This generation

[claninja]

For sure, they asked two unrelated questions. They just did not know it at the time.

excellent, you agree they didn’t know they were asking 2 unrelated questions. In their mind the destruction of the temple was associated with the coming of Christ. I absolutely agree they believed they were asking 2 related questions.

 

[claninja]

There is nothing about the temple in Jerusalem or about the city of Jerusalem in any of those verses (Matthew 24:4-31; Mark 13:6-27 and Luke 21:8-19 & 25-28).

Jerusalem is in Judea, so I’m not sure what you are talking about.

Mark 13:14 But when you see the abomination of desolation standing where he ought not to be (let the reader understand), then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains.

Matthew 24:16 16then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains

Luke 21:21 21Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, and let those who are inside the city depart, and let not those who are out in the country enter it,

 

[rwb]

I would say no, they didn’t believe there would be 1,950+ years between the destruction of Jerusalem and the great tribulation and coming of Christ , because Jesus said “this generation will not pass away until all these things take place”.

such is evidence me by the apostles’ belief in the nearness of Christs coming:

Peter stated it was the “last days” and that the end of all things “had drawn near (perfect tense)”

Acts 2:16-17 But this is what was uttered through the prophet Joel:
“‘And in the last days it shall be, God declares, that I will pour out my Spirit on all flesh,

1 peter 4:7 The end of all things has drawn near ; therefore be self-controlled and sober-minded for the sake of your prayers.

paul stated the end of the ages had arrived

1 Corinthians 10:11 Now these things happened to them as an example, but they were written down for our instruction, on whom the end of the ages has come.

The author of Hebrews stated it was the last days, end of the ages, and that Christ would come in a “little while” and “without delay”

Hebrews 1:2 2but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world

Hebrews 9:26 for then he would have had to suffer repeatedly since the foundation of the world. But as it is, he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.

hebrews 10:37 For, “Yet a little while,
and the coming one will come and will not delay.”

James stated the coming of Christ had drawn near (perfect tense)

James 5:8 8You also, be patient. Establish your hearts, for the coming of the Lord has drawn near.

john stated it was the “last hour”
1 john 2:18 8Children, it is the last hour, and as you have heard that antichrist is coming, so now many antichrists have come. Therefore we know that it is the last hour.

Additionally, I believe the biblical accounts of the olivet discourse are parallel.

Question 1
Matthew 24:3a Tell us, when will these things be,

mark 13:4a Tell us, when will these things be

Question 2
Matthew 24:3b and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?”

mark 13:4b and what will be the sign when all these things are about to be accomplished?

therefore I believe “what will be the SIGN of your coming and of the end of the age” = “what will be the SIGN these things will take place”.

You prove the universal church entered the Messianic era, "last days" with the advent of Christ' coming. You point to passages like Acts 2:16-17 and focus on the words "and in the last days", but then you ignore all that must come to pass during this era. The outpouring of the Holy Spirit was literally made known at Pentecost, and was evidenced through the sign of speaking in tongues. You seem to pick and choose the parts of Joel's prophesy you make literal, and which you make symbolic. I assume you would agree the Spirit sent to mankind is literal, and the part of men calling upon the name of the Lord to be saved also literal. But then you want to spiritualize the wonders in heaven and signs in the earth because literalizing that part of the prophesy does not fit your point of view???

Acts 2:19-20 (KJV) And I will shew wonders in heaven above, and signs in the earth beneath; blood, and fire, and vapour of smoke: The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before that great and notable day of the Lord come:

Acts 2:21 (KJV) And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.

 

[Zao is life]

I would say no, they didn’t believe there would be 1,950+ years between the destruction of Jerusalem and the great tribulation and coming of Christ , because Jesus said “this generation will not pass away until all these things take place”.

Exactly. At the time they asked the question they did not even know about the 1,950+ years in-between the one event and the other so how could they believe in it? Still doesn't make "this generation" about the generation that would live through the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple. The context of the passage from Matthew 24:9 onward makes "this generation" about the generation that would experience the great tribulation, of which the sign is the AoD, i.e the final son of perdition seating himself up in the New Testament Temple claiming to be God at the end of the Age, i.e the event of which they were unaware at the time they asked their question, which would only come 1,950+ years later.

