Relating to the shortage of Second Coming specific Bible verses amongst partial-preterists: I think it’s very revealing to read the ‘A Statement on Unorthodox Eschatology’ (a good statement btw, I’m glad they did it) which was signed by major partial-preterist leaders (Gentry, Durbin, Wilson, Sandlin, Kayser, etc.) and also some non-preterists, to make a strong statement against the unbiblical and unorthodox nature of full-preterism. I agree with the statement, but I think it’s still woefully weak in biblical support for the Second Coming. What do I mean? Well, first of all, when writing a statement against full-preterism, you would obviously include the most thorough list of biblical proof you have, right? Certainly it would be strange to do anything less. Well, notice point #4 in the statement, which specifically deals with the physical visible future Second Coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. See what biblical support they have listed for this truth, only Acts 1 and Thessalonians! That’s it. Nothing from the Gospels? Nothing from the Revelation of Jesus Christ? Etc. I can only speculate, since I don’t know for certain, but it does seem to strongly suggest that the Second Coming passage list is so short because these would be the only verses that these signatory leading partial-preterists could all agree upon. It certainly does not seem that the reason would be lack of space, or a decision to only limit references to 3 per point, since point #7 even has 5 different Bible references listed for support. It is well known that not all partial-preterist have the same view on what Second Coming passages are still future and which ones were fulfilled in 70AD. Here’s the link to the statement: