If the land promise to Abraham was fulfilled, why...

The land promise to Abraham has not yet been fulfilled. Even if they had possessed ALL the land, which they didn't, the promise is that they will possess it as "an everlasing possession" (Gen 17:8; 48:4).

Also, check the provision of the "Land Covenant" in Deut 30:1-10. This one was UNCONDITIONAL! (in contrast to the Mosaic which was both conditional and temporary.)

 

Simple Brother D.D.: it has a "spiritual" meaning
too deep for mere literalists like
you and i to understand.

 

Oh there are a few literal passages that are taken out of context to support the idea that Israel possessed all the land which He sware to give to their fathers (hint fr. Josh). I could give you a few of them, but I am waiting for someone else to do it. Then we can look at the context and see why they are wrong in their interpretation!

 

Actually the promise was fulfilled before David if Scripture is correct. Please note Joshua 21:43-45:
43. And the LORD gave unto Israel all the land which he sware to give unto their fathers; and they possessed it, and dwelt therein.
44. And the LORD gave them rest round about, according to all that he sware unto their fathers: and there stood not a man of all their enemies before them; the LORD delivered all their enemies into their hand.
45. There failed not ought of any good thing which the LORD had spoken unto the house of Israel; all came to pass.

However a couple of questions for the enlightenment of one who thinks Darby, Scofield, Chafer, Ryrie, Walvoord, Mr. Ed and a myriad of others are flat wrong.

Question #1: How long is everlasting or forevermore, 1000 years!?

Question #2: How do you reconcile the promise made in Verse 27 above and Revelation 21:3 which states: And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God. in which God promises to dwell on the new earth with His people, obviously the Church in this passage?

Question #3; Isn't the passage from Ezekiel an obvious Messianic prophecy?

 

Lets let the New Testament writers interpret this passage for us instead of the wild speculation of the LaHaye's of the world. Lets try putting it into context.

Ez 37:24 " 'My servant David will be king over them, and they will all have one shepherd. They will follow my laws and be careful to keep my decrees. 25 They will live in the land I gave to my servant Jacob, the land where your fathers lived. They and their children and their children's children will live there forever, and David my servant will be their prince forever . 26 I will make a covenant of peace with them; it will be an everlasting covenant. I will establish them and increase their numbers, and I will put my sanctuary among them forever. 27 My dwelling place will be with them; I will be their God, and they will be my people. 28 Then the nations will know that I the LORD make Israel holy, when my sanctuary is among them forever.' "

Is this some unfulfilled prophecy? No. Paul quotes this passage when speaking of the New Covenant believers:

II Cor 6:16What agreement is there between the temple of God and idols? For we are the temple of the living God. As God has said: “I will live with them and walk among them, and I will be their God, and they will be my people.”

We are the Temple of God.

Rev 21:3And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, “Now the dwelling of God is with men , and he will live with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God.

Is Rev 21:3 not true today? Rev 21:2 calls this the New Jerusalem, John goes on to tell us what the New Jerusalem is:
9One of the seven angels who had the seven bowls full of the seven last plagues came and said to me, “Come, I will show you the bride, the wife of the Lamb. ” 10And he carried me away in the Spirit to a mountain great and high, and showed me the Holy City, Jerusalem , coming down out of heaven from God.


Sorry Ed. You can try to literalize this all you want but you miss the meaning if you do. But you can sell alot of books if you do literalize it. Would you also literalize Ephesians 2:
20 built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone. 21In him the whole building is joined together and rises to become a holy temple in the Lord. 22And in him you too are being built together to become a dwelling in which God lives by his Spirit.

No sqirming necessary, the NT writers are quite clear as to the meaning of the passage. Very clear,unless DD does not believe God dwells among His people today.

. They and their children and their children's children will live there forever, and David my servant will be their prince forever

Are we going to be consistent with our definition of "forever"?

forever is the hebrew word "elw". It is used in these passages:

Ex. 12:17 And ye shall observe the feast of unleavened bread; for in this selfsame day haveI brought your armies out of the land of Egypt: therefore shall ye observe this day in your generations by an ordinance for ever .

