Amillennialists...Here's a chance to state your case.

It did happen.....but I cannot address everything at once so it will have to wait.

Lets see if I can try to make it easy

1. Destruction of a temple. It means you destroy it, Tear it down, or as jesus said, No stone will be left

2. Abomination of desolation. A hebrew term were an idol or unclean things is placed inside a holy place to defile the temple or make it unclean, it is used to humiliate a religion of the people you have conquered. You do not tear the temple down, because it defeats the purpose of the abomination. You do it, and make the whole city or place you defeated look in shame. (Antiochus epiphanies did this when they punished isreal for disobedience, and seeing their temple dafaced like that led to the macabean revolt. History proves this. He did not destroy the temple, it was still standing when Christ walked the earth.

They are two events.

Titus destroyed the temple in AD 70


The future prince will bring an end to sacrifice and burnt offering by making the holy place unclean, with an idol (abomination which makes desolate)

Again, How? They would have taken many years (have) to even be possible

I believe the birth pangs are happening now. Look at the exponential severity of storms, or earthquakes, of disease and scientists are saying within 50 years. The earth will not have enough capacity to feed all the people. Meaning hunger will grow to an all-time high.

Now you see disagreeing can be fun.

Okay...late but will pick up again!!

Lol,,

It can, But it can also be frustrating..

I hope to see you bro on the way up. Don't be late. LOLOLOL

When I heard R.C. Sproul speak on how the futurist ultimately questions the credibility of Christ, I really was just stopped in my tracks...what an "aha" moment.

Jesus very clearly tells his disciples a specific time "this generation" 40 years, and then we deny His plain words to make it fit a man made schema, we do a terrible disservice to the credibilty of scripture, Christians and ultimately make Jesus a false prophet.

R. C. Sproul speaks to this so well and with such knowledge and heart.

Well worth 23 minutes.

Good, we'll try this question again...

I am assuming you believe all prophecies were fulfilled in 70 AD.


Zechariah 14:2-4 KJV
[2] For I will gather all nations against Jerusalem to battle; and the city shall be taken, and the houses rifled, and the women ravished; and half of the city shall go forth into captivity, and the residue of the people shall not be cut off from the city. [3] Then shall the Lord go forth, and fight against those nations, as when he fought in the day of battle. [4] And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east, and the mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a very great valley; and half of the mountain shall remove toward the north, and half of it toward the south.

How could it be that the Lord goes forth and fights but apparently loses to the Roman armies in 70 AD?

Then shall the Lord go forth, and fight against those nations, as when he fought in the day of battle

When the disciples asked Him the question(s) they did in Matthew 24:3 (re: "the end [singular] of the age [singular]"), it was BASED ON what He had ALREADY spoken to them about in Matthew 13:[24],30,39,40,49-50 (when the angels will "REAP" ["WHEAT harvest"])

… the problem comes when ppl mistake the phrase [used there] "the kingdom of the heavens" to be [incorrectly] meaning "UP IN Heaven" (it's not that). What they understood correctly, is that "the age [singular] to come" (Matt12:32) FOLLOWS "the end [singular] of the age [singular]" (and the word "age [singular]" is always used in connection to "time/history" on the earth [in contrast to the phrase "the ages [plural] of the ages [plural]" which we call "eternity/the-eternal-state/forever"]) [they did NOT YET understand the intervening "this present age [singular]" spoken of in the later epistles];

...so "the kingdom of the heavens" = "the promised and prophesied EARTHLY Millennial Kingdom, commencing upon His "RETURN" to the earth [His VISIBLE manifestation to the earth, and involves a specific, limited time period LEADING UP TO that], in that Matt13:[24],30,39,40,49-50 passage, upon which their QUESTION to Jesus in the LATER Matt24:3 (Olivet Discourse) passage (and His response follows on from there, in both chpts 24-25)

