What are the benefits of academic rigor?

I agree, I have given up about a 150k in unearned income ...

But, I will continue to support those that do not make your sacrifices or mine ...

I wish I had some of that money at times ...

I need some sleep too.

Good night

Wayne

 

I don't think we are all advocating that you have to go to seminary in order to be adequately trained. Sometimes God doesn't call men to seminary. He does call them to be properly educated for the ministry. I have a friend who is the Minister of Education for a large church who has never gone to seminary (much less finished college.) He made up for his lack of education once in ministry by reading 4 times more than any of the pastors he served under. This man is a voracious reader and tears through books like they were a fine steak.

If God has called someone into the glorious service of His minsitry He has likewise called them to be their best, be ready to make sacrifices to acheive their best, and be always do their best at His work. I wouldn't trust a surgeon with no training to open me and fiddle with my insides...likewise I trust no man to fiddle with the Word of God who has not gone after some rigorous training (on their own or in a classroom)

It is a sad place our society is in today when men called of God to lead a congregation feel they can slide into the ministry without any condition of rigorous life stretching sacrifice (I don't necessarily mean seminary here.)

To be used by God for His Kingdom we must be demonstrate our worthiness of His use in refining our minds and skills to be the best we can be!

 

PreachinJesus

I agree. It is just the recurring, "you have to go to a real seminary no matter what the cost." that keeps running through our threads that worries me.

Academic rigor is just as dangerous as NOT STUDYING to show one's self approved.

 

That is what I was trying to say.

God bless

 

Because positions taken during interacting with a thread can be misunderstood as one reacts to particular statements, for the sake of clarity please allow me to try to make clear my position.

Academic rigor is needed for the minister in training because of the high calling of the ministry. Such rigor in study can be exercised in an on campus situation, a distance education undertaking, or being privately mentored by a qualified pastor.

What I react against is the attitude, whether intentional or not, that genuine scholarship is not needed by ministers. BTW, genuine scholarship does not replace godliness or God's call to the ministry. This is not an either/or.

Everyone can not attain to the same level of scholarship---God gifts all as He will. Nevertheless, all can be trained as well as they are capable. To settle for less is the problem, whether it is scholarship or godliness or practical ministry.

Bill

 

Bill

I can agree with this as well ...

 

Here's my opinion based on my experience. A degree is not necessary to do many kinds of vocations. I do software development work without a completed engineering degree. Sure, I'm always looked at with a little suspicion by new employers, but my resume has lots of good experience on it, which seems to make up for not having a degree.

The only ones who tend to look down on me doing engineering work are those who want to "prestigious" schools like MIT and Stanford. But they feel like they should get the better jobs since they went to good schools.

Now, on the ministry side, I'm exactly opposite. Not much experience, but a degree.

Most churches would not want me as a senior pastor without experience pastoring.

So the thing my Bible degree helps me with is knowing how to study the Bible and some things in ministry.

My plans are to continue developing my experience in both fields, and see what God has for me. I read and study quite a bit on my own. I'm also applying to seminary.

Non-traditional ways of going into the ministry or getting a job do work, but you have to be willing to overcome the questions people have about your education. If you have a good explanation for it, and other experience to back you up, I find most people aren't bothered by the lack of letters after your name.

 

we need pastor/theologians

 

Can I weigh in here as just an average gal that went to Bible college and has attended quite a few different sorts of churches?

In my experience, there are some who emphasize "high-brow" education to the point that they lose much of their ability to communicate to us "average folk." Here in these forums I see it illustrated all the time, and perhaps this forum is not a good example of how real preaching would happen. BUT, I see preachers whose expounding of the Scriptures may very well be brilliant, but it is couched in terms so far above my head that I miss much of what they are trying to say.....and I do have a pretty good degree of intelligence, and I try not to be a "lazy-thinker."

Ive heard preachers who had degrees from impressive seminaries, and they spoke in such a way that it was a struggle just to keep my mind focused on their message and to extrapolate some kind of practical application from it to my own life. Then Ive heard other preachers, who were educated also, btw, but perhaps at places that Ive heard are considered "not academically as legitimate", yet their preaching contains truths, and insights, and real-life applications that I could grasp.

I do not hold to "dumbing-down", but I do think that there needs to be more of an emphasis on practical communication of real Bible truths and application of them to real life, rather than such an emphasis on extensive knowledge.

These are my thoughts on pastoral education. I believe the ones who like to consider themselves theologians could do great good through writing books. So its not that I think there is no place for education.

 

I wonder if some of us here could come to agree somewhat on how academic rigor in higher Christian Education can be seen or not seen in a school? In other words, if we are asked to state criteria by which to estimate a school's academic rigor , what would these criteria be?

Would any agree with me that these suggested (by my observations and reflections) norms are to a great extent fair predictors of the academic rigor of a school?


