1. Is Paul referring only to the people alive in his day?
While it’s true that Paul wrote this letter to a specific church in the first century, the way he uses the term crooked and perverse generation suggests he is describing the broader world system under the curse of sin and rebellion. This system is not limited to one particular group of people or one generation but is a description of the current age in which all believers live, across time.
What textual or linguistic evidence do you have that
genea means ‘the current age in which all believers live across time,’ rather than this being an interpretation you’re reading into the English based on your theological framework?
2. Could this "generation" extend beyond the first century?
The language of Philippians 2:15---about being blameless and harmless, children of God without rebuke---is something that applies to Christians throughout the entire church age, not just in the first century. It makes more sense to view this generation as representing the fallen world in general, across all time, in which believers are called to shine as lights. If this is the case, then genea refers to an age, not just a specific group of people alive during a 40-year period.
A timeless command does not require a timeless referent.
Paul can give an instruction that applies to believers in every century (“shine as lights”), yet root that instruction in the
specific crooked and perverse generation his readers were living among. To argue that because the
command is timeless the
generation must therefore be timeless is a
non sequitur. The conclusion does not logically follow from the premise.
3. Is there a broader biblical precedent for this use of genea?
Yes, in several other passages, genea is used to describe more than just a 40-year span. For example:
In Matthew 24:34, Jesus says, This generation will not pass away until all these things have taken place. While some interpret this narrowly, I argue that the generation refers to the present world system or age, not just the specific people alive in Jesus' time.
In Luke 16:8, Jesus refers to the generation of the children of this world, indicating that genea can describe an entire age or era of people in rebellion against God, not just a 40-year period.
Thus, when Paul speaks of a crooked and perverse generation in Philippians 2:15, it makes more sense to interpret genea as referring to the present age, the world system under the curse of sin and corruption. This fits with the broader biblical usage of genea to refer to an age, not just a narrow period of time.
Once we recognize that genea in Philippians 2:15 likely refers to an age---the entire world system under sin--it helps us understand the broader implications for other passages that use genea, such as Matthew 24:34 and 2 Peter 3:7.
This is probably one of the clearest examples of circular reasoning I think I've ever seen. You start by assuming
genea in Matthew 24:34 refers to an entire world-age, then you interpret Philippians 2:15 through that assumption, and then use those interpretations to “prove” your original assumption. That’s begging the question — the conclusion is assumed in the premise.
To sum up, Philippians 2:15 helps us understand that genea refers to more than just a specific, narrow time period---it refers to the present world system characterized by sin and rebellion. This broader use of genea makes sense in the context of Paul calling believers to shine as lights in a crooked and perverse generation, a description that clearly applies beyond the first century.
This understanding of genea as an age helps us interpret Matthew 24:34 and 2 Peter 3:7 in a consistent way. Both passages describe the passing away of the present age---the world system under sin---before the establishment of the new heavens and new earth. The generation in Matthew 24:34 is not just the people of Jesus' time, but the current age, which must pass away before the new creation can be realized.
Therefore, the Preterist interpretation of Matthew 24:34, which limits the generation to the first century, overlooks the broader, more consistent biblical use of genea to describe an age or epoch. By recognizing this, we can see that both Matthew 24:34 and 2 Peter 3:7 are speaking of the same event: the passing away of the current age and the beginning of the new creation. This challenges the Preterist view and opens the door to a more comprehensive eschatological understanding of the New Testament.
Your argument depends entirely on the English translation and your theological framework; you are reading
genea as ‘the current age’ because of your eschatological doctrine demands it, not because the Greek or context absolutely requires it. UNLESS of course you could provide some lexical evidence (Thayer's, BDAG, etc....) that supports your position?
