When did the 2nd temple literally initially cease being the holy place?

grafted branch · Mar 19, 2025

Davidpt said:
Luke 17:22 And he said unto the disciples, The days will come, when ye shall desire to see one of the days of the Son of man, and ye shall not see it.

Like I pointed out in another post, this verse is key the fact it says this---one of the days of the Son of man.

The first thing to keep in mind, the days of the Son of man involve His birth through His return. We can maybe break it down into 3 parts like such.

A) one of the days of the Son of Man involving His birth to His ascension. Thus He is physically present on the earth until He ascends back into heaven.

B) one of the days of the Son of Man involving His ascension, thus He is no longer physically present on the earth

C) one of the days of the Son of Man being when He returns in the end of this age. Now He is once again physically present on the earth, though some Amils don't agree that He is ever physically back on the earth again. Meaning when He is fulfilling the following, for example---until the day that Noe entered into the ark, and the flood came, and destroyed them all. I guess some Amils have Him doing that from up in the sky, as in an aerial assault the fact they have the entire planet engulfed in flames at the time, well at least the surface anyway. But not to get into that debate.

Getting back to what verse 22 says---The days will come, when ye shall desire to see one of the days of the Son of man, and ye shall not see it. Obviously, one of the days you would desire to see are more like the days involving A) except you can't if B) is true at the time. The next best thing is then C). Except C) can't arrive until B) has passed first. We then know that one of the days of the Son of man ye shall desire to see, yet shall not see it, is not B) because B) is one of the days of the Son of man preventing someone from still seeing A), assuming they were alive during A), and that C) hasn't even arrived yet. C) then being one of the days of the Son of man you desire to see at this point since A) is entirely in the past. Keeping in mind, that unless one is a full Preterist, all Christians are fully aware of C) and long to see that day.

I can accept what you’re saying, I’m not full preterist so I do see a future coming of Christ.

Still, we don’t really know exactly what days the disciples were desiring to see. I would say most likely they were desiring to see the coming of Christ since it’s not possible for us to go back in time on our own and looking back is generally not seen as a positive thing (Lot’s wife).

Spiritual Israelite · Mar 19, 2025

grafted branch said:
I do agree that there are similarities between what happened in 70AD and what will happen at the final coming of Christ.

In Luke 17:30 the Son of man is revealed which I do equate with the 2 Thessalonians 1:7 Lord Jesus being revealed. Luke 17:31 tells us the fleeing takes place after that revealing, which puts us back at 70AD.

You conclude that Luke 17:31 puts us back at 70 AD despite agreeing that there are similarities between what happened in 70 AD and what will happen at the final coming of Christ. Why? There are other things that Jesus said in Luke 17 that can't possibly refer to what happened in 70 AD, such as what He said just prior to verse 31.

Luke 17:26 And as it was in the days of Noe, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man. 27 They did eat, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the ark, and the flood came, and destroyed them all. 28 Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot; they did eat, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they builded; 29 But the same day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all. 30 Even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of man is revealed.

Jesus said that just as the flood destroyed all unbelievers in Noah's day and all unbelievers in Sodom in Lot's day "Even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of man is revealed."? How does that describe what happened in 70 AD when Jesus made it clear that the days would be shortened so that NOT all in Jerusalem would be destroyed?

Davidpt · Mar 19, 2025

grafted branch said:
Ok, let’s look at Luke 17:22.

Luke 17:22 And he said unto the disciples, The days will come, when ye shall desire to see one of the days of the Son of man, and ye shall not see it.

There is only one set of days that came for the disciples, they died before the second coming. Your option B) would have to take place in heaven while they are with Christ. Is that what you’re thinking?

As far as the fleeing in Luke 17:31, I do think it is the same fleeing in Matthew 24. I would say the revealing of the Son of man is the blindness in part being lifted from Israel. Notice Luke 17:34-36 we have the verses that some people associate with the rapture. The word “taken” <3880> can mean to receive something transmitted , to receive with the mind. Those “taken” had the Son of man revealed to them.

