Tom G. "I, myself, am a "Preterist" (Not a scriptural term) and it is not accidental that what every preterist uses as the time statement for the "parousia" (Matthew 16:28) does not use the term "parousia" at all. therefore, neither should we!
"The difference I attempted to explain and why your observation is not the same thing, is that "parousia" is a scriptural term. It is not permissible to substitute one scriptural term for a different term than the one used by the author. Each term used by the author was specifically chosen by God for a reason. That both Mark and Luke did not use parousia when writing of the same event is not accidental, there was a deliberate reason for the difference. Just as the parousia was deliberately used by Paul to describe the coming of the wicked one in 2 Th.2:9. You allude to associated terms, by this I take it to mean associated to the term parousia, which I have just explained I deny as being possible, there are no associated terms to parousia, each term has its only use for a reason. "
planetpreterist.com/news-5470.html#39091
