Richard black bold
I understand why futurism wishes to argue against its fulfillment in the first century so that Christ's coming could not have been fulfilled because the Gospel being preached everywhere had not been fulfilled.
I can also understand why preterists must insist that the gospels have been preached to all the world so as to fit their AD 70 concept and that Christ second coming ocurred in AD 70.
That's not the reason. The reason is because the Bible declares that the Gospel had been preached in the all the world in the first century, and Preterists like to "fit" their ideas to what the Bible actually states.
Why do you insist upon making the " world" and "earth" refer to the planet? You do realize that our present planet was not named Earth until quite some time after, right? It doesn't matter when Earth was named, it is obvious that the gospels have not been preached to Americas, Australia, much of Asia and Africa in the 1st century. So if it have not been preached to all these areas. how can the end comes? It would be unfair to those who haven't heard the gospels. Tell me, did Christ died for the sin of known biblical world only or did He died for the sin of the whole Earth.
If it is unfair to those who have not heard yet, then it is equally unfair to those who died in places before the Gospel reached them! And besides, we all know with absolute certainty that the Bible was not talking about America and Australia in those passages.
The Bible declares that the Gospel was preached in all the world in the first century. Why don't you simply accept what the Bible teaches?