Peter wrote:

"That sets us on a course in which the more obviously central events of his death and resurrection are radically marginalised (which I perceive to be the case from your own central preoccupations)."

Peter, your perception and conclusion above is patently false!  And so is your completely unwarranted charge that I "shy away from the cross as the place which nobody can avoid who wishes to enter into relationship with God."  The fact is that the cross cannot be separated from the resurrection, the ascension, and the Parousia as you are ostensibly attempting to do.  The cross is meaningless without the resurrection, the resurrection is meaningless without the ascension, and the ascension is meaningless without the Parousia.

 Peter wrote:

"Just to comment on one or two things: Hebrews 2:9a does describe the ascension - which was the direct consequence of Jesus’s death on the cross, and subsequent resurrection."

A literal translation of Hebrews 2:9 reads:

"but having been made a little less than messengers we see Jesus because of the suffering of the death with glory and honor crowned so as by the grace of God on behalf of every man He might taste of death" 

Contrary to your assertion this verse does not mention anything about the "ascension."  You simply assume that the statement "with glory and honor crowned" is a reference to what occurred at the moment of ascension - so in your presuppositions this becomes a reference to the ascension.  Unfortunately for your view that does not necessarily make it true.

I read your highly speculative view of these things and marvel that you have the gall to say that my "interpretation of "waiting" - Hebrews 10:13 - is speculation."  There is no speculation about it and contrary to your continued assertions Psalms 110:1-3 does not support your view.  God puts the enemies of Jesus under his authority and JESUS reigns in the midst of His enemies (Psa 110:2) and as He reigns - He subdues His enemies - "the last enemy being subdued by Jesus Christ (not by God) is death" (1Cor 15:28).

You say that I am "muddled" - you are welcome to your opinion.  However, in my opinion, it is you that are "muddled".  You claim that you are not a "futurist" but yet you see every post-Pentecost eschatological event referenced in the NT as a future event.  Every Christian (thousands) which I have ever known could consider the "…life, death, resurrection, ascension and outpoured Spirit of Jesus to be the major eschatological focus of the NT" and all but a few of those thousands identify themselves as "futurists"!  All Christians are preterist in reference to "life, death, resurrection, ascension and outpoured Spirit of Jesus."  That is a non issue for Christians.  The issue is the timing of the events which the NT writers project as imminent in their generation.  As to those issues — the resurrection, the Parousia, the arrival of the kingdom, the beginning of the reign over the kingdom, and the new heaven and the new earth — you are a futurist!

The real problem, that creates "the central difference between us," is the fact that you are a futurist and I am not!         

"Conjoining heaven and earth"??  And you accuse my view of having "esoteric consequences"!  "The "new heaven and the new earth" of Revelation 21:3 is no more or less "conjoined" than is the "first heaven and the first earth" in that passage and all your assertions to the contrary will not change that fact.

Where does the Bible teach that "Eschatology should be viewed from the perspective of what Jesus did on earth????"  I submit that the Bible teaches that everything that Jesus did on earth and in heaven are eschatological and lead to life in the New Marriage Covenant. 

"ho eschatos" — The real question, one that you have not answered correctly is - "ho eschatos" of what? 

You wrote:

"We can be both a resurrection community and an immortal community if you like"

"We" (The people living on earth today) are neither "a resurrection community"  nor are "we" (living on earth) "an immortal community."

The people living on earth in the first century were an eschatological community.  When the people of Jesus Christ were resurrected in ca. AD 70 in the Parousia (1Thess 4:14-17; 1Cor 15:23c 51-54; et al.) they became both a resurrection and an immortal community. 

While it may be true that some "Preterists build part of their case on the apparent inconsistency that an eschatology which marks the ‘last days’ as beginning in the time of Jesus and continuing until today seems contradictory in the light of ’days’ which have extended to over 2000 years" that was not the way that my case was built.  However, now that you mention it, it certainly is ludicrous that anyone could believe that "the last days" of an age could last longer than the age itself.

When Sproul wrote that book, he was just becoming a partial preterist.  If you think that "R.C.Sproul’s ‘The Last Days According to Jesus’" is "the best description" of preterism, then I think that you need to expand your reading list.  If you are interested, I can recommend a number of good books that you should read.

Just for the record; in my opinion, Revelation has nothing what-so-ever to say about the destruction of Rome.  The Great Babylonian whore is apostate Judaism; as is clearly and without equivocation presented in the OT as well as the NT.

You wrote:

"In the meantime, the authority of Jesus can effectively be used within a system in which one age ("this evil age") overlaps with another age ("the age to come") - as I have already suggested."

Thanks for bringing this issue up again.  I wanted to comment on your erroneous view of "overlapping ages".  It is true that the two ages did overlap during the transition from the "vanishing Covenant" (Heb 8:13) age to the New Covenant or Messianic age for a period of ca. 40 years (from the Cross to the Parousia).  However, the Mosaic Marriage Covenant "vanished" with the destruction of its temple and city in AD 70 and the kingdom of the Messianic (New Marriage Covenant) age was established with the AD 70 "resurrection in the Parousia" (1Thess 4:14-17; 1Cor 15:23c, 51-54; et al.)  There are no "overlapping" ages at the present time.  We are living in the days (age) of the New Marriage Covenant (Rev 19:7-9) referred to as "the thousands years" in Rev 20.  Jesus Christ rules (reigns) in this age.  He rules in the heavenly resurrection kingdom and He rules in the hearts and lives of His true followers here on earth and He shall reign for ever and ever.

 Lloyd