Matthew 24 addresses a 1st century Jewish audience. All its prophesies were fulfilled by AD 70.

Round 2 Con parallels between the Olivet Discourse and Revelation 6 regarding the seal judgments. He misses that these seals were sanctions of Old Covenant curses for disobedience. [1] The Great Tribulation Con draws on Matthew 24:21 “then there will be a great tribulation, such as has not occurred since the beginning of the world until now, nor ever will.” Jesus is using the language of Daniel 12:1, “there will be a time of distress such as never occurred since there was a nation until that time.” Daniel is told at that time, your people, those written in the book, will be rescued. The rest will be judged. Jesus tells these OT people that “when these things begin to take place, straighten up and lift up your heads, because your redemption is drawing near.” Daniel is told to conceal these words, seal them until the time of the end (v 4, 9, 13). Jesus opens the seals! What end, Con? Daniel 12:13 speaks of the far future end of the age. Jesus tells these disciples when the end of the age will be, their generation (Matthew 24:3; 28:20). Daniel is told that the power of the holy people will be shattered (v 7). In AD 70 their power is shattered, their relationship with God and the requirements for it are gone. The abomination of desolation is spoken of, as well as the time, times and half times or three and one half years. These are just some of the comparisons the Holocaust is missing. This time was ending their over 1500 year covenant and relationship with God. That is most significant! It was a time like no other in Jewish history. God has abandoned apostate OT Israel for the last time, divorcing them from the covenant. Only the true Israel of God remained, the faithful Jewish remnant plus Gentile believers. The AoD is a covenant curse. Con asked, “Could all life have been wiped out.” If God had not put an end to the tribulation no flesh in Jerusalem and land of Judea would have been spared. Con draws on Revelation 6:3, 7 and 9 to suggest that history and the Bible did not support this catastrophic 1st century fulfillment. He says the word “earth” is used five times in that chapter. The word 'earth' is synonymous with the word ‘land.’ Peace is taken from the land with the Jewish revolt and war. Authority was given the Romans to kill with the SWORD (not guns or helicopters) over ¼ of the land. The blood shed on the land (Rev. 6:9) is the blood of the prophets and saints. Saints in heaven cry out for vengeance. They are told to wait a little longer, not over twenty centuries. Twenty centuries? [2] Con implies that ‘these things’ of Matthew 24 - war [3], death [4], famine, pestilence, earthquakes, [5] etc., were not fulfilled during the siege of Jerusalem yet Josephus and Scripture say otherwise. Con says, “I would not agree it carries no implications for Gentiles.” That was never my argument. My argument was that it was written primarily to a Jewish audience and all the prophecies listed in it concern this OT people. Con says, "“we” have another failure of Pro’s position because the Salvation of Jesus could not have traveled to the whole ancient world in ~40 years." He includes the America’s in the “whole ancient world” yet this is not the way Jewish listeners understood the ancient world, the Roman Empire, the fourth beast. (Daniel 2:44) Acts list the missionary journeys as the Great Commission of Matthew 28 and Mark 16 is fulfilled. Round 3 Con says I confuse "immanency for immediacy in an attempt [to]force a 1St century fulfillment." The text forces a 1st century audience fulfillment with its time statements. THEY do not know the day or hour of Jesus' return, only when it is near (Matthew 24:32-34). Con fails to note the pronoun usage of ‘you’ ‘we’ ‘us’ and ‘they’ in reference to this 1st century address. Con reads into the text. Con said Acts 1:9 speaks of Jesus’ Second Coming, where every eye will see Him, yet the manner in which He goes into heaven is different from every eye seeing Him. Acts 1:9 deals with the 11 men of Galilee, the disciples, not every eye. If He comes in like manner it is only to a handful of people. The passage must be understood in a spiritual sense, not literal. [6] Con says the end of the age is when the heavenly kingdom would be established, and it was. He says Satan’s control of this world will end because evil will end. Satan was thrown into the Lake of Fire yet his influence lives on. He has been conquered! Paul makes this point in Romans 16:20. Men are evil because they live outside of the light of God. Con misinterprets the kingdom of God. He thinks it will be a physical kingdom but Scripture says otherwise (John 4:24). [7], [8] Con says the Law still exists until the day God wipes out sin. He has in Christ! Con fails to grasp the Jewish understanding of what the Law is, the requirements of the Old Covenant with temple and animal sacrifices? Con said futurists hold ‘this generation’ to be the one that would see the tribulation yet Con has said he believes ‘this