Dispensationalism is relatively new, as is their approach to prophetic interpretation, and has the tendency to read into scripture some fanciful ideas that are not meant. Such as Hal Lindsey's seeing jet aircraft in the locusts in John's Book of the Revelation. Most seem to let the newspapers determine what their new interpretation is, ala Lindsey or Jack Van Impe
(and ecclesiological passages)
That's odd, most D's are Arminian flavored Baptists who's ecclesiology is congregational and is not found in Scripture but is a Greek democratic concept. I don't consider that to be "legitimate".
Mind you, I'll not questioning their salvation, but their teachings on secondary matters not essential to salvation.
Briefly:
(Long run-on-sentence alert: in three, two, one....)
Though no great fan of Hal Lindsay, I actually BETTER respect his expectation, born of respect for the plenary, VERBAL inspiration of Scripture, to find real-world fulfillments of prophetic passages, THAN I do the amil blurring of every specific detail of prophecy to mean just one or two (totally unrelated, and non-real-world) things. Though a huge fan of Edward J. Young, his bubling of unfulfilled prophetic passages in Isaiah and Daniel is at least as reprehensible as any mistake Hal Lindsay ever made.
That's first. Second:
Specifically, by ecclesiology I meant, "Is the church a new man, distinct from Israel (as Scripture says), or is it a transmogrified, haha-fooled-you 'spiritual Israel' (as Scripture NEVER says)?"
I didn't have church government in mind. (Though you do overgeneralize even there.)
Dan