III. Biblical Millennialism can be summed up as follows:
1. The "millennium" the figurative amount of time between the first and second comings of Jesus Christ (Rev 1:1 c/w Rev 20:4 c/w Psa 50:10).
2. Jesus bound Satan at His first coming (Rev 20:1-3 c/w Col 2:15 c/w Mat 12:29).
3. The kingdom of God in which the saints reign with Christ during "the millennium" is the New Testament local church (Dan 2:44 c/w Mat 4:17 c/w Mar 1:14-15 c/w Luk 16:16 c/w Luk 7:29-30 c/w Mat 21:31-32 c/w Luk 22:29-30 c/w Heb 12:28).
4. The "church age" is the last age and will last until the last day of time (Heb 1:2 c/w 1Jo 2:18 c/w Heb 9:26 c/w Eph 3:21).
5. The saints will experience tribulation throughout "the millennium" (Joh 16:33 c/w Act 14:22 c/w 2Ti 3:12).
6. The tribulation will become more intense at the end when Satan is loosed for a little season (Rev 20:3,7-9).
7. The second coming of Christ will happen on the last day, at which time He will:
A. return to earth in the clouds (Mat 24:30 c/w 1Th 4:16).
B. resurrect the dead, of both righteous and the wicked, on the LAST DAY (1Th 4:16-17 c/w 1Co 15:52 c/w Act 24:15 c/w Joh 5:28-29 c/w Joh 6:39,40,44,54; Joh 11:24).
C. deliver up his kingdom to God by gathering His elect from the four winds of the earth to meet him in the air (1Th 4:16-17 c/w Mat 24:30-31 c/w 1Co 15:24).
D. destroy the devil and his armies who are gathered to make war with Him and His saints (Rev 19:19-21 c/w Rev 20:7-10).
E. destroy the heavens and the earth (Rev 20:11 c/w 2Pe 3:10-12).
F. judge the wicked and cast them into the lake of fire (Rev 20:11-15 c/w Mat 25:31-46 c/w 2Th 1:7-9).
G. create new heavens and a new earth (Rev 21:1-2 c/w 2Pe 3:13).

source

I am not affliated with this church in no way. Just posted this outline from there.

I think the destruction of the temple and the end of the old covenant age is often downplayed as to its effect on the nation.

Kenneth Gentry has some interesting comments:

“In essence the temple itself is a symbol: it symbolizes the covenantal relationship of God with His people. The heart of the covenant appears in the most important promise: ‘I will be your God, you will be my people. The temple is the special place where God dwells among His people.”

“The significance of the collapse of Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple in AD 70 is little appreciated by modern Christians. But, AD 70 effectively closes out the old, typological era and removes a major hindrance to the spread of the Christian faith.”

I've heard his talk (in this vid) before.

The thing is, it seems to me that those who make this argument always seem to talk out of both sides of their mouths (no offense). I mean, they first of all misapply the "but of that day and hour knoweth no man [not even Jesus Himself, per Mk13:32]" (to incorrectly be referring to "the Rapture" [and to wrongly mean "no one CAN/WILL EVER know!"]) and yet at the same time say that He was telling them "when" (based on not grasping the SEQUENCE issues I mentioned before, as well as disregarding the placement of the specific wording in Lk21:32 "ALL THESE THINGS" to necessarily INCLUDE what v.24 had just stated [and involves, altogether! "and they shall be led away captive into all the nations" etc...(and that fact that "the beginning of birth pangs" FOLLOW the 70ad events, according to Lk21:12's words! )]).




[besides, who cares what Bertrand Russell thinks... or any other person who disbelieves Jesus' miracles, and so forth Really?? LAME point, IMO... lol]

...ran outta "edit time" again (I would change a cpl words, to be more precise, sry 'bout my flubs above ^ lol )

We believers harm the credibility of scripture on any level it is not a lame point. ....imho

And they did....reference to the end of the Mosaic Age...this is the Christian Age

It's not a lame point. He's using Russell as a well known example of this kind of criticism.

But I'm saying that it does NOT harm the credibility of scripture to point out that Jesus' own wording "ALL" in verse 32 necessarily INCLUDES "ALL" of what was just stated in v.24 ("...and they shall be led away captive into all the nations: AND Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles UNTIL the TIMES of the Gentiles be fulfilled" [which started in 606bc with Neb's "statue/image" with Neb as "head of gold" ("Gentile domination over Israel") and which is distinct from "the FULNESS of the Gentiles" in Rom11:25]).



As I see it, it is no different from defending "OSAS/eternal security" from those who believe they see IN SCRIPTURE reasons to disbelieve that... (because of not grasping context, sequence, definitions, and so forth...)