Your arguments are circular precisely because not understanding the difference between the great tribulation and the wrath of God that came upon Jerusalem has got you in a whirlpool of false notions producing false notions. You need to admit that not only is Jesus also talking about the tribulation of His disciples when they are killed and hated of all nations for His name's sake, but this is what most of the passage is about - and the passage says very little about the destruction of the temple.

 

[Zao is life]

Jerusalem is in Judea, so I’m not sure what you are talking about.

Mark 13:14 But when you see the abomination of desolation standing where he ought not to be (let the reader understand), then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains.

Matthew 24:16 16then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains

Luke 21:21 21Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, and let those who are inside the city depart, and let not those who are out in the country enter it,

The region once known as Judea still exists, unlike the temple. There are Christians in it, and there are Christians all around the world, and what Jesus says to one, He says to all: Therefore when you shall see the AoD stand in the holy place, flee out of the towns and cities.

Only the church was considered the holy place following the tearing of the veil.

 

[claninja]

But then you want to spiritualize the wonders in heaven and signs in the earth because literalizing that part of the prophesy does not fit your point of view???

the Old Testament consistently uses this type of metaphorical language (wonders in heavens, etc..) when discussing the terror and fall of kingdoms and governments.

Matthew henry (isaiah 13:10)
“The stars of heaven shall not give their light, the sun shall be darkened. Such expressions are often employed by the prophets, to describe the convulsions of governments.”

benson commentary (Isaiah 13:10)
“Or, rather, the prophet foretels the utter subversion of their republic, and the entire overthrow of their religion and polity, under the emblem of the extinction or passing away of the sun, moon, and stars, and all the heavenly bodies. For, as Bishop Lowth observes, the Hebrew writers, “to express happiness, prosperity, the instauration and advancement of states, kingdoms, and potentates, make use of images taken from the most striking parts of nature; from the heavenly bodies, from the sun, moon, and stars, which they describe as shining with increased splendour, and never setting; the moon becomes like the meridian sun, and the sun’s light is augmented seven-fold: see Isaiah 30:26. New heavens and a new earth are created, and a brighter age commences. On the contrary, the overthrow and destruction of kingdoms are represented by opposite images; the stars are obscured, the moon withdraws her light, and the sun shines no more; the earth quakes, and the heavens tremble; and all things seem tending to their original chaos.”

so, no, I’m not randomly deciding what is spiritual and what is literal. I’m being consistent, Unlike those who wish to divorce OT uses of metaphorical language in order to fit a futurist presupposition.

 

[Zao is life]

excellent, you agree they didn’t know they were asking 2 unrelated questions. In their mind the destruction of the temple was associated with the coming of Christ. I absolutely agree they believed they were asking 2 related questions.

And though the two questions were unrelated, Jesus answered both. The context makes that 100% clear.

 

[rwb]

As you show, we read in Peter that the end has drawn near, but what else does Peter have to say about the end or has it reads "last days"? Yes, it is clear we are in the era Scripture calls last days, and on the last day of the Lord the heavens will pass away, the earth also. So the scoffers we understand are literal, but the signs in the heavens and earth at His coming spiritual, according to your doctrine, because according to you Christ has already come???

2 Peter 3:3-7 (KJV) Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation. For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished: But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.

2 Peter 3:10 (KJV) But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.

You might say these are two separate events, the one spiritual coming in 70 AD, the other the last day of this earth??? Problem with that view is that Scripture says nothing about Christ coming two more times. Christ comes again at the end of this age, and there will be no doubt about His coming because the signs will be clear for all humanity to understand.

 

[Zao is life]

Matthew henry (isaiah 13:10)
“The stars of heaven shall not give their light, the sun shall be darkened. Such expressions are often employed by the prophets, to describe the convulsions of governments.”