In Matthew 24 verse 17 and 18 are meaning during great tribulation. The 2nd coming is nowhere in view at this point. In Matthew 24 the 2nd coming is meaning verse 30 and that verse 29 indicates it is after the tribulation of those days. What tribulation of those days? How can it not be meaning verse 21?

Unlike Preterists I don't take the ones that Jesus is talking to at the time to only be including those that were alive in those days. Some things might apply to them yet some things can't possibly apply to them, especially if they are already dead at the time, and that some of these things are involving the final days of this age. As to you then insisting that B) has be involving heaven makes no sense to me since I'm not taking who Jesus was talking to at the time to only be meaning them but no one in future generations as well. Everything involving B) are things that are taking place throughout the earth while Jesus is still away. And that includes the day and time we are currently living in plus what all lies ahead in our future still, meaning before Jesus returns. One of those things being Matthew 24:21 except some are arguing that was fulfilled ages ago having to do with 70 AD. I obviously disagree, though. Meaning I don't agree Matthew 24:21 involved 70 AD.

Wick Stick · Mar 19, 2025

Spiritual Israelite said:
I have no idea of what you're saying since you are being so vague. Can you clarify what you're saying here?

I'll try to

Spiritual Israelite said:
Are you not allowing for the possibility of any given scripture passage to have a dual meaning or any given prophecy to have a dual fulfillment with the way you are looking at this?

Most people see prophecies as predictions that come true. But WHY do they come true?

The textbook answer is because God knows everything in advance. I suggest that it's because God speaking MAKES those things happen. The world was created when God spoke. If His words have the power to create worlds, certainly they can modify the outcomes of events throughout history.

So, if one takes this view, then multiple fulfillments of a prophecy are likely... more than likely... they're expected. When God speaks, the force of His Word not only brings the thing to pass in short order, but also echoes down the halls of history - the Word comes true again and again. What has been will be again, there's nothing new beneath the sun.

So, for the purposes of this topic, a question has been asked about whether a prophecy refers to historical events, or future events, or whether it might be not literal at all and instead may be a metaphor.

I don't find it necessary to limit the prophecy to one option. It does refer to historical events, having caused them. It will refer to future events as well, causing them. What if a person uses the prophecy as a metaphor and applies it to himself or the world around him? This does not negate its power in the past or the future. This is simply the power of the prophecy, working on/through that person in the present.

Davidpt · Mar 19, 2025

Wick Stick said:
I'll try to

Most people see prophecies as predictions that come true. But WHY do they come true?

The textbook answer is because God knows everything in advance. I suggest that it's because God speaking MAKES those things happen. The world was created when God spoke. If His words have the power to create worlds, certainly they can modify the outcomes of events throughout history.

So, if one takes this view, then multiple fulfillments of a prophecy are likely... more than likely... they're expected. When God speaks, the force of His Word not only brings the thing to pass in short order, but also echoes down the halls of history - the Word comes true again and again. What has been will be again, there's nothing new beneath the sun.

So, for the purposes of this topic, a question has been asked about whether a prophecy refers to historical events, or future events, or whether it might be not literal at all and instead may be a metaphor.

I don't find it necessary to limit the prophecy to one option. It does refer to historical events, having caused them. It will refer to future events as well, causing them. What if a person uses the prophecy as a metaphor and applies it to himself or the world around him? This does not negate its power in the past or the future. This is simply the power of the prophecy, working on/through that person in the present.

Speaking for myself, I'm not fully grasping what you're meaning. Take Matthew 24:21, for instance. That can only be involving one specific era of time. If it involves the first century we then can't also apply it to the future, in any sense. After all, the next verse says those days are cut short, meaning they have an end eventually, and once those days are finished, they never get repeated again, in any sense. I'm arguing that verse 21 hasn't even been fulfilled yet. Others are arguing that it has been fulfilled almost 2000 years ago.

Spiritual Israelite · Mar 19, 2025

Wick Stick said:
I'll try to

Most people see prophecies as predictions that come true. But WHY do they come true?

