Peter, you are raising valid points that would literally take hours to discuss, so I consider this kind of environment least condusive to cover those issues, but I will try.

It seems like your biggest objection to a past return is the lack of a physical re-creation of the universe (obviously the tangible creation was not “re-made” in AD 70) so you are forced to place it somewhere in the future, together with the “final” Parousia and with the final judgment.

But I believe there is a problem with this argument in that it is being created in a framework that placed the physical creation at the top of God’s list of problems to be solved, if you will.  What if I propose to you a new framework in which we no longer use the physical/flesh as a point of reference and rather we use the spiritual, unseen nature of God as such?

I don’t really want to start proof-texting here, but Paul put forward this framework in 2 Cor. 5 when he wrote, “Therefore from now on we recognize no one according to the flesh; even though we have known Christ according to the flesh, yet we know Him in this way no longer.”

It seems to be evident that Paul is proposing a “new way” in which we can understand and relate to God, a new framework that is not bond by atoms and molecules of this creation.  He continues: “Therefore if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creature, the old things passed away; behold, new things have come.”

Paul is presenting his argument in light of what Mircea Eliade called the “Eternal Return” - the ever-present theme we see throughout our faith, the desire to always return to the sacred, to our Creator, to our Eden where we are in a constant relationship with God.  Paul is using ginomai to illustrate tha the “new” has already arrived and in next verse, in 18 he is pointing out the exact problem humanity had: reconcilliation, relationship between God and his creation.

The biggest problem humanity is facing is not one of atoms being arranged the wrong way; it is rather a relational one: we lack a relationship with God. The Orthodox Church has expressed the solution to this problem with the pascha icon, the icon of the resurrection of Jesus, where he is coming out of the grave with the gates of Hades smashed under his feet, with Adam and Eve at his side, bringing them “back to life” - renewing them and through them renewing us, returning us to where we are suppose to be, a relationship with the Creator.  The narrative does not revolve around the re-creation of the physical universe, but the re-creation of our relationship with God.

I agree with Andrew in that traditional Preterism focuses too narrowly on the historical aspects of Matthew 24 and the events surrounding AD 70 while missing the greater points of praxis-centered living for us today.  Jesus did says that “My Kingdom is not of this world” and whatever that means, I cannot see it mean a throne in Jerusalem where Jesus sits on in a physical body with the world worshipping him in a physical sense.  There is something missing from that picture for me.

Please consider my points in love :) I always appreciate your feedback and have always enjoyed interacting with you here.