Day of the Lord

[wonderkins]

That obviously would be part of it, yet not all of it. Why are you not grasping, that if Jesus first said until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled, then later says this generation shall not pass, till all be fulfilled, that this is including the times of the Gentiles being fulfilled first? What part of 'all' in Luke 21:32 is difficult to understand? How can it not be including everything He has already predicted before having said that? Did He or did He not say what He did in verse 24 before He said what He said in verse 32?

This is what He said in verse 24---till the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.

This is what He said in verse 32---This generation shall not pass away, till all be fulfilled. If that does not also include what He said in verse 24, then Jesus lied to us in that case. Impossible that Jesus lied to us. It is one's interpretation that is making Him out to be a liar.

Ok so how did you come to the conclusion that the fulfillment of the gentiles is at the end of history? Why can't it be the destruction of the temple, when sacrifice was put to an end? Israel was put off and gentiles were brought in. Israel was trampled by the gentiles (Rome).

Also where do you get that Rome surrounding Jerusalem, just like Jesus said, is only a partial fulfillment? He says when you Jerusalem surrounded...all you in judea flee to the mountains. That happened. Rome surrounded the city. Then they dispersed for a short time, in which the Christians fled to the city of pella.

I'd like to see you interact with history more.

I'm not grasping what you're saying because I don't feel that the Bible agrees. You're adding 2000+ years when the Bible doesn't.

 

[claninja]

40 years later would have been future to them. Wouldn't what Jesus said to them be useless information if he meant 2000+ years in the future? Jesus said that generation wouldn't pass away until all those things took place. He also told them before that some standing in front of him would not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.

Agreed

 

[Spiritual Jew]

The fact that in every PAST Day of the Lord event, the OT prophets also used the same language indicating they would be events that would bring complete, global, even universal, destruction, is what prevents me from taking the NT passages you cite to mean anything different.

It's all about context. Those verses you're referencing are within books and passages that contain a lot of other symbolic text as well. But, there is no indication whatsoever that Peter in 2 Peter 3:10-12 or Paul in 1 Thess 5:2-3 are using anything but literal, straightforward language to describe what will happen on the future day of the Lord that is "in keeping with his promise" (2 Peter 3:13) which is the promise of Christ's second coming.

The OT prophets were not referring to the second coming of Christ in the passages you're talking about, but 2 Peter 3:10-13 and 1 Thess 5:2-3 do relate directly to the second coming of Christ.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Rubbish.
Revelation 6:12-17 and Revelation 19:11:21 are two different events, several years apart.

Rubbish. When will "the wrath of the Lamb" referenced in Rev 6:12-17 occur? When Christ returns (2 Thess 1:7-10). What does Revelation 19:11-21 portray? The return of Christ. They are clearly the same event.

The great and terrible Day of the Lord's fiery wrath and then after all the Prophesied things between, the glorious Return, where Jesus only kills the armies of the 'beast', and then imprisons Satan.
There is plenty of mention of the forthcoming Sixth Seal worldwide disaster; Luke 21:25-26 and then, that is some time after that disaster: Jesus will Return. Luke 21:27

Luke 21:28 exhorts us to stand firm thru it all, trusting in the Lord's protection and eventual Redemption.

We don't need to stand firm through the day of the Lord, which is the day Christ returns. We will be changed to have immortal bodies and will be caught up to meet Him "in the air" on that day (1 Thess 4:14-17).

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Since we are now on the same page, in regards to some of this, here's a question then. Why is it that Matthew 24:29 doesn't have to be involving literal events, but that verses 15-26 have to be? Because, after all, if those who interpret verses 15-26 to be involving the first century and what happened in 70 AD, obviously, that involved literal events and a literal temple.

The holy place mentioned in this passage, I do take to be meaning a temple. A literal temple, though? Especially if it is involving the one recorded in 2 Thessalonians 2:4, which I myself take it to be involving, and that I don't take that temple to be meaning a literal temple, such as the 2nd temple, nor a rebuilt one in the future.

Matthew 24:1 Jesus left the temple and was walking away when his disciples came up to him to call his attention to its buildings. 2 “Do you see all these things?” he asked. “Truly I tell you, not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down.” 3 As Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately. “Tell us,” they said, “when will this happen, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?”

What is your understanding of the first question the disciples asked after Jesus told them that the literal, physical temple buildings standing at that time would be destroyed? They asked "when will this happen?". What do you think they were asking about with that particular question?

