That Wicked

That Wicked shall be destroyed with the brightness of the Lord's coming (II Thess.2:8).

Does that necessarily mean that Wicked must be alive and remain when the Lord comes? As futurists assert.

Or that the coming of the Lord was to occur while that Wicked was alive and remained? As Preterists assert.

Paul always discussed the coming of the Lord in connection with the still-future hope of the Church - the resurrection. Always!

And it's not only the living but also the dead who will be judged by the Lord Jesus Christ at His appearing and Kingdom (II Tim.4:1).

There is to come a resurrection not only of life but also of damnation (John 5:29).

So whether or not the coming of the Lord coincided with that Wicked's natural lifetime is not really of the essence.

Destruction is coming to all the wicked, not only to the living but also to the dead (Romans 2:9).

Knowing the terror of the Lord, the apostles persuaded men (II Cor.5:11) - not only men in Judaea who might be affected by the events of AD70 - and it did not matter whether or not a man would be alive and remain until the coming of the Lord, because he will face judgment nonetheless, when the Lord comes.

So does the destruction of that Wicked by the brightness of the Lord's coming (II Thess.2:8) really establish the Preterist definition of the "coming of the Lord"?

Or conversely does it necessarily establish the futurist identity of that Wicked?

The New Testament dealt both with things which were to come to pass in the first-century, and also with the still-future coming of the Lord and the resurrection, sometimes in the same context.

Did that really mean everything is now past? or conversely that everything is still future?

Couldn't it just mean that the events of the first century showed that the last days were already inaugurated - and that the consummation of all things (the coming of the Lord) is still to come at a time when no-one knows?

That scheme after all is the overall message of the Gospel of the Kingdom.