Many years ago, I met a person on PalTalk which I talked a lot to about the error of full preterism.  He was a friendly sort - and at first glance seemed to believe the Gospel.  But his error of 100% fulfilled eschatology caused us to not be able to walk in agreement.  Here is a snippet from some of our e-mail exchange.  I found this going through my notes the other day and thought I might share it.  - Brandan

Full Preterist: Did it ever cross your mind that you just might be wrong?

Brandan: Yes, of course. I've doubted my faith and all that Christ has done for me, much to my shame. However, I'm sure you'll agree, that if we admit we might be wrong about the Gospel, we might as well not talk about it. We don't deal with possibilities, but realities. My belief in a future resurrection is surely as strong as my belief in what Christ has already done for me. For me to say that I might be wrong about the resurrection means I might be wrong about the Gospel.

Full Preterist: The moment we dont think we can be wrong is when we stop learning.

Brandan: Do you think you might be wrong about the Gospel? What about the timing of the resurrection and Christ's second coming?

Full Preterist: I have one question for you at this time to prove to you that fulfilled redemption does not in away way deny the gospel of the grace of God. Before I ask the brief question let me say this. I once was discussing arminianism vs calvinism with an arminian and I said something like this. If the Calvinist is wrong he is wrong in the area of giving too much credit to God for his salvation.

Brandan: Here is the problem with that line of reasoning Mike. There is no such thing as "if the Calvinist is wrong." We cannot deal with circumstances that do not exist. We must deal with facts.

Full Preterist: If we are wrong as preterists we are merely saying Christ has completed something that he hasnt.

Brandan: Wrong. Since you want to deal with possibilities, let me say "if" you are wrong, it undercuts the hope of the believer, it gives him nothing to hope for, no longing for Christ or a new heavens and a new earth. It takes what God has promised His people and profanes it by making it meaningless. It takes God's plan of salvation and cuts out what we're being saved to. Salvation is more than just pardon of sin and imputation of righteousness.  It involves the COMPLETE REDEMPTION OF MAN and EARTH.  If you say you still do not sin, then you have to agree that you have not received all the benefits of salvation yet. If you still weep over sin, you have yet to receive all the benefits of salvation. If you look around and see nothing but death and misery in this world, then you still have yet to experience all the benefits of salvation. To say that God has no intention of resurrecting His people (physically) and this earth is to make Christ's work meaningless.

Full Preterist: Where if you are wrong you are not seeing the fulness of redemption already accomplished and truly applied. The latter "error" sure seems better than the former error if you ask me! 1 Pe. 1:9 "receiving the end of your faith the salvation of your souls." Now it is clear from the passage that the salvation of the soul NOT the body is the topic.

Brandan: There is an already not yet fulfillment of salvation. I've already received the salvation of my soul, but this passage is speaking of the enjoyment of the fullness of salvation. We are not yet enjoying all the benefits of salvation. Yes, we're seated in heavenly places with Christ (from God's perspective), but we're not yet experiencing it in all its fullness.

Bottom line, full preterism paints a wrong picture of the future.  It would have some folks like Elijah and Enoch walking around in full bodies like Christ, but the rest of us floating around as disembodied spirits in heaven (since there is no future resurrection according to its teachings.)