1. Because Christ told the Jews the Great Tribulation would begin when they saw the abomination of desolation (spoken of by Daniel the prophet) stand in the Holy Place (Matt. 24: 15). There is no evidence that the parallel visions of Daniel 7, 8, 9, 11, & 12 were fulfilled in A.D. 67-70, and yet such evidence is needed to prove that “that generation” saw the “abomination of desolation” which set off the “Great Tribulation.”
2. Because there was no visible coming of Christ in the first century. The world would not have missed such an event had it happened, for Christ said His coming would be like lightning, shining from the east even unto the west (Matt. 24: 27).
3. Because the view has no Biblical analogy. God always sent His prophets to address Israel as a corporate body. There is not one instance in Scripture in which a certain generation of Israelites was singled out to receive teachings that would expire when they ‘passed away.’ The curses of Deut. 28 were spoken by Moses to the “generation in the wilderness,” and yet according to Preterists they weren’t fulfilled until 1,500 years later! Obviously both Moses and his antitype Jesus Christ were addressing Israel as a corporate body.
4. Because there was no resurrection of the dead in A.D. 70. To claim that there was is a gratuitous assumption, with no proof whatsoever to back it. Previous resurrections mentioned in Scripture were verifiable events (e.g. John 11: 43-45; Matt. 27: 52-53). Why would the wholesale resurrection of believers be any different? Moreover, Daniel places resurrection in connection with the Great Tribulation (Dan. 1-2). This gives us an important hint (see Reason #1) that the Preterist theory of “this generation” is mistaken.
5. Because the Roman armies were never destroyed in A.D. 70. According to Scripture, when Christ returns He will fight against the nations that attack Jerusalem (Zech. 12: 9, 14: 3; cf. Isa. 66: 15-16; Zeph. 3: 8).
6. Because the Jewish nation was never converted in A.D. 70. According to Scripture, Christ will only come back when the Jewish nation repents (Matt. 23: 39; Acts 3: 19-21; Zech. 12: 10). When the siege is lifted by Messiah, blindness will be permanently removed from the Jewish nation (Isa. 29).
7. Because the alleged ‘tribulation’ of A.D. 67-70 was strictly local in nature. But according to Scripture, the real tribulation is to include “all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues” (Rev. 7: 9-14). It is likened to “an hour of temptation, which shall come upon all the world (kosmos) to try them that dwell upon the earth” (Rev. 3: 10).
8. Because the early church knew nothing about any parousia happening in the 1st century. The view that there was an invisible, hypothetical ‘coming of Christ’ in A.D. 70 is a product of post-Reformation theology. As Thomas Ice has correctly stated: “It was not until the seventeenth century that we have an extant record of anyone suggesting anything like a preterist view that refers Matthew 24:27 and 30 to a.d. 70.”
9. Because the Olivet Discourse was spoken privately to Peter, James, John, and Andrew (Mark 13: 3), three of whom never lived to see the destruction of the temple; whilst John himself was nowhere near the vicinity of Jerusalem when the temple was destroyed. Thus when Christ says, “When YE shall see all these things” (Matt. 24: 33), it is obvious that His predictions involve the nation, and not His immediate audience.
10. Because lexicons and concordances always list ‘race/nation’ as an accepted rendering of the Greek word ‘genea.’ The Septuagint warrants this usage in several places (Gen. 31: 3, 43: 7; Lev. 20: 18, 25: 41; Numbers 10: 30; Jer. 8: 3, 10: 23). Also, when the KJV was first published in 1611, the English word “generation” was often used to denote a race or nation. An early Bible dictionary even lists Matt. 24: 34 as a proof-text for this usage. For more info, see “The Quarterly Journal of Prophecy.”
