Indeed, my finest argument is that Preterism confounds the very purpose of the Prophecy:
Isa 46:9 Remember former things from forever; for I am God, and no other is God, even none like Me,
Isa 46:10 declaring the end from the beginning, and from the past things which were not done, saying, My purpose shall stand, and I will do all My pleasure;
(e-Sword: KJV)
The primary purpose of the Prophecy is to prove that God is God. Any theory which purports to prove that the Prophecy stopped at any point, for any reason suggests that God is willing to remove his proof and standard from the direct observation of that generation, and/or following generations.
It is my position that the Prophecy is a lively thing, steady as a clock, winding down to the end of days. It doesn't stop, nor does it falter. It did not end in 70 AD, nor (much to the disagreement of some of my Dispy friends) did it wait until Israel became established before picking back up where it left off.
We will find it has been in evidence to every generation in their own time; of that I have no doubt at all. And the evidences presented to each generation are there, in history for us to seek out. Not only that, but the evidence of new revelation is being presented to our own generation in real time. These things we can readily see, if only we will open our eyes.
Secondly, and perhaps, more vividly:
Mat 24:2 And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.
Not *all* the stones are removed, "one upon another." *Seven* courses remain:
Eze 44:1 Then he brought me back the way of the gate of the outward sanctuary which looketh toward the east; and it was shut. Eze 44:2 Then said the LORD unto me; This gate shall be shut, it shall not be opened, and no man shall enter in by it; because the LORD, the God of Israel, hath entered in by it, therefore it shall be shut. Eze 44:3 It is for the prince; the prince, he shall sit in it to eat bread before the LORD; he shall enter by the way of the porch of that gate, and shall go out by the way of the same.
"This gate was built in the sixteenth century, long after New Testament times. Several years ago, the Herodion remains were accidentally uncovered below this gate, indicating that it was probably built over the one used when Jesus visited the temple.
The Bible predicts that the Messiah will enter the temple through this gate. Years ago, Islamic leaders blocked the entrance and built a cemetery in front of it to prevent the Messiah from entering. If the closed gate would not stop him, the cemetery would, because as a Jew, the Messiah would become ceremonially unclean if he touched anything connected with death; thus, he would not be able to enter the Temple Mount.
Src: http://www.followtherabbi.com/Brix?pageID=1578
Now, on to your argument, beginning with Stormcrow: "The First Installment - Some Background":
The Gospel of Mark is believed to be the earliest of the gospels and presents Christ as the “suffering servant” (pp. 7)
The Gospel of Matthew is traditionally believed to be the earliest, with Papias, Origen, and Eusebius all confirming an Hebrew/Amaraic version pre-existing the Greek. While I am no real fan of the historicity of documents proferred by the Roman church, there seems to be no reason for disputing this record.
"Modern scholarship" leaves much to be desired.
Remember, Matthew’s audience is primarily Jews, so he’s writing to people who understand the Old Testament prophecies.
[...]
Luke, on the other hand, is writing to Greeks and Gentiles: people who would not necessarily know Jewish history and certainly not the Jewish prophets. Therefore – and this is critically important – Luke actually interprets Matthew for us! (pp. 21-22)
I find this assertion to be less powerful than it seems. While true to a point, it is highly doubtful that the people had no knowledge of the stories involved, or the meanings attached therein. Remember that everywhere the Apostles went, they were speaking out of synagogues. The message went first to the local Hebrews.
It is very hard to live within a community without assimilating the basics of a culture - and those gentiles living around those synagogues most certainly would have a working knowledge. Especially before books were readily available - Stories, ANY stories, were told and re-told. And each of those synagogues held a Hebrew Bible...
And this leads, of course to an erroneous conclusion:
[...] Thus begins the Olivet Discourse. The first question His disciples ask is “when will the Temple be destroyed?” They then ask, “what sign will there be when these things are about to take place?” (pp. 29)
Conflating the gospels in comparison is a sloppy start. Compare them, sure... conflate them, no. Each has it's own contribution. Since we are speaking about Matt 24, perhaps it is best to use Matt 24:
Mat 24:3 And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?
Next, lets address Stormcrow: "The Second Installment: The Olivet Discourse…"
Remember: Christ is answering specific questions about the destruction of the Temple IN THEIR GENERATION and the signs that precede it: He is not talking about either our generation or some generation yet to exist in our future. (pp. 3)
According to whom?
Certainly, as Christ warned, there were many deceivers in the land during that generation. (pp. 6)
There are ALWAYS decievers. Show me the "[...] many will come in My name, saying, ‘I am the Christ,’ and will deceive many" before AD 70... Especially in comparison to after70AD.
This passage has been misquoted so often to mean the “end” in our future, that it is often mistakenly asserted as proof that Christ was talking about our time! However, that’s not what the Greek word for “world” meant in His time or to His disciples!
[...] (oikoumene)
In other words, what we consider to be the entire world now only really referred to nations in and around the Roman Empire during the first century. This is the perspective from which Jesus would have been speaking to them. (pp. 8-12)
Oh stop! Then, we must suppose that the references below all refer to the Roman Empire too? how absurd. This is the worst kind of modern sophistry - That which causes the unaware to believe that the world at the time was restricted to what we have our attention upon. The Phoenicians were sailing to Britain, the Benelux region, and around Africa many centuries before the time of Christ. The Silk Road was centuries old. And in His time, there is no way that people weren't aware of Parthia and Carthage (Phoenicians), and the Celto-Anglo-Saxon hordes, which were still far beyond the reach of Rome. The Chinese were sailing into ports in the gulf of Arabia, for Pete's sake. Mining and goods were coming from the midst of Africa. It is simply ludicrous to restrict the "inhabited earth" to Rome alone.
oikoumene
¯
Total KJV Occurrences: 15
world, 14
Mat_24:14, Luk_2:1, Luk_4:5, Act_11:28, Act_17:6, Act_17:31, Act_19:27, Act_24:5, Rom_10:18, Heb_1:6, Heb_2:5, Rev_3:10, Rev_12:9, Rev_16:14
earth, 1
Luk_21:26
(e-Sword: KJV Concordance)
The following is a list of those apostles and disciples martyred for Christ before the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple. [...] Most of the remaining apostles were martyred shortly after the fall of Jerusalem with the exception of John, who was exiled to Patmos where he wrote his epistles and the Book of Revelation. During this time, however, the gospel had been preached from Britain to Ethipoia and from Spain to India. (pp. 21-22)
But what the author fails to mention is where those Apostles WENT, which thoroughly destroys his impression of the "inhabited world" being the Roman Empire. For the most part, those Apostles went BEYOND Rome, passing through it. Scythia, Parthia, England, Ireland, Ethiopia, Russia (as far as Kiev and the Deipner), and the list goes on. Bartholomew died on the shores of the Caspian Sea.
More than any other thing, this attests to a rather myopic scope on the author's part. Unlike some would have it, Rome is *not* the center of the world.
And let's mention with emphasis that at least a quarter (3) of the Apostles lived beyond the fall of Jerusalem - and that a good portion (about half) of the dates of their various deaths went unrecorded. The author mentions this in passing, but it is a substantial piece of errata. Many of them may have died beyond AD 70.
And when was it exactly that the Apostles specifically were "hated by all nations?"
All of these things Christ said would happen came to pass before the Temple was destroyed in that generation. (pp 23)
A few wars within an empire that used war for income, a single example of famine, an eathquake or two, an inferred pestilence... This doesn't rise to the authoritative "many" the prophecy presents.
It is getting late (early, actually)... I will reply to your 3rd installment another time.