Text: John 10:22-31
Gary Demar, in preparation for an up-coming debate on the subject of the Rapture writes the following (source: https://americanvision.org/21827/preparing-for-my-debate-with-kent-hovind-on-the-rapture/):
In the process of my preparation and publicity of the debate, someone asked if I would debate Alan Kurschner. I’ve seen his name, and I know that he has responded to some of my material over the years, but have not read much of his work. I found this article especially interesting: “Preterist Gary DeMar Promoting Fake Exegesis.”
He took issue with the following comment of mine:
There are numerous examples of flawed starting points when it comes to the topic of eschatology. “This generation” becomes “this race” or “the generation that sees these signs.” In the first case, the Greek word for “race” (genos) is not used in Matthew 24:34. Jesus uses the Greek word genea.
There’s nothing fake about what I wrote. Jesus does use genea and not genos. Mr. Kurschner then makes this comment:
At the outset I am not defending the “race” interpretation. I don’t think it is the correct interpretation here. My point here instead is to correct DeMar’s ignorant claim that genea never means “race” within its semantic range.
He then offers the following from “[t]he most authorative [sic] Koine Greek Lexicon,” A Greek–English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature Third Edition (BDAG).
γενεά, ᾶς, ἡ (Hom.+; ins, pap, LXX, En; TestSol C 13:7; TestJob, Test12Patr; GrBar 10:3; Philo, Joseph., SibOr, Just., Tat.) a term relating to the product of the act of generating and with special ref. to kinship, frequently used of familial connections and ancestry. Gener. those descended fr. a common ancestor, a ‘clan’ (Pind., P. 10, 42 the Hyperboreans are a ἱερὰ γενεά [holy race]; Diod. S. 18, 56, 7; Jos., Ant. 17, 220), then
Then there’s this from Mr. Kurschner:
So DeMar is wrong on that front. Then in the same article, DeMar concludes his discussion by citing all the instances of the term in the Gospels. And get this. The one single instance that BDAG cites as meaning “race” in Luke 16:8, DeMar leaves out! Talk about fake exegesis! He mistakenly has Luke 18:8 instead of Luke 16:8, either he did this on purpose or he is sloppy by copying and pasting from his source that contains the error.
Actually, I am not wrong. I disagree with the authors of BDAG as do a number of Bible translations.
Yes, it was a copying error. It’s not the only time I’ve made such a mistake, and unfortunately, it won’t be the last. I certainly didn’t do it on purpose (better to leave it out) since I deal with Luke 16:8 in other places (see below). That’s a point to keep in mind. One article does not make an argument.
To be honest, like Mr. Kurschner I do not believe genea in Luke 16:8 should be translated as “race.” It doesn’t fit the context.
In his book Jesus v. Jerusalem, published by American Vision, Joel McDurmon writes the following:
Then Jesus gives an explanatory note: “the sons of this world are more shrewd in dealing with their own generation than the sons of light” (16:8). While I normally stick with the ESV, it incorrectly translates aion here as “world” instead of “age.” Most of the other modern translations get it right. It could more simply and more accurately be translated, “the sons of this age are more shrewd in their own generation than the sons of light.” He is clearly referring to the “age” which was coming to a close … and the children of that generation.1
Jesus v. Jerusalem: A Commentary on Luke 9:51–20:26, Jesus’ Lawsuit Against Israel is the best book that expounds on the fact that Jerusalem “was responsible for ‘all the righteous blood shed upon earth’ and that she was ‘the city that kills the prophets’ (Matt. 23:35, 37).” It was that generation that was judged not a “race” or “kind of people.”
“Age,” referring to a period of time, is closer in meaning (parallel) to “generation,” also a period of time, than “kind” or “race” in the same way that the two uses of “sons” are parallel.
