The destruction of the temple in 70AD, how do futurists deal with this?

[Consecrated Life]

I'm sure I know what it is, and it's not a statue or an image. We figured it out on a forum thread 8 years ago. It was the most exciting thread I was ever a part of. I don't think now is the time for me to explain it here.

Matthew 24's abomination, is not the same thing as Luke 21's "Jerusalem surrounded by armies.

It's not a statue, or an image. It's not the Dome of the Rock. Statue or image comes from the Hal Lindsey school right? He got that from Revelation 13?

"and by the signs that it is allowed to work in the presence of the beast it deceives those who dwell on earth, telling them to make an image for the beast that was wounded by the sword and yet lived. And it was allowed to give breath to the image of the beast, so that the image of the beast might even speak and might cause those who would not worship the image of the beast to be slain.​

It's not a statue that comes to life, it's more like a statute,

• a rule of an organization or institution.
  "the appointment will be subject to the statutes of the university"
• archaic
  (in biblical use) a law or decree made by a sovereign, or by God.

Like on the side of a police car where it says: "deeds speak".

"so that the image of the beast (who was wounded (past tense) by the sword) might even speak and might cause those who would not worship the image of the beast to be slain.​

That word for worship (proskuneo) also means to submit to, or obey.

The "image of the beast" is more like a carbon copy of the beast that WAS wounded by the sword in the middle ages, but is now brought to life again but with the crowns moved from the religious "heads", to the political "horns". Authority is transferred from the "church", to the state, of the church state entity.

Being able to identify that "head" healed from a mortal wound, also helps to see how the other 6 must be something of the same kind. With blasphemous names written on them also points to a religious nature.

"One of its heads seemed to have a mortal wound, but its mortal wound was healed​

So explaining Matthew 24's abomination, (let the reader understand), might be like trying to explain to Thomas Jefferson why his White House is now all alight with multi colors:

Peaceful Sabbath.

How does any of that correspond to the disciples understanding of the "holy place" that Jesus spoke to them by name as the spot where the abomination will happen.
There is no mistaking the "holy place" Jesus is naming to His disciples in context of their understanding.

Mat 24:15
When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

I wonder about that too. I wouldn't want to bet my life on it. If an innocent person were to tread on those historical locations, without knowing it, without being warned? To him it is not sin.

"But now you boast in your arrogance. All such boasting is evil.​

Therefore, to him who knows to do good and does not do it, to him it is sin.​

Except God was never interested in holy pieces of land but instead is interested in holy people. No where in the NT is anyone encouraged to visit any particular place on earth to meet God. No where.

I continue to insist that a "place prepared by God", by default becomes a holy place.

"and the woman fled into the wilderness, where she has a place prepared by God, in which she is to be nourished for 1,260 days​

How come the write did not say the place was holy. You might like to think it was but the author, John, apparently did not think so. IN any case, the "woman" is not a flesh and blood single human female. So the wilderness and place prepared are not real estate.

Scripture has to be fulfilled.

These events are baked in the cake.

When the dragon saw that he was cast down, the first thing that he would want to do is to go after the "woman", God's People.

And then plan on attacking the "place prepared by God" for His Christian Church.

"But the earth helped the woman by opening its mouth and swallowing the river that the dragon had spewed out of his mouth. Then the dragon was enraged at the woman and went off to wage war against the rest of her offspring—those who keep God’s commands and hold fast their testimony about Jesus.​

God allows it. He said the wheat will grow with the tares until the harvest.

"Because of the signs it was given power to perform on behalf of the first beast, it deceived the inhabitants of the earth. It ordered them to set up an image in honor of the beast who was wounded by the sword and yet lived.​

The only One that could give the Dragon the power to do these signs on behalf of, or in the presence of, the composite beast is God.

The Devil gives power as well. Just a thought.

God allows the Dragon to give his power, and his throne, and his great authority to the composite beast for 42 months.

We might not like it.

But that's the deal.

Peaceful sabbath.

Well, it can be argued if the Devil asks permission for everything he does. He certainly did not ask for permission on his first act of rebellion. No reason to think he continually asks permission.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

Jesus is in complete agreement with the Word concerning His one holy hill.
If you can name another " hill " that Good claims in scripture to be "holy" I would like to see it.

Please provide the scripture where Jesus talks about his or any "holy hill."