Priesthood:
Exodus 40: 15 and thou shalt anoint them, as thou didst anoint their father, that they may minister unto me in the priest's office: and their anointing shall be to them for an everlasting priesthood throughout their generations.

Atonement
Leviticus 16
34 And this shall be an everlasting statute unto you, to make atonement for the children of Israel because of all their sins once in the year. And he did as Jehovah commanded Moses.

Are these to continue on forever?

Who are the heirs of the promises? Paul says this:

Galatians 3:16The promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. The Scripture does not say “and to seeds,” meaning many people, but “and to your seed,” meaning one person, who is Christ. 17What I mean is this: The law, introduced 430 years later, does not set aside the covenant previously established by God and thus do away with the promise. 18For if the inheritance depends on the law, then it no longer depends on a promise; but God in his grace gave it to Abraham through a promise.

........ 26You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus , 27for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. 28There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. 29If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's seed , and heirs according to the promise .

Heirs to what? Who is the seed of Abraham, people living in modern day Israel or those in Christ?

Will this "New Earth" be identical to the earth we live in today? Are the Jews entitled to "all the land" of this earth or the new earth or both? What happens to the people living on the old earth when it is destroyed to make room for your new earth?

 

OldReg,

Thanks. I was waiting for that one (as I warned you above), or the one in 11:23. This one is certainly better because it is not followed immediately with the specifics of what they did possess in the next chapter and then a statement that when “Joshua was old and stricken in years... there remaineth yet very much land to be possessed” (13:1-2). The next chapters give the details of how the land was divided and who was to get what. By the time we come to your reference in 21:43-45 we have gone over the details of their possession of the land.

PLEASE NOTE: JOSHUA 23, which parallels 13.
1 And it came to pass a long time after that the LORD had given rest unto Israel from all their enemies round about, that Joshua waxed old and stricken in age.
2 And Joshua called for all Israel, and for their elders, and for their heads, and for their judges, and for their officers, and said unto them, I am old and stricken in age:
3 And ye have seen all that the LORD your God hath done unto all these nations because of you; for the LORD your God is he that hath fought for you.
4 Behold, I have divided unto you by lot these nations that remain, to be an inheritance for your tribes, from Jordan, with all the nations that I have cut off, even unto the great sea westward.
5 And the LORD your God, he shall expel them from before you, and drive them from out of your sight; and ye shall possess their land, as the LORD your God hath promised unto you.

Interesting after they had “all the land” they still did not have it.

Please explain why we read the following in Judges:

Jud 1:27 Neither did Manasseh drive out the inhabitants of Bethshean and her towns, nor Taanach and her towns, nor the inhabitants of Dor and her towns, nor the inhabitants of Ibleam and her towns, nor the inhabitants of Megiddo and her towns: but the Canaanites would dwell in that land.
Jud 1:29 Neither did Ephraim drive out the Canaanites that dwelt in Gezer; but the Canaanites dwelt in Gezer among them.
Jud 1:30 Neither did Zebulun drive out the inhabitants of Kitron, nor the inhabitants of Nahalol; but the Canaanites dwelt among them, and became tributaries.
Jud 1:31 Neither did Asher drive out the inhabitants of Accho, nor the inhabitants of Zidon, nor of Ahlab, nor of Achzib, nor of Helbah, nor of Aphik, nor of Rehob:
Jud 1:33 Neither did Naphtali drive out the inhabitants of Bethshemesh, nor the inhabitants of Bethanath; but he dwelt among the Canaanites, the inhabitants of the land: nevertheless the inhabitants of Bethshemesh and of Bethanath became tributaries unto them.

Perhaps you could also explain why Samson had such trouble with the Philistines if they had all been driven out of the land. Do you RECALL that one of the purposes of the delay in possessing the land when promised to Abraham was because the iniquity of the Amorites was not yet full...

Well their iniquity was full now, but Israel was unfaithful in many ways, therefore their actual experience, as per the Mosaic Covenant was that they “were smitten before their enemies” (Deut 28:25) on many occasions. According to Deut 30 and the unconditional Land Covenant (separate and distinct from the conditional Mosaic Covenant, 29:1) the Jews would be scattered from the promised land into all the nations. YET, GOD PROMISED THAT HE WOULD ONE DAY BRING THEM BACK. Compare the wording here with the New Covenant and with the gathering at the end of the Olivet Discourse.

Guess what? God STILL HAS SOME OPEN PROMISES TO ISRAEL!!!

Sorry, gotta go for now, will resume later.

 

David Daniel: "There is NOTHING anywhere in the Bible
to indicate this promise has been revoked. This is
just another case of the Amills not dealing with a text
and dodging the issues. Classic. "

Amen, Brother David Daniel -- Preach it!

Rjprince: "Guess what? God STILL HAS SOME OPEN PROMISES TO ISRAEL!!!"

Amen, Brother Rjprince -- Preach it!!

 

OldRegular: "However a couple of questions for the enlightenment
of one who thinks Darby, Scofield, Chafer, Ryrie,
Walvoord, Mr. Ed and a myriad of others are flat wrong.

Question #1: ...

Question #2: ...

Question #3; ..."

1. "couple" as generally considered by many people
means TWO. You specify three questions.

2. As a matter of fact, i've not read Darby,
i've not read Chafer, i've not read Ryrie,
i've not read Walvoord. Only 2 or 3 people have
ever read Ed Come on, what did Schofield say
that was so far off base?

 

"what did Schofield say that was so off base?"

That half of what Jesus said was "not for us" but rather just for the Jews!!

 

Why does everyone keep spelling the name wrong? It is SCOFIELD, not ScHofield!

 

Yes, certain people around here bash Scofield. I want to know what is disagreed with. A list of his ommissions and commissions re: Bible prophecy would be preferable.

 

Ezekiel 40 to 48 are very deep and spiritualize. Premills stress Ezekiel 40-48, these are literal things will be during millennial kingdom. One thing, none word of 'a thousand years' mentioned find anywhere in Ezekiel 40-48.

I understand Ezekiel 40-48 speak of Jesus Christ who already fulfilled the old covenant through Calvary.

Jesus Christ is the type of King David. Christ already built his tabernacle follow after his resurrection according to Acts 15:16-17 fulfilled Amos 9:11. While Christ was alive on earth, he told them, he'll destroy that building of the temple, and he'll raise it up in three days - John 2:19-21, he was spoken of his body as the temple.

While Christ was on earth, Pharisees and Jews were looking forward for Messiah to set up the kingdom and to overthrow Roman Empire, and set Jerusalem to be world's capitol. Christ told them, the kingdom is not with observation, it is from above and it is within us through Holy Spirit. Christ already bring kingdom as He begun his ministry - Mark 1:15.

Premills believe Genesis 12 promised to Abraham, the land will be possess to the Jews for future millennial kingdom.

That promise does not limited for the 'Jews' only, also, it given to all nations(Gentiles) whosoever have faith in Jesus Christ, they inherit Abraham's promise.

I suggest you to read whole Galatians chapter 3 talking lot on Abraham, and covenant. This chapter will help us to understand better what the covenant is all about.

We now already have new covenant.

'Land' is speak of New Jerusalem from above, not an earthly city- Gal. 4:26; Hebrews 11:8-10; and 12:22, Not just for New Jerusalem only, also, we shall inherit eternality land - new earth, that would be at Christ's coming - 2 Peter 3:12,13; Isa. 65:17; Rev. 21:1-2.

None find anywhere in the New Testament saying 'Jews' shall possess their own physical land for a thousand years beyond Christ's coming.

Bible teaches us, both Jews and Gentiles are already reconciled together through Christ by Calvary. Now, are share the new covenant of eternality things from above, that we already inherit from Christ.

We do not focus on earthly things, and modern Jerusalem in Israel of the Middle East of today's. Modern Jerusalem is filled of wicked and chaos. We shall dwell in a holy eternality city which is from above - New Jerusalem, where God now dwell there. New Jerusalem shall be descend from heaven, land upon the new earth, and we shall dwell in there for eternality follow Christ's coming.

That's what I am looking for!!

In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!

 

DPT,

First, thanks for some substance in your reply. Still did not address all of my points, but thanks for this.

Yep. 1K years only mentioned in Rev 20 (six times!). THE FACT THAT EVE ATE FIRST AND THEN HANDED THE FRUIT TO HER HUSBAND WHO WAS WITH HER IS ONLY DETAILED ONE TIME AS WELL. Of course, there are some who see that as allegorical as well. Oh, guess what, we are back to the CONTEXTUAL LITERAL GRAMMATICAL HISTORICAL HERMENEUTIC aren’t we? (I am going to abbreviate this as CLGHH in future posts on this thread.)

Let’s talk about the classic post-mil/a-mil take on Rev 20. “He owns the cattle on 1000 hills... Mercy to thousands of generation... et. al. per Hank Hanegraaff, etc – since He owns all the cattle and all the hills, we therefore conclude that generally whenever 1000 is used it must therefore be symbolic and not literal”. Oh really? NOT!

Thomas Ice (Pre-Trib Perspectives, Nov/Dec 2004) counts 531 uses of the word “thousand” in the OT and NT. The vast majority of which are LITERAL! I looked up some, suggest you do the same. Further, there is no contextual requirement to ASSUME that in any of the three passages where we find “a thousand years” it has a non-literal sense. The clear wording of the Revelation 20 passages indicates a literal thousand year period! PERIOD. Here they are:

Re 20:2 And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,
Re 20:3 And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season.
Re 20:4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
Re 20:5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.
Re 20:6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.
Re 20:7 And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison,

Of the 31 times the word “thousand” is used in Revelation it is MOST reasonable to understand it in a literal sense, except in 5:11 where the context seems to indicate a non-literal sense – “I heard the voice of many angels round about the throne and the beasts and the elders: and the number of them was ten thousand times ten thousand, and thousands of thousands”. All of the other uses by John can easily be taken in a very literal sense. To make it non-literal just because that fits your theology is bad hermeneutics.

HERE IS A GREAT RULE OF INTERPRETATION – If the literal sense makes sense, seek no other sense. We must bend our theology to Word, not vice versa, especially not in violation of the CLGHH.

Next, paragraph. Almost said, next sentence, but there were two sentences in your first paragraph.

Isa 40-48 fulfilled on Calvary? What is the basis for such an understanding!?!? THE OLD COVENANT WAS NOT FULFILLED ON CALVARY!!! IT WAS DONE AWAY ON CALVARY!!! The Mosaic Covenant was with the people brought out of Egypt (Exod 20:2). Of course if we are not bound by a CLGHH, we can just interpret in the way that best fits our theology, can’t we. Further, the NEW COVENANT IS NOT WITH THE CHURCH!!!

The New Covenant is with the house of Israel and Judah! (Jer 31:31-32, which also mentions that they broke the old Mosaic Covenant, again CLGHH). The New Covenant is confirmed to still be with the House of Israel and Judah in the NT (Heb 8:8-13). Compare that with Jer 31.

It is true that the Church receives some of the blessings provided by the New Covenant, just as Gentiles receive blessing from the Abrahamic Covenant even though Gentiles are not a party to the Jewish Covenants (Gen 12:3; 15; 17; et.al.w/ Rom 9:3-4 & Eph 2:11-13). Should note, just in case you look it up that although we who were once far off are made nigh by the death of Christ, THE PASSAGE CERTAINLY DOES NOT SAY WE ARE MADE “TAKER-OVERS” of the Jewish Covenants. NOPE! We are partakers of the blessings of the Jewish covenants, but we are not “TAKER-OVERS” and replacement theology contends. Oops, have slipped back to that old CLGHH thing again, haven’t I?!

Next sentence.

