Can Preterists Even BEGIN To Make Their Case?

[TCassidy]

genus - Wiktionary
genus - Wiktionary
Borrowed from Latin genus (“birth, origin, a race, sort, kind”) from the root gen- in Latin gignere, Old Latin gegnere (“to beget, produce”).

 

[agedman]

genus - Wiktionary
genus - Wiktionary
Borrowed from Latin genus (“birth, origin, a race, sort, kind”) from the root gen- in Latin gignere, Old Latin gegnere (“to beget, produce”).

The etymology from the link you supplied is interesting.

Did I read correctly that the entomology shows the word was used as both race and station as the class of a soldier in 25 BC?

 

[prophecy70]

Matthew 12:39 But he answered them, “An evil and adulterous people seeks after a sign, but no sign will be given to it but the sign of Jonah the prophet."

So, do you claim that only those alive at that time were evil and adulterous?

And were they alive when Jonah

Matthew Poole sums this up nicely

5. The Ninevites, though upon the preaching of Jonah they made a show of repentance, yet returning to their former sins were soon after destroyed; so were the Jews within forty years after Christ’s ascension.

He sighed deeply in his spirit, and said, “Why does this people seek a sign? Most certainly I tell you, no sign will be given to this people.”

That was a "sign to their own desire" the parallel is above and says except the sign of Jonah. They seen all the signs they needed to. The ressurection being the greatest and still did not believe so

Matthew 28:38 look your house is left to you desolate. When did this happen again? Ad 70 that same Generation.


If you translate genea race here then your saying the Jewish race will never get a sign?

For whoever will be ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful people, the Son of Man also will be ashamed of him, when he comes in his Father’s glory, with the holy angels.

The next verse Matthew 9:1 And he said to them, “Truly I tell you, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see that the kingdom of God has come with power.

So Matthew 8:38 and Matthew 9:1 are talking about two different events 2000 plus years apart?

I still have not seen clear evidence to genea referring to race.

 

[agedman]

I still have not seen clear evidence to genea referring to race.

Ok, you are without excuse.

Here it is again.

The point being that YOU desire an EXCLUSIVE definition that will fit your scheme.

The word ALSO includes OTHER just as valid definitions so you cannot claim exclusionary use.

The word can and does apply to race, family stock...

It is NOT exclusive to a certain set of years

Your view fails by extorting the facts of Scripture into some mold that denies the vast prophetic statements. In particular the last 3 chapters of Revelation.

The NAS New Testament Greek Lexicon
Strong's Number: 1074 Browse Lexicon
Original Word Word Origin
genea from (a presumed derivative of) (1085)
Transliterated Word TDNT Entry
Genea 1:662,114
Phonetic Spelling Parts of Speech
ghen-eh-ah' Noun Feminine
Definition

1. fathered, birth, nativity
2. that which has been begotten, men of the same stock, a family
   1. the several ranks of natural descent, the successive members of a genealogy
   2. metaph. a group of men very like each other in endowments, pursuits, character
      1. esp. 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

Taken from: Genea - New Testament Greek Lexicon - New American Standard

 

[agedman]

Another definition:
Genea - Wikipedia

Again another:
Dictionary:
γενεά, -ᾶς, ἡ
Greek transliteration:
genea
Simplified transliteration:
genea
Numbers
Strong's number:
1074
GK Number:
1155
Statistics
Frequency in New Testament:
43
Morphology of Biblical Greek Tag:
n-1a
Gloss:
generation, one's own kind or race, descendant; fig., age, period of time (as in to all generations)
Definition:
pr. birth; hence, progeny; a generation of mankind, Mt. 11:16; 23:36, et al.; a generation, a step in a genealogy, Mt. 1:17; a generation, an interval of time, an age; in NT course of life, in respect of its events, interests, or character, Lk. 16:8; Acts 13:36
Taken from:γενεά | billmounce.com

 

[prophecy70]

Ok, you are without excuse.

Here it is again.

The point being that YOU desire an EXCLUSIVE definition that will fit your scheme.

The word ALSO includes OTHER just as valid definitions so you cannot claim exclusionary use.

The word can and does apply to race, family stock...

It is NOT exclusive to a certain set of years

Your view fails by extorting the facts of Scripture into some mold that denies the vast prophetic statements. In particular the last 3 chapters of Revelation.

The NAS New Testament Greek Lexicon
Strong's Number: 1074 Browse Lexicon
Original Word Word Origin
genea from (a presumed derivative of) (1085)
Transliterated Word TDNT Entry
Genea 1:662,114
Phonetic Spelling Parts of Speech
ghen-eh-ah' Noun Feminine
Definition

1. fathered, birth, nativity
2. that which has been begotten, men of the same stock, a family
   1. the several ranks of natural descent, the successive members of a genealogy
   2. metaph. a group of men very like each other in endowments, pursuits, character
      1. esp. 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

Taken from: Genea - New Testament Greek Lexicon - New American Standard

And here we are again!

I am asking for one verse that it clearly can not mean the current generation and must be used as race. I am not arguing the lexicon meaning. I am arguing the fact that in the gospel it's used as a literal present generation.

I was carrying around a file to sharpen the knife.

Are you going to argue with me that because file can mean

Folder or box for holding loose papers that are typically arranged in a particular order for easy reference.

That I am going to sharpen a knife with a folder?

I'm not asking the definition. I'm asking where it is used as race and not the current generation.

 

[prophecy70]

The point being that YOU desire an EXCLUSIVE definition that will fit your scheme.

The word ALSO includes OTHER just as valid definitions so you cannot claim exclusionary use.

Alright so change generation to race and give me the verse with "race" in it's place besides Matthew 24.

 

[prophecy70]

Are you not aware that God doesn’t operate according to human 24 hour timing?

No? Then how many days did it take God to create the universe and everything in it, do you take them as literal days? And why if he does not operate on them.

 

[prophecy70]

Another definition:
Genea - Wikipedia

The link says

Genea (derived from the Greek word γενεά, meaning "descent") is a genus of truffle-like fungi in the family Pyronemataceae. There are about 32 species in the genus that occur in North America and Europe.[2] The genus was circumscribed by Italian mycologist Carlo Vittadini in 1831.[3]

So now it's fungus that will not pass until all them things happen?
I

 

[Covenanter]

genus - Wiktionary
genus - Wiktionary
Borrowed from Latin genus (“birth, origin, a race, sort, kind”) from the root gen- in Latin gignere, Old Latin gegnere (“to beget, produce”).

That's a long article - referring to genus, not genea.
John doesn't allow his students to quote Wiki - so we too will reject your contribution.

 

[Covenanter]

Matthew 12:39 But he answered them, “An evil and adulterous people seeks after a sign, but no sign will be given to it but the sign of Jonah the prophet."

So, do you claim that only those alive at that time were evil and adulterous?

And were they alive when Jonah had his encounter with the sea monster?

Mark 8:12 He sighed deeply in his spirit, and said, “Why does this people seek a sign? Most certainly I tell you, no sign will be given to this people.”

So, you think only the people alive at the time as Christ sought after a sign? And how does your theory deal with the "no sign will be given" to them?

Mark 8:38 For whoever will be ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful people, the Son of Man also will be ashamed of him, when he comes in his Father’s glory, with the holy angels.

So, only those alive at that time were ashamed of Him and His words? And Jesus will only be ashamed those who were alive at that time and not everybody who denies Him?

Hebrews 3:10 Therefore I was displeased with those people, and said, ‘They always err in their heart, but they didn’t know my ways.’

So, was it only the people of that day that erred in their heart and displeased God?

You seem to have learnt the principles of reasoning from Lewis Carroll - Rev. Charles Dodgson.

John insists with his students that they study the context when considering the meaning. That of course is necessary as we engage in a serious theological discussion.

Your own inferences of the consequences of our belief that generally the translators are correct in translating genea as generation represent a reducto ad absurdum. But I will consider them - as prophecy70 already has.

Matthew 12:39 But he answered them, “An evil and adulterous people seeks after a sign, but no sign will be given to it but the sign of Jonah the prophet."

So, do you claim that only those alive at that time were evil and adulterous?

And were they alive when Jonah had his encounter with the sea monster?