I am not aware of God naming any other except "Zion"
We can the specific locale because of the term " Zion"
Psa 2:6
Yet have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion.

That was not Jesus talking and at that time there was a place where the presence of God dwelt. That has been now destroyed and was opened some decades before.

The hill of Zion is still there .
Only the structures on it have been destroyed .
Which by the way is exactly what God foretold would happen if the people turned away from Him.
The destruction of them is God's prophesy fulfilled .
It is still His and He is far from done with it.

Where is a scripture for that and what does God say to a piece of real estate he is done with where people now live? What does that look like? Did God ever say he was done with a piece of land?

 

[Dorothy Mae]

How does any of that correspond to the disciples understanding of the "holy place" that Jesus spoke to them by name as the spot where the abomination will happen.
There is no mistaking the "holy place" Jesus is naming to His disciples in context of their understanding.

Mat 24:15
When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place.

The only holy place they would have known about in their understanding (and God's understanding I might add) was in the temple. That was the only holy place on earth according to the scripture although that is not gone forever.

 

[eddif]

Isaiah 9:6 kjv
6. For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counseller, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

The mountain: (to a redneck)
The headship of Jesus was placed on the shoulders of Jesus.

The holy mount is on our shoulders. Our carnal mind is to be replaced by the mind of Christ Jesus. No assault of Satan is to not be allowed to have dominion/stand in our mind. Attacks may come, but we cast down vain imaginations.

Note the image in the Holy Place.

The shadows of this spiritual reality is what we study in the past. Abraham looked for a city made by God. The Jerusalem coming down out of heaven is the reality we seek.
New Jerusalem to allow Jesus to be in us.
Jew and gentile making the one new man.

Mississippi redneck
eddif

 

[eddif]

Isaiah 9:6 kjv
6. For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counseller, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

The mountain: (to a redneck)
The headship of Jesus was placed on the shoulders of Jesus.

The holy mount is on our shoulders. Our carnal mind is to be replaced by the mind of Christ Jesus. No assault of Satan is to not be allowed to have dominion/stand in our mind. Attacks may come, but we cast down vain imaginations.

Note the image in the Holy Place.

The shadows of this spiritual reality is what we study in the past. Abraham looked for a city made by God. The Jerusalem coming down out of heaven is the reality we seek.
New Jerusalem to allow Jesus to be in us.
Jew and gentile making the one new man.

Mississippi redneck
eddif

So, if we are the temple of the Holy Spirit, where are our battles?

Ephesians 6:12 kjv
12. For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.

eddif

 

[Dave Watchman]

How does any of that correspond to the disciples understanding of the "holy place" that Jesus spoke to them by name as the spot where the abomination will happen.
There is no mistaking the "holy place" Jesus is naming to His disciples in context of their understanding.

Mat 24:15
When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place.

That's easy.

They didn't understand.

Matthew 24's "holy place", is the equivalent to Mark 13's "ought not to be".

Standing where it ought not to be.

At the Olivet Discourse, the disciples didn't even imagine that the curtain would be rent. It was only the four disciples in attendance. Peter, James, John, and Andrew. Whoever inserted the: "(Let The Reader Understand)", knew that the listeners in the first century would not be able to imagine our world as it is today. The printing press wouldn't be invented until the end of the middle ages, but the Bible didn't really get printed and distributed in big numbers until the USA got going. The only nation complete with a Bible Belt.

Even in the 30's and 40's and as recent as 1969 it would have been impossible to understand.

An example being prior to 1969, the private possession of pornography was NOT legal in the USA.

They're protesting the showing of a porno movie in this stock photo from May 31, 1980.

In 1987, the Supreme Court legalized hardcore pornography.

(Opened it's mouth to blaspheme God)​

And now it's streaming over the internet 24 hour a day.

But even those protesters from 1980 would probably find it hard to believe what we are used to today.

Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg announced on Twitter that he and his husband, Chasten Buttigieg, have welcomed twins into their family.

Pete Buttigieg shared a photo to Twitter of the couple holding the babies, named Penelope Rose and Joseph August.

“Chasten and I are beyond thankful for all the kind wishes since first sharing the news that we’re becoming parents,” he said. “We are delighted to welcome Penelope Rose and Joseph August Buttigieg to our family.”​

It's only in our time that the people reading these end time prophecies have a chance to understand.

Peaceful Sabbath.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

That's easy.

They didn't understand.

