While I consider myself a preterist in many ways (no not full preterist obviously), the more I read the more I wonder how a system can stop from becoming full preterism, especially the American Vision/Gary Demar type. While, he has undeniably been helpful, I keep coming across numerous instances in books from Demar and other partial preterists, where every single sort of "coming" mention is a reference to 70 AD; every parable, every talk of judgment, i.e. Matt 10:23, wheat and tares, sheep and goats, and so on was fulfilled in the abomination of desolation. Though certainly Christ referenced the Pharisees and his current generation many times, I wonder how much of his talk about judgments, moral teachings were more universal than they seem to let on. I wonder where in the world they get the doctrine of hell, intermediate state, etc. Or is that just taking certain doctrines for granted? (For the record, I am not remotely entertaining full preterism. The resurrection, including Jesus' own has been denied in all but name on their side in order to "stay consistent" on the Parousia passages). While I know that the Gospels should be understood within a specific context and that there are problems of universalizing everything in the Bible, such interpretations seems to strip them of any real positive theology especially for those of us who are Gentiles (and I am still struggling to understand why exactly Jesus seemed to preach to Israel during his first advent if the Mosaic administration was rendered moot with him). Anyway, what is the proper response or interpretations of such passages traditionally linked to the end of the world considering the context of apostate Judaism? Would the disciples have known enough to ask the question: when will Jesus judge the whole world considering they thought on the terms of an immediate earthly kingdom?