Does Matthew 24:34 REALLY support Preterism?

[Guest]

There is no "Jewish race." Converts from places scattered over the earth make up the people calling themselves Jewish. Genea can't mean "Jewish race." Try substituting "Jewish race" in every passage where genea is translated "generation."

So there is no Jewish race simply because Jewish people are converts from many different ethnic origins. Tell me, is there no "Christian race" on the same basis? Second century Christian writers made reference to "The Christian Race". It would seem that the word "race" in those days was often used with reference to a group which had a common philosophy or religion.

I suppose there could also then be a sort of "Jewish race" metaphor, but the scripture in question doesn't say "this race." It says, "this generation."

As I understand it, the Greek word genos was the word translated as "race" from the second century writings to which you refer. If your belief is correct, then in the New Testament genos should have been the word used to mean "race." Instead, tautē genea is used and rightfully translated "this generation."

I believe the problems people have with Matthew 24:34 may be related more to an understanding of what is meant by "these things" instead of what is meant by "this generation." Look back and see that the timing of the "things" asked about is a question separate from the timing of the second coming question. Perhaps someone else can explain it better than I can.

Blessings,
Lazarus43

[Guest]

Paidion,

Back to your orig. question "Does Matthew 24:34 really support Preterism?" I would have to say yes, and at the same time this does NOT mean that a futuristic perspective of Matt 24 is not valid either, possibly. And to tell you the truth, I believe that Matt 24 speaks of Christs 2nd coming just as much as it does regarding the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70.

If a prophecy is fullfilled in the past in one sense, does that mean it cannot have a future fullfilment in another sense? I am only asking, not necessarily trying to defend a particular view, just wanting to learn.

Off the top of my head I think of prophecy regarding the Kingdom of God, and it came as predicted at Christs 1st coming I believe, and there will be a future fullfillment of the Kingdom of God at His 2nd coming.

Any thoughts brother?
Doug

[Guest]

Paidion,

I would suggest that everything after verse 15 in Luke chapter 1 is simply a description of who John will be. That can be determined by it beginning with the word 'for'. There are no rules broken when he says 'these things' because he was there to tell him he would be having a kid. The description of John's past, present or future could be included without them being considered to be a part of 'these things'. However, there are rules broken when Jesus said 'these things' and added the word 'all'.

Whenever the word 'genea' is used, it cannot be pressed to mean the entire race or the entire generation so it is invalid to make that argument. I think first, you need to establish a time in the Bible where genea is required to be translated 'race', then you could make a case for your argument. Genea is required to be translated 'generation' in Matthew chapter 1 and seems to me the stronger argument because it allows us to see that at least Matthew understood that genea means generation.

Thank you,
Sam