Matt 24:28

[James224]

I was talking with a friend of mine about this verse and we came up with this: Matt 24:28 says, “Wheresoever the body shall be, there shall the eagles also be gathered together.” Now, the KJV says, “For wheresoever the carcase is, there will the eagles be gathered together.” The Haydock Commentary says the “Body” is referring to Christ and the “Eagles” refers to the angels and saints who will swiftly join Christ at the place of judgement. St. Hilary understands this literally; that where his body shall hang upon the cross, there will he appear in judgment, i.e. near the valley of Josaphat; in which place the prophet Joel (chap. iii. ver. 2,) declares, that the general judgment shall take place. So Hilary believed that the judgement will begin with Christ appearing on the exact spot where He died on the cross. Joel 3:2 says, “I will gather together all nations and will bring them down into the valley of Josaphat: and I will plead with them there for my people, and for my inheritance, Israel, whom they have scattered among the nations, and have parted my land.”

I have to say that I see the Eucharist in this. I understand that eagles eat ONLY living flesh, whereas, vultures eat only dead flesh. In this verse, the eagles gather around Christ on the cross and this same bloody sacrifice is what is offered on the altar at every Mass - Living Flesh!

I almost forgot, if the Judgement begins at the place of the cross, this seems to destroy the idea of the Rapture.

What do you think?

 

[JonathonofOhio]

Hi James,

I know you posted this several months ago, and no one responded to it apparently. I was trying to find out what other people’s opinions are on this so I came across your post and just figured I would drop you a note if you are still watching this thread for responses (hopefully I’m not violating forum policy by replying to an ‘older’ thread).

I have to agree with you that the Eucharist is indeed involved in this passage, obviously. In my research here is what I uncovered:

The word eagle is generally rendered in Hebrew as ‘néshér’ (so I’ve read), but there is a doubt as to whether the eagle or some kind of vulture is intended. It seems even probable that the Hebrews did not distinguish very carefully these different large birds of prey, and that all are spoken of as though they were of one kind. Many allusions are made to the eagle in Scripture: its inhabiting the dizziest cliffs for nesting, its keen sight, its habit of congregating to feed on the slain, its swiftness, its longevity, its remarkable care in training its young, are often referred to (see in particular Job 39:27-30).

Note: When the relations of Israel with their neighbours became more frequent, the eagle became, under the pen of the Jewish prophets and poets, an emblem first of the Assyrian, then of the Babylonian, and finally of the Persian kings.

In Matthew 24 and Luke 17 Jesus talks about Noah and the flood and how those people were ‘swept away’. In Luke 17 he talks about Lot and how those people were ‘taken’ by fire and brim stone. So too is the fate of the people taken in the end, it is not the faithful who are taken, but the unfaithful; the unbelievers it appears. The ones left behind then are the faithful.

In 1 Thessalonians he talks about the ones who are left alive are taken up with those who have risen from the dead-- those left alive implies that there must be other that were destroyed.

The imagery in Revelation 19 also follows this interpretation, it being all those who reject Jesus and wish to make war on him being ‘taken’ (destroyed) and thrown into the fire, of which all the ‘birds are filled with their flesh’.

And this follows the prophecy of Ezekiel 39:17-20:
“And thou, O son of man, saith the Lord God, say to every fowl, and to all the birds, and to all the beasts of the field: Assemble yourselves, make haste, come together from every side to my victim, which I slay for you, a great victim upon the mountains of Israel: to eat flesh, and drink blood. You shall eat the flesh of the mighty, and you shall drink the blood of the princes of the earth, of rams, and of lambs, and of he goats, and bullocks, and of all that are well fed and fat. And you shall eat the fat till you be full, and shall drink blood till you be drunk of the victim which I shall slay for you. And you shall be filled at my table with horses, and mighty horsemen, and all the men of war, saith the Lord God.”

So that’s what I found out. I hope that helps you and your friend get an even better understanding.

 

[ryanoneil]

The eagles are the Roman’s and the body is Jerusalem in 70 A.D.

 

[JonathonofOhio]

Well you might be right about them being the Romans in Revelations…I’m still learning so I won’t disagree with you there.

