γενεά geneá and the fallacy of illegitimate totality transfer

[claninja]

We have talked about this many times. Search this site and you will see evidence.

We have talked multiple times about what lexicon you use that has Matthew 24:34 listed under the definition “family of same stock”? That’s definitely not true.

My only recollection is you using Thayers incorrectly by cherry picking it, all while ignoring that Thayers defines genea in the setting of Matthew 23:34 as multitude living at the same time.

So again, you don’t have any lexicon that you prefer, where Matthew 24:34’s genea is listed under the definition of “family stock”? Providing something like this would actually be really helpful for the OP.

Now, will you try and rebut the facts above you avoided?

Already rebutted: Those are strawman arguments. Mainline preterism, whether partial or full, doesn’t believe any of those constructed points. It’s easy to build up a fake argument and then knock it down. Try building a real argument.

 

[WPM]

We have talked multiple times about what lexicon you use that has Matthew 24:34 listed under the definition “family of same stock”? That’s definitely not true.

My only recollection is you using Thayers incorrectly by cherry picking it, all while ignoring that Thayers defines genea in the setting of Matthew 23:34 as multitude living at the same time.

So again, you don’t have any lexicon that you prefer, where Matthew 24:34’s genea is listed under the definition of “family stock”? Providing something like this would actually be really helpful for the OP.



Already rebutted: Those are strawman arguments. Mainline preterism, whether partial or full, doesn’t believe any of those constructed points. It’s easy to build up a fake argument and then knock it down. Try building a real argument.

The lexicons all (rightly) show how broad the meaning is.

The meaning also covers a type of human - as in a wicked generation in Matthew 24. Jesus even takes that generation back to the 1st reprobate Cain to show that. Cain lived long before Abraham, Isaac and Jacob (Israel).

It is not limited to 40 years in between AD 30 and AD 70. That is a faulty Preterist fixation.

 

[claninja]

The lexicons all (rightly) show how broad the meaning is.

I agree that lexicons show a broad range of meanings for words. That’s not really the issue. The discussion is how to use a lexicon correctly.

A word does not carry all of its meanings in every context. In other words, a lexicon shows the specific definition and usage within a certain context. It’s not meant to be cherry picked so as to commit the fallacy of illegitimate totality transfer.

So if Thayers assigns genea in Matthew 24:34 to “whole multitude living at the same time” but not to “family of same stock”, then it would be incorrect to say Thayers demonstrates genea means “family of same stock” in the context of Matthew 24:34.

The meaning also covers a type of human - as in a wicked generation in Matthew 24. Jesus even takes that generation back to the 1st reprobate Cain to show that. Cain lived long before Abraham, Isaac and Jacob (Israel).

Illegitimate totality transfer fallacy. Notice, there are near context semantic clues as to when it means a metaphorical generation, such as “faithless”, “wicked”, or “perverse” next to the word genea. Just look at all the verses:

• 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].

It is not limited to 40 years in between AD 30 and AD 70. That is a faulty Preterist fixation.

Demonstrate your claims objectively with a lexicon or dictionary. If you could provide even one lexicon that states genea in Matthew 24:34 falls under the definition of “family of same stock”, this would really help the overall discussion.

 

[WPM]

I agree that lexicons show a broad range of meanings for words. That’s not really the issue. The discussion is how to use a lexicon correctly.

A word does not carry all of its meanings in every context. In other words, a lexicon shows the specific definition and usage within a certain context. It’s not meant to be cherry picked so as to commit the fallacy of illegitimate totality transfer.

So if Thayers assigns genea in Matthew 24:34 to “whole multitude living at the same time” but not to “family of same stock”, then it would be incorrect to say Thayers demonstrates genea means “family of same stock” in the context of Matthew 24:34.



Illegitimate totality transfer fallacy. Notice, there are near context semantic clues as to when it means a metaphorical generation, such as “faithless”, “wicked”, or “perverse” next to the word genea. Just look at all the verses:

• 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].

Demonstrate your claims objectively with a lexicon or dictionary. If you could provide even one lexicon that states genea in Matthew 24:34 falls under the definition of “family of same stock”, this would really help the overall discussion.

That meaning is in your own posts above. Read them again. Search back in our discussions and you will find it. I'm not going to do the work for you. I presented it and you didn't want to hear it. That is because you're blinkered by your own false teaching.

 

[claninja]

That meaning is in your own posts above. Read them again. Search back in our discussions and you will find it. I'm not going to do the work for you. I presented it and you didn't want to hear it. That is because you're blinkered by your own false teaching.

Right, the meaning, according to Thayer, is in my posts - Matthew 24:34 is explicitly listed under the definition “whole multitude living at the same time”. It does NOT list the definition and usage of genea, in the context of Matthew 24:34, under “family of same stock”.