1) The entry bar into a graduate program should be high enough to give a reasonable assurance that the applicant is prepared by experience, skills, and intellect to complete the graduate program he desires to enter.

comment: If the prerequisites for a graduate program of study are not efficient in determining who can do genuine grad work, and who cannot, then the course content ,and the expectations of that program, must be kept low so as to fit the abilities of a broader population of students, including the lesser prepared.

2) The objectives ,and duration, and curriculum, of a graduate program of study should result in the graduate acquiring skills and learnings which in general coincide with the expectations of graduates in similar programs.

comment: So, eg, one graduating from a MDiv program should be prepared to effectively pastor a church including doing expositions of Biblical texts and being aware of how his interpretations of these texts either do cohere or do not with the conservative belief system . This should be done in preparation to preach on those texts. One receiving a PhD in Bible should be able to do research and teach Bible at the college or seminary or university level.

3. The faculty members should have completed themselves rigorous programs of study at appropriate levels.

comment: I do not see how it can in general be well-argued that one teaching, eg, graduate courses in Systematic Theology, should not normally be expected to possess a credible doctorate in Theology. How can one who himself has not been through a credible grad program be expected to competently lead another through what he, himself, has chosen not to go through? This is NOT to say that having an accredited PhD assures quality teaching ; it does not. It is only one of several factors, but it is an important factor.

4. The outcomes of graduate programs of a school should be deemed by recognized schools to in general prepare the graduate to be successful in higher degree programs at credible schools.

comment: So, if the graduates of a suitable master's program of school A csnnot enter and complete the doctoral program of the accredited school B, then that indicates that school A is not rigorous! Obviously there may be some snobbery that occurs. But, the fact is, that it regularly is the case that some few unaccredited schools have graduates who do complete doctoral programs at TEDS or Westminster or Dallas or their foreign equivalents. That fact, IMO, warrants this criterion.

5. Graduates of ThD or PhD programs in Bible/Theology should be able to find faculty positions in credible schools.

Comment: So often it is argued that a graduate or a student in a PhD or ThD program in a substandard school is not getting that doc to teach. And that is fine. But the issue is not his motive, the issue is COULD he be hired on the virtue of that doc if he wished to be? IF he could not, then academically speaking, that PhD or ThD likely is not rigorous IMO.

Bill Grover

 

There seems to be a common misconception of what rigor is. It is not necessarily more. This is the mistake that degree mills propagate. They think a long paper indicates scholarship and rigor. Bosh! I've seen lots of long papers and even published books that were a total waste of ink and paper. Rigor is more about quality than quantity. By rigor we mean a higher level of cognitive functioning, not just more of the same.

 

I have been in the same field for 35 years now and know what it takes to be successful. What I give to my students now that I am teaching is less than 10 percent of what I have learned and I make them work hard. The person who knows, knows what his students must know because he has already been there.

 

Thats all I was trying to say, too, Plain Old Bill.

But it seems that there are some out there who want rigorous education simply for the sake of being educated. They've forgotten US.....the ones they are supposed to be helping.

 

Rhetorician,

I can't do anything but respect your position. I truly appreciate how you put it, and Im glad to see you express that.

Thank you very much!

 

bapmom sez:

The perfect phrase that I've heard for this problem is "educated beyond his intelligence"!

And I totally agree that it is rampant by a few posters on this board.

 

Id thought of that phrase myself sometimes!

 

I'm afraid that too often posts are read the way people read the Bible, that is, reading into them from the reader's perspective, not seeking to understand what is being communicated.

I have been in the ministry for almost thirty years. Those who truly care about communicating truth, and communicating means being understandable, know more about their subjects than the average person in the pew can understand. Yet the preacher's knowledge aids him in explaining the Scripture text accurately and understandably.

I have seen poorly trained preachers speak on a difficult text of Scripture and be so confusing that no one could comprehend what was said; or they claimed a text meant something that was completely wrong.

I have also seen highly educated preachers forget that they are speaking to non-specialists. Few could comprehend what was being said because the terminology was foreign to their ears.

And I have heard some preachers who did not have a great formal education but who had applied themselves to study deeply and read widely and were able to preach with conviction and clarity.

I have also heard well trained preachers preach with such fervor, clarity, and conviction that the congregation was overwhelmed with joy at understanding a passage that before was difficult for them to grasp and apply.

We mix and mangle issues when we talk about some being too highly educated for common folks to understand and poorly trained preachers who can outpreach "all dem ejucatid preechurs wid all der book larnin." That's just plain silly. If there is one danger that churches do not face in America, it is having too many highly trained pastors.

As I and others have written here and elsewhere, a preacher worth his salt will get the best training available and not excuse his indolence by gaining prestigious degrees from substandard institutions.

Bill