Read the context:

38 Then some of the scribes and Pharisees answered, saying, “Teacher, we want to see a sign from You.”

39 But He answered and said to them, “An evil and adulterous generation seeks after a sign, and no sign will be given to it except the sign of the prophet Jonah.40 For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. 41 The men of Nineveh will rise up in the judgment with this generation and condemn it, because they repented at the preaching of Jonah; and indeed a greater than Jonah is here. 42 The queen of the South will rise up in the judgment with this generation and condemn it, for she came from the ends of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon; and indeed a greater than Solomon is here.​

We need to ask the questions:
Who came to Jesus demanding a sign?
Who is Jesus talking to?
Whose preaching did Nineveh hear & respond to?
Whose wisdom did the queen come to hear?
Who is Jesus talking about when he speaks of one greater than Jonah, greater than Solomon?
What was the sign of Jonah & how did Jesus demonstrate that sign?
Who comprises this generation in context?
Was the entire Israelite race evil & adulterous?
What about the prophets & history writers & the vast number of the descendants of Abraham who were owned by God as my people?

 

[robycop3]

Some systems of thinking actually must discredit the Scripture in some manner. This is seen not just in eschatology.

The basic question comes down to why would one not take the Scriptures as literal as possible considering the complete fulfillment of Scriptures concerning the first advent?

It is (IMO) because the lie of Satan may seem so reasonable, yet is a lie.

When the first step is taken to question the authority, it isn’t far from taking the next step to declare a Scripture doesn’t exist or do as Jefferson, take a knife and remove anything objectionable.

Exactly.

The Bible is a book of ABSOLUTES, pillars of truth that cannot be moved by the "waves" and "tsunamis" of man-made ideas & doctrines. when Jesus says in Scripture, "I am the way", that's an absolute, unalterable truth.

Most symbolism in Scripture is explained in further passages, such as that in Revelation of the 7 stars or the beast ridden by the woman. Also, we have the hindsight of all Scripture to guide us in our overview.

And what symbolism there is, especially in Jesus' parables, ALWAYS represents something or someone literal.

 

[robycop3]

Not all the prophecies of the Lord were fulfilled literally by any means. Far from it.

Example, please?

Not to mention Jesus' eschatological prophecies have NOT yet been fulfilled.

 

[robycop3]

I started a thread to continue this discussion. John replied once & the thread was locked.

Put simply, the case for "genea=race" (the Jewish race) is based on the assertion that all the events Jesus said would take place before this "genea" passed, particularly

the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.​

have not yet occurred, & will not occur until Jesus comes again.

Glad to see you know that!

The case for "genea=generation" (those living at the time Jesus spoke) is based on the assertion that Jesus as said:

"this generation will by no means pass away till all these things take place"​

that those events occurred because Jesus prophesied that they would occur, being seen by the prophesied events occurring at the AD 70 destruction, not in the way most of us expect at his return for resurrection & judgment, when indeed the resurrection will mean that every eye will see him at a final coming.

History has proven that genea means "people' or "race' in this case.

20 years ago I preached through Revelation with the amil understanding that Jesus' coming was at the end of time -

the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth/land will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.​

was his final coming. Further study has resulted in my present understanding.

Further study of WHAT? The writings of Preston, Gentry, etc? History shows this event has NOT yet occurred, as you admitted above.

As for -

"They got torpedoed over the translation of the Greek genea, but don't wanna admit that fact, either."​

you will see that John admitted having confused various Greek words & being misled by his search engine, & was glad we were able to correct him.

But you haven't "corrected" HISTORY/REALITY.

The question of whether Jesus is asserting that the Jewish race will continue, presumably in unbelief, until Jesus' final coming raises further questions. How could God condemn 60 generations of Jews who were not involved in the rejection & crucifixion of their Messiah? 3 or 4 generations perhaps (Deut. 5) but 60 ?!?

How could he? EASILY! GOD ID GOD! He can do as He chooses. he's let many other peoples live in non-belief longer than He has the Jews.

However, there are some Christians among the Jews, and among almost every other people on earth.

Remember, Jesus was a Jew as a man, & was sent to the Jews first, and is the Messiah whom the Jews have awaited since they've existed. Christianity was made available to the Jews first. But most Jews rejected Him & the Gospel, so, as paul said, "Look! We turn to the gentiles!"

 

[robycop3]

Why dont you head on over to the Matthew 24 Fulfilled topic and make your case? You never seem to have a case, your only defense is, the word PROOF AND CAPITAL LETTERS.


We can't prove what you are asking, how can we prove your own fantasy about what the bible teaches?

I asked you simple questions before and you have failed to answer them, Instead its a broken record with you with nothing to back it up.

Sir, 'tis YOU who needs to prove your case.