Also, look at the translation problem in the BDAG quotation that Mr. Kurschner references above: “people of the world.” This, too, is problematic since the Greek word is αἰῶνος (aiōnos), not kosmos, and yet BDAG translates it as “world.” This is typical in some translations. For example, the KJV translates aiōnos (αἰῶνος) as “world” in Matthew 24:3.
You can see how the repeated expressions of judgment on that generation are found in Luke’s gospel as well as the book of Acts: 13:34-35; 17:22-37; 19:41-44; 21:5-36; Acts 2:40 (cp. Phil. 2:15). “Generation” is the best translation. Even Mr. Kurschner agrees.
The thing of it is, I have dealt with Luke 16:8 in other places and mention the fact that genea is sometimes translated as “race” or “kind.” For example, quoting Jack Lewis:
The meaning of generation (genea) is crucial to the interpretation of the entire chapter. While Scofield, following Jerome, contended that it meant the Jewish race, there is only one possible case in the New Testament (Luke 16:8) where the lexicon suggests that genea means race. There is a distinction between genos (race) and genea (generation). Others have argued that genea means the final generation; that is, once the signs have started, all these happenings would transpire in one generation (cf. 23:36). But elsewhere in Matthew genea means the people alive at one time and usually at the time of Jesus (1:17; 11:16; 12:39, 41, 45; 23:36; Mark 8:38; Luke 11:50f.; 17:25), and it doubtlessly means the same here.”2
In a footnote, I added the following:
The New American Standard translates genea in Luke 16:8 as “kind,” but “generation” is equally valid. The King James Version, the New King James, and American Standard Version, and Young’s Literal Translation translate genea as “generation.”
In the margin, the NASB adds, “Lit. generation.” There was no need for me to spend time making these points since the New Testament consistently translates genea as “generation” and not “race.” This is especially true in the gospels (Matt. 1:17). It seems that futurists (Kurschner is an advocate for the pre-wrath rapture view) have to find just one verse that they can use to upset the exegetical applecart of preterists.
In the same outline, I included this:
The following is Charles Ryrie’s comment on Matthew 24:34 from his Study Bible: “this generation. No one living when Jesus spoke these words lived to see ‘all these things’ come to pass. However, the Greek word can mean ‘race’ or ‘family’ which makes good sense here; i.e., the Jewish race will be preserved, in spite of terrible persecution, until the Lord comes.” Stanley Toussaint, a dispensationalist, dismisses Ryrie’s line of argument: “A second interpretation, held by a number of futurists, affirms that the noun γενεά means race, that is, the Jewish race. Bauer, Arndt, and Gingrich give ‘clan’ as a primary meaning, but they list only Luke 16:8 as an illustration in the New Testament. It is difficult for dispensational premillennialists to take this view because this would imply that Israel would cease to exist as a nation after the Lord’s return: ‘This race of Israel will not pass away until the Second Advent.’ But Israel must continue after the Second Advent into the millennium in order to fulfill the promises God made to that nation.”3
Even the dispensational Darby Translation translates genea as “generation” in Luke 16:8:
And the lord praised the unrighteous steward because he had done prudently. For the sons of this world are, for their own generation, more prudent than the sons of light.
There are others: American Standard, English Revised, Webster’s Bible Translation, Weymouth New Testament.
I’m glad that Mr. Kurschner brought this material to my attention. I wished I had known sooner so I could change Luke 18:8 to 16:8 on page 173 (2020 printing) of Wars and Rumors of Wars. In the next edition of Wars, I’ll include this material since Mr. Kurschner believes it’s significant.
Kevin DeYoung writes (source: https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/kevin-deyoung/what-is-preaching-and-who-does-it/):
One of the best books I read last year was Preaching in the New Testament (IVP, 2017) by Jonathan Griffiths. As part of D. A. Carson’s series New Studies in Biblical Theology, I expected the book to be exegetically rich and the cover to be slate gray. I was not disappointed on either account. Griffiths, a pastor in Ottawa, Canada, makes a compelling case that there is such a thing as preaching and that not every Christian is called to do it.