But in Matthew 24 Jesus is clearly not only talking about the destruction of the temple (which did occur in 70 A.D.), but He is also talking about His second coming. The portion where He says “Where the body (carcass) is the eagles will gather.” is a direct reply to their questioning where those people will go when they are taken. I just don’t see here that He is referring to the Romans as the eagles in that particular passage (you may be correct about Revelation referring to the Romans as birds though).

But if we say the Romans are the eagles, then we have a little bit of conflict in imagery. It doesn’t fit well in the prophecy of Ezekiel to say the Romans were the eagles, because the prophecy seems to show a destruction of all those who oppose Christ, and eagles consume their flesh. In Daniel the Roman empire is a dragon, not an eagle. We also know that John the Evangelist, or, perhaps more accurately, his gospel, is also associated with the eagle (in Revelation this is one of the four living creatures that stand before the throne, the one shaped like an eagle). John uses the imagery of creatures that look like beasts to describe the attributes of Christ addressed in each scripture, and suggests by the number 4 that this is complete and perfect. The eagle seems to be associated with the divine nature, the spirit, soaring above all things in the heavens (Exodus 19:4, Isaiah 40:31, Jeremiah 48:40).

Therefore, the only conclusion I can come up with at this time, is that the imagery of the eagle consuming the flesh of the enemies of Christ means this: That the Word of God will consume (destroy) them. So again, this suggests that the people who are left behind are the ones that are saved, not the ones that are taken, because they are destroyed by the Word of God (See: 2 Thessalonians 2:8).

I just realized something: God breathed life into man in Genesis 2:7. He breathed on man when He gave the Holy Spirit in John 20:22. When He comes again, it is the breath of God (which is the breath of life) that will destroy His enemies, and destroy death (again, see 2 Thessalonians 2:8).

 

[ryanoneil]

Well you might be right about them being the Romans in Revelations…I’m still learning so I won’t disagree with you there.

But in Matthew 24 Jesus is clearly not only talking about the destruction of the temple (which did occur in 70 A.D.), but He is also talking about His second coming. The portion where He says “Where the body (carcass) is the eagles will gather.” is a direct reply to their questioning where those people will go when they are taken. I just don’t see here that He is referring to the Romans as the eagles in that particular passage (you may be correct about Revelation referring to the Romans as birds though).

But if we say the Romans are the eagles, then we have a little bit of conflict in imagery. It doesn’t fit well in the prophecy of Ezekiel to say the Romans were the eagles, because the prophecy seems to show a destruction of all those who oppose Christ, and eagles consume their flesh. In Daniel the Roman empire is a dragon, not an eagle. We also know that John the Evangelist, or, perhaps more accurately, his gospel, is also associated with the eagle (in Revelation this is one of the four living creatures that stand before the throne, the one shaped like an eagle). John uses the imagery of creatures that look like beasts to describe the attributes of Christ addressed in each scripture, and suggests by the number 4 that this is complete and perfect. The eagle seems to be associated with the divine nature, the spirit, soaring above all things in the heavens (Exodus 19:4, Isaiah 40:31, Jeremiah 48:40).

Therefore, the only conclusion I can come up with at this time, is that the imagery of the eagle consuming the flesh of the enemies of Christ means this: That the Word of God will consume (destroy) them. So again, this suggests that the people who are left behind are the ones that are saved, not the ones that are taken, because they are destroyed by the Word of God (See: 2 Thessalonians 2:8).

I just realized something: God breathed life into man in Genesis 2:7. He breathed on man when He gave the Holy Spirit in John 20:22. When He comes again, it is the breath of God (which is the breath of life) that will destroy His enemies, and destroy death (again, see 2 Thessalonians 2:8).

Please consider that the immediate context of chapter 24 is concerned with the coming judgment of Israel at the end of the Old Covenant age when the Temple is destroyed. And Jesus’ words do point to his Second Coming in glory but the immediate context is what will happen within his generation (Mt 24:34). The eagle would be God’s tool of destruction. The eagle (also translated as vulture) symbolize pagn nations who brought suffering on Israel in the OT. So there is no conflict in symbolism because it does not remain constant from book to book.

Deut 28:49
"The LORD will raise up against you a nation from afar, from the end of the earth, that swoops down like an eagle, a nation whose tongue you do not understand,
50
a nation of stern visage, that shows neither respect for the aged nor pity for the young.
51
They will consume the offspring of your livestock and the produce of your soil, until you are destroyed; they will leave you no grain or wine or oil, no issue of your herds or young of your flocks, until they have brought about your ruin.
52
They will besiege you in each of your communities, until the great, unscalable walls you trust in come tumbling down all over your land. They will so besiege you in every community throughout the land which the LORD, your God, has given you,
53
that in the distress of the siege to which your enemy subjects you, you will eat the fruit of your womb, the flesh of your own sons and daughters whom the LORD, your God, has given you.

Hab 1:6
For see, I am raising up Chaldea, that bitter and unruly people, That marches the breadth of the land to take dwellings not his own.
7
Terrible and dreadful is he, from himself derive his law and his majesty.
8
3 Swifter than leopards are his horses, and keener than wolves at evening. His horses prance, his horsemen come from afar: They fly like the eagle hastening to devour;
9
each comes for the rapine, Their combined onset is that of a stormwind that heaps up captives like sand.

So the first sense of Mt 24 is about judgment in the first century and that points to the judgment of the whole world when Christ comes in glory. I hope that makes sense.

 

[TimothyH]

But in Matthew 24 Jesus is clearly not only talking about the destruction of the temple (which did occur in 70 A.D.), but He is also talking about His second coming. The portion where He says “Where the body (carcass) is the eagles will gather.” is a direct reply to their questioning where those people will go when they are taken. ← Where do you get that? I just don’t see here that He is referring to the Romans as the eagles in that particular passage (you may be correct about Revelation referring to the Romans as birds though). .

Matthew 24:28 is part of Jesus discourse in response to the disciples question about when “not a stone left upon another stone” will take place. In Matthews account as well as the parallel accounts in Mark 13 and Luke 21, there is no question posed to Jesus about where anyone will go, at least not that I can see. What verse do you get that from?

I totally disagree that the discourse is about the end of time. I believe it is about the destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD and the killing of 1.2 million Jews by Tertillian.

Amen, I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things have taken place. (Mark 13:30 and Luke 21:32)

Jesus refers to the temple and states that there will not be a stone left upon a stone. The disciples ask him when that will happen and he replies that it will happen before the end of their own generation. Jerusalem was destroyed by Tertillian approximately 40 years after Christs words - about one generation. The desolating abomination might refer to a Roman military standard which was known to have been set up in the Jerusalem Temple prior to it’s destruction. See bible-history.com/sketches/ancient/roman-standards.html. A picture of one such Roman Military Standard is below.



Note the eagle which might be a clue to the OP’s original question! Also keep in mind how Jesus talks about labor pains and fig tree starting to bud as an indication that summer is near.

*All these are the beginning of the labor pains. (Matthew 24:8)

He taught them a lesson. "Consider the fig tree and all the other trees. When their buds burst open, you see for yourselves and know that summer is now near; in the same way, when you see these things happening, know that the kingdom of God is near. (Luke 21:29-31)*

The discourse is about the birth of God’s kingdom on earth, the summer of Christs Holy Catholic Church! But the birth of the Church does not come without labor pains, of which the destruction of Jerusalem, the killing of the Jews, and the persecution of the disciples as described by Jesus are parts.

-Tim-

 

[JonathonofOhio]

there is no question posed to Jesus about where anyone will go,

The question is actually posted in Luke 17, where the same phrase appears again. So naturally I am assuming parts of Luke 17 and Matthew 24 are talking about the same discourse.

Jesus refers to the temple and states that there will not be a stone left upon a stone.

Yes, Jesus does make the predication of the destruction of the temple while he is among the buildings. However, you will notice after that prediction Matthew places Jesus on the Mount of Olivet and the disciples came to him asking him a two part question (Douey-Rheims version: Matthew 24:3 - "3 And when he was sitting on mount Olivet, the disciples came to him privately, saying: Tell us when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the consummation of the world? "

They not only asked when the temple would be destroyed buy they also asked him when his second coming was to be. He responds to both questions. Therefore, His discourse is about both the destruction of the temple and His second coming.

 

[JonathonofOhio]

Please consider that the immediate context of chapter 24 is concerned with the coming judgment of Israel at the end of the Old Covenant age when the Temple is destroyed. And Jesus’ words do point to his Second Coming in glory but the immediate context is what will happen within his generation (Mt 24:34). The eagle would be God’s tool of destruction. The eagle (also translated as vulture) symbolize pagn nations who brought suffering on Israel in the OT. So there is no conflict in symbolism because it does not remain constant from book to book.

