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

[Davidpt]

Compare Matthew 24 with Luke 21 and you can clearly see that part is about the 70Ad destruction
Luke 21

The Destruction of Jerusalem​

20 “But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation is near. 21 Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, let those who are in the midst of her depart, and let not those who are in the country enter her. 22 For these are the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled. 23 But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! For there will be great distress in the land and wrath upon this people. 24 And they will fall by the edge of the sword, and be led away captive into all nations. And Jerusalem will be trampled by Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.

Matthew 24

15 “Therefore when you see the ‘abomination of desolation,’ spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place” (whoever reads, let him understand), 16 “then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. 17 Let him who is on the housetop not go down to take anything out of his house. 18 And let him who is in the field not go back to get his clothes. 19 But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! 20 And pray that your flight may not be in winter or on the Sabbath. 21 For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been since the beginning of the world until this time, no, nor ever shall be. 22 And unless those days were shortened, no flesh would be saved; but for the [c]elect’s sake those days will be shortened.

Clearly, Luke 21:20 is pertaining to what eventually happened in 70 AD. But that doesn't mean so is Matthew 24:15-21. Like I already pointed out, Revelation 7.9 is involving great tribulation that can't be matched nor surpassed in greatness. And that Jesus said in Matthew 24:21, pertaining to great tribulation, that it too can't be matched nor surpassed in greatness.

What should this be telling any reasonable thinking person? That great tribulation pertaining to Matthew 24:21 is meaning the same great tribulation pertaining to Revelation 7:9? Or that Matthew 24:21 is not meaning the same great tribulation pertaining to Revelation 7:9? Which then means if the latter is true, alleged tribulation involving Jews in the first century was greater than great tribulation involving Revelation 7:9, keeping in mind that we can't ignore what Jesus said in Matthew 24:21--no, nor ever shall be. Obviously, meaning that no tribulation in the past or future can match nor surpass this tribulation in greatness. As if it makes sense, assuming Matthew 24:21 is involving unbelieving Jews in the first century, that those events surpass Revelation 7:9 in number and in greatness.

Keeping in mind that this age isn't over yet, meaning that the worst is yet to come, great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time. But let's just apply that to the first century and not even give it a chance to be fulfilled in the future.

 

[Scott Downey]

Clearly, Luke 21:20 is pertaining to what eventually happened in 70 AD. But that doesn't mean so is Matthew 24:15-21. Like I already pointed out, Revelation 7.9 is involving great tribulation that can't be matched nor surpassed in greatness. And that Jesus said in Matthew 24:21, pertaining to great tribulation, that it too can't be matched nor surpassed in greatness.

What should this be telling any reasonable thinking person? That great tribulation pertaining to Matthew 24:21 is meaning the same great tribulation pertaining to Revelation 7:9? Or that Matthew 24:21 is not meaning the same great tribulation pertaining to Revelation 7:9? Which then means if the latter is true, alleged tribulation involving Jews in the first century was greater than great tribulation involving Revelation 7:9, keeping in mind that we can't ignore what Jesus said in Matthew 24:21--no, nor ever shall be. Obviously, meaning that no tribulation in the past or future can match or surpass this tribulation in greatness. As if it makes sense, assuming Matthew 24:21 is involving unbelieving Jews in the first century, that those events surpass Revelation 7:9 in number and in greatness.

Keeping in mind that this age isn't over yet, meaning that the worst is yet to come, great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time. But let's just apply that to the first century and not even give it a chance to be fulfilled in the future.

The wording of both Luke and Matthew is intensely similar.

Matthew 24

1 Then Jesus went out and departed from the temple, and His disciples came up to show Him the buildings of the temple. 2 And Jesus said to them, “Do you not see all these things? Assuredly, I say to you, not one stone shall be left here upon another, that shall not be thrown down.”
************************************************************************************
here is Mark 13, again the same things are spoken as in Luke and Matthew

And Jesus says it is about Jerusalem destruction by mentioning the buildings being torn down every single stone of them
As Christ's words also speak of His returning, obvious to me the prophecies span thousands of years including our future.
How can it be otherwise?
I view this as having a fulfilment in the past and also a fulfillment in the future.
It logically must be both.
Tribulation does not stop until the return of Christ.

*************************************************************************************
1 Then as He went out of the temple, one of His disciples said to Him, “Teacher, see what manner of stones and what buildings are here!”

2 And Jesus answered and said to him, “Do you see these great buildings? Not one stone shall be left upon another, that shall not be thrown down.”

The Signs of the Times and the End of the Age​

3 Now as He sat on the Mount of Olives opposite the temple, Peter, James, John, and Andrew asked Him privately, 4 “Tell us, when will these things be? And what will be the sign when all these things will be fulfilled?”

5 And Jesus, answering them, began to say: “Take heed that no one deceives you. 6 For many will come in My name, saying, ‘I am He,’ and will deceive many. 7 But when you hear of wars and rumors of wars, do not be troubled; for such things must happen, but the end is not yet. 8 For nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. And there will be earthquakes in various places, and there will be famines [a]and troubles. These are the beginnings of [b]sorrows.

9 “But watch out for yourselves, for they will deliver you up to councils, and you will be beaten in the synagogues. You will [c]be brought before rulers and kings for My sake, for a testimony to them. 10 And the gospel must first be preached to all the nations. 11 But when they arrest you and deliver you up, do not worry beforehand, [d]or premeditate what you will speak. But whatever is given you in that hour, speak that; for it is not you who speak, but the Holy Spirit. 12 Now brother will betray brother to death, and a father his child; and children will rise up against parents and cause them to be put to death. 13 And you will be hated by all for My name’s sake. But he who [e]endures to the end shall be saved.

