I've had my "Christian credentials" questioned by a number of dispies (not just on the web, but old friends in "real life," too) because I am no longer a dispensationalist. It isn't peripheral to them, somehow believing in the "futurist" interpretation of Scripture is central to the faith. I must adhere or I am rejected. Sorry to hear it. FWIW, it's not something I agree with and have encountered that same type of treatment from amill folks at FR.
I'll have to ping you if I'm able to flesh out my thought better about amill churches being characteristically rigid and exclusionary. I know the RCC fits that description, but I'm not sure about the Presbyterian and other denominations that are amill.
Sorry to hear it. FWIW, it's not something I agree with and have encountered that same type of treatment from amill folks at FR.
I'm not doubting you, but I have been fairly heavily involved in the eschatology argument here and I've never seen that from any amil adherent wrt eschatology. Maybe calling out a heresy or a fallacy where one exists, but never wrt to eschatology. Please give an example, I'd like to talk with the offender.
I'll have to ping you if I'm able to flesh out my thought better about amill churches being characteristically rigid and exclusionary. I know the RCC fits that description,
Catholics are not amil. They may have a system similar to amil eschatology, but it's
not classic amil.
Presbyterian and other denominations that are amill.
Denominations are not amil. I hold to amil eschatology with post-mil leanings. Some of the members of my church hold to post mil exclusively. Presbyterians are similar if not the same. Covenant theology is not necessarily amil, post mil, or pre-mil. It is, however, decidedly not dispensational.