Matthew 24's "holy place", is the equivalent to Mark 13's "ought not to be".

Standing where it ought not to be.

At the Olivet Discourse, the disciples didn't even imagine that the curtain would be rent. It was only the four disciples in attendance. Peter, James, John, and Andrew. Whoever inserted the: "(Let The Reader Understand)", knew that the listeners in the first century would not be able to imagine our world as it is today. The printing press wouldn't be invented until the end of the middle ages, but the Bible didn't really get printed and distributed in big numbers until the USA got going. The only nation complete with a Bible Belt.

Even in the 30's and 40's and as recent as 1969 it would have been impossible to understand.

An example being prior to 1969, the private possession of pornography was NOT legal in the USA.

They're protesting the showing of a porno movie in this stock photo from May 31, 1980.

In 1987, the Supreme Court legalized hardcore pornography.

(Opened it's mouth to blaspheme God)​

And now it's streaming over the internet 24 hour a day.

But even those protesters from 1980 would probably find it hard to believe what we are used to today.

Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg announced on Twitter that he and his husband, Chasten Buttigieg, have welcomed twins into their family.​

​

Pete Buttigieg shared a photo to Twitter of the couple holding the babies, named Penelope Rose and Joseph August.​

​

“Chasten and I are beyond thankful for all the kind wishes since first sharing the news that we’re becoming parents,” he said. “We are delighted to welcome Penelope Rose and Joseph August Buttigieg to our family.”​

It's only in our time that the people reading these end time prophecies have a chance to understand.

Peaceful Sabbath.

Jesus said in the first verse of Revelation that it was written to them so that they would know (understand) what was about to take place. He wanted them to understand. They did.

 

[eddif]

Quite a trip.
A futurist does not ignore 70AD but looks for symbolism parallels to a future event.

The destruction in 70AD has a path of authority from heaven to accomplish the destructive force of the 70AD temple. Foreign kings were raised up to do the will of of God.

The future event of parallel destruction has to come from heaven, but with a more spiritual army. The future event is to destroy the temple inside saints minds. A temple but not one made of stone and timber but thoughts and theology.

The horns, thunders, kings, servants, Old Jerusalem, New Jerusalem, parallels , have to be established.

The key:
The word is a seed
The planter is Jesus (or those sent)
The ground is men’s hearts

70AD seems to be more about territory ad foreign advancement, but is it really?

The new ground is men’s hearts, (and minds), but the old ground was soil. Man was made from dust so that is not too hard. A medium of growth, but tares or wrong thoughts grow in different mediums.

70AD was more physical
But
The future is more about Matthew chapters
5,6,7 (abstract to some but spiritual reality to others)

God used ancient kings to work his will. 70AD existed.

The New Jerusalem of new hearts and minds is real. The attack by Satan is still to desecrate the new temple. The desire of Satan is still steal, kill, destroy, but different parallel methods.

I wonder about redneck theology at times. Oh well the disciples might have been from Galilee. Redneck territory of a time past.

eddif

 

[Consecrated Life]

Manifest that Jesus, having already made the disciples aware of His pending execution, and His future return it is only natural that after being informed of the Temples coming destruction the disciples first thought & hope was that this dramatic event would mark time of His return & that they would be there for His return.
A Perfectly understandable first impulsive reaction & hope on their part given their desire to be with Him above all else being what it was.
However against all their hopes Jesus has to break the news to them on the walk to the Mount Of Olives that it was not to be, that His return would be further into the future beyond their generation, and would include multiple events , not just the single event of the Temple's destruction.

We can know this discussion had already begun during the transit from Temple grounds to the Mt. of Olives because by the time they reach Mount of Olives instead of asking about the dramatic solitary event revealed to them, the Temple's destruction. the very first question from them is in regard to unspecified list of " these Things".

Mat 24:3
And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?

What are all these things,
No other event has been mentioned by Jesus at verse 24:3 save the single event of the Temple's destruction.
Nothing else, at least on record.
Obviously much inquiring minds want to know type discussion,that we are not privy too, took place between Jesus and His disciples on the walk they took from the Temple Mount to the Mount of Olives.
The disciples very first question on the Mount being of multiple events is clear indication that Jesus has already begun to break it down for them that His return will be at another time marked by multiple events having nothing to do with the Temple's destruction.
The disciples are not the generation that will be around for it.
Jesus then goes on to elaborate on the multiple future events that will precede His coming emphasizing that these
events will be witnessed by a single generation.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

Manifest that Jesus, having already made the disciples aware of His pending execution, and His future return it is only natural that after being informed of the Temples coming destruction the disciples first thought & hope was that this dramatic event would mark time of His return & that they would be there for His return.
A Perfectly understandable first impulsive reaction & hope on their part given their desire to be with Him above all else being what it was.
However against all their hopes Jesus has to break the news to them on the walk to the Mount Of Olives that it was not to be, that His return would be further into the future beyond their generation, and would include multiple events , not just the single event of the Temple's destruction.

We can know this discussion had already begun during the transit from Temple grounds to the Mt. of Olives because by the time they reach Mount of Olives instead of asking about the dramatic solitary event revealed to them, the Temple's destruction. the very first question from them is in regard to unspecified list of " these Things".

Mat 24:3
And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?

What are all these things,
No other event has been mentioned by Jesus at verse 24:3 save the single event of the Temple's destruction.
Nothing else, at least on record.
Obviously much inquiring minds want to know type discussion,that we are not privy too, took place between Jesus and His disciples on the walk they took from the Temple Mount to the Mount of Olives.
The disciples very first question on the Mount being of multiple events is clear indication that Jesus has already begun to break it down for them that His return will be at another time marked by multiple events having nothing to do with the Temple's destruction.
The disciples are not the generation that will be around for it.
Jesus then goes on to elaborate on the multiple future events that will precede His coming emphasizing that these
events will be witnessed by a single generation.

Surprisingly, we agree on a lot. The destruction of Jerusalem and his second are not together. On that we agree.

We disagree on the other events you see happening then. When Jesus starts talking about the second coming he clearly says there are no signs same as before the flood. The signs are all before the coming Judgement (“coming in the clouds”) and destruction. On this we disagree. In Matthew 24, there are no signs mentioned after verse 36. Those are connected with the fs of Jerusalem and the signs so the believers leave town. There’s no where to go to when Jesus comes again.

At least we can understand each other.

 

[Dave Watchman]

Jesus said in the first verse of Revelation that it was written to them so that they would know (understand) what was about to take place. He wanted them to understand. They did.

That was in 95AD.

So why would He have told them on Ascension Day, in 30AD, that it was not for them to know the times and seasons set in place by the father?

"He said to them, “It is not for you to know times or seasons that the Father has fixed by his own authority.​

We are in 2023 now.

Isaac Newton would have loved to see one of our days.

Peaceful Sabbath.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

That was in 95AD

No, that was in 60 something AD. The late date has many problems a big one being Jesus kept saying soon and near and not far off and so on and that they would understand. If it was for 2000+ years later, they did not at all understand. There are other problems such as John was told by Jesus that he would still be ministering and in 95AD the man could no longer walk or say anything but a few words together. In 60 something AD, he was sentenced to exile the same time Peter and Paul were executed, which fits. Who sentences a 95 year old man who cannot walk or talk to exile? Even futurists say that they cannot find evidence of great persecution in 95AD but it was very big in 60 something AD under Nero. When Nero died (persecution lasted the number of years the Bible predicts) the persecution ended.

.

So why would He have told them on Ascension Day, in 30AD, that it was not for them to know the times and seasons set in place by the father?

Because it was not for them to speculate about it and it was not what they imagined in any case. Clarity would come later and it did and they never had that theology again.

"He said to them, “It is not for you to know times or seasons that the Father has fixed by his own authority.​

We are in 2023 now.

Yes, it is not for us to know when Jesus is coming again.

Isaac Newton would have loved to see one of our days.

Probably. So would Faraday and a number of other devoted believers and scientists. Is there a point to this? Jesus is not coming soon and there won't be any signs in any case, just as in the days of Noah.

Peaceful Sabbath.

To you as well.

 

[eddif]

No, that was in 60 something AD. The late date has many problems a big one being Jesus kept saying soon and near and not far off and so on and that they would understand. If it was for 2000+ years later, they did not at all understand. There are other problems such as John was told by Jesus that he would still be ministering and in 95AD the man could no longer walk or say anything but a few words together. In 60 something AD, he was sentenced to exile the same time Peter and Paul were executed, which fits. Who sentences a 95 year old man who cannot walk or talk to exile? Even futurists say that they cannot find evidence of great persecution in 95AD but it was very big in 60 something AD under Nero. When Nero died (persecution lasted the number of years the Bible predicts) the persecution ended.

