Andrew P.C.
Puritan Board Junior
Today, I went to the Tim Lahaye conference and no, I'm not a dispie. In fact, going to this conference was very fruitful for me. It reminded me how wrong the dispensational view really is. They slaughter the scriptures when coming to their view. I'm actually leaning more toward the Amill position because of my recent studying of the scriptures and this conference.
In the opening session, Dr. Gary Fraizer from Dallas said:
"We understand the bible differently then they did 2000 years ago."
He believes in something called "Progressive Illumination." He explained that we, now, know what the bible teaches about the end times. He was implying that historical teaching must be thrown out, and we must now embrace the dispensational view. (He did explain how scripture is closed, so he does not believe in "progressive revelation.")
Has anyone else heard of this view? Is this a normal dispensational doctrine?
In the opening session, Dr. Gary Fraizer from Dallas said:
"We understand the bible differently then they did 2000 years ago."
He believes in something called "Progressive Illumination." He explained that we, now, know what the bible teaches about the end times. He was implying that historical teaching must be thrown out, and we must now embrace the dispensational view. (He did explain how scripture is closed, so he does not believe in "progressive revelation.")
Has anyone else heard of this view? Is this a normal dispensational doctrine?