I'm sick. I almost never get sick, but this week I definitely am. I took a sick day yesterday -- which is the first one I've taken since beginning this job more than three years ago.
Being sick apparently means being home. Without much to do. For a much larger chunk of the week than when you're not sick. So I read The Hunger Games the other day, which we borrowed from a friend. It was good (although I was expecting at least a little competitive eating to be involved). Now Elizabeth's reading it. Which means I have plenty of time to write this blog post.
We're moving. Kinda. Sorta. But not really. But maybe.
A little over a month ago I found out that I passed my comprehensive exams for my MA program. That was a huge relief. After taking the exams I did not feel confident that I had performed well enough to pass. Thankfully, the Biblical studies faculty at Denver Seminary disagreed with me.* So now I'm completely done with all course work and all exams. Literally the only thing left for me to do before they'll give me a degree is write a thesis. I know, I know, writing a thesis is no small task. But here's the thing: it can be done in evenings and on weekends and it can be done from anywhere that's somewhat near a decent theological library (technically, it could probably be done from a mud hut in the Gobi Desert, but it'd take longer and be much more difficult). So, Elizabeth and I have started the job search process which we hope will lead at least one of us to full time employment in our area of interest. We also hope that this employment will be somewhere in the midwest closer to some family. We've both applied for numerous positions in numerous locations and although we have our own preferences, we will be following God's call and we'll go wherever he wants us to (but I really hope it's not a mud hut in the Gobi Desert).
I'm currently in phase 2 of the selection process for a job at a Christian high school here in Denver, so it's certainly possible that we'll remain here at least another year. I've also submitted applications for jobs in the Quad Cities, Des Moines, and the Twin Cities. Elizabeth has applied in some of those places too, but also has the option of staying at her current position for the next school year if we stick around.
SO, we could be moving as soon as a job shows up, or we could be remaining here. Both of us have a fairly strong desire to be back in the midwest. It's an exciting time for us, but it can also be very frustrating when we get rejected from jobs we've applied for, and it's a little tough not knowing how much longer before we'll be heading into something different.
And there you have it. I figured if I'm not good enough to post something regularly here, the least I could do was give both of my faithful readers an update on the lives of Jake & Elizabeth.
*Though I can't shake this nagging feeling that the Seminary's Biblical studies department just wants to finally be rid of me, and they knew that passing me was their only hope...
Showing posts with label seminary. Show all posts
Showing posts with label seminary. Show all posts
April 12, 2012
August 17, 2011
An amateur looks at Love Wins
At the end of February a pastor from Michigan named Rob Bell released a promo video for his soon-to-be-released book, Love Wins, and a firestorm of controversy erupted in the online evangelical world. The next month the book came out, and the controversy continued. From the end of February until about mid-April it seemed everything Christianity-related I read online had to do with Bell's book. In a nutshell, Bell's book is (as his subtitle suggests) A Book About Heaven, Hell, and the Fate of Every Person who Ever Lived. In this book Bell is seen by many as having taken a step toward (if not a canonball-sized plunge into) universalism - the idea that in the end, all people will be saved. Though the controversy is now "old news," I just recently had a chance to read the book, and I wanted to share my thoughts.
When I began reading, I started taking notes on just about every sentence on every page, but I soon realized that this was taking a ridiculous amount of time, and it was completely unnecessary. Many others have posted detailed reviews of this book and have done so much more eloquently and intelligently than I would ever be able to (I can provide links to enough blog posts, articles, and broadcasts to keep you busy for the rest of the calendar year, if you're so inclined). And so, I settled in and finished the book within a couple of days (the book will NOT take you that long if you just sit down and knock it out in one swipe - a couple of hours maybe). I thought I'd provide you with my overall reactions, which could very well be longer than you're willing to read from a nobody like myself.
THE GOOD
Bell's book has forced Christians to examine their theologies about heaven and hell more closely. This is good because often these ideas -- especially hell -- are more or less avoided. Also, Bell emphasizes in parts of his book that we should be careful when we describe heaven as a distant location of wonderfulness where all Baptists (or Calvinists, or Presbyterians, etc.) will someday go, as if it's some pie-in-the-sky place and we're all just waiting around here to die so we can get there. If this is what we believe, we don't have any real obligation to working on problems in our lives on this planet. Also, if we truly believe this, why don't we just all kill ourselves so we can get to heaven sooner?
And unfortunately, that's about it for the good.
THE BAD
Let's see... where to start.
There are many notes I jotted down while reading that won't make their way to this "review," but I'd like to start with the opening pages of Bell's second chapter in which he basically ridicules a painting that his grandmother had hanging in her house while little Rob was growing up. It's a painting that depicts the "cross as a bridge" image that you've probably seen a million times. There's a great chasm with hell at the bottom. On one side of the chasm is humankind, and on the other side is God (often depicted as popular ideas of heaven with shiny streets and angels and harps). The only way from one side to the other is to take the cross-shaped bridge. Bell rails against this image, saying it makes us think heaven is somewhere else that we need to get to, and it's dangerous for us to think in those terms. Ironically, this "artist" (or so he is described by most of his defenders, and perhaps even himself?) doesn't seem to understand that oftentimes paintings are metaphorical. I'm guessing that neither the painter of this image, nor Rob's grandmother, really believe that there is some physical place where we have to go and walk across a cross, and if we don't step carefully we'll fall to our eternal damnation in a fiery furnace. But the image, according to the Bible, is pretty accurate. There is a gap between people and God. A huge gap, called sin, that can never be crossed with anything man-made. The only way to bridge that gap is with the cross of Christ. What's wrong with metaphorical paintings that have assisted missionaries and evangelists for years, Rob?
