There are julia implementations of continuation capturing [1] fwiw. Broadly though, I agree that 'lisp semantics' is a very fuzzy term. I'd claim this family has several strong semantic themes despite their differences. E.g. their approach to meta programming, their approach to dynamism, lexically scoped closures, and the everything-is-a-expression rule. Julia fits all these themes (and others), though it's dynasmism is a bit more restricted than most lispy languages, and it's AST is printed differently, even if it's internally represented and manipulated the same as other lispy languages.
You're probably right though that we wouldn't be tempted to group them together nowadays if it weren't for their syntactic similarities.
Virtually every modern language has lexical closures; dynamic typing is certainly not unique; and not everything is an expression that returns values at all.
You're probably right though that we wouldn't be tempted to group them together nowadays if it weren't for their syntactic similarities.
[1] https://github.com/MikeInnes/Continuations.jl