[Frumanchu]

The author has made a series of points about preterism in his article. His concluding comments included a personal observation.

Yup, and I gave my personal observation regarding the misleading nature of such a spurious comment. I questioned the unquestionable.

That concluding observations was something that was commented on by you to me in post #5. When you posted to me, did you want me NOT to respond? If you'd simply said so, then I probably would have obliged.

I honestly didn't think you would go to such great lenghts to defend a ridiculous statement like this one. You invited such criticism the moment you passed this guy off as some sort of proof that preterism is not truly Reformed.

[xzins]

I suspect you aren’t addressing any of the 7 points for a reason. Far easier to bloviate about his personal observation.