The textbook answer is because God knows everything in advance. I suggest that it's because God speaking MAKES those things happen. The world was created when God spoke. If His words have the power to create worlds, certainly they can modify the outcomes of events throughout history.

So, if one takes this view, then multiple fulfillments of a prophecy are likely... more than likely... they're expected. When God speaks, the force of His Word not only brings the thing to pass in short order, but also echoes down the halls of history - the Word comes true again and again. What has been will be again, there's nothing new beneath the sun.

So, for the purposes of this topic, a question has been asked about whether a prophecy refers to historical events, or future events, or whether it might be not literal at all and instead may be a metaphor.

I don't find it necessary to limit the prophecy to one option. It does refer to historical events, having caused them. It will refer to future events as well, causing them. What if a person uses the prophecy as a metaphor and applies it to himself or the world around him? This does not negate its power in the past or the future. This is simply the power of the prophecy, working on/through that person in the present.

Thanks for trying, but I can't make any sense of what you're saying.

grafted branch · Mar 19, 2025

Spiritual Israelite said:
Jesus said that just as the flood destroyed all unbelievers in Noah's day and all unbelievers in Sodom in Lot's day "Even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of man is revealed."? How does that describe what happened in 70 AD when Jesus made it clear that the days would be shortened so that NOT all in Jerusalem would be destroyed?

When the days were shortened, the beginning part of those days were removed, they didn’t take place. That is how the elect in Jerusalem were not destroyed.

After Israel left Egypt, they initially rejected going into the promised land. They all died in the wilderness, without hope of ever going into that land. After the cross those who rejected the new covenant and continued in the old covenant had hope, they could still be saved. The days without hope of entering the promised land were shortened, that hope remained until Jerusalem was surrounded by armies and destroyed.

The Son of man was revealed per Luke 17:30 that is when they recognized Him. I believe that coincided with Jerusalem being surrounded by armies, perhaps Jerusalem being surrounded by armies was the revealing. In any case we know the fleeing takes place after the Son of man is revealed, just as Luke 17:30-31 says.

grafted branch · Mar 19, 2025

Davidpt said:
In Matthew 24 verse 17 and 18 are meaning during great tribulation. The 2nd coming is nowhere in view at this point. In Matthew 24 the 2nd coming is meaning verse 30 and that verse 29 indicates it is after the tribulation of those days. What tribulation of those days? How can it not be meaning verse 21?

Well, I say the great tribulation was the spiritual blindness in part that Israel experienced. That tribulation ended when the Son of man was revealed which is in Luke 17:30. After that tribulation they fled as Luke 17:31 says. Remember, I place the days being shortened as the beginning portion of the days being removed, not the last portion being removed.

Davidpt said:
Everything involving B) are things that are taking place throughout the earth while Jesus is still away. And that includes the day and time we are currently living in plus what all lies ahead in our future still, meaning before Jesus returns. One of those things being Matthew 24:21 except some are arguing that was fulfilled ages ago having to do with 70 AD. I obviously disagree, though. Meaning I don't agree Matthew 24:21 involved 70 AD.

Luke 17:22 only references disciples who desire to see the days of the Son of man but don’t see it. Where are you seeing option B) where they do see the days of the Son of man in Luke 17?

Spiritual Israelite · Mar 19, 2025

grafted branch said:
When the days were shortened, the beginning part of those days were removed, they didn’t take place. That is how the elect in Jerusalem were not destroyed.

I think you missed the point. The fact that they weren't destroyed shows that what Jesus said in Luke 17:26-30 cannot possibly refer to what happened in 70 AD because He said the day of His second coming would be just like events where all unbelievers were destroyed.

grafted branch said:
After Israel left Egypt, they initially rejected going into the promised land. They all died in the wilderness, without hope of ever going into that land. After the cross those who rejected the new covenant and continued in the old covenant had hope, they could still be saved. The days without hope of entering the promised land were shortened, that hope remained until Jerusalem was surrounded by armies and destroyed.