But you don’t agree with Thayer. That’s why I’m asking what source are you using?
You have never once provided a lexicon or dictionary that lists genea, in the context of Matthew 24:34, under the definition “family stock” or “race”. That would be the most helpful thing for this discourse, though I suspect you will continue to deflect.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Without using any sort of tool, resource, or aide, can you please tell me what this says or means by simply AND only praying to the Spirit for Him to reveal it to you?

“πολλοὶ γάρ εἰσιν κλητοὶ ὀλίγοι δὲ ἐκλεκτοί”

unless your native language is first century koine Greek or God has just miraculously given you the gift of tongues, I’m assuming you can’t tell me what it says or means without an English resource - In other words you rely on the hard work or linguists, translators, commentators, and scholars that God has worked through.

Praying for understanding is extremely important. And so is not incorrectly using the tools that God has provided through the hard work of others.

I don't get any sense from you at all that praying for understanding has any part of your study of scripture. You certainly never talk about it.

I mean, I didn’t make any of this up. If you are unfamiliar with how to properly use a lexicon, blueletterbible, as well logos have some great resources and tutorials

I am familiar, but I also don't just blindly trust in those sources like you apparently do, as if they are infallible and equal with scripture itself.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

1. When did/does the old covenant end?
2. When did/does the new covenant begin?
3. When did/does "the last days" begin?
4. When will "the last days" finish?
5. When is "the last day" of "the last days"?
6. What occurs on "the last day" of "the last days"?
7. When is the "end of the age"?
8. When is the day of redemption?
9. When did/does "this age" arrive?
10. When did/does "this age" end?
11. When did/does the new heavens and new earth arrive?
12. When did the kingdom of God begin?
13. When did/does "the age to come" arrive?
14. Is the second coming of Christ a past event, an ongoing process or a literal physical future climactic event?
15. Is the resurrection of the dead a past event, an ongoing process or a literal physical future climactic event?
16. Is the judgment of all a past event, an ongoing process or a literal physical future climactic event?

Please list the Scriptures you believe support these?

You will get nothing but silence from preterists on these questions because, like Premils, when their beliefs get challenged like this, they go silent. Their false doctrine does not hold up to scrutiny, but they don't care because they are content with believing a doctrine based on cherry picked scriptures that they take out of context.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

I don’t know if you noticed this but saying the morally corrupt, unbelieving world-order (that was prior to the cross) continues until all eschatological prophecy is fulfilled, actually would agree best with the preterist view.

Do you not think there was any difference in the world from the time prior to Christ's first coming and after? Scripture says that before Christ came and shed His blood, the Gentiles had "no hope" and were "without God in the world" (Ephesians 2:11-12). Has that been the case since Christ came, died and rose again? No. So, the idea that nothing changed after Christ came makes no sense whatsoever, yet, that is what preterists and Premils both believe.

 

[WPM]

Right, the meaning, according to Thayer, is in my posts - Matthew 24:34 is explicitly listed under the definition “whole multitude living at the same time”. It does NOT list the definition and usage of genea, in the context of Matthew 24:34, under “family of same stock”.

But you don’t agree with Thayer. That’s why I’m asking what source are you using?
You have never once provided a lexicon or dictionary that lists genea, in the context of Matthew 24:34, under the definition “family stock” or “race”. That would be the most helpful thing for this discourse, though I suspect you will continue to deflect.

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

Different translations and Bible scholars interpret it in different ways. A broad objective study of this subject will show that you cannot limit its meaning to a 40-year generation as Preterism must to sustain its school of thought.

It can equally and fairly broadly describe time-periods (a literal generation or age) or natural descendants (a group of men very like each other in endowments, pursuits or men of the same stock). The root word for genea is genos (Strong’s 1085), which means race, kindred, offspring, family, stock, tribe, nation, i.e. nationality or descent from a particular people.

It can figuratively describe a category of people who share the same identity. Both the Greek words genos and genea can refer to race or group of like-minded people.

Acts 13:26 talks about “children of the stock [Gr. genos] of Abraham” and Philippians 3:5 those “of the stock [Gr. genos] of Israel.” The Bible is here speaking in a natural sense.

The root word of genos is ginomai (Strong’s 1096), which literally means to gen-erate.

It can also refer to a space of time occupied by a particular generation of people.

It could be strongly argued that this is talking about the Jewish race. It could mean “this race” – as in “the successive members of a particular genealogy.” It could also relate to all those living at the time this message was presented. 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 the one preceding Christ’s return.