 

[rwb]

Ok so how did you come to the conclusion that the fulfillment of the gentiles is at the end of history? Why can't it be the destruction of the temple, when sacrifice was put to an end? Israel was put off and gentiles were brought in. Israel was trampled by the gentiles (Rome).

Also where do you get that Rome surrounding Jerusalem, just like Jesus said, is only a partial fulfillment? He says when you Jerusalem surrounded...all you in judea flee to the mountains. That happened. Rome surrounded the city. Then they dispersed for a short time, in which the Christians fled to the city of pella.

I'd like to see you interact with history more.

I'm not grasping what you're saying because I don't feel that the Bible agrees. You're adding 2000+ years when the Bible doesn't.

Again, I caution you to remember Christ is speaking to Messianic Jews, you seem to be missing the greater fulfillment of the times of the Gentiles being fulfilled. It's true Gentiles (Roman Army) did trample Jerusalem, but that is only part of the prophetic words of Christ.

Luke 21:24-28 (KJV) And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled. 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; 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. And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh.

Paul also gives us prophesy for the times of the Gentiles being fulfilled. Paul shows us that when the fullness of the Gentiles are grafted into the same good olive tree of faithful Israel, that "all Israel shall be saved". This cannot be ethnic people because Gentiles are grafted in with them.

Romans 11:25-27 (KJV) For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in. And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.

So Gentiles will be given time to come into the Kingdom through the Seed (Christ) of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and when the last Gentile is eternally saved the Lord (Deliverer) will come out of Zion from above (Rev 14:1) to turn away ungodliness from Jacob, representing all people of faith for the Covenant of grace through faith is unto them because Christ shall take away their sins. Not an ethnic people, but all people of faith.

To bring it back to the topic this will all come to pass in this age/era/time/ Day of the Lord that began with the birth of Christ and will be finished when the last trumpet begins to sound that time shall be no more. Then Christ will return again on His final Day of the Lord as the prophets foretell.

 

[DavidPT]

Rubbish. When will "the wrath of the Lamb" referenced in Rev 6:12-17 occur? When Christ returns (2 Thess 1:7-10). What does Revelation 19:11-21 portray? The return of Christ. They are clearly the same event.

We don't need to stand firm through the day of the Lord, which is the day Christ returns. We will be changed to have immortal bodies and will be caught up to meet Him "in the air" on that day (1 Thess 4:14-17).

Something to keep in mind, though. If the day of the Lord involves the last 7 vials of wrath, like I'm assuming it is, since the DOTL obviously involves His wrath, note what some of the following says.

Revelation 16:10 And the fifth angel poured out his vial upon the seat of the beast; and his kingdom was full of darkness; and they gnawed their tongues for pain,
11 And blasphemed the God of heaven because of their pains and their sores, and repented not of their deeds.


Even though they don't repent of their deeds, why even mention it unless it's at least an option at the time? The point being, if the day of the Lord involves the 7 vials of wrath, would repenting of one's deeds be an option before He bodily returns, or after He bodily returns?

This is what is recorded in Revelation 15 and 16.

Revelation 15:6 And the seven angels came out of the temple, having the seven plagues, clothed in pure and white linen, and having their breasts girded with golden girdles.
7 And one of the four beasts gave unto the seven angels seven golden vials full of the wrath of God, who liveth for ever and ever.
8 And the temple was filled with smoke from the glory of God, and from his power; and no man was able to enter into the temple, till the seven plagues of the seven angels were fulfilled.
Revelation 16:1 And I heard a great voice out of the temple saying to the seven angels, Go your ways, and pour out the vials of the wrath of God upon the earth.

This is what is recorded in Revelation 6.

Revelation 6:16 And said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb:
17 For the great day of his wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand?


If it is not until this point in time that the great day of his wrath is come, but that not of the vials of wrath are meaning during this time, that some of them are meaning before the 6th seal, how is that even reasonable? The events recorded in the 5th seal obviously precede the events recorded in the 6th seal, and that we are told it is not yet time for His vengeance. Would not the vials of wrath, every single one of them be involving His vengeance?

 

[Spiritual Jew]

While I fully agree with this myself, how is this any different than what rwb is doing? He too has it being a long period of time, but not a literal thousand years, but 2000 years, maybe even more, depending on when Christ returns. Which then puzzles me as to why he agreed with your post when you stated the above? I don't care if he agrees with you. I won't be losing sleep over it or anything, it's that it puzzles me as to why since he is doing the same thing himself, but in a different way. IOW, how can he fault these Premils in question for doing the same thing he is doing, equating the day of the Lord with that of the thousand years?

Why are you asking me this? Ask him. I don't speak for him.

 

[keras]

When will "the wrath of the Lamb" referenced in Rev 6:12-17 occur? When Christ returns (2 Thess 1:7-10). What does Revelation 19:11-21 portray? The return of Christ. They are clearly the same event.

Two different events. Proved by how in 2 Thess 1:10 the Lord is revealed only to His own. He stands on Mt Zion - Revelation 14:1
At the glorious Return, Jesus is seen by all peoples. Revelation 1:7

We don't need to stand firm through the day of the Lord, which is the day Christ returns. We will be changed to have immortal bodies and will be caught up to meet Him "in the air" on that day (1 Thess 4:14-17).

This belief is serious and gross error. We must stand firm in our faith on the terrible Day the Lord destroys His enemies. Zephaniah 2:3, 1 Corinthians 10:13 The Sixth Seal, years before the Return.
Nowhere does 1 Thess 4 say people will receive immortality when Jesus Returns.
Revelation 20:4 is undeniable; ONLY the GT martyrs will be resurrected then.

 

[parousia70]

It's of great importance because it tells us the creation story of ALL humankind.

Ahhh ok, so it's the Exodus story you believe is of no value to the Chuch then?

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Something to keep in mind, though. If the day of the Lord involves the last 7 vials of wrath, like I'm assuming it is, since the DOTL obviously involves His wrath, note what some of the following says.

I see the day of the Lord as being His final wrath which will literally impact the entire earth and not all of His wrath. So, I see no basis for concluding that the day of the Lord involves all seven vials. I would see it as involving just the seventh vial. As you should know by now, I believe that the seals, trumpets and vials are all generally parallel to each other. So, I don't see all seven vials as following the seventh trumpet like you do.

 

[parousia70]

Obviously, that would have to include the following taking place first, before this generation meant passes away.

Luke 21:24 And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.
.....
Therefore, based on these things alone, the fact the times of the Gentiles are still ongoing, thus not fulfilled yet

The "times of Gentile Trampling of the City" were prophesied to END 42 Months after they began.

Revelation 11:2
But leave out the court which is outside the temple, and do not measure it, for it has been given to the Gentiles. And they will tread the holy city underfoot for forty-two months.

Revelation 11:2 is entirely parallel to Luke 21:24

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Two different events. Proved by how in 2 Thess 1:10 the Lord is revealed only to His own.

Did you miss the part about Him destroying His enemies at that same time? It's not two different events.

This belief is serious and gross error.

Rubbish.

We must stand firm in our faith on the terrible Day the Lord destroys His enemies. Zephaniah 2:3, 1 Corinthians 10:13 The Sixth Seal, years before the Return.
Nowhere does 1 Thess 4 say people will receive immortality when Jesus Returns.
Revelation 20:4 is undeniable; ONLY the GT martyrs will be resurrected then.

Rubbish. We will all be changed to have immortal bodies on the day of the Lord when Christ returns. As can be VERY clearly seen in 2 Peter 3:10-12, there will be no mortal survivors on the day of the Lord when Christ destroys all of His enemies.

 

[rwb]

Ahhh ok, so it's the Exodus story you believe is of no value to the Chuch then?

Since the Old Covenant people in the wilderness were the Church on earth at that time, of course it makes sense for the Church of the New Covenant to understand what was written to be an example for the New Covenant Church. The Old Covenant Church is an example of unbelief that we, from the New Covenant, would do well to learn from them.

Acts 7:38 (KJV) This is he, that was in the church in the wilderness with the angel which spake to him in the mount Sina, and with our fathers: who received the lively oracles to give unto us:

Hebrews 4:2-11 (KJV) For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it. For we which have believed do enter into rest, as he said, As I have sworn in my wrath, if they shall enter into my rest: although the works were finished from the foundation of the world. For he spake in a certain place of the seventh day on this wise, And God did rest the seventh day from all his works. And in this place again, If they shall enter into my rest. Seeing therefore it remaineth that some must enter therein, and they to whom it was first preached entered not in because of unbelief: Again, he limiteth a certain day, saying in David, To day, after so long a time; as it is said, To day if ye will hear his voice, harden not your hearts. For if Jesus had given them rest, then would he not afterward have spoken of another day. There remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God. For he that is entered into his rest, he also hath ceased from his own works, as God did from his. Let us labour therefore to enter into that rest, lest any man fall after the same example of unbelief.

