When did the 2nd temple literally initially cease being the holy place?

[Davidpt]

I should have been more precise. Paul was confirming the fulfillment of Jesus' prophecy "this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations". He was not confirming the fulfillment of Jesus' prophecy "then shall the end come" because the end had not yet come.

I do not think verse 14 means the end of this age, because I'm then unable to make sense of verses 15-21.

I appreciate your honesty by admitting that you would be unable to make sense of verses 15-21 if verse 14 is meaning the end of this age.

 

[Davidpt]

No. A dual fulfillment would mean that, for example, believing that the verses Matthew 24:15-21 were fulfilled in 70 AD and will be fulfilled again in the future. If we allow for things like that then we can make scripture say whatever we want it to say without ever accepting that anything has ever been completely fulfilled yet.

I submitted the following to chatgpt to get it's opinion.

--------------
Me:

An interpreter is arguing with another interpreter who insists dual fulfillments are found in the Bible and that this other interpreter is arguing against the concept of dual fulfillments in the Bible. This same interpreter though, the one arguing against dual fulfillments, takes Matthew 24:21 to be involving 70 AD while taking Daniel 12:1 to be involving the final days of this age, for example.

Both passages have this in common.

For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be

and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time

Isn't he then contradicting what he is arguing against, dual fulfillments, by interpreting Matthew 24:21 and Daniel 12:1 in the manner he is?
----------------------------

ChatGPT said:
Yes, you're raising a very sharp and important point. If the interpreter rejects the concept of dual fulfillments—the idea that a prophecy can have an initial, partial fulfillment in one historical context and a fuller or final fulfillment in another—but still claims that:

Matthew 24:21 refers to 70 AD, and

Daniel 12:1 refers to the end times/final tribulation,

despite the fact that both texts describe an unparalleled, singular time of trouble, then he is indeed employing a form of dual fulfillment, whether he admits it or not.

Here's why this is a contradiction:
Both Matthew 24:21 and Daniel 12:1 use absolute, superlative language:

Matthew 24:21: "For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be."

Daniel 12:1: "There shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time."

These statements seem to refer to the same unique, unparalleled event. It would be inconsistent to say:

Matthew 24:21 describes the greatest tribulation that ever will be (in 70 AD),

But Daniel 12:1 describes a different, yet also greatest tribulation ever (in the end times).

Logically, there can only be one “worst ever” time of trouble. So treating these as different events—while insisting that there are no dual fulfillments—is problematic. Either:

He must acknowledge that the texts refer to the same event (either both 70 AD or both end times),

Or he must accept that at least one of them has a dual aspect—a shadow in 70 AD and a fuller expression later—thus implicitly accepting the principle of dual fulfillment.

Conclusion:
Yes, his handling of these passages is contradictory. If he opposes dual fulfillment in principle but interprets these two similar verses as referring to separate events—both labeled as "unequaled"—then he is applying a dual-fulfillment framework without calling it that.

 

[Davidpt]

I do not think verse 14 means the end of this age, because I'm then unable to make sense of verses 15-21.

What we have to keep in mind here, that works both ways. Well except in @Spiritual Israelite case. He is obviously an exception in this case. He always seems to be able to find ways around things others are unable to find ways around. The fact I do take verse 14 to be meaning the end of this age, I am then unable to make sense of verses 15-21 if those verses are supposed to be meaning the first century and 70 AD according to numerous interpreters.

As to verse 14 I tend to think Jesus is applying this in more than one manner. By the end meant, He is meaning the end of this age and that the fulfilling of verses 15-21 is the beginning of the end. Meaning what follows these events is the end meant in verse 14, and that what verses 15-21 is involving begins the final countdown. Which might mean, that this part is already fulfilled---And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations---before what is recorded in verses 15-21 begin. IOW, per my view this could mean a time of testing for those that were saved when this gospel was being preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations. Meaning the ones still alive in the end of this age.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

I appreciate your honesty by admitting that you would be unable to make sense of verses 15-21 if verse 14 is meaning the end of this age.

How do you make sense of Luke 21:20-24 being related to 70 AD when you believe that verse 19 relates to the end of this age (it is parallel to Matthew 24:13)?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

I submitted the following to chatgpt to get it's opinion.

Congratulations on not being the only one who believes what you do. As if I didn't already know that. I didn't claim otherwise, so you don't have to constantly prove that you're not the only one who believes something. Can you please address the rest of what I said in post 638?

 

[David in NJ]

Jesus never taught dual prophecy, so you should not misrepresent Him like this.

Which prophecies exactly in Revelation in relation to the 7 churches do you believe has a dual fulfillment?

The LORD Jesus Christ has Spoken and His Dual Prophecies never fail.

 

[covenantee]

The fact I do take verse 14 to be meaning the end of this age

Then:
1. What is the explanation for Paul's declarations that the gospel had penetrated globally in his day?
2. Why is the word for "end" not "sunteleia", consistent with its usage in verse 3?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

The LORD Jesus Christ has Spoken and His Dual Prophecies never fail.

Was my question not clear? Can you not answer it? Which prophecies exactly in Revelation in relation to the 7 churches do you believe have a dual fulfillment?

 

[David in NJ]

Was my question not clear? Can you not answer it? Which prophecies exactly in Revelation in relation to the 7 churches do you believe have a dual fulfillment?

It is self evident.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

It is self evident.

LOL. No, it is not. Nothing is self evident when it comes to you. You are very evasive. Why can't you just answer the question? You come across like you have things to hide.

So, should I assume that you think all of Revelation 2 and 3 happens twice? Should I assume you believe that the following happened to the people of the church in Smyrna in the first century and will somehow happen to the people of the church in Smyrna again in the future even though the church in Smyrna no longer exists? A tribulation of ten days will occur again in a church that no longer exists?

Revelation 2:8 And unto the angel of the church in Smyrna write; These things saith the first and the last, which was dead, and is alive; 9 I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich) and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan. 10 Fear none of those things which thou shalt suffer: behold, the devil shall cast some of you into prison, that ye may be tried; and ye shall have tribulation ten days: be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a crown of life.