Hello pilgrim, I like your name, and such should be the confession of every Christian! To answer your question, -my own thoughts are that Dispensationalism is heretical (I am very much opposed to it). By that I do not mean it is damnable heresy, unless one would insist, for example, that salvation is possible apart from Christ (such as the salvation of Jewish people, or salvation during Old Testament times &c.). I am very much against the antinomianism and various other errors that go along with Dispensational teachings. Also, I think that the Millennium is already past (I don't equate the Millenium as being entirely synonymous with Christ's Kingship as Mediator, or with the first resurrection), so I suppose that entirely disqualifies me from the premillennialist camp. Most of my life I have considered myself an Amillennialist of sorts, but I confess the term is inadequate to describe my own views sufficiently. Perhaps my Historicism (which includes a partly yet-future aspect) made you suppose I might be a Premillennialist. I think historic Premil's are usually Historicists as well, but I disagree with much of their conclusions about the fulfilment of prophecy. I also think Postmil Historicist's conclusions are often either off, or else involve too much preteristic thinking. An example of this might be concerning Daniel 11, which I had quoted from above (previously). I agree with Postmillennialists that these things did have a fulfilment around 171-168 BC, but I believe that there is a latter-day fulfilment as well. In other words, I believe there to be multiple fulfilments of many Scripture prophecies.