• **Notifications**: Notifications can be dismissed by clicking on the "x" on the righthand side of the notice.
  • **New Style**: You can now change style options. Click on the paintbrush at the bottom of this page.
  • **Donations**: If the Lord leads you please consider helping with monthly costs and up keep on our Forum. Click on the Donate link In the top menu bar. Thanks
  • **New Blog section**: There is now a blog section. Check it out near the Private Debates forum or click on the Blog link in the top menu bar.
  • Welcome Visitors! Join us and be blessed while fellowshipping and celebrating our Glorious Salvation In Christ Jesus.

Why Can't Dispensational Premillennialists Stay on Topic?

Josheb

Senior Member
Joined
May 19, 2023
Messages
6,967
Reaction score
3,796
Points
113
Location
VA, south of DC
Faith
Yes
Marital status
Married with adult children
Politics
Conservative
Why can't/won't/don't Dispensational Premillennialists (and the affiliated more generic modern futurists) stay on topic?

I was going to ask this question in my post on the delusional effects of Dispensational Premillennialism (DP), but that thread is closed to further discussion. There are many places where, practically speaking, Dispensational Premillennialism leads to delusional thinking and practice but perhaps the most frequently observable example is the fact it is nearly impossible to have a cogent discussion on end times with a Dispensationalist. They are constantly trying to change the subject or moving from one verse to another and then another and another without ever exegeting any verse they broach to its necessary conclusion. It's like trying to catch a rabbit in an open field. In addition to never being able to sustain a topical conversation, Dispensational Premillennialists near-constantly enter threads, ignore what is specified as the topic of discussion, and post whatever agenda strikes their interest.

A recent example of this phenomenon would be Posts 14 and 18 in the "Was John MacArthur a Dispensationalist?" and Post 10 in the "1000 Years of Revelation" threads. No one asked why Jesus has a second coming. It is not the topic f that thread. No one asked for comments on Covenant Theology (CT) apart from John MacArthur. Nothing specified in the op has anything to do with the veracity of CT. No one asked anything about any "Messianic Age." In fact, no one asked about any age and the fact of scripture is 1 Corinthians 10:11. It is not possible to have a discussion on what is to be literally with people who claim everything should be read literally but they do not do so with any degree of consistency.

Their not recognizing this is what they chronically do is delusional.

Just about every thread in the End Times and Prophecy boards of most Christian forums contain similar examples. CCAM is heavily laden with Reformed-minded members. It makes the presence of the few Dispensationalists apparent, more visible. An example in this thread would be this Post 25. In this thread it is Post 22. In this thread there are several; Post 45 is one example. Threads on any future temple, like this one, invariably digress. In that thread it took only fifteen posts to start a digression. By the end of that thread digressions like the mosque and preterism were attempted. This is not to say folks from other points of view never digress. Digressions happen and they are not the sole domain of any viewpoint. The difference is they as standard operating procedure for the futurist.




Why can't Dispensational Premillennialists/modern futurists stay on topic?
 
Why can't/won't/don't Dispensational Premillennialists (and the affiliated more generic modern futurists) stay on topic?

I was going to ask this question in my post on the delusional effects of Dispensational Premillennialism (DP), but that thread is closed to further discussion. There are many places where, practically speaking, Dispensational Premillennialism leads to delusional thinking and practice but perhaps the most frequently observable example is the fact it is nearly impossible to have a cogent discussion on end times with a Dispensationalist. They are constantly trying to change the subject or moving from one verse to another and then another and another without ever exegeting any verse they broach to its necessary conclusion. It's like trying to catch a rabbit in an open field. In addition to never being able to sustain a topical conversation, Dispensational Premillennialists near-constantly enter threads, ignore what is specified as the topic of discussion, and post whatever agenda strikes their interest.

A recent example of this phenomenon would be Posts 14 and 18 in the "Was John MacArthur a Dispensationalist?" and Post 10 in the "1000 Years of Revelation" threads. No one asked why Jesus has a second coming. It is not the topic f that thread. No one asked for comments on Covenant Theology (CT) apart from John MacArthur. Nothing specified in the op has anything to do with the veracity of CT. No one asked anything about any "Messianic Age." In fact, no one asked about any age and the fact of scripture is 1 Corinthians 10:11. It is not possible to have a discussion on what is to be literally with people who claim everything should be read literally but they do not do so with any degree of consistency.

Their not recognizing this is what they chronically do is delusional.

Just about every thread in the End Times and Prophecy boards of most Christian forums contain similar examples. CCAM is heavily laden with Reformed-minded members. It makes the presence of the few Dispensationalists apparent, more visible. An example in this thread would be this Post 25. In this thread it is Post 22. In this thread there are several; Post 45 is one example. Threads on any future temple, like this one, invariably digress. In that thread it took only fifteen posts to start a digression. By the end of that thread digressions like the mosque and preterism were attempted. This is not to say folks from other points of view never digress. Digressions happen and they are not the sole domain of any viewpoint. The difference is they as standard operating procedure for the futurist.




Why can't Dispensational Premillennialists/modern futurists stay on topic?
Do you see Dispy premil though being same view as historical premil?
 
Back
Top