Preterism and typology

David Field has some helpful comments on preterism here. I really would like to thank him for the help he has been to me, and I'm sure others, on thinking through this issue over the last couple of months. I'm certain he has helped me to read the Scriptures in a more faithful way.

However I wouldn't be as certain that a preteristic reading allows us to affirm point a) "we do not necessarily think that everything is going to get worse before Jesus comes back (the verses which look like 'getting worse and worse' aren't about that)."

Typologically why the Noanic flood judgment that Peter refers to 2 Peter 3:5-8 should be typological of the AD 70 end of a world judgment and not of the judgment at Jesus second advent makes no sense. If we can say that we should actually expect to see similar nonsense in our day as in the pre-flood days because the characteristics of the ungodly are the same in any age, then why should we not also expect to see the same state of affairs existing just prior to Jesus' return as existed both immediately preceding the flood and the AD 70 end of world judgments - affairs which include the righteous minority being oppressed unrighteous majority.

Surely in this way, those passages which Preterism rightly identifies as having the AD 70 end of world judgment as their referent, are typologically informative for the end of world judgment at Jesus' return. Given the unity in which God works out his purposes that underlies a typological reading of Scripture, one would therefore expect on the basis of the flood, the Exile, Jesus' cross and resurrection and AD 70 that the final judgment anti-typical judgment would echo these judgments in this way.