The Great Tribulation​

14 “So when you see the ‘abomination of desolation,’ [f]spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing where it ought not” (let the reader understand), “then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. 15 Let him who is on the housetop not go down into the house, nor enter to take anything out of his house. 16 And let him who is in the field not go back to get his clothes. 17 But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! 18 And pray that your flight may not be in winter. 19 For in those days there will be tribulation, such as has not been since the beginning of the creation which God created until this time, nor ever shall be. 20 And unless the Lord had shortened those days, no flesh would be saved; but for the elect’s sake, whom He chose, He shortened the days.

 

[MA2444]

When Christ died and rose? Or in 70 AD when it was fully destroyed? There can only be one answer here.

Why this matters is because of what Matthew 24:15, for one, records.

Matthew 24:15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand

If the holy place in this verse is meaning the 2nd temple, that obviously, thus undeniably, means that the 2nd temple did not cease to be the holy place when Christ died and rose, it continued to be the holy place up until it ws destroyed. Which then means since animal sacrificing continued even after Christ died and rose, that because some are interpreting the holy place to be meaning the 2nd temple, their interpretation implies that God was ok with animal sacrificing still continuing, because, after all, per their interpretation, the 2nd temple was the still the holy place until it was destroyed.

Some interpreters seem to speak out of both sides of their mouth. Where on one side of their mouth they insist that the 2nd temple ceased to be the holy place once Christ died and rose, then on the other side of their mouth they insist the 2nd temple was still the holy place until it was destroyed. Don't some interpreters even grasp what a 'contradiction' is? That contradictions clearly lead to lies not the truth?

What does one do then, assuming they are at least humble enough to admit that they are contradicting that they agree Christ's death and resurrection made the 2nd temple no longer the holy place by insisting that the holy place in Matthew 24:15 is meaning the 2nd temple? Do they do like Dispys do, make it be involving a rebuilt temple in the future? Like that is the only option. But if it was the only option, I for sure don't fault them for insisting the holy place is meaning the 2nd temple in that case. Because clearly, a literal rebuilt temple in the future being how one should interpret this, is one of the most far-fetched ideas anyone has ever come up with. And I'm thinking there may have been a time in the past when that was my position as well. And if so, that was then, this is now.

Is there another option? Of course there is. It's involving 2 Thessalonians 2:4 and what all that involves. Except 2 Thessalonians 2:4 is not involving a literal temple, not the 2nd one before it was destroyed nor a rebuilt one in the future. And the funny thing about it, some of these interpreters insisting the holy place meant in Matthew 24:15 is the 2nd temple are on the same page with me concerning 2 Thessalonians 2:4, that it is not involving a literal temple.

Why can't these same interpreters plainly see, that by applying 2 Thessalonians 2:4 to Matthew 24:15 rather than the 2nd temple, now they are no longer speaking out of both sides of their mouth? Now they are no longer contradicting that they agree that the 2nd temple ceased to be the holy place once Christ died and rose, as opposed to it continuing to be the holy place until it was destroyed in 70 AD. But who cares, right? It's way better to contradict something rather than trying to understand something in such a manner where nothing is being contradicted. God forbid, that the latter makes the better sense.

What one should be asking themselves since Jesus was a prophet and knew He was going to the cross, did He too think the 2nd temple remained the holy place until it would be destroyed in 70 AD? After all, keep in mind, Jesus is the one who called the temple in mind the holy place. Would He be so silly to contradict that His death and resurrection would make the 2nd temple no longer the holy place, by then meaning the 2nd temple rather than the 3rd temple, a spiritual temple?

When do some of you think the 3rd temple initially came into affect? In 70 AD when the 2nd temple was destroyed? Surely not. There you go then unless you want to continue speaking out of both sides of your mouth. That the 3rd temple came into affect once Christ died and rose, therefore, causing the 2nd temple to cease being the holy place, yet the holy place meant in Matthew 24:15 is meaning the 2nd temple. What a confused interpreter this person is, spouting nothing other than one contradiction after another.

The way I figure it, we all know from experience that the wheels of the Political system spin mighty slowly. And the Priests in the temple were the effectors of the political system back then. Now Jesus had revealed Himself to over 500 people after His resurrection? Well what was the population of Israel when Jesus resurrected? And most of them didnt believe that Jesus was the Messiah, they had just put Jesus to death, remember.

SO God, in His infinite compassion and mercy, knew that word travels fairly fast but people also need time to adjust to new truths...so the Lord gave them 38 more years (?) to make the transition in their own minds and then let the Romans tear down the temple and destroy it.

So technically, it was in effect right when Jesus dies and rose again, but it took some time to put it into practice.

One day God said, they wont need that temple anymore, it can go away. That happened in 70 AD.

 

[Scott Downey]

I doubt very much I will be in Judea and have to flee to the mountains.
How about you? Where do you live? Judea?
See, that is a regional warning to the city of Jerusalem alone.

Luke gives a clearer explanation to my mind. But it is all the same messaging coming from Christ about the times and seasons to be watching for.

After Jerusalem is wiped out by the Romans this is said, 24 And they will fall by the edge of the sword, and be led away captive into all nations. And Jerusalem will be trampled by Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.

