[topcat54]

No I wasn't -- you just screamed unfair at how John characterizes that Preterist "not in the flesh coming" in 70 AD. John saw Preterism coming 2000 years ago.

Absolutely you were and you know it. 1 John is talking about Christ's first coming, when He was clothed with flesh and tabernacle among His people. This was being denied by the Gnostics and others who claimed Christ was some type of phantasm.

You know that it does not apply to partial preterist (like you find around here) because you know that we have consistently affirmed a future bodily second coming.

I’m not sure if you are fundamentally dishonest, just get that way when backed into a corner.

[Uncle Chip]

1 John is talking about Christ's first coming, when He was clothed with flesh and tabernacle among His people. This was being denied by the Gnostics and others who claimed Christ was some type of phantasm.

Sorry -- I don't see that John's text is limited to that first 26 AD coming. It can very well apply to that first preterist ethereal coming in 70 AD.

You know that it does not apply to partial preterist (like you find around here) because you know that we have consistently affirmed a future bodily second coming.

I know nothing of the sort. If partial preterists confess that Christ came in 70 AD in some way other than in the flesh, then John's text covers them.

Do you confess that Jesus Christ came not in the flesh but in some other way in 70 AD????