For example, it depicts the demise of Judaism as an enemy of Christianity (Rom. With the removal of the temple system the church would grow unimpeded.
One of the main objections to Preterism is that its focus on the original setting limits its application for us today.
And yet I find that the position he advanced is given a passing notice at best, and summarily dismissed as totally unworthy of serious consideration while obeisance is given to the common view. This dating structure does not fall along liberal/conservative lines, except as some may choose to make of it what they will.
It seems to me that Wallace’s position deserves a closer look. It is true, however, that one’s interpretation of Revelation is strongly influenced by the date assigned to it.
Needless to say, few, if any, other commentators before Chilton have found this to be the structure of the book.
Authors like Gentry tend to be 1/3 preterist: using normal historical-grammatical hermeneutics in interpreting the New Testament and only taking a passage in a preterist sense where it is necessarily, contextually called for, and has been interpreted that way through much of Church history.
Chilton is a 2/3 preterist: imposing as an interpretive grid the preterist interpretation on every N. passage that can conceivably take it; doing so for all such prophecies except the 2nd coming and a few other last straws.