Partial-preterism is poisonous, because it greatly weakens the biblical witness to the glorious second coming of Christ. How so? By assigning MANY second coming passages to 70AD, and thereby twisting their glorious promise.

Let me give one example: See here an excellent quote (picture below) from the well respected Reformed theologian Herman Bavinck. Notice how when speaking here about the glorious promised return of Christ to earth, he appeals to two passages as main evidence: Matthew 24:30 and Revelation 1:7. Excellent primary passages indeed! However, this is something a partial-preterist could NOT do, since these verses (and many more) have in their view already been fulfilled in 70AD. They do still believe in an actual future return also (hence partial, not full), but they have a lot less Bible passages that speak about it.


 I am certainly aware that Bavinck was no fan of premillennialism (my view), and my point is not that he is some authority that cannot be questioned in light of Scripture. However, I do think this is a good example of how a futuristic understanding of passages like Matthew 24:30 and Revelation 1:7 has essentially been the unquestioned view of the Christian church at large (even amongst those who have differing millennial views and such), right from the early church fathers to present day. Yet, preterism goes against this all, and begins to poison and weaken our view of the blessed hope of our Lord’s return.

“Then will appear in heaven the sign of the Son of Man, 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.” (Matthew 24:30)

“Behold, he is coming with the clouds, and every eye will see him, even those who pierced him, and all tribes of the earth will wail on account of him. Even so. Amen.” (Revelation 1:7)