 

[rwb]

The "times of Gentile Trampling of the City" were prophesied to END 42 Months after they began.

Revelation 11:2
But leave out the court which is outside the temple, and do not measure it, for it has been given to the Gentiles. And they will tread the holy city underfoot for forty-two months.

Revelation 11:2 is entirely parallel to Luke 21:24

You're assuming the temple John was instructed to measure is the literal temple in Jerusalem. Further you are assuming the time of the Gentiles being fulfilled as recorded in the Gospel of Luke is forty-two months. Your final assumption is that the 42 months the Gentiles tread down the Holy City are consecutive. The problem for you is that Paul in Romans 11 says the fullness of the Gentiles coming into Israel of faith is when Christ the Deliverer will come out of Zion, and in this manner "all Israel shall be saved". That means the time of the Gentiles is the whole New Covenant Gospel age/era/time Day of the Lord. To this day Gentiles are still trodding down on Jerusalem. It's lasted far more than 42 literal months.

Your assumptions I believe hinges on the date of the writing of the Revelation, which remains a very weak argument.

 

[parousia70]

It's all about context. Those verses you're referencing are within books and passages that contain a lot of other symbolic text as well. But, there is no indication whatsoever that Peter in 2 Peter 3:10-12 or Paul in 1 Thess 5:2-3 are using anything but literal, straightforward language to describe what will happen on the future day of the Lord that is "in keeping with his promise" (2 Peter 3:13) which is the promise of Christ's second coming.

And they were speaking to Jews who lived their whole lives studying and understanding those OT scriptures for what they meant, and no doubt IMMEDIATELY recognized that language for what it was when the apostles used it as well. To suggest that their audience would have applied any other meaning to that language when they heard the apsotles use it, is just to far fetched for me to buy into, as it completely ignores the precident that they ALL understood.

The OT prophets were not referring to the second coming of Christ in the passages you're talking about, but 2 Peter 3:10-13 and 1 Thess 5:2-3 do relate directly to the second coming of Christ.

Yep and both the OT Prophets and NT Apostles spoke of God Coming in Judgment. The Difference is the NT apostles, in using that familiar OT imagry that their audience immediately understood, were affirming and asserting that Christ was Equal with the Father.

The Jews understood that God governs human events and brings calamities upon nations by coming to earth and personally visiting those judgments upon them. It was through the eyes of faith that Elisha saw God's warring chariots of fire all around during a human battle (2 Kings 6:17). It was through the eyes of faith that Gideon raised his own sword and shouted "the Sword of the Lord" (Judges 7:20-22). It was with the eyes of faith that King David could say of his defeat of King Saul:
"Smoke went up out of [God's] nostrils, fire from His mouth devoured; coals were kindled by it. He bowed the heavens also, and came down with thick darkness under His feet. And He rode on a cherub and flew; And He appeared on the wings of the wind. And He made darkness canopies around Him, a mass of waters, thick clouds of the sky. From the brightness before Him coals of fire were kindled. The LORD thundered from heaven, and the Most High uttered His voice. And He sent out arrows, and scattered them, Lightning, and routed them. Then the channels of the sea appeared, the foundations of the world were laid bare by the rebuke of the LORD, at the blast of the breath of His nostrils." (2 Sam 22:8-16)

Likewise it was with the eyes of faith that Jesus labeled the destruction of their country the "coming of the Lord of the Vineyard" and "the Stone which crushes them" (Matt 21:40-45). You see, the Jews understood the rise and fall of nations and empires as God's doing, and that the destruction of their City and temple meant God's personal visitation in Judgment upon them. In none of these instances was a physical incarnation required. And yet in all of these instances God indeed came to earth in Judgment and waged war and did countless deeds, each time melting the earth, destroying the heavens, causing the sun and moon to go dark and the stars to fall, etc, etc....

Jesus, the Apostles and their Flocks all understood that the impending doom of AD70 would be no different, save the fact that Jesus and the Apsotles all taught that it would be Jesus Coming in that SAME MANNER of Judgment this time, in the Glory of the Father, as He and the Father are ONE.