generation’ references to the 1st century Jews (in other dialog). Which? Con is flipping and flopping? He equates “this generation” with “that" generation whatever “that" generation is. Does Con know? Con references ‘futurists’ with his argument on Babylon in Isaiah 13. Does he not understand that ANE language uses apocalyptic language in describing destruction of nations? God and the inspired writers can tell time. Isaiah 13:6 says the day of the LORD is near. Daniel is told to seal up prophecy for fulfillment for his OT people is far off (Daniel 12:13). In Isaiah 13:17 God said He would stir up the Medes against them. The Medes no longer exist as such, the 2nd kingdom that would arise and dismantle the 1st. Isaiah speaks of the end of the Babylonian kingdom. [9] I pointed out to Con that the time of Jesus’ 2nd Coming was partly in response to Old Covenant sanctions. Con has not addressed this claim. The Bible says the gospel was preached in all the earth. Con says no, not the world we know today. However, Jesus was addressing a 1st century people that saw the world differently. [10] Round 4 Ambiguous Ireneaus Mark Hitchcock's suggestion that the earliest interpretation occurred 16 centuries after the fact and “no one in the early church interpreted it that way” is very misleading. [11], [12] Eg., The Muratorian Canon, Clement (AD 150-215), and Epiphanies. [13] Mark Hitchcock and Con's argument hinge on Irenaeus. They ignore Irenaeus' credibilty issues. They ignore what Scripture says. Where is any mention of Jerusalem actually already being destroyed in the NT or Revelation? These are gaping holes in his theology. [14] The Beast Con’s objection to Nero being the Beast of Revelation 13:8 is that my link only supplied one quote calling him beast. Please understand that more than one beast is mentioned in Revelation. “Most commentators agree that the Beast imagery in Revelation shifts between the generic and the specific. That is, sometimes the Beast seems to picture a kingdom, sometimes a particular, individual leader of that kingdom. Nevertheless, it should be understood that the number 666 is itself applied to a particular individual king in that kingdom (Rev.13:18).” [15] “It is significant that "all the earliest Christian writers on the Apocalypse,...connect Nero, or some Roman emperor, with the Apocalyptic Beast ." [16] “In Book 8 of the Christian Sibylline Oracles (A.D.175) Nero is fearfully designated a ‘great beast.’” “Lactantius also speaks of Nero as “an execrable and pernicious tyrant” and a ‘noxious wild beast.” “Lactantius, St Chrysostom, St Jerome, and other Christian writers accept and repeat the theory that Nero is the Antichrist to come.” [17] Measuring the temple Con claims that I said the temple to be measured in Revelation 11 is a heavenly temple. Not true. I said, there was no outer court in heaven (because), “There is no temple in heaven” (Revelation 21:22). “22 I saw no temple in it,...” Con says it refers to a future earthly temple. Con is reading into Scripture instead of taking out of it. Where in Scripture is a future temple found? Revelation 11 told John to measure the temple. You can’t measure something that does not exist. Con’s 6th point a) Con assumes a lot, that this 1000 year period is literal in length. [18] I) Con confuses the heavenly Jerusalem from the earthly one and Mount Zion from Mount Sinai. (Hebrews 11:9-10, 13-16; 12:18-28) ii) There are no wars in heaven. b) Everlasting Kingdom – Gog and Magog no longer exist. Are you proposing a non-existent battle? This was fulfilled during the times when warfare still involved the sword. The new heaven and earth mean the New Covenant world. The covenant is spiritual in nature, not physical. Under the New Covenant God removes our guilt and sin through Jesus paying the price for it. Those in Christ are a part of that kingdom even as they walk this earth. There is no death or crying in heaven. Christ has returned to fulfill all that was written and usher in the New Covenant Age in AD 70. Show me where Christ speaks of another age after the Christian age? There are no curses in Christ or heaven (Rev. 22:3). [1] https://www.biblegateway.com...... [2] http://www.christeternalchristianchurch.com...... [3] Wars, death - http://www.christeternalchristianchurch.com...... [4] Death – http://www.christeternalchristianchurch.com...... [5] Famines, pestilence, earthquakes – http://www.christeternalchristianchurch.com...... [6] http://www.eschatology.org...... [7] http://www.christeternalchristianchurch.com...... [8] http://www.eschatology.org...... [9] http://www.eschatology.org...... [10] http://www.christeternalchristianchurch.com...... [11] http://www.eschatology.org...... [12] http://www.eschatology.org...... [13] http://www.christeternalchristianchurch.com...... [14] http://www.eschatology.org...... [15] http://www.garynorth.com...... p. 11 [16] http://www.preteristarchive.com...... [17] Ibid. pp. 43-45 [18] http://www.christeternalchristianchurch.com... I thank you Skepticalone for engaging in this debate! I'm out of space.