Why partial preterism is false...

[robycop3]

 Partial preterism says all eschatological events except Jesus' return have already occurred.  However, Matt. 24:29-31 show this is wrong.

Matt. 24:29 "Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. 30 Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. 31 And He will send His angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they will gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.

  There can be no denying of "immediately". This shows the whole partial pret idea is incorrect. (As is full preterism, of course!)

[lea]

 Understand if you notice that was figurative language, just like when destruction was coming to a people in the O.T.
Isaiah 13:13 (NKJV)
13
Therefore I will shake the heavens,
And the earth will move out of her place,
In the wrath of the Lord of hosts
And in the day of His fierce anger.

Only in Matt.24 the devastation falls on Israel. Jerusalem in fact.

[soterion]

Partial preterism says all eschatological events except Jesus' return have already occurred.  However, Matt. 24:29-31 show this is wrong.

Matt. 24:29 "Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. 30 Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. 31 And He will send His angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they will gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.

  There can be no denying of "immediately". This shows the whole partial pret idea is incorrect. (As is full preterism, of course!)

If eschatology is defined as end of the world events, then it is a misnomer to apply that term to preterism. Obviously, whatever events preterism says are supposed to have already occurred would not be eschatological.

Also, the word "immediately" works against what you are saying here. If the events in verse 29 are to occur immediately after the preceding events, then either all of the preceding events are end of the world, or the events following verse 29 have already occurred.

[robycop3]

  I can only quote Scripture here. These are the words of Jesus Himself, who knows (and then knew) more about His return than any mortal person.

  While "praeter" means "past", what's generally defined as "preterism" today is the belief that the eschatological events - the events occurring shortly before Jesus' return, as well as His return itself - occurred in the past. This is simply not so. The world goes right on, same as it was in 65 Ad, same as it was in 71 AD. Jesus has not reigned on earth for 1K years yet, nor has Satan been confined to "the abyss", as the prevalence of sin proves.

  **PRETERISM - PHONY AS A FORD CORVETTE !**