Bell argues that when Jesus talks about "hell," he uses the word "gehenna," which refers, basically, to the town garbage dump outside of Jerusalem where there was an ongoing fire that consumed the city's trash. He also tells us that when Matthew writes about the sheep and the goats, and that the goats will "go away to eternal punishment" (Matt. 25:46), the Greek words there would more accurately be translated "go away to an intense period of pruning." This allows Bell to argue that punishment in hell is only meant to bring people around to Jesus, and that it won't last forever. I'll leave it to other experts to explain to you why Bell must not have done very well in his exegesis classes in seminary, but if you'd like, just read a few good commentaries on these verses and you'll find out that Bell's version just doesn't work. None of the major English translations in existence supports his theory. Is there a Western-world conspiracy that wants everyone to believe Hell is forever, Rob? Or is it possible that your lone voice is the one that's mistaken?
Kevin DeYoung's review of Bell's book goes into much more detail about this point, but I did notice that sin, for Rob, seems to be almost exclusively about horizontal injustices. He regularly talks about rape and war and oppression and abuse and other things people to do other people. Flowing from this is Rob's insistence that "hell" is what we experience here on earth because of these sins. "Hell" is finding out your daughter has been repeatedly sexually abused over the years by a relative. "Hell" is the teenagers in Africa who have had their limbs cut off in the midst of civil unrest. Missing from his theology seems to be any notion of the idea that sin is also against God. It's vertical. And it must be atoned for. That is what Jesus' death did. Bell's theologies of sin, hell, and especially his Christology are sorely lacking.
When the Love Wins promo video was released, the big controversial question was, "Is Rob Bell a universalist?" After reading this book, I would say that although Bell tends to be as slippery as an eel, and does his best to avoid any single label, "universalist" in any meaningful sense of the term seems fairly accurate. Bell does emphatically say that Jesus is THE ONLY way, but then he says that anywhere people find hope and forgiveness - that's Jesus. No matter your beliefs, Bell seems to think that if you have some bit of joy, hope, forgiveness (or any other touchy-feely abstract noun) in your life, that's Jesus, and so even though you didn't know that's what its name was, you've been saved by Jesus. Some might call this inclusivism instead of universalism. Perhaps that's more accurate, but it seems like a semantic battle now. For all practical purposes, Bell is quite a few paces down Universalist Road. A rose by any other name may smell as sweet, but calling my bike a rose won't make it so.
Sometimes I wonder if Bell understands syntax when it comes to sentences. He LOVES John 3:16. I guess I should say, he LOVES John 3:16a: "For God so loved the world that he gave is only begotten son..." but that's where the love stops. Bell even describes that part as "beautiful." But, he argues, "millions have been taught that if they don't believe..." and then he launches into a rant about how God instantly becomes a vindictive monster to people who don't believe. I wonder if Bell has read the rest of the verse and chooses to ignore it, of if he just never got that far. To help him out, it goes like this: "...that whoever believes in Him will not perish but have eternal life." The inverse of the argument isn't true, Rob? Maybe he thinks there's an omitted part that says, "...and whoever does NOT believe in Him will also not perish, but have eternal life -- because we here at Bible Writers, Incorporated are very open and loving and affirming, and it'd be unloving of us to deny anyone eternal life."
In Bell's paradigm, I honestly see very little need for evangelism and missions within the Christian faith. In fact, the one time I remember Bell mentioning missions, it's only say that he hears stories all the time about missionaries who tell the stories of Jesus, and the native peoples say, "That's Jesus? But we've been telling those stories for years" (again confirming my "pretty close to universalism" beliefs about Bell). Bell talks about the importance of following God in this life, but the reasons for it seem to be mostly, "because it's just better, and you'll feel more fulfilled." It feels like someone trying to convince me to cheer for the Steelers, because they win a lot of Super Bowls, and they're a well-run franchise that doesn't disappoint nearly as often as other teams, so I'll just enjoy football more if I convert. Unfortunately, I enjoy being a Cowboys fan, and since, in the end, it doesn't really matter what I choose (I'll always be able to change my mind after I die when I realize that the Steelers really were the better team), I'll stick with my 'Boys. I'm enjoying it just fine. It reads to me like Bell basically says, "Jesus is NOT the mean judgmental guy you hear about from the Westboro Baptist Church weirdos. Now that you are aware of that, I can't really give you a solid reason why you need to follow him right now. Just keep him in the back of your mind so that when you die and it comes time for you to change your mind, you won't have to be 'pruned' for very long before you realize Jesus is the right way."
My last point: None of this would be that big of a deal if Rob Bell were truly just seeking answers and trying to provoke thought, but he's teaching this stuff to millions of followers. He preaches at a megachurch, he writes very popular books, and he speaks at conferences and gives interviews around the world. His influence is huge, and that's why this is important to combat. Bell loves to play the "I'm just a pastor" card, but when we're talking about millions who look to you as a spiritual advisor in their lives, false teaching carries some dire consequences.
I understand that this post reads largely as some rant against a guy I don't like, and I'm sorry for that. But, honestly, I've never had a real problem with Bell before I read this book (I thought he might be slightly "out there" regarding a few things he's said and written, but I didn't have a problem for the most part with what he and his church has been teaching to tons of people). Now that's changed.
Read Kevin DeYoung's lengthy review for the most thorough exposition of the flaws in Bell's book.