It could also describe “a group of men very like each other in endowments, pursuits, character … especially in a bad sense, a perverse nation.” This seems to best fit the overall background of the Lord’s message. This is supported by the context of Christ’s teaching in the preceding chapter (Matthew 23:32-36). There, Jesus takes His listeners right back in time to the first reprobate in the natural lineage of Israel – Cain. He carries the resistance through the different ages right up until the hypocritical Pharisees that were before Him.

 

[WPM]

Strawman arguments often can be convincing.

Speak for yourself. Maybe for Preterists.

 

[WPM]

I don’t know if you noticed this but saying the morally corrupt, unbelieving world-order (that was prior to the cross) continues until all eschatological prophecy is fulfilled, actually would agree best with the preterist view.

Amill would say Satan was bound after the cross so the world-order was changed, as all power was given to Jesus after the cross.

Premill would say the world-order changes when Christ returns and sets up His kingdom to rule with the rod of iron.

A preterist might say the world-order of the old covenant lasted until all prophesy got fulfilled as in Luke 21:22.

The morally corrupt, unbelieving, natural world-order will continue until every eschatological prophecy is fulfilled at the return of Christ in the future where He introduces the redeemed to glory, perfection everlasting righteousness and eternity.

 

[claninja]

I don't get any sense from you at all that praying for understanding has any part of your study of scripture. You certainly never talk about it.

An arrogant assumption and bizarre non sequitur.

I am familiar, but I also don't just blindly trust in those sources like you apparently do, as if they are infallible and equal with scripture itself.

Modern English translations are not the original text; they are interpretations of the Greek, Hebrew, or Aramaic. By quoting an English Bible, you are already relying on someone else’s exegesis and translation decisions, just as using a lexicon is.

If you claim that using a lexicon is ‘trusting a human source’ while quoting an English Bible is not, that’s inconsistent. Every modern translation inherently relies on the scholarship found in lexicons and grammars to convey the original text.

 

[covenantee]

It is not implausible to recognize that the definition of "generation" in Matthew 24:34 incorporates the elements of both race and time. Ethnic Jews (the race element) living when Jesus prophesied, were destroyed within a generation (the time element) in 70 AD.

There's room for both.

 

[grafted branch]

Do you not think there was any difference in the world from the time prior to Christ's first coming and after? Scripture says that before Christ came and shed His blood, the Gentiles had "no hope" and were "without God in the world" (Ephesians 2:11-12). Has that been the case since Christ came, died and rose again? No. So, the idea that nothing changed after Christ came makes no sense whatsoever, yet, that is what preterists and Premils both believe.

The morally corrupt, unbelieving, natural world-order will continue until every eschatological prophecy is fulfilled at the return of Christ in the future where He introduces the redeemed to glory, perfection everlasting righteousness and eternity.

Now hold on a minute, on the one hand SI says there is a clear difference from before the cross as compared to after the cross concerning the morally corrupt, unbelieving, without hope Gentles.

And WPM is saying there was no difference, that morally corrupt, unbelieving, natural world order will always be the same until every eschatological prophecy is fulfilled.

Which is it guys?

 

[WPM]

Now hold on a minute, on the one hand SI says there is a clear difference from before the cross as compared to after the cross concerning the morally corrupt, unbelieving, without hope Gentles.

And WPM is saying there was no difference, that morally corrupt, unbelieving, natural world order will always be the same until every eschatological prophecy is fulfilled.

Which is it guys?

We are talking about 2 different things, but both are true. He is talking about the notable enlightenment of the Gentiles since the cross that is undeniable. I am talking about perfection after the second coming that is undeniable. Both are true!

 

[grafted branch]

We are talking about 2 different things, but both are true. He is talking about the notable enlightenment of the Gentiles since the cross that is undeniable. I am talking about perfection after the second coming that is undeniable. Both are true!

So when Jesus said “this generation shall not pass”, was he talking about the Gentiles or not? Jesus made that statement prior to the cross.

 

[WPM]

So when Jesus said “this generation shall not pass”, was he talking about the Gentiles or not? Jesus made that statement prior to the cross.

He meant the wicked.

 

[grafted branch]

He meant the wicked.

A great multitude which no man can number of the morally corrupt, unbelieving, without hope Gentles did pass, right? They passed from death to life, right? Which means the statement “this generation shall not pass”, can’t include all the wicked Gentiles, right?

 

[WPM]

A great multitude which no man can number of the morally corrupt, unbelieving, without hope Gentles did pass, right? They passed from death to life, right? Which means the statement “this generation shall not pass”, can’t include all the wicked Gentiles, right?

The wicked are destroyed at the second coming.

 

[grafted branch]

The wicked are destroyed at the second coming.

The wicked hopeless generation of Gentiles, prior to the cross, passed after the cross, at least according to the Amill position.