My alternative is that the rebels using the Temple as a fortress during the Jewish Civil War and during the Jewish Revolt against Rome was the abomination of desolation despite the reference to a statue–abomination of a Desolate Temple not being used for its purpose.

Thank you, very much.

Desolations plural. I’m thinking the Temple became desolate one time. I’m not getting what you’re saying, there.

I’m also thinking that once the rebels revolted, get out of Jerusalem: they are dysfunctional and will really mess everything up; for example, they will and did cut off food supplies and people began to starve and cannibalize. So it would make sense to flee. And like people did ask armies to see they were not against Rome. So many people surrendered to the Romans and Vespasian and Titus accepted that on many occasions.

Flee to the mountains and find the Romans in the mountains. Why not?

So you want to push all of the Tribulation from the First Jewish-Roman War
past the Second Jewish-Roman War
to the Third Jewish-Roman WAr?

The Romans had to come from Galilee.
In fact, they did come from the north in Galilee after the Battle of Galilee.

If rebel factions were taking over Ancient Jerusalem, taking over the Temple for a fortress, cutting off food supplies, attacking the elite and high priests, people should run away.

Do you have a citation to Wars of the Jews about Romans arriving from the west?

I doubt what you say Robert because Wars of the Jews is pretty detailed about the Romans coming in and putting down the Revolt.
That’s what you found from critics of Wars of the Jews? Josephus did not cover the troop movements of the Romans?

It’s just a first for me hearing this criticism.

All of the outlines of the Jewish Revolt have the Romans going from Galilee then to Jerusalem.

That’s only two points.

This is better it shows Jewish REvolt losses by year: 67, 68, then 69-73.
** you do not have permission to see this link **