When I began reading, I started taking notes on just about every sentence on every page, but I soon realized that this was taking a ridiculous amount of time, and it was completely unnecessary. Many others have posted detailed reviews of this book and have done so much more eloquently and intelligently than I would ever be able to (I can provide links to enough blog posts, articles, and broadcasts to keep you busy for the rest of the calendar year, if you're so inclined). And so, I settled in and finished the book within a couple of days (the book will NOT take you that long if you just sit down and knock it out in one swipe - a couple of hours maybe). I thought I'd provide you with my overall reactions, which could very well be longer than you're willing to read from a nobody like myself.
THE GOOD
Bell's book has forced Christians to examine their theologies about heaven and hell more closely. This is good because often these ideas -- especially hell -- are more or less avoided. Also, Bell emphasizes in parts of his book that we should be careful when we describe heaven as a distant location of wonderfulness where all Baptists (or Calvinists, or Presbyterians, etc.) will someday go, as if it's some pie-in-the-sky place and we're all just waiting around here to die so we can get there. If this is what we believe, we don't have any real obligation to working on problems in our lives on this planet. Also, if we truly believe this, why don't we just all kill ourselves so we can get to heaven sooner?
And unfortunately, that's about it for the good.
THE BAD
Let's see... where to start.
There are many notes I jotted down while reading that won't make their way to this "review," but I'd like to start with the opening pages of Bell's second chapter in which he basically ridicules a painting that his grandmother had hanging in her house while little Rob was growing up. It's a painting that depicts the "cross as a bridge" image that you've probably seen a million times. There's a great chasm with hell at the bottom. On one side of the chasm is humankind, and on the other side is God (often depicted as popular ideas of heaven with shiny streets and angels and harps). The only way from one side to the other is to take the cross-shaped bridge. Bell rails against this image, saying it makes us think heaven is somewhere else that we need to get to, and it's dangerous for us to think in those terms. Ironically, this "artist" (or so he is described by most of his defenders, and perhaps even himself?) doesn't seem to understand that oftentimes paintings are metaphorical. I'm guessing that neither the painter of this image, nor Rob's grandmother, really believe that there is some physical place where we have to go and walk across a cross, and if we don't step carefully we'll fall to our eternal damnation in a fiery furnace. But the image, according to the Bible, is pretty accurate. There is a gap between people and God. A huge gap, called sin, that can never be crossed with anything man-made. The only way to bridge that gap is with the cross of Christ. What's wrong with metaphorical paintings that have assisted missionaries and evangelists for years, Rob?
Bell argues that when Jesus talks about "hell," he uses the word "gehenna," which refers, basically, to the town garbage dump outside of Jerusalem where there was an ongoing fire that consumed the city's trash. He also tells us that when Matthew writes about the sheep and the goats, and that the goats will "go away to eternal punishment" (Matt. 25:46), the Greek words there would more accurately be translated "go away to an intense period of pruning." This allows Bell to argue that punishment in hell is only meant to bring people around to Jesus, and that it won't last forever. I'll leave it to other experts to explain to you why Bell must not have done very well in his exegesis classes in seminary, but if you'd like, just read a few good commentaries on these verses and you'll find out that Bell's version just doesn't work. None of the major English translations in existence supports his theory. Is there a Western-world conspiracy that wants everyone to believe Hell is forever, Rob? Or is it possible that your lone voice is the one that's mistaken?
Kevin DeYoung's review of Bell's book goes into much more detail about this point, but I did notice that sin, for Rob, seems to be almost exclusively about horizontal injustices. He regularly talks about rape and war and oppression and abuse and other things people to do other people. Flowing from this is Rob's insistence that "hell" is what we experience here on earth because of these sins. "Hell" is finding out your daughter has been repeatedly sexually abused over the years by a relative. "Hell" is the teenagers in Africa who have had their limbs cut off in the midst of civil unrest. Missing from his theology seems to be any notion of the idea that sin is also against God. It's vertical. And it must be atoned for. That is what Jesus' death did. Bell's theologies of sin, hell, and especially his Christology are sorely lacking.
When the Love Wins promo video was released, the big controversial question was, "Is Rob Bell a universalist?" After reading this book, I would say that although Bell tends to be as slippery as an eel, and does his best to avoid any single label, "universalist" in any meaningful sense of the term seems fairly accurate. Bell does emphatically say that Jesus is THE ONLY way, but then he says that anywhere people find hope and forgiveness - that's Jesus. No matter your beliefs, Bell seems to think that if you have some bit of joy, hope, forgiveness (or any other touchy-feely abstract noun) in your life, that's Jesus, and so even though you didn't know that's what its name was, you've been saved by Jesus. Some might call this inclusivism instead of universalism. Perhaps that's more accurate, but it seems like a semantic battle now. For all practical purposes, Bell is quite a few paces down Universalist Road. A rose by any other name may smell as sweet, but calling my bike a rose won't make it so.
Sometimes I wonder if Bell understands syntax when it comes to sentences. He LOVES John 3:16. I guess I should say, he LOVES John 3:16a: "For God so loved the world that he gave is only begotten son..." but that's where the love stops. Bell even describes that part as "beautiful." But, he argues, "millions have been taught that if they don't believe..." and then he launches into a rant about how God instantly becomes a vindictive monster to people who don't believe. I wonder if Bell has read the rest of the verse and chooses to ignore it, of if he just never got that far. To help him out, it goes like this: "...that whoever believes in Him will not perish but have eternal life." The inverse of the argument isn't true, Rob? Maybe he thinks there's an omitted part that says, "...and whoever does NOT believe in Him will also not perish, but have eternal life -- because we here at Bible Writers, Incorporated are very open and loving and affirming, and it'd be unloving of us to deny anyone eternal life."
