Evidence of what…reading one’s theology into the Bible instead of taking one’s theology from it?
Your other two Pantelistic proof texting “witnesses” were shot down in flames. This is strike three:
“Here “the coming of the Lord” (like simply “the Lord” in Philippians) is said to be “at hand”. What does this mean? We have seen that the term “coming” is used in different senses in Scripture. The Old Testament prophets often speak of the Lord “coming” in judgement upon a particular nation (e.g., Isa. 19:1; 31:4; 35:4; 66:15; Mic. 1:3-5). These comings in judgement occurred centuries before Christ, and did not involve a literal coming of God from heaven to earth. It is possible, therefore, that “the coming of the Lord” spoken of in James (and implied in Philippians) is a coming of Christ’s judgement upon his enemies.”
“We have also observed that the prophet Daniel uses the term “coming” in a specific context to which the New Testament often alludes. Daniel speaks of the “coming” of “One like the Son of Man”, but this coming is a coming of the Son of Man up to the Ancient of Days to receive his kingdom (Dan.7:13-14). Jesus alludes to this passage a number of times in the Gospels. If Philippians and James are also alluding to Daniel 7, then they are referring to something connected with Christ’s ascension and reception of his kingdom. In this case, they would probably be referring to the destruction of Jerusalem, an event that would vindicate Jesus’ messianic claims and prove that he had received his kingdom.”
“A third kind of “coming” is the return of Jesus to earth that is described in Acts 1:11. In this passage, two men in white tell the apostle that Jesus will come in the same manner that they saw him go into heaven. The emphasis in this passage is on a visible, bodily, and personal return of Jesus from heaven to earth to be with his people. This coming has not occurred yet, so it is unlikely that either Philippians or James is referring to the return of Jesus. However, it must also be remembered that the Old Testament prophets regularly used terms implying “nearness” to describe events that did not occur for centuries.” 63
“…There are a number of possible interpretations for some of these texts, but regardless of which exegetical option one considers to be most likely, there is nothing in any of these texts that demands hyper-preterism”.
“63. See chapter 3 of this volume for more on the idea of prophetic delay.”
“When Shall These Things Be? A Reformed Response To Hyper-Preterism”, ed. Keith A Mathison, c 2004, 376 pags, p.201-202)
“…this book is a good starting point for people who are finding themselves tempted by the quasi-Gnostic, neo-Hymenaean, anti-authoritarian, hyper-spiritualizing, history-ignoring gangrene which is hyperpreterism and all of its attendant bleak outlooks on the (lack of) this world’s redemptive future.” amazon.com/When-Shall-These … 0875525520