The Son of man was revealed per Luke 17:30 that is when they recognized Him. I believe that coincided with Jerusalem being surrounded by armies, perhaps Jerusalem being surrounded by armies was the revealing. In any case we know the fleeing takes place after the Son of man is revealed, just as Luke 17:30-31 says.

Wait a minute here. Didn't you just agree with David in another recent post that Luke 17:30-31 is likely referring to the future coming of Christ rather than to 70 AD? Did you change your mind again?

grafted branch · Mar 19, 2025

Spiritual Israelite said:
I think you missed the point. The fact that they weren't destroyed shows that what Jesus said in Luke 17:26-30 cannot possibly refer to what happened in 70 AD because He said the day of His second coming would be just like events where all unbelievers were destroyed.

What happened in 70AD was very similar to what happened to Sodom. Lot was notified and he fled. In Luke 17:30 the Son of man is revealed, which notified, and then they fled per vs 31. In 70AD they were notified by Jerusalem being surrounded by armies, and they fled.

Spiritual Israelite said:
Wait a minute here. Didn't you just agree with David in another recent post that Luke 17:30-31 is likely referring to the future coming of Christ rather than to 70 AD? Did you change your mind again?

No, the disciples all died before 70AD except John. A future coming for them would’ve been a 70AD coming.

Wick Stick · Mar 19, 2025

Davidpt said:
Speaking for myself, I'm not fully grasping what you're meaning. Take Matthew 24:21, for instance. That can only be involving one specific era of time. If it involves the first century we then can't also apply it to the future, in any sense.

That's how YOU use prophecy. It isn't how Matthew uses prophecy. This is how Matthew uses prophecy:

Matthew 2:14-15
When he arose, he took the young child and his mother by night, and departed into Egypt: And was there until the death of Herod: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, Out of Egypt have I called my son.

Matthew took an Old Testament prophecy that was clearly about Israel, and applied it to Jesus. This is just one example... Matthew does this A LOT in his gospel. Even though the the original prophecy had a clear literal fulfillment, Matt had no problem applying it to other events that happened over a thousand years later than the first one.

Davidpt said:
After all, the next verse says those days are cut short, meaning they have an end eventually, and once those days are finished, they never get repeated again, in any sense.

Except they did. They were fulfilled in 70AD and 135AD. And both of those fulfillments could also be looked at as re-fulfillments of the destruction of Solomon's temple in 586BC. Look up Tishba B'Av - the day of the year when every version of the Jewish temple at Jerusalem was destroyed, albeit in different centuries.

Davidpt said:
I'm arguing that verse 21 hasn't even been fulfilled yet. Others are arguing that it has been fulfilled almost 2000 years ago.

When a prophecy is fulfilled, that isn't the end of it. Prophecies get re-fulfilled. Why is it hard for you to believe this, when there are multiple examples just in the book of Matthew?

Wick Stick · Mar 19, 2025

Spiritual Israelite said:
Thanks for trying, but I can't make any sense of what you're saying.

That's kind of what I figured would happen. It isn't the easiest concept to grasp.

grafted branch · Mar 19, 2025

Wick Stick said:
When a prophecy is fulfilled, that isn't the end of it. Prophecies get re-fulfilled.

I’m wondering if you see all prophecy already being fulfilled in a type or figurative way? I think we all agree there is still a future coming of Christ but 70AD could be a type of a future coming.

Ecclesiastes 1:9 The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun.

Do you see any prophecy that hasn’t already been fulfilled in some kind of way?

tailgator · Mar 19, 2025

grafted branch said:
Correct, and that was fulfilled in 70AD.

Luke 23:28But Jesus turning unto them said, Daughters of Jerusalem, weep not for me, but weep for yourselves, and for your children. 29For, behold, the days are coming, in the which they shall say, Blessed are the barren, and the wombs that never bare, and the paps which never gave suck. 30Then shall they begin to say to the mountains, Fall on us; and to the hills, Cover us.

You honestly believe the heavens departed as a scroll being rolled together and the stars of heaven fell to the earth in 70 AD?

