That is simply not true. You are misreading the lexicon. The first section in the lexicon under this term lists the conjunctive uses, the second section lists the prepositional uses. Matt 1:25 is in the second section, not the first.
As I explained to you #1368, nothing in Thayers shows which of the two possible ways this term should be taken. You keep appealing to Thayers, but Thayers does not say that this word means only 'up to but not continuing past'. In fact, there are many places where it clearly doesn't mean 'up to but not continuing past'.
-A8
I did better than appeal to Thayers, I supplied the link where I was reading it. Section II, 22 lines down under a. refers specifically to the verse in question. Quote:" b. with the gen. of the neut. rel. pron. ou or otou (which this text has by the way - ou) gets the force of a conjuction, until, till (the time when); a. ews ou (first in Hdt. 2, 143; but after that only in later auth., as Plut. et al. [W. 296 (278) note; B. 230 sq. (199)]): foll. by the indic., Mt. 1.25 [WH br. ou]; xiii.22; Lk xiii......"
From Thayer's Lexicon (Hel0) http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/words.pl?book=Mat&chapter=1&verse=25&strongs=2193&page=1&flag_full=1