[topcat54]

Exactly. Gary DeMar has absolutely no foundation upon which to make his argument against dispensationalists

I see it's easier to throw stones than address the substanmce behind the charges. E.g.,

How will we ever convince skeptics of the truthfulness of the Bible when it is distorted to defend interpretations where "this" means "that," and "this is that" actually means "this is like that"?

Thus the true state of dispensationalism and it's fundational methodology is revealed.

[dartuser]

I see it's easier to throw stones than address the substanmce behind the charges.

You missed the point. The basic assertion of his work, a priori, is wrong. There is no need to dissect point 4 when point 1 is seriously flawed.

There is absolutely no basis in his assertion. He is making an argument by starting with a false premise. The interpretive framework for Dispensational premillenialism rests on its own merit, not on the perceived relationship to a theological position that some evolutionist doesnt support.