Which is where we are today. Jerusalem is divided up into Jewish and gentile areas.
After this we have the watching and waiting of the church for Christ to return.
And terrible times it is beforehand.

20 “But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation is near. 21 Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, let those who are in the midst of her depart, and let not those who are in the country enter her. 22 For these are the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled. 23 But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! For there will be great distress in the land and wrath upon this people. 24 And they will fall by the edge of the sword, and be led away captive into all nations. And Jerusalem will be trampled by Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.

The Coming of the Son of Man​

25 “And there will be signs in the sun, in the moon, and in the stars; and on the earth distress of nations, with perplexity, the sea and the waves roaring; 26 men’s hearts failing them from fear and the expectation of those things which are coming on the earth, for the powers of the heavens will be shaken. 27 Then they will see the Son of Man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. 28 Now when these things begin to happen, look up and lift up your heads, because your redemption draws near.”

 

[grafted branch]

No one at the time was fleeing to the mountains. This passage says that when one sees the AOD, they are to flee to the mountains, no time to even pack, get it now before it's too late. If the AOD was animal sacrificing continuing, one would have to be plain blind back then to not notice at the time, that animal sacrificing continued. Keeping in mind, the text says when one sees the AOD they are to then flee to the mountains at that time.

You left out Matthew 24:22.

Matthew 24:22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.

The days were shortened. When you shorten a period of time you have two choices, you can either end that time period earlier or start that time period later. Since the indicator of when to flee in Matthew 24 is different than the indicator of when to flee in Luke 21, it stands to reason that when the days were shortened, those days started later than originally anticipated.

Luke doesn’t mention the phrase “abomination of desolation”, the days being shortened, or whoso readeth let him understand.

Luke 1:3 It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus,

Luke read, understood, and let us know in plain language what the order of the events would be. The fleeing didn’t take place when the AOD was seen because they read the book of Daniel and understood that the days would be shortened. They understood that the indicator of when to flee changed when the days were shortened.

Nor was there great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, occurring during this era of time involving Christ's death and resurrection. And I can't even see any of these things recorded in Matthew 24:15-21 applying to 70 AD, let alone the time period you are trying to apply them to, for some of the reasons I mentioned.

Israel was blind in part. The greatest tribulation any human can ever face is being spiritually blind. That tribulation was a one time event, never to be repeated again.

 

[Scott Downey]

Luke 17, Christ speaks about His return. And the phrasing used is very similar to that referring to the destruction of Jerusalem note v31.
To me this proves a dual use of these various prophetic chapters in referring to a destruction to come for Jerusalem and then for the destruction of the world.

God shortened the days of both events for the sake of the elect. We do know it is 42 months for the one yet to come.

22 Then He said to the disciples, “The days will come when you will desire to see one of the days of the Son of Man, and you will not see it.

23 And they will say to you, [h]‘Look here!’ or ‘Look there!’ Do not go after them or follow them. 24 For as the lightning that flashes out of one part under heaven shines to the other part under heaven, so also the Son of Man will be in His day. 25 But first He must suffer many things and be rejected by this generation. 26 And as it was in the days of Noah, so it will be also in the days of the Son of Man: 27 They ate, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, and the flood came and destroyed them all. 28 Likewise as it was also in the days of Lot: They ate, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they built; 29 but on the day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven and destroyed them all. 30 Even so will it be in the day when the Son of Man is revealed.

31 “In that day, he who is on the housetop, and his [i]goods are in the house, let him not come down to take them away. And likewise the one who is in the field, let him not turn back.

32 Remember Lot’s wife. 33 Whoever seeks to save his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life will preserve it. 34 I tell you, in that night there will be two [j]men in one bed: the one will be taken and the other will be left. 35 Two women will be grinding together: the one will be taken and the other left. 36 [k]Two men will be in the field: the one will be taken and the other left.”

37 And they answered and said to Him, “Where, Lord?”

So He said to them, “Wherever the body is, there the eagles will be gathered together.”
***************************************
And the ones take away and destroyed. Eaten by the birds. While the ones who remain inherit the (new) earth and all things.

Hey, if you saw a body surrounded by eagles, what do you think is going to happen... a feast. You just load up a you tube video if you want. Another version uses the word 'corpse'

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Clearly, Luke 21:20 is pertaining to what eventually happened in 70 AD. But that doesn't mean so is Matthew 24:15-21. Like I already pointed out, Revelation 7.9 is involving great tribulation that can't be matched nor surpassed in greatness. And that Jesus said in Matthew 24:21, pertaining to great tribulation, that it too can't be matched nor surpassed in greatness.

David, please stop making the text say what you want it to say.

Matthew 24:21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.

Where does this say that there would be "great tribulation that can't be matched nor surpassed in greatness."? Nowhere. It says no such thing. Stop twisting the text to make it fit your doctrine. All it says is that it would be great tribulation unlike anything that happened before or after without indicating in what sense exactly it would be unlike anything else. You change the text to say that He indicated that it would surpass anything else in greatness, but He did not say that.

Think about it. How could anything surpass the flood in greatness in terms of the level of tribulation it caused? There's no way that Jesus was intending to say what He did in that context unless you think there will be even less than 8 people in the world who survive the great tribulation?

 

[grafted branch]

So He said to them, “Wherever the body is, there the eagles will be gathered together.”

Some people think that is referring to communion.