In Bell's paradigm, I honestly see very little need for evangelism and missions within the Christian faith. In fact, the one time I remember Bell mentioning missions, it's only say that he hears stories all the time about missionaries who tell the stories of Jesus, and the native peoples say, "That's Jesus? But we've been telling those stories for years" (again confirming my "pretty close to universalism" beliefs about Bell). Bell talks about the importance of following God in this life, but the reasons for it seem to be mostly, "because it's just better, and you'll feel more fulfilled." It feels like someone trying to convince me to cheer for the Steelers, because they win a lot of Super Bowls, and they're a well-run franchise that doesn't disappoint nearly as often as other teams, so I'll just enjoy football more if I convert. Unfortunately, I enjoy being a Cowboys fan, and since, in the end, it doesn't really matter what I choose (I'll always be able to change my mind after I die when I realize that the Steelers really were the better team), I'll stick with my 'Boys. I'm enjoying it just fine. It reads to me like Bell basically says, "Jesus is NOT the mean judgmental guy you hear about from the Westboro Baptist Church weirdos. Now that you are aware of that, I can't really give you a solid reason why you need to follow him right now. Just keep him in the back of your mind so that when you die and it comes time for you to change your mind, you won't have to be 'pruned' for very long before you realize Jesus is the right way."
My last point: None of this would be that big of a deal if Rob Bell were truly just seeking answers and trying to provoke thought, but he's teaching this stuff to millions of followers. He preaches at a megachurch, he writes very popular books, and he speaks at conferences and gives interviews around the world. His influence is huge, and that's why this is important to combat. Bell loves to play the "I'm just a pastor" card, but when we're talking about millions who look to you as a spiritual advisor in their lives, false teaching carries some dire consequences.
I understand that this post reads largely as some rant against a guy I don't like, and I'm sorry for that. But, honestly, I've never had a real problem with Bell before I read this book (I thought he might be slightly "out there" regarding a few things he's said and written, but I didn't have a problem for the most part with what he and his church has been teaching to tons of people). Now that's changed.
Read Kevin DeYoung's lengthy review for the most thorough exposition of the flaws in Bell's book.
May 16, 2011
Future Me: About school work
Dear Future Jake,
I pray that you're not still doing school work. If you are, it must mean you decided to pursue a Ph. D. (or another master's, or another bachelor's?) over my strong objections. C'mon, man. I begged you. Seriously, take a moment to punch yourself in the face (just once, please—and not too hard). You're supposed to be done with that stuff by now. You promised.
In any case, if you still regularly have homework and deadlines, take this advice: Plead with Elizabeth to help you set up a schedule for when you will work on your projects. Be specific and STICK TO YOUR SCHEDULE. Believe me, I know how wonderful you are at procrastinating (perhaps that's what you're getting your Ph. D. in?), but it is not worth the nightmare you will experience in the days leading up to your deadline. If you make a schedule and stick to it, you'll roll your eyes a few times when you're forced to do homework weeks before it's due, but when you complete your final draft a week ahead of time, you will realize that your work is better, and your heart is healthier because you are not completely stressing yourself out. Celebrating a job well done before the job needs to be done is one of those truly liberating feelings, and it's great.
Now, make sure you thank your wife. You know that even with a non-procrastinating schedule, you never would have stuck to it if she hadn't made you. She's the reason you've finished all your homework with days (weeks?) to spare. Take her out to dinner and buy her something nice (or try to convince her to conveniently forget about her milk allergy for an evening and indulge in carry-out pizza and boxed macaroni... okay okay, that's more for you than for her. Sorry).
Jake (2011 version)
I pray that you're not still doing school work. If you are, it must mean you decided to pursue a Ph. D. (or another master's, or another bachelor's?) over my strong objections. C'mon, man. I begged you. Seriously, take a moment to punch yourself in the face (just once, please—and not too hard). You're supposed to be done with that stuff by now. You promised.
In any case, if you still regularly have homework and deadlines, take this advice: Plead with Elizabeth to help you set up a schedule for when you will work on your projects. Be specific and STICK TO YOUR SCHEDULE. Believe me, I know how wonderful you are at procrastinating (perhaps that's what you're getting your Ph. D. in?), but it is not worth the nightmare you will experience in the days leading up to your deadline. If you make a schedule and stick to it, you'll roll your eyes a few times when you're forced to do homework weeks before it's due, but when you complete your final draft a week ahead of time, you will realize that your work is better, and your heart is healthier because you are not completely stressing yourself out. Celebrating a job well done before the job needs to be done is one of those truly liberating feelings, and it's great.
Now, make sure you thank your wife. You know that even with a non-procrastinating schedule, you never would have stuck to it if she hadn't made you. She's the reason you've finished all your homework with days (weeks?) to spare. Take her out to dinner and buy her something nice (or try to convince her to conveniently forget about her milk allergy for an evening and indulge in carry-out pizza and boxed macaroni... okay okay, that's more for you than for her. Sorry).
Jake (2011 version)
November 30, 2010
a little silliness
This is the epitome of seminary nerdiness, but I find New Testament Scholar Mike Bird to be very funny, and this is a funny little nerd-themed rip-off of the Old Spice commercials. Enjoy.
September 20, 2010
May 16, 2010
Graduation weekend
Elizabeth participated in graduation ceremonies for Denver Seminary this weekend.
This is her (both in real life and on the big screen) being handed her degree from our seminary's president, Dr. Mark Young.
This is us with her parents and her brother who came to visit.
May 10, 2010
Final
Today finals week started. And for me, finals week ended. That's what happens when you're only taking two classes in a given semester.
This afternoon I took my Greek final on the book of James. It was tough, but fair.
Tonight I taught a class for my teaching practicum. I taught on James 4:1-10 (which was, coincidentally, the passage on which I wrote my big huge "James Paper"). It went really well, and I had a great group of people in my class.