And it proves that Matthew 24:29-31 is talking about the great tribulation that is to be experienced by the saints in the days leading up to His return, and it has nothing to do with Jerusalem and its temple in 70 A.D:

9 And he dreamed still another dream, and told it to his brothers. And he said, Behold, I have dreamed another dream. And behold, the sun and the moon and the eleven stars bowed down to me.
10 And he told it to his father and to his brothers. And his father rebuked him and said to him, What is this dream that you have dreamed? Shall I, and your mother, and your brothers indeed come to bow ourselves to the earth before you? Genesis 37:9-10

1 And there appeared a great sign in the heavens, a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon was under her feet, and a crown of twelve stars on her head. Revelation 12

29 And immediately after the tribulation of those days, the sun shall be darkened and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from the heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken.
30 And then the sign of the Son of man shall appear in the heavens. And then all the tribes of the earth shall mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of the heaven with power and great glory.
31 And He shall send His angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather His elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other. Matthew 24:29-31

It's talking only about the redemption of the elect at the end of the Age from the great tribulation that the passage was describing. It's saying nothing about the destruction of the Temple in 70 A.D

 

[rwb]

the Old Testament consistently uses this type of metaphorical language (wonders in heavens, etc..) when discussing the terror and fall of kingdoms and governments.

Matthew henry (isaiah 13:10)
“The stars of heaven shall not give their light, the sun shall be darkened. Such expressions are often employed by the prophets, to describe the convulsions of governments.”

benson commentary (Isaiah 13:10)
“Or, rather, the prophet foretels the utter subversion of their republic, and the entire overthrow of their religion and polity, under the emblem of the extinction or passing away of the sun, moon, and stars, and all the heavenly bodies. For, as Bishop Lowth observes, the Hebrew writers, “to express happiness, prosperity, the instauration and advancement of states, kingdoms, and potentates, make use of images taken from the most striking parts of nature; from the heavenly bodies, from the sun, moon, and stars, which they describe as shining with increased splendour, and never setting; the moon becomes like the meridian sun, and the sun’s light is augmented seven-fold: see Isaiah 30:26. New heavens and a new earth are created, and a brighter age commences. On the contrary, the overthrow and destruction of kingdoms are represented by opposite images; the stars are obscured, the moon withdraws her light, and the sun shines no more; the earth quakes, and the heavens tremble; and all things seem tending to their original chaos.”

so, no, I’m not randomly deciding what is spiritual and what is literal. I’m being consistent, Unlike those who wish to divorce OT uses of metaphorical language in order to fit a futurist presupposition.

Yes, the Old Testament prophets all write of what appears to be metaphor of an age/era, calling it the day of the Lord when they expect all these things will come upon the earth during this time. We don't use the Old Testament to understand what is written in the New. What is written during the Old is often said to be shadows and vague of things in heaven. That's why we have the New Testament to make known or reveal what was shadows is now made known, so that we can understand what was once vague has become clear. So what appears to be metaphor will be shown to be fulfilled when the Day of the Lord came.

What we have to remember is that the Old Testament prophets looked for an age/era when the promised Messiah would finally come and save them. Where we living after His first advent don't look for an age/era, but rather we look for A Day when Christ will return again.

 

[claninja]

Exactly. At the time they asked the question they did not even know about the 1,950+ years in-between the one event and the other so how could they believe in it? Still doesn't make "this generation" about the generation that would live through the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple. The context of the passage from Matthew 24:9 onward makes "this generation" about the generation that would experience the great tribulation, of which the sign is the AoD, i.e the final son of perdition seating himself up in the New Testament Temple claiming to be God at the end of the Age, which they were unaware at the time they asked their question would only come 1,950+ years later.

excellent, we are on the same page that Jesus’ first century audience believed the destruction of the temple would occur at the coming of Christ, hence they asked 2 questions they believed to be related.

Your arguments are circular precisely because not understanding the difference between the great tribulation and the wrath of God that came upon Jerusalem has got you in a whirlpool of false notions producing false notions.

That is not circular reasoning. Circular reasoning is a logical fallacy where you begin with what you are trying to end with.

Let me give you an example. I was once a futurist. My presupposition was that coming of Christ in Matthew 24 was the “2nd advent”, therefore genea doesn’t mean generation, thus proving the 2nd coming has not occurred. That is circular reasoning.

My argument is that this generation means those contemporary of christ. Therefore, since the destruction of temple did occur within Jesus’ generation, the coming of Christ was not the “2nd advent” but of judgement and wrath upon apostate Israel.

