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

POINT FOUR - CovenantsThe Bible is divided into two covenants, two testaments. Jesus came to abolish the old, legal, works related covenant of Law but not before fulfilling everything required by the Law, both blessings and curses. It was necessary that the old disappear so the new could fully take its place. This is what we are witness to in the writing of the NT, the transition between covenants. Matthew 5:17-18 (NASB)17 "Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill. 18 For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law UNTIL ALL IS ACCOMPLISHED." Everything required of the Law was accomplished by AD 70 for the very fact that not only the smallest stokes of the Law passed then, it all did. To say otherwise Skepticalone, you would need to show that the OT system of things could still function without a temple, priesthood, animal sacrifices, genealogies, ceremonial feast days, etc. If the heaven and earth spoken of here would not pass without the smallest letter of the Law passing then all was accomplished by AD 70 for there is no trace left of it after this destruction - none. Therefore, the heaven and earth Jesus is speaking of would have certainly passed by AD 70.The same term, "heaven and earth" is used in the Olivet Discourse. What does the term refer to? How would the Jews understand it? A clue would be to see how it is used in the OT. Is Jesus speaking of the literal heaven and earth? You discover the literal heavens and earth, your implication, did not disappear. In Isaiah 34 the term is used to predict the fall of the Edomite kingdom. Edom fell to Babylonia in BC 583. The same can be said for the fall of Babylon by the Assyrians in Isaiah 13. Isaiah 65:17 is a judgment on covenant Israel, yet the literal heaven and earth still exist. REBUTTAL1) REVELATION AND LATE DATE ADVOCATESThis point was argued in our last debate and your whole argument hangs on a disputed translation from Ireneaus.Kenneth Gentry and others note Ireneaus was a child when he met Polycarp so he is recalling childhood events that are likely embellished about John. Ireaneaus' testimony is also ambiguous. Ireneaus' translators have commented on the difficulty of translating him.Kenneth Gentry points out:"The all-important question in the matter is: Did Irenaeus mean to say that Revelation was seen by John in Domitian's reign? Or did he mean that John, who saw the Revelation, was seen in Domitian's reign?" [1]It all depends on what "that"" modifies, John or what he wrote and saw.Iraneaus was also know to have made a number of historical errors of which Gentry notes a couple, as does Guthrie and Moffatt.[2]The Syriac version of Revelation states:"The Revelation, which was made by God to John the Evangelist, in the island of Patmos, to which he was banished by NERO THE EMPEROR."Most of the Syriac translations, which are known as the "Peshito,""Curetonian," the "Philoexenian" and the "Harclean" are supposed to have been translated late in the first century or very early in the second, but the ones containing Revelation are not believed to be quite that old." [2]This put the Ireneaus passage into further question.Nero's original name was Lucius Domitius Ahenobarbus. [3] Nero is known for his persecution of Christians, not Domitian. He is even called the Beast, a term used in Revelation, by historians and early church fathers."the clue is preserved for us, not only by Jewish Talmudists, and Pagan historians and authors, such as Tacitus, Suetonius, Dion Cassius, and Dion Chrysostom; but also by Christian fathers like St. Irenaeus, Lactantius, St. Victorinus, Sulpicius Severus, and the Sibylline books, and even by St. Jerome, and by St. Augustine. Nothing can prove more decisively than these references that for four centuries many Christians identified Nero with the Beast." [4]Also many "modern scholars" are revising their opinion of when Revelation was written. A.T. Roberson, the noted scholar was one. [5]NT epistles and gospels in question as to their late date answer the dating questions nicely. Why is there no mention of the fall of Jerusalem as already happening, yet always an imminent warning to flee from coming wrath? The very passage you, Con, quote from in Revelation 11 tells John to measure the temple, but leave the outer courts for the Gentiles until their time is fulfilled. Their time frame is 42 months (vs 2). I noticed you quoted Luke 21:20 which also speaks of these Gentiles (vs. 24). It is the time in which Jerusalem was surrounded, not after, as you have already conceded in Luke, yet your second chart lists it as after, around AD 85. Which is it? Is it AD 58-60 or AD 85? Your time line for dating the authorship of Revelation has many problems, not the least of which is that you see Revelation as being written in the 90's whereas Luke is written in 58-60 by the timeline you cite. Both contain many accounts that mirror each other, as you have noted with the Olivet Discourse and Revelation 6, and depend on there being a temple in place.Another problem with your view of Revelation 11 is the heavenly tabernacle has no outer courts for the Gentiles. There is no temple in heaven (Revelation 21:24). So what temple does it refer to?42 months is the timeline around the siege of Jerusalem. I have no idea where you get seven months from. The time frame of John's writing was near, short, soon, at hand. What kind of timeline are you, Con, projecting into the NT? You seem to think that God and the inspired writers can't tell time. In addition, if you continued reading the Revelation 11 passage you quoted on the two witnesses you would see that in two verses after the witnesses it refers to the great city, Sodom, in which the Lord was crucified. "8 And their dead bodies will lie in the street of the great city which mystically is called Sodom and Egypt, where also their Lord was crucified."This can only be 1st century Jerusalem. The theme of the "Great City" is discussed in Revelation 14, 17, 18 also and it can only refer to one city and that during the Roman Empire, the fourth beast of Daniel, therefore to the generation Jesus came to for one important fact. Jesus attributed to Jerusalem all the blood of all the saints and prophets. Compare Revelation 18:21, 24 with Matthew 23:32-38.21 Then a strong angel took up a stone like a great millstone and threw it into the sea, saying, “So will Babylon, the great city, be thrown down with violence, and will not be found any longer….24 And IN HER WAS FOUND THE BLOOD OF PROPHETS AND OF SAINTS and of all who have been slain on the earth.”"30 and say, "If we had been living in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partners with them in shedding the blood of the prophets." 31 So you testify against yourselves, that you are sons of those who murdered the prophets. 32 Fill up, then, the measure of the guilt of your fathers...36 Truly I say to you, all these things will come upon this generation.37 "Jerusalem, Jerusalem, who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, the way a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were unwilling. 38 Behold, your house is being left to you desolate!"If that is not enough to convince you read 1 Thessalonians 2:14-16. All the blood of the prophets and saints is attributed to these OT people and city.You quite rightly connect the Discourse with Revelation 6 but again you remove the timeline by positing a different heavenly people. But seals and trumpets are connected with God's covenant people, Israel. DANIEL is told to seal up the visions and prophecy. We see Jesus, as worthy, opening the seals. They contain the WRATH or curse provisions under the Old Covenant law, especially about avenging the blood of the martyrs (Deuteronomy 32:43) But the point I want to make about Revelation 6 is that the saints cry out, "How long, O Lord, until You judge the inhabitants of the earth [land] AND AVENGE OUR BLOOD? (Revelation 6:10) And the answer is they were told to wait a little longer. Con, you are again guilty of ignoring context and time lines. John begins the Revelation by stating things that must shortly come to pass. Revelation 6 and 7 again identifies a Jewish theme, avenging their blood and mentions 144,000 who are sealed from all the tribes of Israel (Revelation 7:4). There were no more tribes of Israel after AD 70. Old Covenant Israel ceased to exist because Old Covenant Israel no longer had a covenant. (Hebrews 8:13) Your next point, the two witnesses (vs 6) can be shown to be in the time frame of the 1st century also. They are sandwiched between the measuring of the temple (vs 1) and where the Lord was crucified (vs 8) and although there is some speculation as to who they are you can't remove them from the 1st century that easily without ignoring the context of Revelation 11. It tells you some specifics. Some commentators believe the two witnesses are Moses and Elisha who represent the Law and the Prophets. They are witnessing the fulfillment of the covenant curses. The plagues, diseases, famines of Revelation were curses in the Law of Moses - covenant curses. Read them in Deuteronomy 28-32.You, Con, are trying to dichotomize the time frame when it is specific. The city that the Lord was crucified in was first century Jerusalem.It was completely destroyed by the Romans as predicted in Daniel 2:44; 9:24-27 and elsewhere in the OT and in the NT in the Olivet Discourse which we are debating over.Your other points on the AoD, the Great Tribulation and World Missions will be taken up in Rounds 4-5.[1] http://www.rpts.edu...... p.334[2] http://christeternalchristianchurch.com...... [3] http://www.britannica.com...[4] http://www.preteristarchive.com...[5] http://www.amazon.ca...