You do make a valid point about the eagle being used to describe characteristics of an enemy. And it is a valid argument that He was referring to the Roman Army since they did use the symbol of the eagle (in Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible, he takes this point of view). So, yes, it does make sense that He could be referring to the destruction of the Jews at the hands of the Romans. I’m not saying you are wrong, I’m just offering another way of looking at it. Often times Jesus could say a single phrase, and in that phrase is a dozen lessons, like a picture that paints a thousand words.

To me the passage clearly indicates Jesus was answering two questions, so His discourse was both about the destruction of the temple, and His second coming. He is also telling us what to look out for and what to do. He says ‘Don’t go out and look’ when someone says "here He is’, and He advices that we “do not go back” to get something. In other words, do not look back as Lots Wife did. He is drawing on lessons of the Old Testament, it seems. In Luke 17 he says “Whoever seeks to save his life, will lose it” So if you look back at your former life of sin and desire it, you will lose your eternal life. He is talking about persevering during the times of persecution and of suffering both in the near future and before he returns. Therefore, if you do go out, if you do go back, if you do look back, you will die.

So in saying that “Wherever the corpse is, the eagles gather”, he is most likely referring to Job 39:27-30, where we see this proverb:

“Will the eagle mount up at thy command, and make her nest in high places?
She abideth among the rocks, and dwelleth among cragged flints, and stony hills, where there is no access.
From thence she looketh for the prey, and her eyes behold afar off.
Her young ones shall suck up blood : and wheresoever the carcass shall be, she is immediately there.”

Now, I don’t mean that he was trying to get them to just remember that one particular passage where the proverb appears, but I think it is his intention to call to mind the story of Job, as is his intention to call to mind the story of Lot and Noah as well. The story teaches a valuable lesson of persevering during difficult times. We see that Job was fully restored in the end, so Jesus advices us that we are to remain faithful and abide in the Truth, or we will die (we will be taken, swept away, destroyed by fire from heaven).

So, while these lessons and the warnings can be applied to what happened during the time of the Roman persecutions, it is my opinion that He was not only referring to that time, but also a future time when He will come again, before that the Church will see a persecution like no other.

 

[thistle]

I was talking with a friend of mine about this verse and we came up with this: Matt 24:28 says, “Wheresoever the body shall be, there shall the eagles also be gathered together.” Now, the KJV says, “For wheresoever the carcase is, there will the eagles be gathered together.” The Haydock Commentary says the “Body” is referring to Christ and the “Eagles” refers to the angels and saints who will swiftly join Christ at the place of judgement. St. Hilary understands this literally; that where his body shall hang upon the cross, there will he appear in judgment, i.e. near the valley of Josaphat; in which place the prophet Joel (chap. iii. ver. 2,) declares, that the general judgment shall take place. So Hilary believed that the judgement will begin with Christ appearing on the exact spot where He died on the cross. Joel 3:2 says, “I will gather together all nations and will bring them down into the valley of Josaphat: and I will plead with them there for my people, and for my inheritance, Israel, whom they have scattered among the nations, and have parted my land.”

I have to say that I see the Eucharist in this. I understand that eagles eat ONLY living flesh, whereas, vultures eat only dead flesh. In this verse, the eagles gather around Christ on the cross and this same bloody sacrifice is what is offered on the altar at every Mass - Living Flesh!

I almost forgot, if the Judgement begins at the place of the cross, this seems to destroy the idea of the Rapture.

What do you think?

Eagles eat fresh flesh which is different from living flesh. In other words they do not scavenge for dead carcasses like vultures but catch, kill and then eat their prey (fresh but dead).

 

[TimothyH]

The question is actually posted in Luke 17, where the same phrase appears again. So naturally I am assuming parts of Luke 17 and Matthew 24 are talking about the same discourse.

Yes, very good.

The question is actually posted in Luke 17, where the same phrase appears again. So naturally I am assuming parts of Luke 17 and Matthew 24 are talking about the same discourse.

Yes, very good.

And there will be two women grinding meal together; one will be taken, the other left." They said to him in reply, “Where, Lord?” He said to them, “Where the body is, there also the vultures will gather.” (Luke 17:25-36)

First off, I totally agree with your assessment that the faithful will be left behind and the wicked will be taken.

