How would you say it?

Gary DeMar is a defender of the "partial preterist" view.  In his presentation he asks a most important question of those who say the imminency language of scripture should not be taken as meaning the prophesied events were to take place soon. If you've studied prophecy for any time at all, you've read those words and phrases (near, at hand, shortly, about to, at the door, quickly, the last hour, etc.). Chances are, you've read them so often you have learned to read right past them without realizing that they are the key to understanding prophecy.

DeMar's question is simple and it is always followed by silence. Paraphrased, it goes something like this:

Since you reject the imminent language of the time statements used in scripture, what language would you use to communicate to a first century audience that an event really was going to transpire in their lifetime?

The reality is that the language used in scripture is so emphatic and so consistent that it is hard to imagine how they might have made it clearer. Employ whatever scriptural gymnastics you need to explain them away, but you will never understand prophecy if you do.