My case is made by the simple FACT that the prophesied eschatological events haven't yet occurred. That's the ONLY thing needed to make your case fail.

The common pret duck/dodge that the prophecies are symbolic is false, and can't be proven otherwise.

Proof? EASY!

Those prophecies that HAVE cometa pass have done so LITERALLY. The empires revealed to Daniel came & went just as he wrote, so far. The history of the Ptolemaic & Seleucid kingdoms has literally cometa pass so far. Jerusalem & the temple were destroyed as Jesus said. So, there's simply no basis for reducing the accompanying prophecies to "figurative/symbolic" status.

 

[robycop3]

Please enlighten me where we got torpedoed.

History PROVES the prophesied eschatological events didn't occur during that generation. But, as Jesus' words are 100% true, we must look to another meaning of genea.

 

[robycop3]

I have? From John? A few of them were the wrong word. And I explained the other two before the thread was closed, so PLEASE don't say I ignored them!

But you denied their REAL meaning.

As I, and others, have said several times, the ONLY proof that your 'take' on genea is correct would be that the prophesied events actually occurred in that generation then alive. And such proof simply doesn't exist!

 

[robycop3]

I see we're still receiving the same ole set of excuses from the preterists:

1.) "The verses are figurative/symbolic."

2.) " Genea in those verses means only the generation then living."

3.) "The fulfillment of the prophecies is not as non-preterists imagine them."

Preterists, you just don't wanna accept the FACT that the prophesied eschatological events are literal, and they haven't yet occurred! You're simply kidding yourselves by believing the works of Alcazar, Preston, Gentry, Miano, etc. over history/reality.

Alcazar refined a vague set of false beliefs & ideas into a readable, more-believable form, with a good deal of fiction added, to protect the pope from being labeled the "beast/antichrist". (Another false doctrine in itself.) Alcazar's work was the basis for subsequent authors' works, including those of Gentry, Preston, Miano, Sproul, etc. in this day. ( Mike Miano is pastor of Blue Point Baptist Church, NY.)

I hope the preterists reading this will ask themselves, "Why should I believe the pret doctrine when there's no proof it's true, nothing in history even remotely resembling the eschatological events Jesus predicted?"

 

[asterisktom]

Let's see...

The previous thread on tnis subject was closed after Prophecy 70 denied rev. 13:5 is a literal verse. However, he has no PROOF, basis, or authority for such a statement. It's simply an "inconvenient" Scripture shedding falsehood on his pret doctrine, so he denies its literality.

That's a common preterist duck-n-dodge for Scriptural prophecies they KNOW haven't yet come to pass, but don't wanna admit their pret doctrine is false.

They got torpedoed over the translation of the Greek genea, but don't wanna admit that fact, either.

Repeated requests by myself & other readers for **PROOF** the events they SAY have already occurred, HAVE actually already occurred, have been met with excuses, guesswork, bunny trails, red herrings, and stony silence.

THEY'RE STUMPED, & THEY KNOW IT!

So, preterists, why don'tcha do the Christian & Baptist thing & admit you've been deceived & lied to by whoever taught you that absurd false doctrine? Nuffin' to be ashamed of; we've all been deceived by Satan at one time or another to some degree. (For example, I almost fell into the quagmire of Herbie Armstrong's "Worldwide Church of God".)

So, Preterists, either PROVIDE SOME PROOF, or admit you were deceived!

Against my better judgment, Robycop, I am going to answer your question, even though it will do no good. First your either/or question is pointless since you were given Biblical evidence - by me and others - and it didn't show up on your radar. So why write more?

In a nutshell, the core of your misunderstanding is that you think that a lack of visible evidences undermines our spiritual position. It doesn't. The Jews of the 1st century, also, kept looking for the Messiah who would accommodate to their worldly conceptions of Himself and His kingdom. Even the Disciples had to radically change their thinking in order to perceive Christ's message.

The "proof" you are looking for will never come.
Just like the earthly "messiah" the Jews were looking for never came.

 

[TCassidy]

Who comprises this generation in context?

The wicked and adulterous people (all those descended from a common ancestor).

Was the entire Israelite race evil & adulterous?

Yes. "ALL we like sheep have gone astray and turned, every one, to his own way."

What about the prophets & history writers & the vast number of the descendants of Abraham who were owned by God as my people?

See above. Sinless perfection (in this life) is a damnable heresy.