Doctrine of the Last Things (Part 6): The Preterist Interpretation Continued

Dr. William Lane Craig continues his critique of the preterist view that Christ's "coming" as the Son of Man was fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. He argues, first, that the New Testament consistently describes this coming as visible and public: witnessed by everyone, not a secret event hidden from history. Second, he contends that Christ was already reigning as the risen and ascended King well before AD 70, so the Olivet Discourse can't be describing his enthronement in that year; it's better read as his future return as conquering King. Third, and most decisively, Paul ties Christ's coming to the bodily resurrection of the dead, which plainly did not happen in AD 70, a problem so sharp that even interpreters sympathetic to a preterist reading, as N.T. Wright's own remarks show, end up treating Paul's resurrection hope as a separate, still-future event. Dr. Craig explains why, despite its appeal, he can't accept Preterism as the solution to the New Testament's expectation of Christ's return.