Jesus a type of King David! I assume you meant the reverse, that King David was a type of Jesus – You have GOT TO BE KIDDING! What Scripture supports such a theory? Jesus was the “Son of David” by genealogical progression, but a type? Jesus is the “root and offspring of David” (Rev 5:5; 22:16). Melchizedek, Joseph, perhaps even Daniel may be considered as types of the Lord Jesus, but David? How does the Bathsheba incident prefigure the life of Jesus? How about David refusing to reconcile with Absalom? A type, NO WAY!

Anyhow, on to the next sentence.

James’ words in Acts 15 no more indicate complete fulfillment of Amos 9 than the words of Peter in Acts 2 indicated the complete fulfillment of Joel 2!

A basic principle in understanding and interpreting prophecy is that details that may linked in the giving of a prophecy may be separated by hundreds or even thousands of years in fulfillment. Partial fulfillment of some points at one time do not NEGATE complete fulfillment of the rest of the points at a later time! CASE IN POINT – Isa 61:1-2 with Luke 4:17-21 – the day of His vengeance has not fully come; ALL that mourn are not comforted. That is WHY JESUS STOPPED READING IN THE MIDDLE OF VERSE TWO! That part awaits His return to the Earth to deliver Israel and judge the heathen.

Same sentence still.

If James asserts complete fulfillment of Amos 9, where do you find fulfillment of the following verses?
8 I will not utterly destroy the house of Jacob, saith the LORD.
11 ¶ In that day will I raise up the tabernacle of David that is fallen, and close up the breaches thereof; and I will raise up his ruins, and I will build it as in the days of old:
Is the church built “as in the days of old”, Solomon’s, then in ruins?
12 That they may possess the remnant of Edom, and of all the heathen, which are called by my name, saith the LORD that doeth this.
13 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that the plowman shall overtake the reaper, and the treader of grapes him that soweth seed; and the mountains shall drop sweet wine, and all the hills shall melt. (Clearly a reference to the removal of some aspects of the curse in the Messianic Kingdom)
14 And I will bring again the captivity of my people of Israel;and they shall build the waste cities, and inhabit them; and they shall plant vineyards, and drink the wine thereof; they shall also make gardens, and eat the fruit of them.
15 And I will plant them upon their land, and they shall no more be pulled up out of their land which I have given them, saith the LORD thy God.

PLEASE, DO NOT JUST GLOSS OVER THIS!!! I HAVE GIVEN YOU THE COURTESY OF A SUBSTANTIVE REPLY, HOW DO YOU HARMONIZE THIS WITH YOUR VIEW? IF YOU CAN’T, AT LEAST ADMIT IT! Don’t just ignore the detail here. At least TELL us that you hold this to be all allegorical!

I MAINTAIN THAT A CLGHH DOES NOT ALLOW FOR SUCH FANCIFUL INTERPRETATIONS AS AMILS COME UP WITH HERE AND ELSEWHERE. At least tell me that you do not believe me to be “spiritual” enough to see the deeper meanings behind the clear words of the text!

Next sentence, re “destroy the temple” – I would call your attention to the C in CLGHH – Contextual – the context, both near and distant (comparing Scripture with Scripture) makes it clear that Jesus was speaking of His flesh. Does that mean that every other time we see the word “temple” it must be understood in a non-literal sense? I guess the destruction of the Temple of Herod foretold by Jesus in Matt 24:1-2 somehow related to His impending death and not the literal casting down of the Temple and its stones in AD 70? Now that we understand that, we can therefore assume that the measuring of the new temple in Revelation must also be taken in some non-literal manner. OK. I play along, if the Revelation temple is non-literal, explain from the text of Rev 11 what is meant? Or can you come up with an explanation from the text without falling back to my CLGHH? Did not think so. (Not my intent to offend, it is my intent to show the inherent weakness of the amil/postmil preterist posttrib position.)

How could they have the kingdom if they crucified the king?

HERE IS THE FUNDAMENTAL INTERPRETIVE ERROR OF THE AMILLENNIAL POSITION!!! PAY ATTENTION!!!

AMILLENNIALLISTS READ THE NT BACK INTO THE OT, RATHER THAN TAKING THE OT AS FOUNDATIONAL FOR THE INTERPRETATION OF THE NT!!! It is as if the NT is the starting point and the OT is reinterpreted to fit ones theology that is drawn from the NT with little regard for the OT.

