I’m sure you must know who Martin Luther was, but that remark doesn’t sound like you do.
Yes, he was a man who taught Sola Scriptura
So, if he can't prove what he says from scripture, I ignore him.
[ “The Temple that is described in Matthew is not the Lord’s Body since no abomination of desolation can stand in it!” ]
That’s obvious. It was the temple that was still standing, not a “future third temple” mentioned only in the sensationalized, yet nonbiblical books written by the likes of people such as LaHaye and Lindsey.
Since no Abomination of desolation ever stood in that temple of 70AD a stubborn fact that you keep tripping over.
Again, the physical temple was destroyed because Christ is the Temple
No one is talking about why the Temple of 70AD was destroyed so don't try to change the subject.
The question is, is that Temple the same one of 70AD and the answer is-no it is not, since no Abomination of desolation ever stood in it.
So, you can keep twisting and turning, but you can't change that fact.
“Since no Abomination of desolation ever stood in that temple of 70AD a stubborn fact that you keep tripping over.”
Were you there? I assume you weren’t.
Have you ever read Josephus’ eye-witness account? I also assume by your above statement that you haven’t.