But I’m not too sure about the question “Where, Lord?” asked of Jesus. You make some valid points I will have to consider, and, quite frankly, compare with the teaching of the Church.

My knowledge of history points me to the destruction of the temple however. Historical analysis of Tertillians entry into Jerusalem and the distruction of the temple parallel Jesus’ discouse too closely to be coincidental. I’ll put my pride aside and defer to truth however. It is an interesting topic for me. The St. Hillary references are interesting as well.

Quite frankly, the KJV reference in your original post scared me. Any mention of the KJV puts my antenna on alert.

PAX
-Tim-

 

[JonathonofOhio]

In thinking more on it, I am also seeing that perhaps he is saying that the ones taken are taken by the false teachers, or they are taken by the false prophets; not in the literal sense, but more as someone who is ‘taken’ by an object of beauty. But I too have to do more thinking on this…I just thought it was interesting enough to share my thoughts.

Quite frankly, the KJV reference in your original post scared me. Any mention of the KJV puts my antenna on alert.
-Tim-

If I quoted KJV, my apologies, it was my intent to paste the passage from Douay-Rheims (which I thought I did). I always refer to multiple translations when I read for comparison, and I do read the KJV just to see how it’s translated there (because often times I find myself into long discussions with Fundamentalists that only read KJV so it’s helpful to know of any mistranslations). But Douay-Rheims was my intended source here, simply because I had that one open online while I researching. More often though I use the newadvent.org bible, which I probably should have done here.

 

[ryanoneil]

Then he said to his disciples, "The days will come when you will long to see one of the days of the Son of Man, but you will not see it. (Lk 17:22)

Mention of the “days of the Son of man” gives us a clue that Jesus is forewarning about the downfall of Jerusalem. It is echoed later when reference is made to the “days” when foreign armies will besiege the city and the “days” when the Temple will be devastated.

**For the days are coming upon you when your enemies will raise a palisade against you; they will encircle you and hem you in on all sides. They will smash you to the ground and your children within you, and they will not leave one stone upon another within you because you did not recognize the time of your visitation." (Luke 19:43-44)

“All that you see here–the days will come when there will not be left a stone upon another stone that will not be thrown down.” Then they asked him, “Teacher, when will this happen? And what sign will there be when all these things are about to happen?” (Luke 21:6-7)**

So back to Lk 17, the disciples will desire to see the vindication of Jesus as he avenges the city that condemned him to a violent death. They will not see it first hand though, because Jesus ordered them to evacuate Jerusalem and flee from Judea before the onset of Judgment. The fate of the wicked is to be swept away and the righteous will be mercifully spared. The eagles (vultures) will surround and besiege the body (corpse) of Jerusalem. So, when they ask “where Lord” Jesus was talking about getting out of Judea.

**"When you see the desolating abomination spoken of through Daniel the prophet standing in the holy place (let the reader understand), then those in Judea must flee to the mountains, a person on the housetop must not go down to get things out of his house, a person in the field must not return to get his cloak. Woe to pregnant women and nursing mothers in those days. Pray that your flight not be in winter or on the sabbath, for at that time there will be great tribulation, such as has not been since the beginning of the world until now, nor ever will be. (Mt 24:15-21)

And if those days had not been shortened, no one would be saved; but for the sake of the elect they will be shortened. If anyone says to you then, ‘Look, here is the Messiah!’ or, ‘There he is!’ do not believe it. False messiahs and false prophets will arise, and they will perform signs and wonders so great as to deceive, if that were possible, even the elect. Behold, I have told it to you beforehand. So if they say to you, ‘He is in the desert,’ do not go out there; if they say, ‘He is in the inner rooms,’ do not believe it. For just as lightning comes from the east and is seen as far as the west, so will the coming of the Son of Man be. Wherever the corpse is, there the vultures will gather. (Mt 24:22-28**)

While the coming of the Son of man does point to Christ’s second coming in glory, it first points to his ascension to heaven where he is given the kingdom and is seated at the right hand of the Father. A study of the Son of man imagery would be helpful, but the short of it is: after going to heaven the Father would decree the destruction of his enemies. The first earthly evidence of this is the destruction of Jerusalem. Hope that helps.

