Actually, I do not recall this coming up in our discussions, but I'm flattered that you would remember. And, no, it was not a cut & paste although the theme has come up before.
In any event I don't recall any response on your part.
How does Isaiah 13 relate to Matthew 24, or doesn't it?
How is it that the Jewish Christians of Jesus' day understood the Olivet Discourse as referring to the events of AD70 and fled the city while so many modern Jews and gentiles see fit to invent a future abomination of desolation, rebuilt a future temple, reconstitute a future priesthood, resurrect a future Roman empire, etc? What do you know that they didn't know?
How is it that the Jewish Christians of Jesus' day understood the Olivet Discourse as referring to the events of AD70 and fled the city while so many modern Jews and gentiles see fit to invent a future abomination of desolation, rebuilt a future temple, reconstitute a future priesthood, resurrect a future Roman empire, etc? What do you know that they didn't know?
Those pesky (and unfindable) gaps in Daniel's seventy sevens.
Cue up Answers in Genesis' Ken Ham's sarcastic remarks about "gap theory, and millions of years"....
How is it that Christians of a generation later saw a future Antichrist if all those prophecies were fulfilled by Nero and Vespasian?
Besides, TC, a Jewish student of the prophecies understands that a prophet's words have import both for his own time and for the eschaton. When one frames the argument as an absolute "either/or"--either the Olivet Discourse must refer to 70 AD or the eschatological Second Coming, never both--one demonstrates a lack of knowledge of how Biblical prophecy works. It's about pattern, not just prediction (as some good Christian scholars can tell you).
Shalom.