Dispensational Premillennialism consists of a lot more than only talking about "different dispensations in God's gradually unfolding plan of salvation" (or whatever words Disp. uses to define it). Dispensationalism also teaches something that Amillennialists and Historic/Classic Premillennialists certainly do not teach, i.e Two Israel's: One being the church, and the other being the unsaved Jews who they regard as still being God's chosen people, and Disp. also has all Old Testament prophecy that is fulfilled
in Christ and in the New Jerusalem
, instead being fulfilled in 'national Israel' (or whatever they choose to call it), where the nations are going up to the land of Israel in that geographic location in the Middle East every year (in the millennium) to worship Christ who has become seated on "His throne" in earthy Jerusalem and is the Messiah of Israel ruling all nations from there, in a day when all Jews are saved.
Some even have a 'third temple' in earthly Jerusalem (a building made with human hands) as the throne of Christ.
There is a lot of teaching in Dispensatonalism that is totally rejected by all Amillennialists and by all Historic Premillennialists.
I believe it's this Disp. teaching that
@Earburner was referring to in that post (which he put up in reply to
@ewq1938) .
I know I kept replying to posts he made that were not replying to me, but because he is speaking about
all Premillennialists and misrepresenting Premillennialism, I replied to what he said.
Unless the Millennium is a totally different dispensation altogether, then it is pointless to even have a Millennium. Of course people try to define this period of time. Amil could call it the A-dispensation, that cannot exist, because Revelation 20 is just the same time loop mentioned in Revelation several times. Amil invent this recapitulation of time.
Even in Augustine's day that was the argument that there cannot be another dispensation after the one they actually lived in.
I was never taught any pre-mil view as you describe. I can never even remember needing such pre-mil error as the Jews needing the Millennium to fulfill prophecy. Especially outside of Christ. Did I think that every Israelite ever born lost or redeemed would
only be resurrected at a Second Coming? It is possible that I did. But that would put me still at odds with classical pre-mill dispensational thought, as they also included redeemed Gentiles. Now the argument turns to replacement theology. Israel became the church, and stopped being genetic. Now the dispensation went from Israel remaining Israel and set aside, to now the church, and Gentiles are just the lost sheep of Israel and still Israel. Still a form of dispensational thought even though historist and amil deny such a dispensational divide. This still leaves us with only Israel was redeemed and another group outside of the Gentiles as those never redeemed at all. Yet still Israel rejects the Messiah and are not forced out, because they can still choose on their own volition, they just remain in a rejective state of their choosing, not God's.
That sounds great, and the national political Jew can still seek a Jewish state, but the lost are still the lost sheep of Israel and not the other nationalities of the earth. If that were true, then if a person admits redemption, they have to make the whole earth the lost sheep of Israel and no other ethnicity exist separate to Israel as the idealist justify their gospel. Yet even among Israel, Jesus in Matthew 25 now points out there are goats in with the lost sheep of Israel at the end. The metric is not nationality. The metric is one's attitude:
"Inasmuch as ye did it
not to one of the least of these, ye did it
not to me."
"Inasmuch as ye
have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye
have done it unto me."
Certainly these are all of Israel ideally or genetically, but not all of Israel are Israel. The idealist cannot deny their spiritual nor ambiguous definition of Israel. Now they have to admit these are not even spiritually redeemed humans at all. The Atonement is based on what God did on the Cross, not what humans do or not do. Are we now going to say the goats were not ideally nor genetically ambiguous, but outside of Israel totally? Yet these sheep are as well, "outside of Israel" as the metric for these particular sheep is not the Atonement (Israel) but works or one's attitude. So what are the actual words:
"And before him shall be gathered
all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats:"
Israel is not even named. Jesus is not separating the righteous from the unrighteous. Jesus is sitting and judging all nations and separating them as a shepherd divides. Jesus is claiming sheep who never were sheep prior to this point. Am I being hypocritical in stating that now, after the church has been removed Jesus is calling Israel out of the nations? Or is Israel being called out of the nations and
then separated into sheep and goats? Are there many humans still left on earth not nationally Israel that will be separated at a later time? And this is just the living, not all the dead of Israel resurrected from all time since Jacob. Is Jesus not sitting on His throne in His Temple in Jerusalem on earth? The one that after this final harvest, Satan will be allowed to sit on and desolate? The one that will be the camp of the saints for 1,000 years?
I am not denying dispensations nor arguing for them. I am saying those who make the loudest arguments against are still defining dispensations, because it is impossible not to.