 

[JonathonofOhio]

While the coming of the Son of man does point to Christ’s second coming in glory, it first points to his ascension to heaven where he is given the kingdom and is seated at the right hand of the Father. A study of the Son of man imagery would be helpful, but the short of it is: after going to heaven the Father would decree the destruction of his enemies. The first earthly evidence of this is the destruction of Jerusalem. Hope that helps.

The Pharisees in Luke 17 ask Jesus when the Kingdom of God was coming. Jesus answers that the Kingdom of God is not a place, but is within each of us.

Here is an excerpt from the Catholic Encyclopedia concerning what the Kingdom of God is:

So, too, as men realized that this kingdom stood for a certain tone of mind, and saw that this peculiar spirit was enshrined in the Church, they began to speak of the Church as “the kingdom of God”; cf. Colossians 1:13; 1 Thessalonians 2:12; Apocalypse 1:6-9 and 5:10, etc. The kingdom was regarded as Christ’s and He presents it to the Father; cf. 1 Corinthians 15:23-28; 2 Timothy 4:1. The kingdom of God means, then, the ruling of God in our hearts; it means those principles which separate us off from the kingdom of the world and the devil; it means the benign sway of grace; it means the Church as that Divine institution whereby we may make sure of attaining the spirit of Christ and so win that ultimate kingdom of God Where He reigns without end in “the holy city, the New Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God” (Revelation 21:2).

So it becomes more clear when he says that they will say “See here, and see there. Go not after, nor follow them” - He is saying that they will tell you that the Church is here, or there, but do not go after them, because it is not. This is not only in their time, but this is during the time of the Kingdom of God (during the time of the Church)-- ALL of it. He warns of many false prophets and false teachers, which were in existence since the beginning of the Church and now are everywhere. Not only does the Church have to deal with the many churches today who refer to themselves as Christian Churches, but She also has to deal with the growing number of people who are converting to Islam and its spread throughout the world. Islam denies that Jesus is God, and that He rose from the dead, and is seated at the right hand of the Father. And this belief of theirs that Jesus is not the Son of God is inscribed in their temple, which is sitting in the holy place (where the 2nd Temple used to stand). He uses the stories of Noah and Lot to demonstrate that it will be similar, and destruction will come quick.

He tells them that you will desire to see a day like the Son of Man; ‘day’ meaning that time when the light of the Kingdom of God is in the world (the Church is visible in the world today). He talks of a time when “you will not see it”, and then says “in that night”, which is not the destruction of Jerusalem, but a time coming in which the Church is overpowered, and is no longer visible in the world. But even in the night there is the light of the moon and the stars, so the Church will remain, but it will be a dark time. And it will remain, because if it doesn’t then who could survive? He says ‘in that night’ some will be taken, and others will be preserved (left), because some will leave the faith in order to save their life (and those that do will lose their eternal life).

He mentions that when they see the “abomination that causes desolation” then they should flee Judea, as if it were some signal to look for. An article in the Catholic Encyclopedia discusses it (it does mention that some say it refers to the Romans, but there are problems with that). It is way too much to quote so here is the link: newadvent.org/cathen/01046a.htm

So I must continue to disagree that Jesus is only referring to the destruction of the temple and events that were to take place soon after His ascension into heaven. It is just so clear to me that He was talking about more than that. But if the explanation that He is referring to the Romans and the destruction of the temple is sufficient for you, then I will not persuade you further to see the possibility of something more, which is not really in conflict with your explanation of it, because certainly He was, in part, speaking of the destruction of the temple.

 

[ryanoneil]

But I don’t think I ever said he was only refering to the destruction of the Temple, but that was the primary meaning. Everything Jesus said was initially fulfilled in the first century but imbedded in his words are the spiritual truths that point forward to his Second Coming in glory and the end of the visible world.

Put another way, everything took place on a micro scale in the first century. The Temple and the holy land was an architectural model of the heavens and the earth. It’s judgment and destruction at the end of the Old Testament world (being renewed in the New Testament) prefigures the judgment of all nations and destruction of the entire universe and the end of the Church age (to be renewed in eternity).

Or put another way, the desolation was fulfilled in the time of the Maccabees. That fulfilment became prophecy pointing to the time of Christ and he claimed the desolation for his generation. The fulfilment of the desolation during his generation then pointed to the last generation. So I think we are mostly in agreement.