 

[claninja]

And it proves that Matthew 24:29-31 is talking about the great tribulation that is to be experienced by the saints in the days leading up to His return, and it has nothing to do with Jerusalem and its temple in 70 A.D:

9 And he dreamed still another dream, and told it to his brothers. And he said, Behold, I have dreamed another dream. And behold, the sun and the moon and the eleven stars bowed down to me.
10 And he told it to his father and to his brothers. And his father rebuked him and said to him, What is this dream that you have dreamed? Shall I, and your mother, and your brothers indeed come to bow ourselves to the earth before you? Genesis 37:9-10

1 And there appeared a great sign in the heavens, a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon was under her feet, and a crown of twelve stars on her head. Revelation 12

29 And immediately after the tribulation of those days, the sun shall be darkened and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from the heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken.
30 And then the sign of the Son of man shall appear in the heavens. And then all the tribes of the earth shall mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of the heaven with power and great glory.
31 And He shall send His angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather His elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other. Matthew 24:29-31

It's talking only about the redemption of the elect at the end of the Age from the great tribulation that the passage was describing. It's saying nothing about the destruction of the Temple in 70 A.D

not following your reasoning. Can you clarify?

 

[Hammster]

37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the one killing the prophets and stoning those who are sent to her, how often would I have gathered your children together, even as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you would not!
38 Behold, your house is left to you desolate.
39 For I say to you, You shall not see Me from now on until you say, "Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord.

1 And Jesus went out and departed from the temple. And His disciples came to Him to show Him the buildings of the temple.
2 And Jesus said to them, Do you not see all these things? Truly I say to you, There shall not be left here one stone on another that shall not be thrown down.

3 And as He sat on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? And what shall be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the world? Matthew 23:37-Matthew 24:3.

Your argument?

Oh yes, your argument is that just because Jesus mentioned the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple, this means that when the disciples, who had no idea of knowing at the time that there would be 1,950+ years in-between the one event and the other, asked Him when these things would be, and what the sign would be of His coming and of the end of the Age, Jesus only answered the first part of their question.

Did Jesus tell them when the destruction of Jerusalem would come?

No, he did not. They still had no idea.

He did tell them that when they see the armies gathering against Jerusalem, they should flee, because, He said,

"But woe to those who are with child, and to those suckling in those days! For there shall be great distress (ἀνάγκη anánkē) in the land and wrath (ὀργή orgḗ) upon this people." (Luke 21:23).

Did He give them the sign of His coming and of the end of the Age in His reply?

Yes, He did: From verse 4 to verse 31 of Matthew 24, Jesus is speaking of the generation of Christians that would face the great tribulation of Christians, and their redemption when Christ returns. The same goes for Mark 6:6-27 and Luke 21:8-19 and Luke 21:25-28.

There is nothing about the temple in Jerusalem or about the city of Jerusalem in any of those verses (Matthew 24:4-31; Mark 13:6-27 and Luke 21:8-19 & 25-28).

Your thesis is based on the myth that the words tribulation and wrath mean the same thing. But nothing is further from the truth.

There are only two New Testament references to tribulation experienced by non-Christians:-

1. Of all who do evil: Romans 2:9.

2. Of the world as repayment for bringing tribulation upon the saints: 2 Thessalonians 1:6.

There are no other New Testament mentions of tribulation as the experience of those who are not Christians.

Here is the list of New Testament verses talking about the persecution and tribulation of Jesus, the apostles, and Christians:-

Persecution: Of Jesus: John 5:16

Persecution of Christians: Matthew 5:10-12; John 15:20; Acts 22:4; Acts 26:11; 1 Corinthians 4:12; 1 Corinthians 15:9; 2 Corinthians 4:9; Galatians 1:13 & 23; Galatians 4:29; Galatians 5:11

