true for antichrist, but they are more specific about son of perdition/man of sin. i dont use the term antichrist much, because it's not very accurate.
The bits in Daniel seem to be more of hints about the son of perdition, an archetype. But i dont think the A of D is over with. Titus didn't defile the temple, they destroyed it by accident, it burnt down and they had to prise the stones apart to get the gold.
Antiochus was the main character who defiled the temple. I still think that them giving Obama the Nobel peace prize for doing nothing, exactly 3.5 years to the day, before March 22nd, is not another coincidence.
it confirms that there is something to the Daniel Timeline, even if it's not a replay of 167 BC.. word for word, which is what people are looking for.
Hi, this is a response to Bible 2 that tried to make AD70 irrelevant by playing semantic games over 'building' verses temple, so please excuse any 'accusations' here because they are not addressed to you but Bible2.
Bible2
3 reasons Aod Was in AD70!
Modern Jews are lost without their temple. The sacrificial system, which was the WHOLE POINT of Jesus quoting the AoD in Matt and Mark, has been desolate for 2000 years. The Abomination that caused the Desolation of the sacrificial system by DESTROYING THE ACTUAL TEMPLE has completely fulfilled the 3 main parts of the prophecy:
1. It was a thorough and complete AoD, exponentially longer than the Jewish Exile into Babylon and Persia. For 2000 years the sacrificial system has been desolate: broken, not working, defunct. For 2000 years Christians have trusted in Christ's perfect death instead as God's kingdom grows out of one nationally defined border into a worldwide kingdom. For 2000 years the AoD has been fulfilled spiritually in God's utter abandonment of that old covenant system.
2. The BUILDINGS were destroyed. I really don't care what you say about the word 'structures' or 'edifice' because you're just playing childish semantic games to avoid the point. The TEMPLE BUILDINGS WERE destroyed. Luke confirms that they were looking at the TEMPLE when they said all this, throwing light on Matthew and Mark's use of the word 'buildings'. You just cannot wriggle out of that because of some Jewish sentimental wailing at the retaining wall. That simply wasn't the focus of the discussion. The TEMPLE was the focus because THAT is where the sacrifice is held, THAT is where the abomination occurred that ended that sacrifice, and THAT is what the Romans pulled down stone from stone because when the temple burned all the temple gold leaked down into the drains.
3. The horrors of the destruction of Jerusalem and the loss of life were immense and unequalled, as far as I know, in Jerusalem's history. The Crusades possibly wiped out somewhere between 1 to 3 million people over nearly 300 years.
List of wars and anthropogenic disasters by death toll - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
But Josephus reports Titus killed over 1.1 million Jews in that one event!
Face it: the abomination that caused the desolation of the daily sacrifice, the destruction of the temple buildings so that not ONE building has one stone upon another, and that wiped out 1.1 million Jews occurred in AD70. However we are to read the Olivet discourse, we know that the AoD was predicted and accurately fulfilled. And the retaining wall has nothing to do with anything! It simply wasn't on Jesus radar or something the Christians flocked to to protect them when Titus destroyed the Jewish faith, identity, and nation by trashing their city, their temple, and dispersing their people across the ancient world!
What about Luke 19's 'every stone in Jerusalem'?
Decent historians and theologians look at the events of Titus conquest of Israel with loathing and amazement, and even a little dread at the thoroughness of God's judgement against the old covenant. You never seem to recognise literary forms, and so protesting against the Luke 19 like this is more like a kid sulking that their pet theory was proved wrong than any kind of forceful argument. The 3 reasons I gave above are more than enough to convince most bible scholars I read that the AoD happened in AD70. Jerusalem, her faith, and her people were TRASHED! The 'not one stone upon another' does not have to literally apply to every single stone on every building across the entirety of Jerusalem, as Jesus OFTEN uses Hyperbole. Look it up, you don't seem to be very informed of literary forms. (If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. etc).
43 For the days will come upon you, when your enemies will set up a barricade around you and surround you and hem you in on every side 44 and tear you down to the ground, you and your children within you. And they will not leave one stone upon another in you, because you did not know the time of your visitation.