That's easy. I cheerfully assume that they are immature rather than reprobate.
I know S. Lewis Johnson. He is a fine Christian with an immature eschatology. It's a blind spot on his part.
I have read a critique by Lanier Burns of a friend's paper on amillennial theology, and it seemed to be a generally polite but woefully inadequate response to the questions raised in the paper. (And the very inadequacy of Burns's response gave it a rather ugly quality, as I recall.)
I know of Walvoord and Hendricks by reputation only, but I frankly doubt that they are finer Christians than S. Lewis Johnson. So, why should I be intimidated by your name-dropping? (grin)
I consider your statement about them a sub-Christian insult.
I think you are too enamored with DTS faculty members. Gosh, you act like I have trashed your spiritual heroes personally. I haven't. I have just said that they are immature in some ways.
Your statement is precisely the reason I have no desire to discuss theology with you.
You are taking what I would dare to call histrionic offense. It's your main defense mechanism. It keeps you from addressing the fatal flaws in your position and gives you "cover" for your refusal to discuss millennial theology with someone who may very well know the topic better than the typical DTS grad.
I will charitably assume that you don't fully realize what is going on in your soul.
You have a serious problem of a DTS party spirit. You are in violation of 1 Corinthians 3. This is the real reason why you won't discuss 2 Peter 3. You have locked yourself out of the truth of the millennium.