Persecution of the woman who gave birth to the Messiah: Revelation 12:13

Tribulation of apostles or Christians: Matthew 13:21 (Parallel: Mark 4:17); Matthew 24:9, 21 & 29 (Parallel Mark 13:19, 24); John 16:33; Acts 11:19; Acts 14:22; Acts 20:23; Romans 5:3; Romans 8:35; Romans 12:12; 2 Corinthians 1:4, 6 & 8; 2 Corinthians 2:4; 2 Corinthians 4:8; 2 Corinthians 4:17; 2 Corinthians 6:4; 2 Corinthians 7:4-5; 2 Corinthians 8:2; Ephesians 3:13; Philippians 1:16; Philippians 4:14; Colossians 1:24; 1 Thessalonians 1:6; 1 Thessalonians 3:3-4 & 7; 2 Thessalonians 1:4, 6-7; 2 Timothy 1:8; 2 Timothy 3:11; 2 Timothy 4:5; Hebrews 10:32-33; 1 Peter 5:9; Revelation 1:9; Revelation 2:9-10, 22; Revelation 7:14

Great Tribulation: Mentioned only three times in the New Testament and each time it's the experience of Christians: Revelation 2:22; Revelation 7:14; 'Olivet Discourse': Matthew 24:21 *

* Luke uses the words great distress and wrath in Luke 21:23 (not the word tribulation).

The AoD mentioned in Matthew 24:15 is what Paul later told us will be the final son of perdition seating himself up in the New Testament Temple, and the great tribulation is referring to the experience of Christians.

It's 100% clear by the whole context of the passage in Matthew 24:4-34 that "this generation" in Matthew 24:34 is referring to the generation of Christians who would be alive when the man of sin seats himself up in the New Testament Temple 1,950+ years later.

And because the Greek word used for the holy sanctuary of God (naos) stops being used in reference to the Temple in Jerusalem following the verses talking about the tearing of the veil, and is only used in reference to the church and the temple in heaven after this, it's clear that the temple mentioned in both 2 Thessalonians 2:4 and Revelation 11:1-2 is talking about the New Testament temple:

Tearing of the veil: Matthew 27:51; Mark 15:38; Luke 23:45.

The church and the temple in heaven:

1 Corinthians 3:16-17 & 1 Corinthians 6:19; 2 Corinthians 6:16; Ephesians 2:21; 2 Thessalonians 2:4; Revelation 3:12; Revelation 7:15; Revelation 11:1-2; Revelation 11:19; Revelation 14:15 & Revelation 14:17; Revelation 15:5-6 & Revelation 15:8; Revelation 16:1 & Revelation 16:17; Revelation 21:22

All the above verses uses the word naos for temple.

But the Greek continues to use the word hieron in reference to the physical Jerusalem temple complex throughout the New Testament's references to the Jerusalem temple following the tearing of the veil.

Your assertion is based on a premise which ignores 50% of the facts (a false premise).

Ah, you’re another one who asks me questions, assumes the answers, and then gives the counter-argument.

Let me know when you want to have a discussion.

 

[Hammster]

Apparently I misunderstood your question: "When were you scattered?"

I was under the impression that your argument is that scriptures are “applicable to every believer regardless the age we live in”. So I was wondering when you were scattered.

 

[rwb]

"My argument is that this generation means those contemporary of christ. Therefore, since the destruction of temple did occur within Jesus’ generation, the coming of Christ was not the “2nd advent” but of judgement and wrath upon apostate Israel."

So why conflate the two events as you are? The wrath of the Lord was poured out on an apostate place and people in 70 AD. While that gives a pretty good picture of what His wrath is like, it does not compare to the judgment that will come upon the whole earth when Christ returns on the last day of this era.

 

[claninja]

The region once known as Judea still exists, unlike the temple. There are Christians in it, and there are Christians all around the world, and what Jesus says to one, He says to all: Therefore when you shall see the AoD stand in the holy place, flee out of the towns and cities.

Only the church was considered the holy place following the tearing of the veil.

great, so you believe Jerusalem is applicable after all

 

[claninja]

"My argument is that this generation means those contemporary of christ. Therefore, since the destruction of temple did occur within Jesus’ generation, the coming of Christ was not the “2nd advent” but of judgement and wrath upon apostate Israel."

So why conflate the two events as you are? The wrath of the Lord was poured out on an apostate place and people in 70 AD. While that gives a pretty good picture of what His wrath is like, it does not compare to the judgment that will come upon the whole earth when Christ returns on the last day of this era.

would you agree this event was related to the “coming” of the vineyard owner to destroy the wicked tenants for murdering his son?

