What is it with guys, carrying on with the incessant arguments over such a simple thing???
Yeah, I think that’s how it did start. It was then contended that a generation was only 20 years when I pointed out that all of the New Testament books were written by 96AD. I had posted a list of the NT books and the dates attributed to them saying it had not been generations after Christ.
I jumped in only because I saw something adduced as evidence which was not 'competent' to show what was claimed to be shown by it.
When a verse from a psalm which does not even use the word generation is used to support an argument about how long a generation is, that gets my attention.
Similarly, when a source outside Scripture is adduced to prove a point, but the very same method applied to another part of the very same source "proves" the opponent's point, that gets my attention.
What I saw was an assertion supported by other assertions presented with the appearance of an argument. But that appearance was specious, fair but false. And you probably know by now that one of MY hobby horses is "Fides ET Ratio", and one of my conjectures is that at the heart of Reform Christianity (and of groups influenced by it) is a disastrous rejection of reason.
Nope, I stated 'a generation'. Not generations.
The argument started when CB tried to get us to believe that a 'generation' was 70 years, rather than 20-25 in those years.