At the heart of Griffiths’s examination is this well-defended conclusion:
Preaching in the New Testament is a public declaration of God’s word by a commissioned agent that stands in a line of continuity with Old Testament prophetic ministry. (128-129)
Building on the work of Claire Smith, Griffiths argues that in the New Testament euangelizomai, katangello, and kerysso are semi-technical terms referring to the proclamation of the gospel. Griffiths charts all 54 uses of euangelizomai (“announce good news”), all 18 uses of katangello (“proclaim” or “announce”), and all 59 uses of kerysso (“make proclamation as a herald”). While the three terms are not employed in a uniform sense, they are “semi-technical” in that they normally refer to preaching by some recognized authority. Of the three verbs, kerysso is the most specialized term with the narrowest range of meaning. But even with the other terms, Griffiths notes, there are no examples in the New Testament where believers in general are commissioned or commanded to “preach” (36).
Preaching is a certain kind of speech carried out by certain kinds of people. Of course, there are other kinds of word ministries given to all believers (Eph. 6:13-17; Col. 3:16; 1 Thess. 1:8; 1 Pet. 3:15) but preaching (especially the speech signified by kerysso) is a ministry set apart. Paul’s charge to Timothy (2 Tim. 4:1-2) indicates not only that preaching is a task for one with commissioned authority, but also that the preacher is a man of God (2 Tim. 3:17) like the prophets of old (61-66). Likewise, Romans 10 assumes that New Testament preaching stands in continuity with the Old Testament prophetic ministry of Isaiah. We also see that being commissioned (i.e., sent out) is an essential prerequisite for preaching ministry.
As Griffiths moves through 1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians 2-6, 1 Thessalonians 1-2, and Hebrews, he reinforces the main themes of the book: that New Testament preaching is powerful, that God speaks through gospel preaching, that God expects people to respond to preaching with faith and obedience, that preaching requires a commissioned speaker, that preaching stands in continuity with Old Testament prophetic ministry, and that preaching is, therefore, a unique word ministry.
So what does this mean for the church today? Griffiths offers several points of application, let me mention three of my own (which overlap with some of his).
1. Preaching is not what every Christian does. The work of heralding is related to other word ministries but is not identical with them. There are no instructions for non-leaders to preach or proclaim the gospel. Obviously, the Bible was written in Greek not in English. The apostles never used the word “preach,” but the words they did use under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit mean something distinct from bearing witness, one-to-one discipleship, or leading an inductive Bible study. There is such a thing as preaching, and not every Christian is called to do it.
2. The act of preaching is inherently authoritative. For some reason, I had not seen before how clear this is in Romans 10. Preachers preach the gospel. Yes, that’s clear. But what is also clear is that preachers don’t just decide themselves that they want to preach. They must be sent. Preaching implies a commissioned agent authorized to preach. Rightly understood, there is no preaching that does not come from an authority in the church and no preaching that does not carry with it God’s own authority. A corollary to this point, then, is that complementarians should not speak of “women preachers,” nor should we describe the word ministry of women as “preaching.” The use of such terminology is unwise and unbiblical.
3. Preaching is meant to lead to an encounter with God. The word of Christ preached is not only a word about Christ; it is a word from Christ (Rom. 10:17). Though coming from human lips, the preached word is nothing less than the divine word of God (1 Thess. 2:13). Think of the book of Hebrews, a word of exhortation (13:22) that most scholars now think is the earliest extant full-length Christian sermon. We see that preaching comes from a congregational leader (13:7-24). We see that preaching is an exposition of Scripture. And we see that in preaching we come face-to-face (or ear-to-ear, we might say) with the living God (3:7, 15; 4:7). God’s voice is heard in the Sunday sermon, which is why we are right to give preaching the central place in our worship services and why we should pray regularly for the powerful preaching of God’s Word.