 

[Zao is life]

excellent, we are on the same page that Jesus’ first century audience believed the destruction of the temple would occur at the coming of Christ, hence they asked 2 questions they believed to be related.




That is not circular reasoning. Circular reasoning is a logical fallacy where you begin with what you are trying to end with.

Let me give you an example. I was once a futurist. My presupposition was that coming of Christ in Matthew 24 was the “2nd advent”, therefore genea doesn’t mean generation, thus proving the 2nd coming has not occurred. That is circular reasoning.

My argument is that this generation means those contemporary of christ. Therefore, since the destruction of temple did occur within Jesus’ generation, the coming of Christ was not the “2nd advent” but of judgement and wrath upon apostate Israel.

But the generation that Jesus is referring to in Matthew 24:34 is the generation of the saints who will go through the great tribulation leading up to His return. His disciples had asked him both when the temple would be destroyed and for the sign of His coming and the end of the Age. You've already admitted this.

Jesus did not tell them either when Jerusalem would be destroyed, but He gave them a sign - the gathering of the armies around Jerusalem. Likewise, Jesus did not tell them when the end of the Age would come, but He gave them a sign - the AoD standing in the holy place - and that holy place refers not to the temple at Jerusalem, but to the New Testament Temple.

The Greek word naos and how it is used in the New Testament proves once and for all to all gainsayers of the gospel that after the tearing of the veil, the Jerusalem temple ceased being the holy place. The apostle Paul later told us exactly what that AoD will be:

1 Now we beseech you, my brothers, with regard to the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him,
2 that you should not be soon shaken in mind or troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word or letter, as through us, as if the Day of Christ is at hand.
3 Let not anyone deceive you by any means. For that Day shall not come unless there first comes a falling away, and the man of sin shall be revealed, the son of perdition,
4 who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God, or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, setting himself forth, that he is God. 2 Thessalonians 2:1-4

Matthew 24:31 and 2 Thessalonians 2:1 are talking about the gathering of the elect following the great tribulation. Matthew 24:15 and 2 Thessalonians 2:4 are talking about the AoD.

It has nothing to do with the Jerusalem Temple, and it has nothing to do with 70 A.D. Jesus did not leave us in ignorance as the the sign of His coming and of the end of the Age.

 

[rwb]

I was under the impression that your argument is that scriptures are “applicable to every believer regardless the age we live in”. So I was wondering when you were scattered.

Are you saying that if Scripture is applicable to every believer regardless the age we live in, we would have to have been among those scattered through persecution in the first century???

 

[claninja]

But the generation that Jesus is referring to in Matthew 24:34 is the generation of the saints who will go through the great tribulation leading up to His return. His disciples had asked him both when the temple would be destroyed and for the sign of His coming and the end of the Age. You've already admitted this.

Jesus did not tell them either when Jerusalem would be destroyed, but He gave them a sign - the gathering of the armies around Jerusalem. Likewise, Jesus did not tell them when the end of the Age would come, but He gave them a sign - the AoD standing in the holy place - and that holy place refers not to the temple at Jerusalem but the New Testament Temple.

The Greek word naos and how it is used in the New Testament proves once and for all to all gainsayers of the gospel that after the tearing of the veil, the Jerusalem temple ceased being the holy place. The apostle Paul later told us exactly what that AoD will be:

1 Now we beseech you, my brothers, with regard to the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him,
2 that you should not be soon shaken in mind or troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word or letter, as through us, as if the Day of Christ is at hand.
3 Let not anyone deceive you by any means. For that Day shall not come unless there first comes a falling away, and the man of sin shall be revealed, the son of perdition,
4 who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God, or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, setting himself forth, that he is God. 2 Thessalonians 2:1-4

Matthew 24:31 and 2 Thessalonians 2:1 are talking about the gathering of the elect following the great tribulation. Matthew 24:15 and 2 Thessalonians 2:4 are talking about the AoD.

It has nothing to do with the Jerusalem Temple, and it has nothing to do with 70 A.D. Jesus did not leave us in ignorance as the the sign of His coming and of the end of the Age.

He said “this” generation. Not “that”. Your argument would be stronger if jesus said “that” generation.