Thank you both, now a follow up question: I have seen many "Dispesational" theologians speak with derision regarding this hermeneutic because it doesn't define "Israel" as only the physical nation. In fact I've seen a few ministries like Zola Levitt's warn about how Moody and Dallas are going liberal because they no longer teach strict "Dispensationalism" but allow this hermeneutic to be taught. Is there any reason why this is a lesser hermeneutic than the grammatical-historical?

Peter

If you believe what you like in the gospels, and reject what you don't like, it is not the gospel you believe, but yourself. Augustine of Hippo