You say it’s narcissistic to hold to a pre-trib rapture. So you know everyone who holds this view personally and can impute that attribute to each of them?
I have spent considerable time trying to find the best way to articulate a defense of this statement to you. The problem is that your posts are rather hypocritical, particularly when you ask for civility then go headlong into accusing those differing with you of being heretics through the fallacy of "Guilt by Association".
I thought about writing a ten-thousand word essay describing in detail how I came to this conclusion, but then I thought - there are already ten-thousand words out in this very forum that prove the truth behind the charge that Premillennial Dispensationalism is the doctrine of Narcissists.
Here are some of the trail-markers to look for:
Flattery towards those who affirm your beliefs, utter contempt for those who disagree: Now review the posts where a Post-Mil or Realized Mil challenges a statement made by a Futurist. The most common rebuttal is a Cut & Paste "you are going to Hell for disbelief" scripture. The "Heretic" label gets thrown on without any substantiation whatsoever. Then you get the gratuitous "Get Off My Thread" tantrums. There is a poster here, Quix, who has made this symptom/tactic a brand. The Flattery pours out with as much intensity when another poster merely states agreement with the premise.
Hypersensitivity to slights or imagined insults: Usually the Futurist will immediately assume that we are challenging her faith by not agreeing. Some people will think that questioning them is a savage attack and will respond by questioning the non-Futurist's salvation.
Pretending to be more important and claiming to be an 'expert' on most things. Lets combine these two with the "hypersensitivity" symptom and look at something you contributed:
You obviously take it very personally that someone might hold a viewpoint contrary to your own. As I’ve previously mentioned, I suggest you revisit Paul, he will have some instruction for you in 2 Timothy on how to “correct” those who disagree with you. The venom I have seen here makes me very sad. I also wouldn’t expect profanity such as yours in a discussion such as this.
This is classic Narcissism post. Here you imagine that you are so important that your beliefs shouldn't be challenged, you believe that you are an expert on giving proper "correction" without actually demonstrating this expert knowledge, you project on a moral standard that you yourself are too important to have to keep, and the ironic use of inflammatory rhetoric and outrage is icing on the Narcissists' cake as you show your contempt for those who don't agree with you.
An obvious self-focus on interpersonal relationships: in your statement, you also projected this "how dare you insult me" sentiment while embodying it fully while conveying it
I believe that while projecting your own neurosis you don't quite understand why many of us non-Futurists challenge the prophecy hucksters. It has never been about us or our allegedly fragile belief systems, it is that we know, some from personal experiences, that Dispensationalism is a profoundly false teaching that divides the Church, stifles the Gospel, quenches the Spirit, and brings anxiety and fear into the body. IOW, its a mortal sickness that needs to be cured.
I think what you may be witnessing is frustration in trying to talk sense into people who see themselves as "experts" in the Practice of Futurism such that they don't need the Bible, God, sound doctrine or challenges from a brother in Christ.
As for me, I was sanctified out of Dispensationalism by people who cared enough for me to beat it out of me. They too were frustrated because I thought I knew it all, and then when the Scriptures were opened up, I saw what an idiot I was for believing the Hal Lindseys and Tim LaHayes of this world. What you see from me is the same sort of thing you would expect from a "former smoker" or "former Roman Catholic" - one who zealously acts as a missionary to his own people.
FWIW, Post Mills and I disagree on a number of theological and interpretational points regarding eschatology. If we were so sensitive and egotistical, why aren't we clobbering each other? The reason why is that we don't see the other's beliefs as being destructive to the Church, they may just see my belief as harmful to myself.
Did you read none of my earlier posts. I’ve stated that I haven’t made up my mind what I believe and I’m not here to argue the merits of any point of view. My purpose is to point out some here (and Mr. Mitchell in particular) are mean spirited and not gently correcting anyone. You all may very well be correct in your beliefs, but the use of ridicule as a teaching method certainly isn’t convincing anyone.
By the way, the only person I believe I called a heretic was Marcion...who else did I accuse of heresy?
I’ve come to the conclusion that this thread is a bait for people to come in and have venom spat on them. I am not disagreeing with anyone’s position. I disagree with the ridicule and non-loving approach to the teaching.
I should further add that although I’ve stated that I’m biased toward a premillenial viewpoint, that is purely due to upbringing. I have in no way made up my mind as to what I believe in this area...hence the reason I claim “pan-millenialism” as my current viewpoint.
My point is that scoffing ridicule such as Mr. Mitchell’s is not going to convince anyone. A Scriptural proof text would be a far better method to convince anyone he wishes to “reach”.
I am currently reading several books on this subject such as “Relevation: Four Views, A Parallel Commentary”, “Three Views on The Rapture” and “Five Views on the Book of Revelation”. These books compare and contrast the various positions and are a far better education than the video linked in the original post.