 

[DavidPT]

Ok so how did you come to the conclusion that the fulfillment of the gentiles is at the end of history? Why can't it be the destruction of the temple, when sacrifice was put to an end? Israel was put off and gentiles were brought in. Israel was trampled by the gentiles (Rome).

Also where do you get that Rome surrounding Jerusalem, just like Jesus said, is only a partial fulfillment? He says when you Jerusalem surrounded...all you in judea flee to the mountains. That happened. Rome surrounded the city. Then they dispersed for a short time, in which the Christians fled to the city of pella.

I'd like to see you interact with history more.

I'm not grasping what you're saying because I don't feel that the Bible agrees. You're adding 2000+ years when the Bible doesn't.

Luke 21:24 And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.


Let's do some comparing with the following in Revelation.

Revelation 11:1 And there was given me a reed like unto a rod: and the angel stood, saying, Rise, and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them that worship therein.
2 But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months.

Verse 2 obviously connects with Revelation 13, and that the 42 months meant here are meaning the 42 months recorded in Revelation 13:5. Which then tells us that until the beast is no longer reigning 42 months, we are still in the times of the Gentiles in the meantime. The question then is, what happened leading up to 70 AD and 70 AD itself, does it involve anything recorded in Revelation 13? If yes, in what way? If no, how can that not mean the times of Gentiles haven't been fulfilled yet, meaning we are still in those times?

Even though I'm Premil, and that I used to interpret some of these things differently some years back, such as, I took verse 1 to be involving a literal temple, not the 2nd temple, but a rebuilt one in the future, but no longer do once I finally realized---and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles--is meaning in an ongoing manner, but not a literal manner involving the literal city in the middle east, therefore, the times of the Gentiles has to be involving the entire NT church age where in the final days of this age it will be involving what is recorded in Revelation 13, which is involving what is recorded in Revelation 11:2, which is some of what this in Luke 21:24 is involving---and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.


If you can show, thus prove otherwise, that the times of the Gentiles have already been fulfilled, and that it is undeniable proof, I will then at least reconsider what I'm arguing, that the times of the Gentiles haven't been entirely fulfilled yet, therefore, neither has this generation passed away yet since it can't pass away until all is fulfilled first, where I take that to mean everything Jesus predicted before He even said that in Luke 21:32.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

And they were speaking to Jews who lived their whole lives studying and understanding those OT scriptures for what they meant, and no doubt IMMEDIATELY recognized that language for what it was when the apostles used it as well. To suggest that their audience would have applied any other meaning to that language when the apsotles used it is just to far fetched for me.

Are you looking at the text carefully in context or just making assumptions?

Look at this carefully:

2 Peter 3:3 Above all, you must understand that in the last days scoffers will come, scoffing and following their own evil desires. 4 They will say, “Where is this ‘coming’ he promised? Ever since our ancestors died, everything goes on as it has since the beginning of creation.” 5 But they deliberately forget that long ago by God’s word the heavens came into being and the earth was formed out of water and by water. 6 By these waters also the world of that time was deluged and destroyed. 7 By the same word the present heavens and earth are reserved for fire, being kept for the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly.

Is any of this symbolic? No. There is no indication whatsoever that any of this is not literal. Peter made reference to last days scoffers who ignorantly scoff at the second coming. They think He's not coming and they therefore don't think any wrath is coming their way. But, Peter pointed out how they are ignorant and "deliberately forget" that God once destroyed the world with flood waters (obviously in Noah's day).

After Peter pointed that out he then said "by the same word the present heavens and earth are reserved for fire". Was Peter directly comparing two events while describing one symbolically and one literally? No. Why would he do that? No, he was comparing two similar events. That's why he side in verse 7 "by the same word..." to make it clear that he was saying just as the one event occurred in the past, a similar event will occur in the future. So, he was saying that just as the Lord destroyed the world with water in the past, He will destroy it with fire in the future. People like those scoffers are ignorant about this and will be caught completely by surprise when it happens unexpectedly "like a thief in the night". And Peter goes on to describe the fiery destruction he referenced in verse 7 verses 10-12. There is no reason whatsoever to not take verse 7 and verses 10-12 literally since there is no indication whatsoever in the text that it's anything but literal.

God is not going to put up with this evil world forever. He is going to burn it up when Christ returns and make everything new with the perfect, eternal new heavens and new earth. That is what we are looking forward to in fulfillment of the promise of the second coming of Christ, according to Peter in 2 Peter 3:13.