John 6:51 I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world. 52The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, How can this man give us his flesh to eat? 53Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Compare Matthew 24 with Luke 21 and you can clearly see that part is about the 70Ad destruction
Luke 21

The Destruction of Jerusalem​

20 “But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation is near. 21 Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, let those who are in the midst of her depart, and let not those who are in the country enter her. 22 For these are the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled. 23 But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! For there will be great distress in the land and wrath upon this people. 24 And they will fall by the edge of the sword, and be led away captive into all nations. And Jerusalem will be trampled by Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.

Matthew 24

15 “Therefore when you see the ‘abomination of desolation,’ spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place” (whoever reads, let him understand), 16 “then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. 17 Let him who is on the housetop not go down to take anything out of his house. 18 And let him who is in the field not go back to get his clothes. 19 But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! 20 And pray that your flight may not be in winter or on the Sabbath. 21 For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been since the beginning of the world until this time, no, nor ever shall be. 22 And unless those days were shortened, no flesh would be saved; but for the [c]elect’s sake those days will be shortened.

That is very clear, but some people deny it, anyway, because of doctrinal bias.

Most of those who deny that those are parallel passages believe that Luke 21:20-24 is related to what happened in 70 AD. But, think about what they're saying when they deny that those are parallel passages. That means they think Jesus said "When you see" things related to the impending desolation of Jerusalem "then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains" twice in the Olivet Discourse. And they think He said "But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days!" twice as well. And that He referenced "great tribulation" or "great distress" twice as well. How can that be taken seriously?

Imagine how confused the disciples would have been if He said what is recorded in Matthew 24:15-22 separately from what He is record as saying in Luke 21:20-24. I don't know which of those passages people who believe they are not parallel think He said first. Let's say it was Matthew 24:15-22. Imagine how confused the disciples wold have been hearing Him say that and then a little later say what is recorded in Luke 21:20-24. Surely, they would have been asking "Lord, did you forget that you talked about that already?".

 

[Dave Watchman]

Most of those who deny that those are parallel passages believe that Luke 21:20-24 is related to what happened in 70 AD. But, think about what they're saying when they deny that those are parallel passages. That means they think Jesus said "When you see" things related to the impending desolation of Jerusalem "then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains" twice in the Olivet Discourse.

He said it twice in a 24 hour period of time, but only once in the Olivet Discourse. Luke 21 is not the Olivet Discourse. Luke 21 was the daytime before the Olivet would begin.

Think of it like Luke 21 was on the temple mount, and Matthew 24 was on the Mount called Olivet.

Two separate Mounts separated by the Kidron Valley.

View from the Olivet:

Kidron Valley view:

And they think He said "But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days!" twice as well. And that He referenced "great tribulation" or "great distress" twice as well. How can that be taken seriously?

It's true. Twice as well. There's two sets of pregnant women, and those nursing babies. One at the destruction of Jerusalem, and another set at the end of the world.

Imagine how confused the disciples would have been if He said what is recorded in Matthew 24:15-22 separately from what He is record as saying in Luke 21:20-24.

The disciples actually were confused. They couldn't understand what the end time Abomination would be. Only the reader can understand what Jesus was speaking to them at that time.

I don't know which of those passages people who believe they are not parallel think He said first. Let's say it was Matthew 24:15-22. Imagine how confused the disciples wold have been hearing Him say that and then a little later say what is recorded in Luke 21:20-24.

The Luke 21 passages came first. Jesus spoke these sitting inside the Temple, in the women's court, the day of the Olivet. The treasury jars surrounded the women's court. As Jesus was sitting opposite the treasury, He watched the crowd putting money into it.

Matthew 24 began after Jesus had departed from the Temple and was walking away with His disciples and made the 20 minute trip to the Mount called Olivet. It was the end of the Luke 21 day. I can be relatively certain the sun was setting and was on it's way down, so technically it was the next day. I can't know, but wouldn't be surprised if they had a campfire going. It was two days before Passover.

"And every day he was teaching in the temple, but at night he went out and lodged on the mount called Olivet.​

"Strictly speaking, it meant to lodge, not in a room, but in the court-yard of a house; and so was used generally, in military language, for a “bivouac.” It would seem to have been chosen by both Evangelists (it does not occur elsewhere in the New Testament) to include the fact, implied in all four and definitely stated by St. John, that most of the nights were spent not in a house, but in the garden, or orchard, of Gethsemane​

Surely, they would have been asking "Lord, did you forget that you talked about that already?".

I doubt it. Most of them would have been tired by then and had fallen asleep for the night. It was at the end of a long day. Only four of them were troubled by His sayings.

“Do you not see all these things? Assuredly, I say to you, not one stone shall be left here upon another, that shall not be thrown down.”​

All these things? The gravity, the seriousness, of a situation sinking in. Where Jesus is talking about something bigger than just the destruction of the buildings of Jerusalem. They remember the Day of the Lord prophecies where the earth sways to and fro like a drunkard. Could He be talking about all the buildings all over the earth? When every island and mountain is moved from it's place?

"The earth staggers like a drunken man; it sways like a hut; its transgression lies heavy upon it, and it falls, and will not rise again.​

​

"Men will flee to caves in the rocks and holes in the ground, away from the terror of the LORD and from the splendor of His majesty, when He rises to shake the earth.​

Only four disciples, Peter, James, John, and Andrew asked Him privately, “Tell us, when will these things be? And what will be the sign when all these things will be fulfilled?”

There were no rich people there donating gifts. No crowd putting money into the treasury. No poor widows at the treasury. No beautiful stones and donations adorning the temple. Because they were sitting 20 minutes across the Kidron Valley from the temple. Just Jesus and four disciples that night on the Mount called Olivet. All of Matthew 24 is about our modern end times. It has nothing to do with the historical destruction of Jerusalem.

