I realized at the end of the 2015 Fall Semester that I had
completed twenty-five years of teaching at GPTS (I began in the Spring Semester
of 1991). There are many seminary professors who have been teaching loner than
I, at larger schools, who therefore have more experience than I do. But I
intend to put down some of my reflections based on the last twenty-five years.
First, in general, students entering seminary today seem to
have a weaker grasp of the content of the English Bible than they did when I
started teaching. That’s bothersome to me. I remember when I went back to my
home church after my first year of seminary. There was an older lady who said
to me, “How wonderful it would be to just study the Bible all day.” I didn’t
correct her, and perhaps that’s the view many people have of seminary. But
English Bible is only part of the curriculum. There are languages to be
learned. Church history and theology have much in the way of required reading.
Even the English Bible courses are often more concerned with technical issues,
than with a mere recitation of content. Then there are the extra-curricular
activities that seminary students get drawn into, such as teaching Sunday
school, occasional supply preaching, and the demands of family life. So a
student who comes to seminary with a weak grasp of English Bible content likely
will not leave seminary with his understanding of the English Bible much
improved. This is further confirmed by the fact that many men, even after
seminary, do not do all that well on presbytery Bible content exams.
So my recommendation is that those who are contemplating
attending seminary should work first on their grasp of the English Bible. Read
it regularly and carefully. Develop your own outlines of the books. Yes, study
Bibles and other books provide such things. But if you spend the time working
out your own outlines, they will be more meaningful, and stick with you longer
than those pre-digested outlines that have been provided for you.
Second, it might be the impression of many that seminary is
where men learn their theology, so that the perspective of the school would
naturally have a significant effect on a man’s theological commitments.
However, I’ve found that not to be the case. Usually a man comes with his commitments
already in place. A man’s commitments generally reflect the commitments of the
church or the pastor under whom he began his growth as a Christian. Further, a
pastor will generally direct any of his men who are considering seminary to a
school that is congenial to his own commitments. So in general, seminary will
give a man greater theological sophistication, but rarely will it alter his
basic theological commitments. More on this next time.
1 comment:
The fact that a man's theological commitments tend to be already shaped before seminary lets us know that as Reformed and Presbyterian, we need to be more active in evangelism and discipleship. Letting charismatics and Arminian baptists evangelize folks and then us giving them more theological content may also mean that some deep seated thinking and perspective may be carried on into our presbyteries even when the surface thinking sounds just like other reformed folks. I think this goes in particular for the degree to which certain positions are valued and non-negotiable. Ecclesiology and worship principles may in practice be more loose and less out of definite conviction and more easily swayed by congregation members who feel hurt or have objections. We need men who take clear stands out of definite conviction of what God's Word calls us to believe and do.
Post a Comment