In every theological position, there are the mainstream and then there are others who have some different beliefs. This is how I view your position.
I know, and that wouldn't be correct. You are moving goalposts and altering boundaries. The definition of Preterism is pretty clear--it is a system of eschatological interpretation that views nearly all biblical prophecy as complete in the time of ancient Rome. That is how they view the Olivet Discourse, and that is how they view the book of Revelation.
What you're saying is that even those who don't believe that, and yet share with Preterists the belief that the AoD was fulfilled in 70 AD, cause them to be labeled "Preterists." Again, that is false. Those who do not share the Preterists' system of eschatological interpretation are not, by definition, Preterists.
Yes, there are a few outliers who hold to Preterist theology, allowing for some future fulfillments. But if they are truly to adhere to a Preterist theological system, they would interpret all of the Olivet Discourse and nearly all of the book of Revelation as fulfilled in the earthly ministry of Christ, and in the Early Church.
All this means is that some people will not fully be consistent with their own theological system, or think they can make exceptions that render their system inept. Or, there are people who simply don't know any better, and say anything they like, consistent or not.
Some who believe the AoD was fulfilled in the Roman Army do not believe that all of the Olivet Discourse and most of the book of Revelation was fulfilled in the Early Church. I for one do not believe that!
So I do not share the Preterist theological system and should not be labeled a Preterist. Those who do so are changing the definition of a Preterist, or do not understand the particularities of their theological system.
A lot of it is classic Partial Preterism and some of it is non-classic with a little futurism tossed in. Believing any part of the Olivet Discourse is Partial Preterism, the term meaning "fulfilled in the past" regarding certain prophecies. While I am 100 perfect a futurist because I believe all of the Olivet Discourse is yet to come and same with corresponding parts of Revelation. Futurists also generally believe the AoD is the antichrist and what he does.
That is a false dichotomy. Futurism does not require 100% fulfillment of the Olivet Discourse in the Last Days. Preterism does require that most all the Olivet Discourse and most of the book of Revelation are already fulfilled from the time of the ancient Roman Empire.
Again, I do *not* believe that. You clearly do not understand what a Preterist is, nor do you understand their theology. You define them purely by one element of their view of the Olivet Discourse, which is that the AoD was the Roman Army.
Believing that does not make one a Preterist. Again, virtually all of the early Church writings indicated belief in that.
One more thing I'd like say, which may help you understand Preterism better. They appear to act like Dispensationalists, who believe that the gifts of the Spirit and the era of prophecy came to an end in Jesus' generation. They don't seem to want to believe that any more prophecies have yet to be fulfilled, after the birth of the initial Church. They want to believe that with the creation of the canon of NT Scripture we need no more prophecy, but only need the word of God to live a Christian life.
That seems to be how Preterism operates, marginalizing prophecy and limiting it to the Early Church and its beginnings. Since then, we just live by the word of God, and refuse to speculate about the future, no longer considering it prophetically-determined.
Well, I'm a believer in the idea that the gifts of the Spirit never ended, nor that prophecy ended. Prophecy is still being fulfilled in history, and will until the end. That's why I'm a futurist, and not a Preterist. I don't fit into their system.