"Early in the morning He went back into the temple courts. All the people came to Him, and He sat down to teach them.​

Peaceful Sabbath.

 

[Scott Downey]

He said it twice in a 24 hour period of time, but only once in the Olivet Discourse. Luke 21 is not the Olivet Discourse. Luke 21 was the daytime before the Olivet would begin.

Think of it like Luke 21 was on the temple mount, and Matthew 24 was on the Mount called Olivet.

Two separate Mounts separated by the Kidron Valley.

View from the Olivet:



Kidron Valley view:



It's true. Twice as well. There's two sets of pregnant women, and those nursing babies. One at the destruction of Jerusalem, and another set at the end of the world.

The disciples actually were confused. They couldn't understand what the end time Abomination would be. Only the reader can understand what Jesus was speaking to them at that time.

The Luke 21 passages came first. Jesus spoke these sitting inside the Temple, in the women's court, the day of the Olivet. The treasury jars surrounded the women's court. As Jesus was sitting opposite the treasury, He watched the crowd putting money into it.

Matthew 24 began after Jesus had departed from the Temple and was walking away with His disciples and made the 20 minute trip to the Mount called Olivet. It was the end of the Luke 21 day. I can be relatively certain the sun was setting and was on it's way down, so technically it was the next day. I can't know, but wouldn't be surprised if they had a campfire going. It was two days before Passover.

"And every day he was teaching in the temple, but at night he went out and lodged on the mount called Olivet.​

"Strictly speaking, it meant to lodge, not in a room, but in the court-yard of a house; and so was used generally, in military language, for a “bivouac.” It would seem to have been chosen by both Evangelists (it does not occur elsewhere in the New Testament) to include the fact, implied in all four and definitely stated by St. John, that most of the nights were spent not in a house, but in the garden, or orchard, of Gethsemane​

I doubt it. Most of them would have been tired by then and had fallen asleep for the night. It was at the end of a long day. Only four of them were troubled by His sayings.

“Do you not see all these things? Assuredly, I say to you, not one stone shall be left here upon another, that shall not be thrown down.”​

All these things? The gravity, the seriousness, of a situation sinking in. Where Jesus is talking about something bigger than just the destruction of the buildings of Jerusalem. They remember the Day of the Lord prophecies where the earth sways to and fro like a drunkard. Could He be talking about all the buildings all over the earth? When every island and mountain is moved from it's place?

"The earth staggers like a drunken man; it sways like a hut; its transgression lies heavy upon it, and it falls, and will not rise again.​

​

"Men will flee to caves in the rocks and holes in the ground, away from the terror of the LORD and from the splendor of His majesty, when He rises to shake the earth.​

Only four disciples, Peter, James, John, and Andrew asked Him privately, “Tell us, when will these things be? And what will be the sign when all these things will be fulfilled?”

There were no rich people there donating gifts. No crowd putting money into the treasury. No poor widows at the treasury. No beautiful stones and donations adorning the temple. Because they were sitting 20 minutes across the Kidron Valley from the temple. Just Jesus and four disciples that night on the Mount called Olivet. All of Matthew 24 is about our modern end times. It has nothing to do with the historical destruction of Jerusalem.

"Early in the morning He went back into the temple courts. All the people came to Him, and He sat down to teach them.​

Peaceful Sabbath.

"All these things? The gravity, the seriousness, of a situation sinking in. Where Jesus is talking about something bigger than just the destruction of the buildings of Jerusalem. They remember the Day of the Lord prophecies where the earth sways to and fro like a drunkard. Could He be talking about all the buildings all over the earth? When every island and mountain is moved from it's place?"

Of course that will happen. The disciples were marveling at the city buildings, so the response is assumed to be directed towards them at this time, the destruction of Jerusalem, which was very extreme and thorough. Jesus includes His own returning, so what He is saying includes all events up till the time of His second appearing. The entire dialog is very comprehensive about the end of the temple system, the Jews power and position, the old covenant system, the end of the world. Really all about the coming end of those things, and judgment of this world.

 

[MA2444]

"All these things? The gravity, the seriousness, of a situation sinking in. Where Jesus is talking about something bigger than just the destruction of the buildings of Jerusalem. They remember the Day of the Lord prophecies where the earth sways to and fro like a drunkard. Could He be talking about all the buildings all over the earth? When every island and mountain is moved from it's place?"

Of course that will happen. The disciples were marveling at the city buildings, so the response is assumed to be directed towards them at this time, the destruction of Jerusalem, which was very extreme and thorough. Jesus includes His own returning, so what He is saying includes all events up till the time of His second appearing. The entire dialog is very comprehensive about the end of the temple system, the Jews power and position, the old covenant system, the end of the world. Really all about the coming end of those things, and judgment of this world.

It sure sounds like there will be a worldwide earthquake in earths future.

 

[Dave Watchman]

Of course that will happen. The disciples were marveling at the city buildings, so the response is assumed to be directed towards them at this time, the destruction of Jerusalem, which was very extreme and thorough. Jesus includes His own returning, so what He is saying includes all events up till the time of His second appearing. The entire dialog is very comprehensive about the end of the temple system, the Jews power and position, the old covenant system, the end of the world. Really all about the coming end of those things, and judgment of this world.

