Replies

Sproul disagrees but he respects our position as a more biblical one than any "dispensational" one.
Gentry is in the class of "heretic" labelers but he is the one who convinced me of "partial-preterism" and yet he alone, gave me the desire to see why he himself was filled with inconsistancies.
Gentry alone persuaded me to become a "full-preterist."

I don't damn your soul. I see nothing wrong with that title. If I spout Gnosticism, call me a Gnostic. (I'll read your response to West tonight)

Hymenaeus was a man who strayed from the faith because Paul clearly taught the resurrection as future.
Paul is dead and AD 70 was future of his writing Philipeans.
If I am wrong, yes, I can understand that "label."
But I have not strayed from the faith as Hymenaeus.

"Sproul disagrees but he respects our position as a more biblical one than any "dispensational" one."

Not hard to imagine, seeing how fraught with error dispensationalism is!

To return to an earlier answer of mine, your earlier refutation of pre-millenialism was addressed against dispensationalism. How do you think you stack up against a historical pre-mil position?