"Dispensationalism is in trouble. ... The pre-wrath position has become a safe prophetic landing spot for many Christians"

My pal Alan is starting a series interacting with his article. Alan is a pre-wrath, guy, btw.

http://www.alankurschner.com/2012/11/08/part-1-response-to-preterist-ga…

DeMar is willingly ignorant and will stay that way. Pre-wrather’s are Dispensationalists, but this bloke contrasts them. He even says Rosenthal was a dispensationalist. Correct me if I’m wrong, but he still is! What he isn’t, and what any responsible writer would know is that he was a pre-tribulationist. He even says there is no such thing as the rapture! Does he not know the Latin translation of harpazo? Plain daft.

DeMar calls dispensationalism “heresy,” which says more about the state of his heart than it does about the state of his scholarship - which isn’t good! Just think, Jesus cited Isa. 61:1-2a at Nazareth and stopped before “the days of vengeance.” Later in Luke 21:22 Jesus identifies these “days of vengeance” as occurring at the second advent (see 21:25-28). I realize DeMar thinks the “days of vengeance” happened in AD 67-70, but besides making mincemeat of the coming of Christ, he also envisages a time-gap between the 69th and 70th Weeks of about 38 years or so - the very thing he argues cannot be predicated of the 70th Week!

This is pure inconsistent rubbish! If someone wishes to argue against dispensationalism or the pretrib position (or the pre-wrath one for that matter), let them put forward better arguments than these.

I believe that DeMar is a partial preterist, a rehashed, reformatted heresy that is now gaining popularity thanks to Hank Hanagraaff and RC Sproul.