Luke 21 was like what you say. It includes both events. The destruction of Jerusalem, and the second coming. It's written in a unique architecture. In the style of a Day of the Lord Prophecy, a near/far prophecy. Like Isaiah 13 where the prophet starts with one Day of the Lord event, then shifts, or skips through time to a completely different Day of the Lord event.

In Luke 21, Jesus begins with an end of the world description of His second coming, but then for some reason stops at verse 12, "But before all this, and shifts back to the destruction of Jerusalem events. He then resumes back to the end of the world Day of the Lord at verse 25.

Matthew 24 has a completely different style. Matthew 24 is written in the style of an Apocalyptic Prophecy, like in Daniel and Revelation, where the chronological order is unbroken. Matthew 24 is all about our modern end times, beginning around our first two world wars, nation against nation, and kingdom against kingdom.

Peaceful Sabbath.

 

[Davidpt]

That is very clear, but some people deny it, anyway, because of doctrinal bias.

Most of those who deny that those are parallel passages believe that Luke 21:20-24 is related to what happened in 70 AD. But, think about what they're saying when they deny that those are parallel passages. That means they think Jesus said "When you see" things related to the impending desolation of Jerusalem "then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains" twice in the Olivet Discourse. And they think He said "But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days!" twice as well. And that He referenced "great tribulation" or "great distress" twice as well. How can that be taken seriously?

Imagine how confused the disciples would have been if He said what is recorded in Matthew 24:15-22 separately from what He is record as saying in Luke 21:20-24. I don't know which of those passages people who believe they are not parallel think He said first. Let's say it was Matthew 24:15-22. Imagine how confused the disciples wold have been hearing Him say that and then a little later say what is recorded in Luke 21:20-24. Surely, they would have been asking "Lord, did you forget that you talked about that already?".

I argue that just because Matthew 24:16 and Luke 21:21 use almost identical language this doesn't necessarily mean they are the same event. You argue that it does mean they are the same event. Then I argue that because Luke 17:31 and Matthew 24:17 are using almost identical language this means they are involving the same event. You then argue that it isn't the same event. You then argue why am I not being consistent? First I argue that even though Matthew 24:16 and Luke 21:21 use almost identical language this doesn't mean they are the same event. Then you argue that I turn around and argue, that since Luke 17:31 and Matthew 24:17 use almost identical language, this means they are the same event. And now all of a sudden I insist it is meaning the same event because both passages are using almost indentical language, you argue. Which then contradicts how I was arguing in regards to Matthew 24:16 and Luke 21:21, you argue.

Notice what you do yourself, though. First you argue that because Matthew 24:16 and Luke 21:21 use almost identical language this means they are the same event. Then you argue that just because Luke 17:31 and Matthew 24:17 use almost identical language, this doesn't make them the same event. Yet, because Luke 17:26-28 and Matthew 24:37-39 use almost identical language this means they are the same event. You are doing the exact same thing you find fault with me doing and I'm doing the exact same thing I find fault with you doing. Then we are both insisting it's because of doctrinal bias.

And so what if Luke 17 might not be the Discourse involving Matthew 24, Mark 13, and Luke 21? You still argue that Luke 17:26-28 and Matthew 24:37-39 are referring to the same event, do you not? Well, what Luke 17 records via Luke 17:31, Matthew 24 records via Matthew 24:17, does it not? Except you insist they are not the same event, do you not?

BTW, just so that I don't confuse everyone, all of the above, to the best of my recollection, is based on past discussions you and I have had per other threads in regards to this.

 

[Davidpt]

David, please stop making the text say what you want it to say.

Matthew 24:21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.

Where does this say that there would be "great tribulation that can't be matched nor surpassed in greatness."? Nowhere. It says no such thing. Stop twisting the text to make it fit your doctrine. All it says is that it would be great tribulation unlike anything that happened before or after without indicating in what sense exactly it would be unlike anything else. You change the text to say that He indicated that it would surpass anything else in greatness, but He did not say that.

Think about it. How could anything surpass the flood in greatness in terms of the level of tribulation it caused? There's no way that Jesus was intending to say what He did in that context unless you think there will be even less than 8 people in the world who survive the great tribulation?

What in the world do you then think Jesus could have possibly meant by---no, nor shall ever be---if not that it will be the greatest tribulation since the beginning of time, and that no tribulation in the future will be as great?

You can't even discern the difference between tribulation and the wrath of God leading to judgment. Nowhere are we ever told that what happened per the flood was tribulation. It was judgment involving the wrath of God, the same way the DOTL will be judgment involving the wrath of God . Nor was it a time of trouble during the flood, where a time of trouble typically involves one side persecuting the other side. No one was being persecuted by anyone during Noah's flood. You have to ignore context to come to some of the absurd conclusions you often come to at times.

The context pertaining to Noah's flood does not involve a time of trouble compared to the context involving Matthew 24:21, where that involves a time of trouble. To then compare with the flood in order to make Jesus out to be a liar per what He said--no, nor ever shall be, is absurd. Only doctrinal bias could cause someone to do something like that. Except in your mind, when it comes to doctrinal bias, that is only something others do, never anything that you ever do as well.

The way you are reasoning the flood would be like you arguing that the DOTL is involving great tribulation when you know good and well great tribulation would be in the past at this point no matter how you look at it.

 

[Davidpt]

The wording of both Luke and Matthew is intensely similar.

And so is some of the wording in Luke 17 and some of Matthew 24 intensely similar. For example.

