Yeah, cuz why bother evaluating and considering other perspectives? Clearly drawing on a select few fairly shallow theologies is clearly enough to inform us. Since we've already arrived at our conclusions its really just about finding those who support them...
Well for starters, MacArthur didn't "slam dunk" preterism like you think he did. There are a number of good replies to preterism out there but no "slam dunks." In order to properly respond to preterism we must first recognize it is a viable theological option which has a lot of support. The next step is realizing that there are few "slam dunks" theologically to a system like that. Just saying man, I think you've got your head in the ground here.
The best challenges to preterism are internal evidences from within the book of Revelation itself. It is a complicated argument though.
Well I have read enough of the other arguments in my life, and being so busy with so little time, who has the time to argue and debate among myself on these views? The Bible is quite clear in its pre-mill & pre-trib passages and I do not understand how anyone could be a preterist. My only guess is that they have not read the book A CASE FOR PREMILLENNIALISM by Campbell & Townsend.