That was a concluding observation to point out that preterism is not simply a benign doctrinal falsity, that it robs people of the hope of the resurrection.
Whatever the case may be, do you think Jesus returned in 70AD?
And as has been repeatedly pointed out, partial preterists most certainly affirm the hope of the resurrection for the people of God. Yet there seems to be a persistent effort to imply that we don't.
Do you believe partial preterists rob people of the hope of the resurrection?
That was a concluding observation to point out that preterism is not simply a benign doctrinal falsity, that it robs people of the hope of the resurrection.
The closer one is to something, the more distinctions one is able to make. For instance, from where I sit all dispensationalists pretty much sound alike.
I'm coming late to the thread, maybe this has been hashed out.
There are those that have the label preterist that are within the bounds of orthodoxy with respect to their view of the resurrection ("partial preterist" or sometimes just preterist), and those that are not ("full preterist" or "Hymenaen preterist"). Exactly what terminology gets applied depends on who's talking and how they're trying to spin the language.
To hold the view that everything was fulfilled when God's wrath fell on Jerusalem and the temple destroyed in Anno Domini 70, necessarily means that the resurrection is something other than a resurrection of the body. That view is beyond the pale. (And, by the way, those preterists expect me to believe that this is the eternal state, that this world is nothing more than a brooder of saved souls for heaven, till the sun goes cold? No way.)