Jesus was challenged by the Jews in John 2:18: "So the Jews said to him, “What sign (S4592 semeion) do you show us for doing these things?” Then Jesus replied by using a symbolism or sign speaking of his body as a "temple".. “Jesus answered them, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.” Now to the start of Revelation:
“The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show unto his servants, [even] the things which must shortly come to pass: and he sent and signified (S4591 semaino)[it] by his angel unto his servant John; who bare witness of the word of God, and of the testimony of Jesus Christ, [even] of all things that he saw. Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of the prophecy, and keep the things that are written therein: for the time is at hand.” (Re 1:1-3)
Checking the Greek for "time is at hand", it is found in 3 places in the NT and I quote them asking why the occurrences in Revelation should be different than what was stated in Matthew? If Matt. 26:18 can't be stretched for 2000 years, why should the times in Revelation?
Mt 26:18 And he said, Go into the city to such a man, and say unto him, The Master saith, My time <2540> is at hand <1451>; I will keep the passover at thy house with my disciples.
Re 1:3 Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time <2540> is at hand <1451>.
Re 22:10 And he saith unto me, Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time <2540> is at hand <1451>.
Not only is it emphatically stated that these symbolic happenings were to "shorty come to pass" and that the "time is at hand" at the beginning of Revelation, it is repeated at the closing, 22:6, 10. The statements of time of fulfillment are not themselves symbols, just plain statements. I have yet to find any rational explanation as to why these words do not mean exactly what they say. The book of Revelation nowhere states it is written in 95-96AD and Rv. 11:1-2 is impossible to explain if the temple were not then still standing. Can you imagine any Jew reading that if the temple was no more?
I find it contradictory for those who claim a literal approach to Scripture, yet totally ignore those statements of time.