Revelation 6
13 And the stars of heaven fell unto the earth, even as a fig tree casteth her untimely figs, when she is shaken of a mighty wind.

You going to claim Jesus came in the clouds and everyone saw him in 70 AD as well?

Mathew 24
29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:

30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

grafted branch · Mar 19, 2025

tailgator said:
You honestly believe the heavens departed as a scroll being rolled together and the stars of heaven fell to the earth in 70 AD?

Revelation 6
13 And the stars of heaven fell unto the earth, even as a fig tree casteth her untimely figs, when she is shaken of a mighty wind.

You going to claim Jesus came in the clouds and everyone saw him in 70 AD as well?

Mathew 24
29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:

30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

Yea

tailgator · Mar 19, 2025

grafted branch said:
Yea

If everyone saw Jesus in 70 AD ,then why did no one say they saw him?

Davidpt · Mar 19, 2025

grafted branch said:
Well, I say the great tribulation was the spiritual blindness in part that Israel experienced. That tribulation ended when the Son of man was revealed which is in Luke 17:30. After that tribulation they fled as Luke 17:31 says. Remember, I place the days being shortened as the beginning portion of the days being removed, not the last portion being removed.

I still don't fully get what you are meaning here. In Matthew 24, it is at the beginning of great tribulation that they begin fleeing.

grafted branch said:
Luke 17:22 only references disciples who desire to see the days of the Son of man but don’t see it. Where are you seeing option B) where they do see the days of the Son of man in Luke 17?

Obviously, during B), meaning while B) is still true, they never see one of the days of the Son of man they are desiring to see, because one of the days is already in the past and that the other one is still in the future. IOW, it is so bad in the earth at the time compared to A) and C), that they desire to see one of those days of the Son of man instead, except they can't, because the days they are dwelling in are not like any of the days involving A) nor C).

You asked where am I seeing in Luke 17 that they do see one of those days they desire to see? If some of those verses are involving His 2nd coming, and surely they are, that would logically be when they finally see one of those days they desire to see. Even if some of them die during B) before C) arrives, well there is such a thing as their resurrection once C) arrives.

grafted branch · Mar 19, 2025

tailgator said:
If everyone saw Jesus in 70 AD ,then why did no one say they saw him?

Everyone at the fifth seal that asked how long until their blood was avenged saw it.

tailgator · Mar 19, 2025

grafted branch said:
Everyone at the fifth seal that asked how long until their blood was avenged saw it.

Revelation 1;7
“Look, he is coming with the clouds,” and “every eye will see him, even those who pierced him"; and all peoples on earth “will mourn because of him.” So shall it be! Amen.

So you believe every eye did not see him.
Do you believe that only the dead mourned for him in 70 AD too?

Davidpt · Mar 19, 2025

Wick Stick said:
That's how YOU use prophecy. It isn't how Matthew uses prophecy. This is how Matthew uses prophecy:

Matthew 2:14-15
When he arose, he took the young child and his mother by night, and departed into Egypt: And was there until the death of Herod: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, Out of Egypt have I called my son.

Matthew took an Old Testament prophecy that was clearly about Israel, and applied it to Jesus. This is just one example... Matthew does this A LOT in his gospel. Even though the the original prophecy had a clear literal fulfillment, Matt had no problem applying it to other events that happened over a thousand years later than the first one.

Except they did. They were fulfilled in 70AD and 135AD. And both of those fulfillments could also be looked at as re-fulfillments of the destruction of Solomon's temple in 586BC. Look up Tishba B'Av - the day of the year when every version of the Jewish temple at Jerusalem was destroyed, albeit in different centuries.

When a prophecy is fulfilled, that isn't the end of it. Prophecies get re-fulfilled. Why is it hard for you to believe this, when there are multiple examples just in the book of Matthew?

In this case, even though you may be right about some of those things, look again what Jesus said in Matthew 24:21---such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be. How can this be trumped or even repeated--- no, nor ever shall be?

When did the 2nd temple literally initially cease being the holy place?

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads