OK, I believe we can have some information of ponder here. A full detailed explanation would be book-length, so it doesn't fit into a post really. I realize that all this is a version of opening a can of worms. Consider these:
Addressing the events we look for to determine when the End will come, we look to Using Matthew's text as the launch point:
Mt 24:1–3 Jesus left the temple and was going away, when his disciples came to point out to him the buildings of the temple. But he answered them,
“You see all these, do you not? Truly, I say to you, there will not be left here one stone upon another that will not be thrown down.” As he sat on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately, saying, “Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?”
It is important to understand that His disciples asked two questions here rather than just one. Yeshua just told them that the temple was doing to be destroyed, so they wanted to know about that, but they also wanted to know when the End of Days would take place.
Yeshua responds to them, predicting many signs and events. About halfway through this long passage, Jesus promises the coming of the Son of man within a generation by stating,
“They will see the Son of man coming on the clouds of Heaven with power and great glory.… Truly, I say to you, this generation will not pass away till all these things take place.”
While people argue the meaning of "generation," Thayer's dictionary shows: the whole multitude of men living at the same time as in: Matthew 24:34, Mark 13:30, and in Luke 1:48. Many have chosen to understand the word to refer to a time millennia later, but then the prophecies fall outside the boundaries of logical.
The book of Matthew causes confusion because the writer combines the answers to those two questions, but in Luke, the answers are separate. We should let Luke and Mark clarify the confusion contained in Matthew.
In Matthew 24:4-35 Luke 21: 5-33, and Mark 13: 5-31 are all about the destruction of the Temple.
As for the second question regarding the End of Days, Matthew 24:36–44, Mark 13:32–37, and Luke 17:22–37 provide the answer about the second coming of Christ.
I have read books by people who have come to the same conclusion that the following author came to, and I'd like to offer quotes from his writing in this post. I'd also recommend reading this book as he goes into a lot more detail. Then again, there is noting salvific in this study, and the author is a Trinitarian; so there is that.
One of the books I read regarding these prophecies is
Rapture (The End-Times Error that Leaves the Bible Behind) by David Currie. The following is a quote from his book:
Between 70 and 73 A.D., the Temple complex was destroyed by the Roman army. In their rage in 70 A.D., the Roman legions disobeyed General Titus’s orders and set fire to the Temple. As a result, the gold in the Temple melted down between its huge stones. To their chagrin, these same Roman soldiers were then ordered to dismantle everything stone by stone over a period of three years. By the time they had finished recovering the gold, nothing was left but a field. The Romans then plowed the field under.
The Jewish Talmud understood the defeat at the hand of Titus to be the final fulfillment of Micah 3:12 (ESV) Therefore because of you Zion shall be plowed as a field; Jerusalem shall become a heap of ruins, and the mountain of the house a wooded height.
Micah 3:12 and Jeremiah 26:18 predicted the destruction of the Babylonian conquest. The Babylonian destruction, in turn, stood as a prophetic event pointing to the Roman destruction. The fourth-century Church historian Eusebius would have agreed with the Talmud on this issue, with the caveat that he believed that Jesus elaborated on the message of Micah and Jeremiah. Eusebius believed that we can take the prophecies of the Olivet Discourse at their straightforward best.
The Signs:
Sign 1: False messiahs
Sign 2: Wars “You will hear of wars and rumors of wars”
Signs 3 and 4: Famines and earthquakes
Sign 5: Persecution
Sign 6: Apostasy
Sign 7: The gospel worldwide
St. Paul states that in his lifetime, the Faith of the Church in Rome “is proclaimed in all the world” (Rom. 1:8). In Colossians 1:5–6, he writes, “You have heard … the gospel … as indeed in the whole world it is bearing fruit and growing.”
Sign 8: Daniel’s desolating sacrilege
Luke 21:20 (ESV) But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation has come near.
All of these signs appeared within a generation of Jesus’ prediction (30 A.D. to 67 A.D.).
As for the sign of the Son of Man coming in the clouds:
We must be careful not to assume that the coming of the Son of man on clouds means that the Son must be coming to earth. Jesus lifted the “Son of man” language directly out of Daniel 7:13–14, so we must respect that context.We already determined that in Daniel it is perfectly clear that the Son of man is coming toward the Ancient of Days, not to earth! We have already seen that Daniel’s “Son of man” was publicly recognized as the victor at the judgment of the Sanhedrin in 70 A.D. This is the point at which Christ was vindicated as Judge of His accusers, and the Kingdom was publicly given to the saints, as Daniel’s vision foretold.
Daniel 7:27 (ESV) And the kingdom and the dominion and the greatness of the kingdoms under the whole heaven shall be given to the people of the saints of the Most High; his kingdom shall be an everlasting kingdom, and all dominions shall serve and obey him.’
What happened here on earth was just the by-product of the heavenly reality. Of course, the “clouds of Heaven” symbolize the majesty and glory of the Son of man when He judges His enemies. It does not mean that this event of coming could not have occurred on a cloudless day).
AS for the answer to the second question:
While Yeshua gave signs for the coming destruction of the Temple, he gave none specifically for the sign of His return. It is certainly possible for us to see the signs for the destruction of the Temple to be the same for the return of Yeshua.
Yeshua spoke of the timing of an event of which no one, not even the Son, has any knowledge:
“But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of Heaven, nor the Son, but the Father only” (Matt. 24:36).
The analogy then was one of lightning:
“For as the lightning comes from the east and shines as far as the west, so will be the coming of the Son of man. Wherever the body is, there the eagles will be gathered together” (Matt. 24:27–28). These parenthetical verses tell us three aspects of the second advent of the real Christ.
♦ First, Christ’s second advent will be sudden. There will be no immediate warning preceding it. There will be no eight signs with five amplifications. As with lightning, we may be aware that storm clouds are gathering, but there is no way to predict precisely when or where the lightning will strike.
♦ Second, the return of Christ will be very public and unmistakable. There is nothing private or secretive about lightning; no one need tell anyone else about its advent. It is immediately experienced by all.
♦ Third, at the second coming, Christ will draw to Himself those who are His.
I think it is worth considering passages that are often take to mean something that they don't actually mean:
Matthew 24:40 (ESV)
Then two men will be in the field; one will be taken and one left.
Matthew 24:41 (ESV)
Two women will be grinding at the mill; one will be taken and one left.
Note that the word "behind" is not there.
David Currie explains it like this:
Rapturists have done a magnificent job in convincing Christians that this is a prediction of the rapture, when Jesus will return secretly for His Christians, take them to Heaven, and leave the unbelievers to suffer here on earth. They insert the word behind into the passage. They understand it as “one is taken, and one is left behind.”
But this is not what the verses say, nor does the Greek language support this interpretation. Jesus does not mean one of these people will be left behind. Jesus is speaking here of the second coming that will usher in eternity. It will be impossible to be left behind, because the world will come to an end.
No, Jesus is saying they will be left out, left out of His eternal Kingdom when He returns. The Gospel account uses the Greek verb aphiemi, which most commonly has the meaning of being left, left alone, forsaken, or even sent away. There is another Greek word that would have made it clear that Jesus meant “left behind.” This word is apoleipo, or hupoleipo.
The idea that the first person will be taken to Heaven and the second left behind is not justified by the Greek text. But the context of Jesus’ discourse argues even more strongly against the rapturist understanding of being left behind. How do we know this? Jesus proceeds to tell three parables. When we get to the second parable, we will see that the only reasonable understanding of Jesus’ meaning is not “left behind,” but “left out”—left out of the eternal marriage feast of the Lamb.
The “left behind” controversy should not obscure an important assertion of Jesus: the daily lives of loyal Kingdom subjects will remain entirely comingled with those of the disloyal. People are not sorted into or out of Christ’s Kingdom by physical or national boundaries. Christ’s subjects will be neighbors and friends with unbelievers until the very end, at His second coming.
They will be working, living, and socializing together. Some will enter the Kingdom of Heaven in the end, and some will be left out of it. This is the part of these verses that would have shocked any first-century citizen of Rome. This is unlike the four earthly kingdoms that the Kingdom of Heaven replaces in Daniel’s vision. Christ’s Kingdom will not have physical boundaries, because it is spiritual. Three parables to clarify the answer Jesus was a master at using parables to clarify His meaning. This case is no exception. 
