A Ramification Of Full Preterism

Full preterism entails that all Biblical prophecies, those about the Second Coming of Christ and beyond included, have already happened before or with the destruction of the Second Jewish Temple (the ruins of which are pictured below) by the Romans in 70 AD.  Was there a last trumpet call, a gathering of living and dead righteous individuals (the first resurrection of the dead), and a return of Christ in the First Roman-Jewish War?  While there is nothing in the historical record to suggest that any such things happened in an invisible, mystical sense (for that is what preterism would require), and while the Second Coming of the Bible, followed by resurrection and judgment, has plainly not occurred, let us focus on a particular ramification of full preterism.  Revelation 21-22's words about New Jerusalem being the final abode of the righteous/saved could not be figurative without John 14:2-3 also being figurative, as Jesus speaks of his Father's house that he will prepare for his disciples.

This would mean Jesus would have to have been highly misleading outside the context of a parable.  Both Revelation and the gospel of John describe a physical dwelling for followers of Yahweh after Christ's return.  Jesus says in John 14:2-3 that he will leave the world, prepare a place for Christians, return, and only then will his "sheep" (John 10) be with him.  This is consistent with the teaching of soul sleep throughout the Bible: humans are not by default in some conscious state between death (James 2:26) and their bodily resurrection (Daniel 12:2), the latter being an eschatological event.  They are totally unperceiving, knowing not even self-evident things like logical axioms and their own existence since they know nothing (Ecclesiastes 9:5-10).  Revelation 21-22 does not touch on soul sleep, as the resurrection and judgment of the dead has already occurred (20:11-15), but it does describe a magnificent city where nations come and go and where the righteous thrive.

If Revelation 21-22's details about New Jerusalem, which in context is unveiled after the wicked are cast into hell to be killed (Matthew 10:28, 2 Peter 2:6, Revelation 20:15), are figurative and do not have to do with a literal future state, then John 14:2-3 is also not literal.  The two passages speak of the same kind of thing.  Clearly, Revelation goes into far more detail than Jesus does in a mere handful of verses, who said only that this other dimension has many rooms, is the domain of the Father, and will be the residence of his followers after his return.  There is no mention here of the walls, (in a terrestrial sense) precious materials, light, or gates that John references.  The tree of life is said to be here only in Revelation as well.  Of all the events addressed in Revelation, everything from the fate of Satan in verse 10 of chapter 20 onward is far more direct.  New Jerusalem is described as a city with very specific features, not as something blatantly figurative or more bizarre like a woman clothed with the sun, moon, and stars (as in Revelation 12).

Did Jesus lie or give a very misleading summary of New Jerusalem?  If full preterism is true, he absolutely did if the Bible accurately represents him, though full preterism also very blatantly contradicts the idea that Jesus has a single return and not multiple returns (a flaw shared with the concept of the pre-tribulation rapture), as well as the idea of Jesus returning very visibly (Acts 1:9-11, Matthew 24:30-31) to resurrect the Christian dead and bring the living to himself at a trumpet blast (1 Thessalonians 4:13-18, 1 Corinthians 15:50-54, and again, Matthew 24:31).  According to the Bible, if there is not yet a resurrection of the righteous dead, then there has not yet been a Second Coming.  If there has not yet been a Second Coming, then Jesus could not have "returned" in 70 AD.  The Second Coming, the real rapture (which occurs at Christ's direct, one-time return), and the eventual reveal of New Jerusalem are presented as literal.  Since they are addressed in passages outside of Revelation, it cannot even be the case that Revelation is too strange to ascertain these doctrines!