Dispensation Premillennialism: Fact or Fiction?

[Josheb]

If you say so.

NEXT

Okay. Next question:

Where does the Bible explicitly state God has two peoples?

Please do not take 70 posts to post an answer to the question asked.

 

[Josheb]

@Josheb Re: post #91 You show that as a quote from @CrowCross but it is actually something I said. Does that change your understanding of why it was said and how you would respond ----knowing where I am coming from, and what Crow would likely mean if he had said it?

My bad. Thanks for the correction.

I understand the positions each of you are trading. The fact is @CrowCross has asserted a synonymity between dispensation and age. Post #30 states, "BTW, post 25 showed a difference in the current dispensation...age...and the dispensation...age of Gideon." and you are 100% correct when posting, "the story is not dispensations as D'ists define them." I would argue they (what DPism teaches are dispensations) are not dispensations at all.... but explaining the alternative digresses from the matter of proving Dispensational Premillennialism fact or fiction.

All I do, day after day is present verses that support the dispensation

No, all you do day after day is present interpretations of verses that support Dispensational Premillennialism. That is much different than presenting verses that "support" "the dispensation" and much, much different that posting verses that explicitly state something is a dispensation and verses that explicitly define a dispensation the way Dispensational Premillennialism defines the term.

 

[Josheb]

That is true. It is a hermeneuitical system of theology just a Covenant.

A Christian can actually find the word "covenant" in scripture. A Christian can actually find scripture marking itself using the term covenant. A Christian can actually find scripture explaining a covenant without referencing extra-scriptural, man-made doctrine.

Dispensational Premillennialists cannot do any of that. All DPism can do s post eisegetic interpretations of scripture, nothing literal or explicit.

I could have use ages instead of time but @Josheb would get upset again.

I have yet to get "upset" a first time. What I will do if you use ages instead of time is ask you to prove your claims with scripture, beginning with scripture as written and not eisegetic interpretations thereof. No "upset" wanted, needed, or existent. Just direct, scriptural answers to questions asked when asked.

Dispensational Premillennialists do not do that, either.