waiting on a response.

“successive members of a genealogy” means generations, as in “14 generationS (PLURAL) from Abraham to David”. Genea in this case is plural, NOT singular.

From definition 2a, which the use in the plural sense is found in Matthew 1:17:
“the several ranks in a natural descent, the successive members of a genealogy: Matthew 1:17”

genea in Matthew 24:34 is singular NOT plural, so your application of definition 2a is completely unfounded and makes no sense. Christ didn’t say “these generations” will not pass away…..

You avoided the main meanings of 1, 2, 2a, 2b and 2b1 in Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament.

incorrect, I haven’t avoided, I’ve actually been having this discussion with SJ in this very thread.

definition 1 is an old use of the word found in the works of Homer (late 8th century bc). Definitions of words do change over time. also the Bible is “koine” Greek, So we should always look at how the Bible uses the word to understand it. There are no biblical uses in the NT or LXX of definition 1.

definition 2a is not being used, because Christ isn’t talking about multiple generations, as genea in matthew 24:34 is not plural.

Definition 2b is used to group contemporaries by characteristics, not only genealogy. We can see this use when jesus stated “this wicked generation asks for sign”. Who asked for a sign? The wicked and adulterous contemporaries of first century israel that literally stood in front of Jesus asking for a sign.

Outside of Matthew 24:34, genea is never used biblically, whether in the LXX or NT, to describe a singular group of people throughout history. The singular use of genea always describes “contemporaries”, whether characteristically or biologically. The only time genea means throughout history is when it is plural as in “14 generationS from Abraham to david” or duplicated, as in “generation to generation”.

Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament. You have to in order for Preterism to fit. Preterists are typically very bias and selective in their quotes in order to sustain their position. This is not being fair or accurate. It is not being totally honest and transparent.

The reality is: Preterists insist on a secondary meaning of the Greek word genea to support their beliefs. This shows the fragility of the whole doctrine. It is manifestly not built on solid ground.

why is the use of genea, in Matthew 24:34, grouped into definition 3 and not 2a or 2b in thayers? Well, genea is not plural and is not used to talk about a genealogy, so 2a is not correct. Genea, in this case, is also not tied to a specific characteristic, like wicked/adulterous/shrewd, so 2b would be inaccurate as well.

It simply just refers to a group of contemporaries in Matthew 24:34.

So it’s obvious that the futurist must twist the actual definition and use of the word to fit their presupposition. It’s also why many futurists have stopped referring to genea as meaning a “type of people throughout all time” to only the “future to us contemporaries” who will experience the future coming events of the OD.

 

[sovereigngrace]

Thayer's uses the definition of people living at the same time period for the verses found in Matthew 23 and 24.

Thayer's Greek Lexicon
STRONGS NT 1074: γενεά

γενεά, γενεάς, ἡ (ΓΑΝΩ, γίνομαι (crf. Curtius, p. 610)); the Sept. often for דּור; in Greek writings from Homer down;
1. a begetting, birth, nativity: Herodotus 3, 33; Xenophon, Cyril 1, 2, 8, etc.; (others make the collective sense the primary significance, see Curtius as above).

2. passively, that which has been begotten, men of the same stock, a family;

a. properly, as early as Homer; equivalent to מִשְׁפָּחַה, Genesis 31:3, etc. σῴζειν Ρ᾽αχαβην καί τήν γενεάν αὐτῆς, Josephus, Antiquities 5, 1, 5. the several ranks in a natural descent, the successive members of a genealogy: Matthew 1:17 (ἑβδόμῃ γενεά οὗτος ἐστιν ἀπό τοῦ πρώτου, Philo, vit. Moys. i. § 2).

b. metaphorically, a race of men very like each other in endowments, pursuits, character; and especially in a bad sense a perverse race: Matthew 17:17; Mark 9:19; Luke 9:41; Luke 16:8; (Acts 2:40).

3. the whole multitude of men living at the same time: Matthew 24:34; Mark 13:30; Luke 1:48 (πᾶσαι αἱ γενεαί); ; Philippians 2:15; used especially of the Jewish race living at one and the same period: Matthew 11:16; Matthew 12:39, 41f, 45; Matthew 16:4; Matthew 23:36; Mark 8:12, 38; Luke 11:29f, 32, 50; Luke 17:25; Acts 13:36; Hebrews 3:10; ἄνθρωποι τῆς γενεάς ταύτης, Luke 7:31; ἄνδρες τῆς γενεάς ταύτης, Luke 11:31; τήν δέ γενεάν αὐτοῦ τίς διηγήσεται, who can describe the wickedness of the present generation, Acts 8:33 (from Isaiah 53:8 the Sept.) (but cf. Meyer, at the passage).