Luke 17:24 For as the lightning, that lighteneth out of the one part under heaven, shineth unto the other part under heaven; so shall also the Son of man be in his day.
25 But first must he suffer many things, and be rejected of this generation.
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 Noe 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.
31 In that day, he which shall be upon the housetop, and his stuff in the house, let him not come down to take it away: and he that is in the field, let him likewise not return back.
32 Remember Lot's wife.
33 Whosoever shall seek to save his life shall lose it; and whosoever shall lose his life shall preserve it.
34 I tell you, in that night there shall be two men in one bed; the one shall be taken, and the other shall be left.
35 Two women shall be grinding together; the one shall be taken, and the other left.
36 Two men shall be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left.
37 And they answered and said unto him, Where, Lord? And he said unto them, Wheresoever the body is, thither will the eagles be gathered together.


Compare Luke 17:24 with the following in Matthew 24.

Matthew 24:27 For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.


Compare Luke 17:26-27 with the following in Matthew 24.

Matthew 24:37 But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
38 For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark,
39 And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

Compare Luke 17:31 with the following in Matthew 24.

Matthew 24:17 Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house:
18 Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes.


Compare Luke 17:35-36 with the following in Matthew 24.

Matthew 24:40 Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left.
41 Two women shall be grinding at the mill; the one shall be taken, and the other left.

And finally, compare Luke 17:37 with the following in Matthew 24.

Matthew 24:28 For wheresoever the carcase is, there will the eagles be gathered together.

The point then being this. Every single thing I brought up per Luke 17 is involving something recorded in Matthew 24:15 through Matthew 24:41. Which then means that everything recorded in Luke 17 undeniably proves that not one single single recorded in Matthew 24:15 through Matthew 24:41 is involving 70 AD. Yet some argue that this is only true of Matthew 24:23 through Matthew 24:41, and not Matthew 24:15 through Matthew 24:22 as well. Except I'm pretty certain that Luke 17:31 is also recorded in Matthew 24 in verses 17 and 18.

And that I'm pretty certain that Luke 17:33 alone, in light of Matthew 16:24-26 undeniably proves that Matthew 24:17-18 is not in regards to 70 AD. IOW, the concept in Luke 17:33 is discipleship and not falling away versus falling away, by comparing with Matthew 16:24-26. And since Luke 17:31 is also recorded in Matthew 24:17 and 18, it stands to reason then, that it too involves discipleship pertaining to not falling away vs falling away. And it's not like there is no such thing as falling away having to do with defiling a temple, a holy place. IOW, let's not pretend that 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4 is not in our Bibles nor that it can't support that the holy place meant in Matthew 24:15 is meaning this temple meant in 2 Thessalonians 2:4..

 

[tailgator]

What in the world do you then think Jesus could have possibly meant by---no, nor shall ever be---if not that it will be the greatest tribulation since the beginning of time, and that no tribulation in the future will be as great?

You can't even discern the difference between tribulation and the wrath of God leading to judgment. Nowhere are we ever told that what happened per the flood was tribulation. It was judgment involving the wrath of God, the same way the DOTL will be judgment involving the wrath of God . Nor was it a time of trouble during the flood, where a time of trouble typically involves one side persecuting the other side. No one was being persecuted by anyone during Noah's flood. You have to ignore context to come to some of the absurd conclusions you often come to at times.

The context pertaining to Noah's flood does not involve a time of trouble compared to the context involving Matthew 24:21, where that involves a time of trouble. To then compare with the flood in order to make Jesus out to be a liar per what He said--no, nor ever shall be, is absurd. Only doctrinal bias could cause someone to do something like that. Except in your mind, when it comes to doctrinal bias, that is only something others do, never anything that you ever do as well.

The way you are reasoning the flood would be like you arguing that the DOTL is involving great tribulation when you know good and well great tribulation would be in the past at this point no matter how you look at it.

The flood was a time a trouble and it was a time of tribulation.
The word tribulation simply means distress.

Luke was speaking of great tribulation in this verse mentioning distress with perplexity.

Luke 21
25 And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring;

26 Men's hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken.


On the day of the Lord,there will be great tribulation.Great distress and trouble.
It takes place after the king of the north goes forth to destroy and Innihilate many .Daniel said it would be a time of trouble /distress/tribulation/anguish

Daniel 12:1


Brenton Septuagint Translation
And at that time Michael the great prince shall stand up, that stands over the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of tribulation, such tribulation as has not been from the time that there was a nation on the earth until that time: at that time thy people shall be delivered, even every one that is written in the book.


Daniel 12:1
King James Bible
And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book.


Daniel 12:1
New International Version
“At that time Michael, the great prince who protects your people, will arise. There will be a time of distress such as has not happened from the beginning of nations until then. But at that time your people—everyone whose name is found written in the book—will be delivered.


Daniel 12:1

New Living Translation
“At that time Michael, the archangel who stands guard over your nation, will arise. Then there will be a time of anguish greater than any since nations first came into existence. But at that time every one of your people whose name is written in the book will be rescued.


The first resurrection takes place at this time of great tribulation.

Daniel 12:2
King James Bible
And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt

 

[Davidpt]

The word tribulation simply means distress.

Luke was speaking of great tribulation in this verse mentioning distress with perplexity.

Luke 21
25 And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring;

26 Men's hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken.

To begin with you are not applying this to the correct era of time, thus this has zero to do with tribulation. Try comparing the following instead.

Luke 21:25 And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring;
26 Men's hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken.


Now compare that with this.

