[Uncle Chip]

So you are denying the reality of all those places in the OT where God said He would come against Israel and He didn’t show up in person but used nations to do His bidding. E.g. ... (Malachi 3:5)

Oh so now we have a preterist fourth "coming"??? Is that right??? or would that Malachi 3:5 be a first coming??? and that 70 AD the second coming??? Should we count those "not in the flesh" comings as comings along with the "in the flesh" comings or a separate category???

You know very well that the word "coming" in the New Testament means "a physical in person coming" except in the world of neo-Gnostic preterists. Keep using that preterist shovel -- your pit just keeps getting deeper.

[topcat54]

You know very well that the word "coming" in the New Testament means "a physical in person coming" except

This is what we call a proof by assertion. Dispensationalism is full of them.

Frankly, I do not know any such thing. But we both know (are painfully aware) that you have been unable to exegete one single text of Scripture, OT or NT, so it amazes me that you would claim to know anything in this regard.

I don't think you would know a neo-gnostic from a wash board.

Your emperor has no clothes.