Now I'm done with homework until September(ish). WHOOOOOOPPPPEEEEEEEEEE!!!
This afternoon I took my Greek final on the book of James. It was tough, but fair.
Tonight I taught a class for my teaching practicum. I taught on James 4:1-10 (which was, coincidentally, the passage on which I wrote my big huge "James Paper"). It went really well, and I had a great group of people in my class.
Now I'm done with homework until September(ish). WHOOOOOOPPPPEEEEEEEEEE!!!
April 8, 2010
Debunking Seminary myths
It seems that lately I’ve come across a pretty large group of people (most of them fellow Christians, and many of them from my own church family) who have some fairly strong negative opinions about seminary that don’t appear to be grounded in their own personal experience or really anything else.
Myth 1: Going to seminary takes away your passion for ministering in the Kingdom of God and replaces it with sterile, lifeless academic study about the Bible.
This myth usually manifests itself in some snide comment to me like, “Well don’t let seminary ruin your faith,” or this actual example, “Like my dad always said, ‘There are an awful lot of people who know a whole lot but they don’t really get it. Make sure you get it.’” That’s all fine, I suppose, except that these comments imply that seminary is the only place on the planet where one’s faith can be shaken. The idea that seminary can “ruin your faith” is no more true than the idea that a Christian college can, or working for Focus on the Family can, or ATTENDING A CHURCH can.
Professors at the seminary I attend have mentioned that they’ve had students who have gone through the program there and earned their degrees who do end up “falling away” from the faith. Far more often, however, that is NOT the case. I think of friends of mine who went to Young Life with me every week in high school. I look on their facebook pages today to realize that that Christian teaching didn’t exactly stick for them (or so it would seem). The same could be said of college friends who were very active in InterVarsity and Campus Ministries. I’m sure most of us could think of an adult or two who used to attend a church regularly and profess to be a Christian, but has since experienced some kind of frustration and no longer claims Christ.
The vast majority of my classmates at seminary are anything but lifeless. You don’t spend the kind of money we’re spending on a Christian education if you don’t believe anything you’re being taught. These people truly desire to serve the Lord through vocational ministry and believe that intense study of the Bible and theology and philosophy and leadership will better equip them for doing so. I don’t see anything wrong with that. Almost all of the MDiv students I know have internships, part-time, even full-time ministry jobs at local churches in addition to their class load. Many of them have already had ministry jobs for years and have now been called to seminary to grow in their abilities so that they can graduate and then go back to ministry jobs. Sterile? Lifeless? Hardly.
Myth 2: Seminary is overrated and unnecessary.
I hesitate to call this one false, though I’d like to clarify it a little. First I would say that in my opinion it is NOT overrated, simply because in my experience it doesn’t really even seem to be rated! Unnecessary might be true depending on how you’re using it. If you mean unnecessary in the sense that the very idea of a seminary is unnecessary, I would argue with you. If you just mean that it’s not always necessary for pastors at every level to have attended an accredited institution and earned an MDiv, I absolutely agree.
I tend to think that good, true, fruit-bearing ministry can be done by just about anyone, regardless of education level. I do believe, however, that it is important for our head pastors and preaching pastors to have a solid biblical and pastoral education (just like I would also think it important for a college history professor to have a solid foundation in history and education). Whether that’s done in a seminary or in a different venue makes little difference. I recently read a really interesting article on how much more beneficial it would be to the church if our congregations provided solid biblical education classes to up-and-coming pastors, rather than sending them away to a seminary for a few years where they would be 1) disconnected from that congregation for that period, and 2) probably going into debt. I’m not against that idea, but as long as that’s not happening in congregations across the country, it seems like seminary is a fine alternative.
Myth 3: Seminary is filled with academics who have all kinds of grand theories and Bible knowledge, but know nothing about real life down-and-dirty ministry.
First, a word of clarification: Not everyone attending seminary is doing so with a call to the pastorate on their hearts. The biggest program at the seminary I attend is actually its MA in Counseling. I’m working on an MA in Biblical Studies (an academic degree designed primarily for those looking to continue on in Ph.D. work and/or enter a teaching field). We also have MAs in Philosophy of Religion, Theology, Leadership, Christian Studies, and more. The degree that most future pastors are working toward is an MDiv. I think it’s important to start with this understanding.
Of course there are academics in seminary. It’s graduate school. Pretty much every level of education beyond high school is filled with what we call “academics.” Many of the academics at my seminary are former pastors. Some are current pastors. Almost all of them preach AND teach regularly at local churches, and ALL are at least involved in local church ministries. Probably the most “academic” professor on campus is an active member of an inner-city Denver church where the ministry couldn’t be more “down and dirty.” Even if this weren’t the case, though, many of the classes a student takes at seminary are not primarily geared toward the practices of pastoral ministry. I hope we can agree that it’s good to have an “academic” teaching New Testament Greek (assuming you’d like to learn it well). Same with Church History. Same with the Gospels and Acts, Biblical Interpretation, and the Epistles and Revelation. Any of these courses could be taught and taught quite well at a secular graduate school. The fact that my graduate school is an evangelical seminary just makes it even better, because the academics that teach them have pastoral hearts and are full of grace and love.
There’s probably some truth to the idea that some professors lack a few pieces of “real world” sense. I’m sure it’s true that many pastoral theories don’t completely work in every situation. But that’s also true everywhere else in all of education. You simply have to take solid teaching for what it is, and rely on your own experience and the experience and advice of your mentors in the field for many of the curveballs that lie ahead of you. It’s naive and more than a little silly to think that seminary students and professors believe that with the right classroom education they’ll be able to step into any church in the world and run it flawlessly with no messes or mistakes.