Because it was not for them to speculate about it and it was not what they imagined in any case. Clarity would come later and it did and they never had that theology again.

Yes, it is not for us to know when Jesus is coming again.

Probably. So would Faraday and a number of other devoted believers and scientists. Is there a point to this? Jesus is not coming soon and there won't be any signs in any case, just as in the days of Noah.

To you as well.

The planetary gearboxes just took on a new meaning. Epicyclic gear train also. Along with what is written in the heavens.

eddif

 

[ILoveYahweh]

I assume this is what you mean by the futurist interpretation of the book of Revelation?

The excerpt below: https://www.gotquestions.org/futurist-Revelation.html

The futurist interpretation of the book of Revelation is one of four approaches to understanding the prophecies of Revelation. The other three systems are the historicist, the preterist, and the spiritual (or idealist).

The basic premise of the futurist viewpoint is that the majority of the prophecies in Revelation still await a future, literal fulfillment. This view of interpreting Revelation is very popular today, particularly among dispensationalists. It is the method used by the authors of the bestselling Left Behind series. Those who hold this view generally believe that everything after Revelation 3 will be fulfilled in the future.

The futurist viewpoint often divides Revelation into three sections, which are defined in Revelation 1:19. There, the apostle John is instructed to “write, therefore, what you have seen, what is now and what will take place later.” Following this three-part outline, Revelation 1 contains John’s vision of the risen Christ and represents the past (“what you have seen”). Chapters 2 and 3, which contain the letters to the seven churches, describe the present (“what is now”). Finally, chapters 4–22 describe events in the future (“what will take place later”).

Dispensationalists generally believe that the rapture of the church takes place at the time of Revelation 4:1, after which comes the “what will take place later.” Revelation 4:1 marks the beginning of the tribulation, a seven-year period where God finishes His discipline of Israel and begins His judgment of the unbelieving world as described in Revelation 4–19. Some futurists place the rapture of the church at Revelation 19, at the time of Jesus’ second coming.

The futurist approach basically sees John’s vision as a series of chronological events, although some futurists see parallel or cyclical patterns in the visions of Revelation 4–19. The futurist interpretation lends itself to a more literal view than do the other interpretive systems, which tend to allegorize the events of Revelation. For example, Revelation 19:20 says, “The beast was captured, and with him the false prophet who had performed the miraculous signs on his behalf. . . . The two of them were thrown alive into the fiery lake of burning sulfur.” The futurist interpretation sees this as a prophecy that two evil individuals will face personal judgment from God. The spiritual interpretation, in contrast, simply sees it as a morality tale expressing an aspect of the age-long struggle between good and evil. The preterist view holds that this event has already occurred, sometime in the first century.

Critics of the futurist view sometimes accuse futurists of holding to a too literal interpretation and of not recognizing any symbolic meanings. However, futurists do recognize that some aspects of Revelation are symbolic. The description of Jesus returning with a “sharp sword” coming “out of his mouth” is obviously symbolic, yet it is a symbol with a literal interpretation—Jesus will return, and He will win the battle by the power of His word.

An error to avoid in the futurist interpretation of Revelation is that of becoming “newspaper theologians” who try to superimpose current events on the timeline of Revelation. This approach can lead to date-setting, if one is not careful. Sadly, many people have been influenced by such “prophecy experts” whose predictions fail to come true.

There are differing viewpoints concerning the end times among faithful, Bible-believing Christians. We believe that the futurist viewpoint of Revelation is the one that is most consistent with a literal interpretation of the Bible overall and the one that best acknowledges the book’s own claim to be prophecy (Revelation 22:7, 10). Whichever view one takes, all Christians should be preparing themselves to meet Jesus Christ and be waiting for His return (John 14:3).

 

[ILoveYahweh]

I assume this is what you mean by the futurist interpretation of the book of Revelation?

The excerpt below: https://www.gotquestions.org/futurist-Revelation.html

The futurist interpretation of the book of Revelation is one of four approaches to understanding the prophecies of Revelation. The other three systems are the historicist, the preterist, and the spiritual (or idealist).

The basic premise of the futurist viewpoint is that the majority of the prophecies in Revelation still await a future, literal fulfillment. This view of interpreting Revelation is very popular today, particularly among dispensationalists. It is the method used by the authors of the bestselling Left Behind series. Those who hold this view generally believe that everything after Revelation 3 will be fulfilled in the future.