Matthew 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:


This verse indicates that what Jesus is referring to in Luke 21:25-26, He places these events after great tribulation, not during it. How can--for the powers of heaven shall be shaken(Luke 21:26) not be referring to this in Matthew 24:29 ---and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken? And how can anyone possibly read Matthew 24:29 in such a manner where they have Jesus meaning that the powers of the heavens shall be shaken during great tribulation rather than after? Especially in light of this--Immediately after the tribulation of those days---the powers of the heavens shall be shaken

 

[Davidpt]

He said it twice in a 24 hour period of time, but only once in the Olivet Discourse. Luke 21 is not the Olivet Discourse. Luke 21 was the daytime before the Olivet would begin.

Think of it like Luke 21 was on the temple mount, and Matthew 24 was on the Mount called Olivet.

Two separate Mounts separated by the Kidron Valley.

View from the Olivet:

Kidron Valley view:

It's true. Twice as well. There's two sets of pregnant women, and those nursing babies. One at the destruction of Jerusalem, and another set at the end of the world.

The disciples actually were confused. They couldn't understand what the end time Abomination would be. Only the reader can understand what Jesus was speaking to them at that time.

The Luke 21 passages came first. Jesus spoke these sitting inside the Temple, in the women's court, the day of the Olivet. The treasury jars surrounded the women's court. As Jesus was sitting opposite the treasury, He watched the crowd putting money into it.

Matthew 24 began after Jesus had departed from the Temple and was walking away with His disciples and made the 20 minute trip to the Mount called Olivet. It was the end of the Luke 21 day. I can be relatively certain the sun was setting and was on it's way down, so technically it was the next day. I can't know, but wouldn't be surprised if they had a campfire going. It was two days before Passover.

"And every day he was teaching in the temple, but at night he went out and lodged on the mount called Olivet.​

"Strictly speaking, it meant to lodge, not in a room, but in the court-yard of a house; and so was used generally, in military language, for a “bivouac.” It would seem to have been chosen by both Evangelists (it does not occur elsewhere in the New Testament) to include the fact, implied in all four and definitely stated by St. John, that most of the nights were spent not in a house, but in the garden, or orchard, of Gethsemane​

I doubt it. Most of them would have been tired by then and had fallen asleep for the night. It was at the end of a long day. Only four of them were troubled by His sayings.

“Do you not see all these things? Assuredly, I say to you, not one stone shall be left here upon another, that shall not be thrown down.”​

All these things? The gravity, the seriousness, of a situation sinking in. Where Jesus is talking about something bigger than just the destruction of the buildings of Jerusalem. They remember the Day of the Lord prophecies where the earth sways to and fro like a drunkard. Could He be talking about all the buildings all over the earth? When every island and mountain is moved from it's place?

"The earth staggers like a drunken man; it sways like a hut; its transgression lies heavy upon it, and it falls, and will not rise again.​

​

"Men will flee to caves in the rocks and holes in the ground, away from the terror of the LORD and from the splendor of His majesty, when He rises to shake the earth.​

Only four disciples, Peter, James, John, and Andrew asked Him privately, “Tell us, when will these things be? And what will be the sign when all these things will be fulfilled?”

There were no rich people there donating gifts. No crowd putting money into the treasury. No poor widows at the treasury. No beautiful stones and donations adorning the temple. Because they were sitting 20 minutes across the Kidron Valley from the temple. Just Jesus and four disciples that night on the Mount called Olivet. All of Matthew 24 is about our modern end times. It has nothing to do with the historical destruction of Jerusalem.

"Early in the morning He went back into the temple courts. All the people came to Him, and He sat down to teach them.​

Peaceful Sabbath.

If I take the time to do it, I'm thinking I can prove that both Matthew 24 and Luke 21 are indeed involving the same Discourse. Even though I think they are, that still doesn't have to mean that what Luke 21 is involving in regards to fleeing is what Matthew 24 is involving in regards to fleeing. But I'm not just saying those things without trying to back it up. I'm using Luke 17, for one, to support this.

 

[tailgator]

To begin with you are not applying this to the correct era of time, thus this has zero to do with tribulation. Try comparing the following instead.

Luke 21:25 And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring;
26 Men's hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken.


Now compare that with this.

Matthew 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:


This verse indicates that what Jesus is referring to in Luke 21:25-26, He places these events after great tribulation, not during it. How can--for the powers of heaven shall be shaken(Luke 21:26) not be referring to this in Matthew 24:29 ---and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken? And how can anyone possibly read Matthew 24:29 in such a manner where they have Jesus meaning that the powers of the heavens shall be shaken during great tribulation rather than after? Especially in light of this--Immediately after the tribulation of those days---the powers of the heavens shall be shaken

First,you still have not learned the difference between tribulation and great tribulation.

And yes,I have the right time period of the great tribulation because Daniel said in Daniel 12:1 ,it takes place at that time.You can argue that Daniel was wrong but I attest he is right and you are wrong.

The persecution of the saints begins in Daniel 11:33 after the second beast arrives to Israel.That is when the tribulation(distress)of the christians in Israel begins.Their tribulation lasts 42 months or according to Daniel ,a time,times and a half.They are the same time period.After the tribulation of those days,the great tribulation Daniel was speaking of in Daniel 12 commences when the king of the north goes forth to destroy and Innihilate many.

The United states armed forces place the abomination of desolation at that time .They will also place the abomination of desolation in n many other cities in the middle east in an effort to destroy everyone in the middle east.

Donald Trump has the power to do all this and the time is drawing nearer.The kingdom of heaven is at hand.