I MAINTAIN, FROM A DISPENSATIONAL PERSPECTIVE, THAT THE OT MUST BE THE FOUNDATION FOR THE UNDERSTANDING OF THE NT!!! You cannot read the statements of Jesus and John in isolation from the MANY CLEAR promises of the OT regarding Israel, the kingdom, and the New Covenant (again, with Israel, but with benefits for the church). The Jews of Jesus day expected a literal kingdom because the OT PROMISES A LITERAL KINGDOM!!! Sadly, they crucified their King after rejecting His message and once again delayed the promises of God to be fulfilled in future generations.

Make Jer 31, or Deut 31, or Zech 12 and 13 fit your interpretation! Guess what, you must allegorize or spiritualize away the clear words of the texts in order to impose an amillennial covenant theology here and just about everywhere else in the OT to support your position. Again, it ALL comes down to CLGHH which clearly distinguishes Israel and the church.

Again, I have note your lack of substantive reply to my earlier brief arguments re Israel and the Church. Will respond to the general comments that you did make in a bit.

There is a sense in which some of the spiritual aspects of the Kingdom are in effect for the church now, that does not replace the many many literal physical aspects that were the heart of OT prophecy. Rom 11:25-26 “For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in. And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:” (unless noted, all my quotes are from the KJV)

BALONEY!!! Show me where the land is ever promised to the Gentiles (in that text please). That was God’s Covenant with Abraham and his physical seed, PERIOD. Allegorizing amillennialists try to force the church into that passage, it DOES NOT FIT! What does fit is that of the seed of Abraham, all families of the earth will be blessed. Guess who was of the seed of Abraham? You got it, Jesus.

THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT SERVED TO DIVIDE THE JEWS AND THE GENTILES! NOT UNITE THEM! When the fullness of the Gentiles is come in, God will again focus on the nation of Israel!

“...blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in. And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:” Rom 11:25-26, also above.

How about Luke 21:24 - “they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.”

Show me where the church takes over the specific and literal promises of the Abrahamic, Palestinian (Land), David, or New Covenants!!! Participation in some of the blessings of God upon Israel does not make us the new recipients of those promises any more than the ones in the ship with Paul experienced eternal salvation because of his presence. They might have experienced physical deliverance due to his presence in the boat, but that does not make them apostles of Christ!

In fact, the separate mention of all nations being blessed because of God’s covenant with Abraham specifically EXCLUDES them from the other provisions of the covenant!

(This is getting LONG. Going to break into more than one post. Don’t despair, we have already made it through six paragraphs of your post! Gal 3 is next!)

 

Tomorrow, I will discuss deeper about covenant with scriptures.

I think, many of you as pretrib seem do not understand the purpose of Calvary and the covenant, what these are talk all about.

I will discuss on this more tomorrow.

In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!

 

Here is one example: This from his reference bible:

24:34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.

This generation

(Greek - agenealogetos [a)genealo/ghtov] ," the primary definition of which is, "race, kind, family, stock, breed)." (So all lexicons.) That the word is used in this sense because none of "these things," i.e. the world-wide preaching of the kingdom, the great tribulation, the return of the Lord in visible glory, and the regathering of the elect, occurred at the destruction of Jerusalem by Titus, A.D. 70. The promise is, therefore, that the generation--nation, or family of Israel-- will be preserved unto "these things"; a promise wonderfully fulfilled to this day.

Actually look up the definition of the greek word he used for" generation."(genealo/ghtov) It is not even used in Matthew. He is either incompetent or a deciever.

Here is the definition: http://www.searchgodsword.org/lex/grk/frequency.cgi?number=35&book=heb&translation=str

As you can see it is used once in Hebrews.

The greek word used in Matt 24:34 is genea. Definiton is found here:
http://www.searchgodsword.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=1074

Here are its usages in Matthew, find any that mean race:
http://www.searchgodsword.org/lex/grk/frequency.cgi?number=1074&book=mt&translation=str