April 5, 2010
the storm is more or less over
Today I had my "James panel." After you turn in your James paper, you sit with another person or two in front of the entire class and they ask you all the interpretive and exegetical questions they have about your passage... and you're supposed to know the answers.
It went well.
Afterwards those of us on the panel got to go out to a restaurant with our professor and her son and another couple of friends. It was great. So nice of her to treat us to that. It's nice because after you've turned in your paper and done your panel, there's not a whole lot left to the class, so you can kinda sit back and relax.
Which is, hopefully, what I'll be able to do a little more of in the next couple of weeks. It has been CRAZY for awhile.
It went well.
Afterwards those of us on the panel got to go out to a restaurant with our professor and her son and another couple of friends. It was great. So nice of her to treat us to that. It's nice because after you've turned in your paper and done your panel, there's not a whole lot left to the class, so you can kinda sit back and relax.
Which is, hopefully, what I'll be able to do a little more of in the next couple of weeks. It has been CRAZY for awhile.
April 2, 2010
Exhausted
I'm tired. I slept for one hour last night. It was really not last night. It was from 6 a.m. to 7 a.m. this morning. Why didn't I sleep more? I had to finish my exegetical paper on James 4:1-12. It's a 30-40 page beast that requires a pretty solid knowledge of New Testament Greek, and advanced exegetical and interpretive skill. I don't really have those things. Therefore, this super difficult paper was even harder.
I've been working on it nonstop for more than a week. Haven't hardly seen my wife (who's been a complete saint through it all). Haven't hardly slept. Haven't hardly eaten.
But it's over now. I turned it in this morning. I do not have a good feeling about it. But it's over. Now I can sleep. And eat. And see my wife (except she's been working all evening tonight, and goes back again at 8:30 tomorrow morning).
And yes, I can blog again.
P.S. Does anyone think it's totally awesome that if you hover your mouse over the scripture passages on my blog you can read the verses they reference? I do.
I've been working on it nonstop for more than a week. Haven't hardly seen my wife (who's been a complete saint through it all). Haven't hardly slept. Haven't hardly eaten.
But it's over now. I turned it in this morning. I do not have a good feeling about it. But it's over. Now I can sleep. And eat. And see my wife (except she's been working all evening tonight, and goes back again at 8:30 tomorrow morning).
And yes, I can blog again.
P.S. Does anyone think it's totally awesome that if you hover your mouse over the scripture passages on my blog you can read the verses they reference? I do.
January 21, 2010
Haiti blog post from Dr. Blomberg
A new blog post from Dr. Craig Blomberg (of Denver Seminary fame) asks, "Is Haiti being judged?" It's only a couple minutes worth of reading.
January 20, 2010
crud
I'm feeling kinda cruddy. It's like my whole head is full of gunk. It's not a big deal. Just makes me uncomfortable.
I'm also somewhat nervous. I haven't taken a New Testament Greek class since the fall semester of 2008. That's more than a year of no intensive Greek study. This semester (which begins on Monday) I'm taking 4th-semester Greek, which at Denver Seminary is called "Greek Exegesis of James." Classes are spent translating orally through the book of James, and reflecting your knowledge of the language, theology of the passage, and proper interpretive and exegetical techniques. Also, each student is assigned a passage on which they must write a 45ish page paper. The paper includes in-depth exegesis and analysis of your passage (word studies, interpretive issues, historical-cultural background, literary context, etc.). After you've written your paper you have to sit before the class (along with the other 1 or 2 people who had the same passage) and answer questions from the students and the professor about the issues in your passage.
It's all very intense, and since I'm coming off a Greek hiatus of sorts, I'm pretty nervous about it.
I'm also somewhat nervous. I haven't taken a New Testament Greek class since the fall semester of 2008. That's more than a year of no intensive Greek study. This semester (which begins on Monday) I'm taking 4th-semester Greek, which at Denver Seminary is called "Greek Exegesis of James." Classes are spent translating orally through the book of James, and reflecting your knowledge of the language, theology of the passage, and proper interpretive and exegetical techniques. Also, each student is assigned a passage on which they must write a 45ish page paper. The paper includes in-depth exegesis and analysis of your passage (word studies, interpretive issues, historical-cultural background, literary context, etc.). After you've written your paper you have to sit before the class (along with the other 1 or 2 people who had the same passage) and answer questions from the students and the professor about the issues in your passage.
It's all very intense, and since I'm coming off a Greek hiatus of sorts, I'm pretty nervous about it.
December 13, 2009
A random thought
This is finals week for Elizabeth and I. Since my only two classes this semester are on Monday, I really only have finals DAY. I know that this is where the rubber meets the road, and I plan to succeed through hard work and mental toughness.
I wish the Cowboys felt the same way. They're apparently not as clutch as me. This afternoon's game is basically a must-win for the Cowboys if they want to hold on to a good chance of making the playoffs. They're losing by a touchdown in the 4th quarter as I write this.
It's hard having more mental toughness than the team you cheer for. Oh well.
December 7, 2009
IBS (No, it's not that disease you might be thinking of)
Every student at Denver Seminary is required to take a class on the Epistles and Revelation, and every student at Denver Seminary while taking that class must write what's called an Inductive Bible Study. It focuses on a Bible passage (usually 8-12ish verses) and it consists of the following components: Literary context of the passage, Historical-cultural background, Word studies, Grammar studies, Major interpretive problems, Analytical Outline, Interpretive Summary, and Application. Many students dread the "IBS" not because of it's length (15ish pages), but because of the depth and intensity of the work required.
I wrote on 1 Peter 5:1-11. The following is the scoresheet that my professor, Dr. Klein, used to grade my paper. I hope it's big enough for you to read, because I'm trying to brag about how well I did, and if you can't see what scores I received it won't do any good at all (I think if you click on it it'll get bigger).
If anyone's interested in reading my paper (you know, if you're nerdy like that), I'd be happy to let you. (I'll be honest, I've not often been truly proud of papers I've written either in college or seminary, but I really did put the effort into this one, and it was very rewarding not just because of the grade but because of everything I learned about this passage in the process! Hopefully I'll feel this good about my thesis once I write one.)
September 21, 2009
I Don't Like Mondays
The link to Justin Taylor's blog under "Blogs I Read" to the left has changed because his blog is now being hosted at the Gospel Coalition. I'm sure none of you care, but if you read and/or subscribe to Justin's blog (it's fantastic, by the way) then I wanted to make sure you're aware of the switch.
Mondays are kind of tough. I have class from 8-11. During my 15-minute break in the middle of class I go to the "bread shed" on campus where day-old breads and other grocery items are delivered so that seminary students can benefit. I have to put in 2 hours of work at church in order to get the facility set up for a huge Monday night Bible study that uses just about every square inch of the building. Today I was scheduled to work at the bookstore from 1-5:15. When I got off I had about an hour to eat supper, change clothes, speak with my wife for a few minutes for the first time all day, and then get to my other class which meets from 6:30-9:15 pm. One of my favorite things to do on Mondays is read Peter King's "Monday Morning Quarterback" column at SportsIllustrated.com. It's 10:52 p.m. as I write this, and I'm about a third of the way through the column, which I've had pulled up on my computer all day.
It's been a long day.
May 18, 2009
Is Ecclesiologist a word? Cuz I think I want to be one when I grow up
My semester's over, by the way.
On Friday afternoon I realized that my little final assignment for my last class that was due on Saturday night was actually a very BIG final assignment, and it was due on Friday night. I freaked out for a few minutes. The I did my assignment in an hour or two (it should have taken me about 12-15 hours) and turned it in. It won't get that good of a grade.
But I'm done now.
So, for a little while now I've been in the process of discovering what I think might be a fairly major passion of mine. But it's hard to describe. I really like the idea of helping churches to improve as communities of people who obey the Word and follow Christ. I feel like "church consulting" is kind of what I'm trying to describe, but I think that phrase seems very much like a secular businessperson trying to turn churches into profitable business that can simply grow attendance and bring in money -- and that's NOT what I'm talking about. I'm talking about learning as best as I can how churches can be most effective for the Kingdom of God, and then helping them to learn and implement ideas that come from it.
More recently, I've become extremely interested in the use of web-based technology as a part of the mission of the church. It was sparked when I came to the conclusion that my church's website could probably be much more user-friendly, and could include much more content and have a better layout. I just don't think that it's being used that much for anything right now, and that could change quite a bit. The use of facebook, twitter, blogs, and other programs on church websites obviously have both positives and negatives, but I've been learning an awful lot about those pros and cons, and if you avoid the cons and stick to the pros I think they can really be integrated into the mission of the church.
So if I designed my own job (which, while somewhat farfetched, isn't completely pie-in-the-sky, given the fact that 10 years ago facebook didn't exist, and 10 years before that the internet didn't... so the job I end up having someday might not even exist yet) it would be some kind of blending of the two exciting things I wrote about above. Using the internet and its tools to assist churches in growing into biblically-based Christ-following communities. So there you go.
On a sidenote, I've also recently discovered something called Google Analytics. Using this tool you can embed an html code into your website and track how people are using your site and where they're coming from. It'll track number of visits, number of new visitors, where your visitors have linked from, how long they tend to stay on your site, which pages of your site they view the most and the longest, where in the world (geographically) your visitors are, and much more. I've only begun to realize the niftiness of Analytics. I'm using it to track info right here on my blog, but a little unpopular blog that's read exclusively by close friends and family isn't the ideal site to use with Analytics. A church website, which has multiple pages and a lot more traffic, would be ideal (in my opinion). Anyway, it's cool. Ask me about it, if you're interested in learning more!
April 30, 2009
International Conference on Historic Premillennialism
The sessions from Denver Seminary's International Conference on Historic Premillennialism are now available to stream or download. All of the presentations are worth a listen, but I would especially recommend listening to Dr. Blomberg's three talks in which he presents the case for Historic Premillennialism against its three main competitors within evangelicalism: Postmillennialism, Amillennialism, and Dispensational Premillennialism. If none of those words make sense to you, make sure you start with Blomberg's first talk because you'll get a brief introduction to what in the world this stuff is even about. After each session the presenter took questions from the audience, and that was interesting too (I'm assuming they are included in the recordings, but I haven't checked to make sure yet).
There are seven sessions in all:
Plenary Speech 1: Dr. Craig Blomberg
"Why We Don't Have to Wait for the Great Commission to be Fulfilled Before Christ Returns: The Problems with Postmillennialism"
Session 1: Dr. Sung Wook Chung
"Who are the Two Witnesses of Revelation 11: An Integration of Western and Asian Proposals"
Session 2: Dr. Bruce Demarest
"What Did the Early Church Believe About the Tribulation?"
Session 3: Dr. Rick Hess
"The Seventy Sevens of Daniel 9: A Time Table for the Future?"
Session 4: Dr. Andrew Dearman
"Transformations of Jerusalem in the Bible"
Plenary Speech 2: Dr. Craig Blomberg
"The Need for a Millennium Beyond This Present Age: The Anticlimax of Amillennialism"
Plenary Speech 3: Gary Hoag (Delivered for an ailing Dr. Craig Blomberg)
"Inappropriately Privileging Israel: Why Historic Premillennialism Trumps Dispensationalism"
April 24, 2009
Blomberg lectures will be available soon!