The futurist viewpoint often divides Revelation into three sections, which are defined in Revelation 1:19. There, the apostle John is instructed to “write, therefore, what you have seen, what is now and what will take place later.” Following this three-part outline, Revelation 1 contains John’s vision of the risen Christ and represents the past (“what you have seen”). Chapters 2 and 3, which contain the letters to the seven churches, describe the present (“what is now”). Finally, chapters 4–22 describe events in the future (“what will take place later”).

Dispensationalists generally believe that the rapture of the church takes place at the time of Revelation 4:1, after which comes the “what will take place later.” Revelation 4:1 marks the beginning of the tribulation, a seven-year period where God finishes His discipline of Israel and begins His judgment of the unbelieving world as described in Revelation 4–19. Some futurists place the rapture of the church at Revelation 19, at the time of Jesus’ second coming.

The futurist approach basically sees John’s vision as a series of chronological events, although some futurists see parallel or cyclical patterns in the visions of Revelation 4–19. The futurist interpretation lends itself to a more literal view than do the other interpretive systems, which tend to allegorize the events of Revelation. For example, Revelation 19:20 says, “The beast was captured, and with him the false prophet who had performed the miraculous signs on his behalf. . . . The two of them were thrown alive into the fiery lake of burning sulfur.” The futurist interpretation sees this as a prophecy that two evil individuals will face personal judgment from God. The spiritual interpretation, in contrast, simply sees it as a morality tale expressing an aspect of the age-long struggle between good and evil. The preterist view holds that this event has already occurred, sometime in the first century.

Critics of the futurist view sometimes accuse futurists of holding to a too literal interpretation and of not recognizing any symbolic meanings. However, futurists do recognize that some aspects of Revelation are symbolic. The description of Jesus returning with a “sharp sword” coming “out of his mouth” is obviously symbolic, yet it is a symbol with a literal interpretation—Jesus will return, and He will win the battle by the power of His word.

An error to avoid in the futurist interpretation of Revelation is that of becoming “newspaper theologians” who try to superimpose current events on the timeline of Revelation. This approach can lead to date-setting, if one is not careful. Sadly, many people have been influenced by such “prophecy experts” whose predictions fail to come true.

There are differing viewpoints concerning the end times among faithful, Bible-believing Christians. We believe that the futurist viewpoint of Revelation is the one that is most consistent with a literal interpretation of the Bible overall and the one that best acknowledges the book’s own claim to be prophecy (Revelation 22:7, 10). Whichever view one takes, all Christians should be preparing themselves to meet Jesus Christ and be waiting for His return (John 14:3).

I do not think that the futurist interpretation of what is going to happen to the Third Temple in Jersaulem in the end times event have anything to do with the Second Temple In Jersaulem in the Old Roman Empire (which is already destroyed by the Roman in AD 70 in the Siege of Jerusalem [Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Jerusalem_(70_CE)]).

However, if you mean that the events that happen in Matthew 24 have a double fulfillment in the sense that the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 cast a foreshadowing of a much worse event that is going to happen in the End Times (which is to say that the Antichrist will march into Jerusalem and plunder the valuable goods in the Third Temple). Then I would wholeheartedly concur with your statement. Am I right about understanding what you are trying to say?

God Bless!

 

[Dorothy Mae]

I do not think that the futurist interpretation of what is going to happen to the Third Temple in Jersaulem in the end times event have anything to do with the Second Temple In Jersaulem in the Old Roman Empire (which is already destroyed by the Roman in AD 70 in the Siege of Jerusalem [Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Jerusalem_(70_CE)]).

However, if you mean that the events that happen in Matthew 24 have a double fulfillment in the sense that the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 cast a foreshadowing of a much worse event that is going to happen in the End Times (which is to say that the Antichrist will march into Jerusalem and plunder the valuable goods in the Third Temple). Then I would wholeheartedly concur with your statement. Am I right about understanding what you are trying to say?

God Bless!

Thanks for answering. That is how you see it which was what I was curious about. You see it as a foreshadowing of your view of future events. Another poster agrees with you.

That isn’t my view but I feel it unfair to ask others their opinion and then attack that option someone was kind enough to share. I do like to understand what others think and was not asking as a trap.

So thank you!