The logic of Matthew 24:34
Oct 11, 2019 10:16:24 GMT
Post by Colossians on Oct 11, 2019 10:16:24 GMT
This material is for the teaching of the Body of Christ, however the author reserves copyright over it.
Forward
In our work: “Concise refutation of the main arguments of Preterism” (see that work), we show why the Preterist’s understanding of Mt 24:34 is wrong.
The logic of the matter is however quite subtle, and for this reason merits restating in more formal terms.
____________________________
THE LOGIC OF MATTHEW 24:34
(1) “This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled” Mt 24:34.
The Preterist reads this as:
(2) “These things shall be fulfilled before this generation passes”.
The two sentences however are not logically equivalent: (2) is entailed by (1) but does not equate to (1).
Specifically, (1) contains an additional constraint over and above that of (2): the “till” of (1) relates both a temporal and a conditional aspect, whereas the “before” of (2) relates only a temporal aspect.
(2) says that if the generation has passed, then the prophecies must have been fulfilled, and this simply because the prophecies are to be fulfilled before the generation passes.
(1) says that if the passing of the generation is permitted, then not only will it be the case that the prophecies have been fulfilled, but the fulfilling of the prophecies is the very thing which permits the passing of the generation.
Logic
The dictionary:
p. The generation is permitted to pass
q. The generation has passed
r. The prophecies have been fulfilled
The propositions:
The two (alternate) readings are respectively expressed as:
(1) ((If p or (p & q)) then r) & (if r then (p or (p & q)))
(2) If q then r
Because (1) is a two-way conditional, it can be condensed using “iff” (“if and only if”).
We thus restate the two readings as:
(1) (p or (p & q)) iff r
(2) If q then r
In order to formally show that (1) and (2) are not equivalent, we only need provide one combination of truth values for p, q and r which produces a truth value for (1) that is different to the truth value for (2). We have performed a formal truth table behind the scenes, and it turns out there are in fact 4 such combinations:
p = 1, q = 0, r = 0
p = 0, q = 1, r = 1
p = 0, q = 1, r = 0
p = 0, q = 0, r = 1
Let’s take the one we have bolded:
In this combination (2) is true, and this because (2) does not say that if the prophecies have been fulfilled, the generation has passed, but only that if the generation has passed, the prophecies have been fulfilled. That is, it allows for a situation where the prophecies have been fulfilled (r = 1) but the generation has not yet passed (q = 0).
Contrasting, in this same combination (1) is false, for although (1) along with (2) allows for the prophecies to be fulfilled and the generation to be not yet passed, it does not allow for the prophecies to be fulfilled without the (concomitant) permission for the generation to pass. That is, according to (1), if r = 1 (i.e. if r is true), p must at least be true also.
So we see that when p = 0, q = 0 and r = 1, (2) is true and (1) is false.
Thus (1) and (2) do not say the same thing.
And so given that (1) is what the bible says and (2) is what the Preterist says, the Preterist’s idea is necessarily extra-biblical.
Theological ramification
(1) tells us that the generation will be sustained (at least) “till” the prophecies are fulfilled, and therefore that the generation length is flexible.
(2) merely tells us that whatever the length of the generation, the prophecies will be fulfilled “before” it expires.
We therefore understand that, given that a (time-based) generation cannot be made to be longer than it is (otherwise it is undefined at the start), the generation Jesus was speaking about was not, as the Preterist declares, a human generation, but the generation that is the creation (hence the book known as “Genesis”) – that which in fact contrasts with the “regeneration” He (Jesus) mentions earlier in the same gospel in reference to the afterlife (see Mt 19:28).
In closing ...
The Preterist’s understanding of Matthew 24:34 constitutes the flagship of his doctrine.
We have just shown, however, that the flagship has no flag.
It therefore matters not what auxiliary passages he appends to (his understanding of) Mt 24:34 in an attempt to get his idea over the line: if the flag is not there, the only one that can be raised, is an imaginary one.
Amen.
Forward
In our work: “Concise refutation of the main arguments of Preterism” (see that work), we show why the Preterist’s understanding of Mt 24:34 is wrong.
The logic of the matter is however quite subtle, and for this reason merits restating in more formal terms.
____________________________
THE LOGIC OF MATTHEW 24:34
(1) “This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled” Mt 24:34.
The Preterist reads this as:
(2) “These things shall be fulfilled before this generation passes”.
The two sentences however are not logically equivalent: (2) is entailed by (1) but does not equate to (1).
Specifically, (1) contains an additional constraint over and above that of (2): the “till” of (1) relates both a temporal and a conditional aspect, whereas the “before” of (2) relates only a temporal aspect.
(2) says that if the generation has passed, then the prophecies must have been fulfilled, and this simply because the prophecies are to be fulfilled before the generation passes.
(1) says that if the passing of the generation is permitted, then not only will it be the case that the prophecies have been fulfilled, but the fulfilling of the prophecies is the very thing which permits the passing of the generation.
Logic
The dictionary:
p. The generation is permitted to pass
q. The generation has passed
r. The prophecies have been fulfilled
The propositions:
The two (alternate) readings are respectively expressed as:
(1) ((If p or (p & q)) then r) & (if r then (p or (p & q)))
(2) If q then r
Because (1) is a two-way conditional, it can be condensed using “iff” (“if and only if”).
We thus restate the two readings as:
(1) (p or (p & q)) iff r
(2) If q then r
In order to formally show that (1) and (2) are not equivalent, we only need provide one combination of truth values for p, q and r which produces a truth value for (1) that is different to the truth value for (2). We have performed a formal truth table behind the scenes, and it turns out there are in fact 4 such combinations:
p = 1, q = 0, r = 0
p = 0, q = 1, r = 1
p = 0, q = 1, r = 0
p = 0, q = 0, r = 1
Let’s take the one we have bolded:
In this combination (2) is true, and this because (2) does not say that if the prophecies have been fulfilled, the generation has passed, but only that if the generation has passed, the prophecies have been fulfilled. That is, it allows for a situation where the prophecies have been fulfilled (r = 1) but the generation has not yet passed (q = 0).
Contrasting, in this same combination (1) is false, for although (1) along with (2) allows for the prophecies to be fulfilled and the generation to be not yet passed, it does not allow for the prophecies to be fulfilled without the (concomitant) permission for the generation to pass. That is, according to (1), if r = 1 (i.e. if r is true), p must at least be true also.
So we see that when p = 0, q = 0 and r = 1, (2) is true and (1) is false.
Thus (1) and (2) do not say the same thing.
And so given that (1) is what the bible says and (2) is what the Preterist says, the Preterist’s idea is necessarily extra-biblical.
Theological ramification
(1) tells us that the generation will be sustained (at least) “till” the prophecies are fulfilled, and therefore that the generation length is flexible.
(2) merely tells us that whatever the length of the generation, the prophecies will be fulfilled “before” it expires.
We therefore understand that, given that a (time-based) generation cannot be made to be longer than it is (otherwise it is undefined at the start), the generation Jesus was speaking about was not, as the Preterist declares, a human generation, but the generation that is the creation (hence the book known as “Genesis”) – that which in fact contrasts with the “regeneration” He (Jesus) mentions earlier in the same gospel in reference to the afterlife (see Mt 19:28).
In closing ...
The Preterist’s understanding of Matthew 24:34 constitutes the flagship of his doctrine.
We have just shown, however, that the flagship has no flag.
It therefore matters not what auxiliary passages he appends to (his understanding of) Mt 24:34 in an attempt to get his idea over the line: if the flag is not there, the only one that can be raised, is an imaginary one.
Amen.