For those of you who have been dying to hear Dr. Blomberg lecture ever since I started posting about him, you're in luck.
This weekend I'm attending a conference on campus on Historic Premillennialism, at which Dr. Blomberg is the plenary speaker (he's giving three lectures over a couple of days). The whole conference is being audio-recorded and will be posted on the Denver Seminary website at some point next week. When it's there I'll let you know where to find it.
Now, I understand that you'd have to be especially nerdy to listen to three 1.5-hour lectures on historic premillennialism (many of you probably don't even know what that means... but the first lecture will explain it to you -- I didn't really know until after that), let alone four other lectures from people you've never heard of. But if you ARE interested, it'll be available for you.
That's all.
April 11, 2009
Easter: Praise God
Happy Easter, everyone. Today we celebrate one of the two most spectacular events in all of human history: the resurrection of Jesus Christ.
The other of the two events, as you may have guessed, was his crucifixion. I hope that both of these events are preached regularly in your church. I write about the resurrection today not because I think it to be more important than the crucifixion, but because
1. I just spent a couple of weeks immersed in a passage of the Bible that deals primarily with the resurrection, so I've studied it and have become especially jazzed about it,
2. In my experience it seems that the church talks about the crucifixion year-round, because it's easily connected to just about every other topic. We often remember, in different ways, that "Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures," and that "God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son..." and I guess I think we tend to leave resurrection talk for one very special Sunday per year: Easter. And
3. When we do talk about it on Easter we often relegate "the resurrection" to the single historical event of Jesus being brought back to life, which is cool because it means that his death really did accomplish what it was supposed to, and our sins really have been forgiven. And we also spend an awful lot of time explaining why the event is historically defensible (a topic, by the way, which I LOVE). There's obviously nothing wrong with that, except that I think there's more to "resurrection" than that.
Take a gander at 1 Corinthians 15. Especially verses 12-28. There are some in the church at Corinth who "say that there is no resurrection from the dead" (v. 12). Now, to clarify, it doesn't appear that they denied Christ's resurrection, only the future bodily resurrection of believers. But Paul doesn't think that logic holds any weight. The bodily resurrection of Jesus is inseparably linked to that of those who belong to him. Paul basically tells the Corinthians, "If there's no bodily resurrection of people, then Jesus wasn't bodily resurrected either. And if Jesus wasn't resurrected everything is very crappy indeed" (v. 13-18, New Revised Jake Version).
Seriously, read it. If there's no resurrection then the preaching of the apostles is worthless (v. 14). Faith is worthless (v. 14). The apostles are liars (v. 15) because they've proclaimed that God raised Christ from the dead, so they're not only lying but blaspheming. We are all still condemned in our sins (v. 17). Those who have believed in Jesus Christ as their savior who have already died are utterly lost (v. 18). Because of all of this, because of our devotion to an empty, worthless faith that has no power over death or sin, we as Christians are to be pitied more than all others (v. 19).
Don't stop reading.
"But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep" (v. 20). As Mark Prior points out, "This But must rank with the great 'buts' of the Bible." Firstfruits is an agricultural term identifying the first installment of an entire harvest of the same kind which is to come. That means that Jesus is just the beginning. Just as he was raised from his death, so will all of those who call on him and trust him as their Lord.
See, Corinthians? A bodily resurrection! For you and me! Don't forget, the word "asleep" (v. 18, 20) holds the promise of an awakening.
Paul's argument started with a refutatio, or a refutation of the Corinthians' stance. He explains to them why denial of the resurrection leads to unacceptable consequences. Verse 20 begins the second half of his argument; the confirmatio, or a reaffirmation of the logical alternative. Just as we were all affected by the sin of one human being (Adam), we will be affected by the resurrection and defeat of death itself of one human being (Jesus). So, without the resurrection our solidarity would still be with Adam. Bummer.
So you see? The resurrection has eschatological (end times) implications. Jesus' resurrection inaugurated the ultimate defeat of the "last enemy" (v. 26), which is death. But the fullness of salvation is not yet realized. We still experience death. Some of you know that all too well. There's still the pain and the sorrow and the suffering. If the resurrection is not true then death is never a conquered enemy. Even when all is said and done it would still have power. But since it is true, God wins. Someday death will be thwarted permanently.
Today we have "prosperity" churches all over the place (if you're not familiar with them, turn on your television on Sunday morning). They pretty much teach what the Corinthians apparently thought. "All we can expect is what we've got now, so live it up!" If some of these preachers and churches really understood the implications of the resurrection would that message change?
Other Christians of the more "liberal" sort deny the resurrection because it's too far-fetched. Christianity needs to be more palatable, so we'll do away with ridiculous notions like some dude came back to life. But they don't consider what that denial means. Without a resurrection you can't be a "Christian," because the entire faith is futile. Paul says so.
"The joy that characterizes the basic orientation of the Christian life is based on the confidence that Christ will return, the dead will be raised, and all wrongs will be made right. If that is not true, then joy is replaced by despair." -- David Garland
But it is true. So celebrate Easter, and keep trying, as I do, to fully understand what it means for us.
April 9, 2009
Um, it's late (early?)
I just finished a paper. For Dr. Blomberg. I have to present for five minutes on it in class tomorrow (today?) afternoon. I'm not sure I'm going to be awake for five minutes in class.
It's 4:04 a.m.
I don't think my paper is very good, but it seriously jazzed me about Easter. Expect an Easter/resurrection-related post soon...
But for now... bed.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)