Yep and both the OT Prophets and NT Apostles spoke of God Coming in Judgment. The Difference is the NT apostles, in using that familiar OT imagry that their audience immediately understood, were affirming and asserting that Christ was Equal with the Father.

The Jews understood that God governs human events and brings calamities upon nations by coming to earth and personally visiting those judgments upon them. It was through the eyes of faith that Elisha saw God's warring chariots of fire all around during a human battle (2 Kings 6:17). It was through the eyes of faith that Gideon raised his own sword and shouted "the Sword of the Lord" (Judges 7:20-22). It was with the eyes of faith that King David could say of his defeat of King Saul:
"Smoke went up out of [God's] nostrils, fire from His mouth devoured; coals were kindled by it. He bowed the heavens also, and came down with thick darkness under His feet. And He rode on a cherub and flew; And He appeared on the wings of the wind. And He made darkness canopies around Him, a mass of waters, thick clouds of the sky. From the brightness before Him coals of fire were kindled. The LORD thundered from heaven, and the Most High uttered His voice. And He sent out arrows, and scattered them, Lightning, and routed them. Then the channels of the sea appeared, the foundations of the world were laid bare by the rebuke of the LORD, at the blast of the breath of His nostrils." (2 Sam 22:8-16)

Likewise it was with the eyes of faith that Jesus labeled the destruction of their country the "coming of the Lord of the Vineyard" and "the Stone which crushes them" (Matt 21:40-45). You see, the Jews understood the rise and fall of nations and empires as God's doing. In none of these instances was a physical incarnation required. And yet in all of these instances God indeed came to earth in Judgment and waged war and did countless deeds.

AD 70 was no different, save the fact that Jesus and the Apsotles all taught that it would be Jesus Coming in Judgment this time, as He and the Father are ONE.

No, they never taught that it was the coming of Jesus that would result in the destruction that occurred in 70 AD. You are trying to change text that refers to the Father coming in judgment to Jesus instead. Yes, Jesus is God, but He is not the Father. He is the Son. So, I'm not buying any of this that you're saying here.

 

[DavidPT]

You're assuming the temple John was instructed to measure is the literal temple in Jerusalem. Further you are assuming the time of the Gentiles being fulfilled as recorded in the Gospel of Luke is forty-two months. Your final assumption is that the 42 months the Gentiles tread down the Holy City are consecutive. The problem for you is that Paul in Romans 11 says the fullness of the Gentiles coming into Israel of faith is when Christ the Deliverer will come out of Zion, and in this manner "all Israel shall be saved". That means the time of the Gentiles is the whole New Covenant Gospel age/era/time Day of the Lord. To this day Gentiles are still trodding down on Jerusalem. It's lasted far more than 42 literal months.

Your assumptions I believe hinders on the date of the writing of the Revelation, which remains a very weak argument.

I was almost ready to press the agree button until I noticed the part about the day of the Lord meaning the entire Gospel age, that you keep insisting is fact. If you are correct about that, I'm simply not seeing it no matter how many different ways you might be trying to explain it.

As to the 42 months, I haven't fully made up my mind if literal or not. One thing I often consider, Jesus' ministry was apparently a literal 42 months. And that I take the 42 months recorded in Revelation 13:5 to be the time of the beast's ministry, so to speak, the fact 2 Thessalonians 2:4 has him proclaiming to be God. Therefore, if Jesus' ministry involved a literal 42 months, why wouldn't the beast's as well? Maybe thinking of the 42 month reign of the beast as a ministry of sorts, is not valid way of looking at it, yet that's all I could think of off hand and that I then compared it with a literal 42 months allotted to Christ at the time. Thus, why was Jesus' 42 months a literal 42 months, but that the beast's 42 months aren't?

 

[Spiritual Jew]

The "times of Gentile Trampling of the City" were prophesied to END 42 Months after they began.

Revelation 11:2
But leave out the court which is outside the temple, and do not measure it, for it has been given to the Gentiles. And they will tread the holy city underfoot for forty-two months.

Revelation 11:2 is entirely parallel to Luke 21:24

I believe it's a mistake to interpret the 42 months literally. Why can you discern that the thousand years is not a literal thousand years, but then you insist that the 42 months is a literal 42 months? I don't believe any of the time periods given in the book of Revelation are meant to be taken literally.