4. an age (i. e. the time ordinarily occupied by each successive generation), the space of from 30 to 33 years (Herodotus 2, 142, et al.; Heraclitus in Plutarch, def. orac. c. 11), or ὁ χρόνος, ἐν ᾧ γεννωντα παρέχει τόν ἐξ αὐτοῦ γεγεννημένον ὁ γεννησας (Plutarch, the passage cited); in the N. T. common in plural: Ephesians 3:5 (Winers Grammar, § 31, 9 a.; Buttmann, 186 (161)); παρῳχημέναις γενεαῖς in ages gone by, Acts 14:16; ἀπό τῶν γενεῶν for ages, since the generations began, Colossians 1:26; ἐκ γενεῶν ἀρχαίων from the generations of old, from ancient times down, Acts 15:21; εἰς γενεάς γενεῶν unto generations of generations, through all ages, forever (a phrase which assumes that the longer ages are made up of shorter; see αἰών, 1 a.): Luke 1:50 R L (דּורִים לְדור, Isaiah 51:8); εἰς γενεάς καί γενεάς unto generations and generations, ibid. T Tr WH equivalent to וָדור לְדור, Psalm 89:2; Isaiah 34:17; very often in the Sept.; (add, εἰς πάσας τάς γενεάς τοῦ αἰῶνος τῶν αἰώνων, Ephesians 3:21, cf. Ellicott at the passage) (γενεά is used of a century in Genesis 15:16, cf. Knobel at the passage, and on the senses of the word see the full remarks of Keim, iii. 206 (v. 245 English translation)).

You are reinforcing my argument.

 

[sovereigngrace]

this is not true. Genos and genea have completely different definitions. They are completely different words used in different contexts and are not interchangeable.

genos means “race” as in nation of those that come from common ancestor.

genea means “race” as in contemporaries who share common characteristics or biology.




and I countered this argument already. I’m still waiting on a response.

“successive members of a genealogy” means generations, as in “14 generationS (PLURAL) from Abraham to David”. Genea in this case is plural, NOT singular.

From definition 2a, which the use in the plural sense is found in Matthew 1:17:
“the several ranks in a natural descent, the successive members of a genealogy: Matthew 1:17”

genea in Matthew 24:34 is singular NOT plural, so your application of definition 2a is completely unfounded and makes no sense. Christ didn’t say “these generations” will not pass away…..




incorrect, I haven’t avoided, I’ve actually been having this discussion with SJ in this very thread.

definition 1 is an old use of the word found in the works of Homer (late 8th century bc). Definitions of words do change over time. also the Bible is “koine” Greek, So we should always look at how the Bible uses the word to understand it. There are no biblical uses in the NT or LXX of definition 1.

definition 2a is not being used, because Christ isn’t talking about multiple generations, as genea in matthew 24:34 is not plural.

Definition 2b is used to group contemporaries by characteristics, not only genealogy. We can see this use when jesus stated “this wicked generation asks for sign”. Who asked for a sign? The wicked and adulterous contemporaries of first century israel that literally stood in front of Jesus asking for a sign.

Outside of Matthew 24:34, genea is never used biblically, whether in the LXX or NT, to describe a singular group of people throughout history. The singular use of genea always describes “contemporaries”, whether characteristically or biologically. The only time genea means throughout history is when it is plural as in “14 generationS from Abraham to david” or duplicated, as in “generation to generation”.




why is the use of genea, in Matthew 24:34, grouped into definition 3 and not 2a or 2b in thayers? Well, genea is not plural and is not used to talk about a genealogy, so 2a is not correct. Genea, in this case, is also not tied to a specific characteristic, like wicked/adulterous/shrewd, so 2b would be inaccurate as well.

It simply just refers to a group of contemporaries in Matthew 24:34.

So it’s obvious that the futurist must twist the actual definition and use of the word to fit their presupposition. It’s also why many futurists have stopped referring to genea as meaning a “type of people throughout all time” to only the “future to us contemporaries” who will experience the future coming events of the OD.

All you are doing is forcing Preterism on the meaning of the Greek and then dismissing each meaning if it does not accord with your obsession with AD70. This shows the fragility of your position. The Preterist approach to every topic here is classic eschatological eisegesis – reading into Scripture whatever you want.

 

[claninja]

All you are doing is forcing Preterism on the meaning of the Greek and then dismissing each meaning if it does not accord with your obsession with AD70. This shows the fragility of your position. The Preterist approach to every topic here is classic eschatological eisegesis – reading into Scripture whatever you want.

which part of my understanding of genea in post 997 is wrong? It would help the readers and myself know where I am incorrect. Simply calling me a preterist is not an argument.