Editors' Note: This is the first in a series of brief articles from students and graduates answering the question, "What do I wish someone had told me before seminary?"

*************

What do I wish someone had told me before seminary? First, I wish someone had explained that my time would be a season of preparation in the fullest sense. To grasp this concept has taken me a few years. I had little experience with graduate level study, even less experience with writing, but most significantly I was unprepared for the kind of commitment I was making. In an ethereal, almost metaphysical sense, I had a notion that I was entering a season of necessary discipline and diligence. But I failed to grasp what that meant in the everyday grind of theological training.

I attend Beeson Divinity School in Birmingham, Alabama. It's an incredible institution founded on the desire to build up and prepare ministers to proclaim the name of Christ. Their credo is what attracted me first, their high academic standard second. Though I wanted to be challenged in my faith as well as in my studies, I'm not sure I understood what that would actually require. As I'm sure most seminary students would agree, studying theology, philosophy, and the biblical languages takes concerted effort and copious amounts of time. It's truly a time of intentional preparation.

When my classmates and I began seminary, many of us assumed we'd have ample opportunity to use what we were learning in everyday ministry. But this hasn't always been the case. I'm not proud of this fact; I'm just making an observation. Much like other fields of training, in ministry it's wise to build a solid foundation of learning before undertaking your first "real world" assignment. Seminary provides such a foundation. Many students have ministry positions during their time in seminary, to be sure. Even in those situations, though, it's difficult to give your all to a particular ministry while investing in the future. This by no means excuses ministry laziness while in seminary; instead, it calls to attention the need to prioritize. It's a hard choice, but one that ultimately results in a person better equipped to serve in the long run.

I also wish I'd understood before seminary that it's an investment in my future. Not some theoretical "oh that sounds nice" sort of investment, but a literal, determined, hard-fought one. Moreover, I wish someone had made clear that such educational pursuit is okay. Investing through further education is worthwhile, and no one should feel a false sense of guilt for this effort.

I believe seminary should be difficult. Most worthwhile pursuits are. Those in seminary are challenged with the prospect of ministering to others who, like themselves, are broken and need help. Rigorous training, therefore, is necessary. We expect high standards from our physicians, our accountants, and our professors; shouldn't we expect as much—if not more—from our Christian leaders?

Seminary is necessarily a time of foundational training and preparation. It sets the standard for the future. I just wish I'd recognized what it actually would—and should—require before I began.

In his book Center Church, Tim Keller identifies the idea of "rights" as a key cultural entry point for helping our neighbors understand the gospel and its implications. That may sound like a strange claim, but I think he's correct.

Notice how "rights" are constantly in the news. The decision to file criminal charges against the Boston bomber meant he had to be granted Miranda rights. Gay marriage advocates claim "marriage equality" is a fundamental right. Believers claim religious liberty is a fundamental right. Everyone from gun owners to hair braiders to taxpayers to welfare activists is out there on TV, demanding rights.

Rights can also determine what doesn't make the news. Kermit Gosnell murdered babies after they were born, chopped them up, and put their little hands and feet on display in his office as trophies—like some barbaric warlord building a pyramid out of his enemies' skulls. But some media didn't want to cover this sensational story, for fear that public attention to these realities would threaten the right to abortion.

Rights matter so much because they determine how our society governs itself. Nothing wrong with that; naturally we all want to recognize and respect legitimate rights claims. But for just that reason, everyone who wants something demands it as a right! "Rights are trumps over the majority will," political theorist Ronald Dworkin put it. Once you establish that what you want is a right, you've already won the game, no matter how your victory may affect others or the community.

So how do we make sense of this seemingly chaotic war of rights, and how does it create a cultural entry point for the gospel? That's a complex question, but here are some basic principles to start the discussion.

1. The modern concept of rights was first articulated in Christian moral theology.

As Brian Tierney and others have shown, the modern concept of rights was not cooked up by nefarious Enlightenment deists as a scheme to destroy moral order. It was first articulated in the late Middle Ages by moral theologians and ethicists, as a necessary consequence of individual human responsibility. If people have duties, by definition they must have rights: If you have a duty not to murder me, then I have a right to life (i.e. a right not to be murdered by you). If I have a duty to worship God sincerely according to my conscience, then I have a right to religious freedom (i.e. a right not to be prevented from worshiping according to my conscience or forced to worship insincerely).

2. Nonetheless, this concept had important pre-Christian roots and is now widely understood and practiced by non-Christians.

Although our current understanding of rights did grow from Christian ethics, we should not try to claim it as exclusively Christian. For one thing, there are clear previews of it in the classical Greco-Roman moral philosophers; Aristotle and Cicero gave the medieval Christian ethicists important help in seeing the logic of rights. And once the idea "if people have duties, they also have rights" is articulated, you don't have to be a Christian to grasp that and live it out. Non-Christians around the world today are strongly dedicated to respecting rights claims.

3. Conflicts about rights are really conflicts about duties.

If rights are a consequence of duties, then the question "who has a right to do what?" is really just another way of asking "who has a duty to do what?" Suppose two people are stranded on a desert island after a shipwreck, and one has lots of food, but he withholds the food from the other person unless the other person agrees to do whatever he wants. He claims the right to do this on grounds that "I have a right to my property," i.e. "you have a duty not to steal my food." The other person can reply, "I have a right to life and liberty," i.e. "you have a duty not to force me into a choice between slavery and death."

4. Conflicts about duties are really conflicts about religion, but people usually can't see this.

In real life, our desert islanders would probably never realize they're making religious claims—just as the people on TV claiming they have rights to everything under the sun don't think they're making religious claims. But if they talked out their differences, questioning assumptions and uncovering presuppositions, they would eventually realize that the food hoarder is claiming "God commands you not to steal" while his companion is claiming "God commands you not to remain idle while your neighbor starves." Or if they come from a non-theistic culture, instead of "God" they may say "the gods" or whatever their conception of the transcendent is.

5. In most cases, people can resolve these differences peacefully only if they discover some cosmic common ground.

Once they realize what they're really arguing about, the food hoarder might simply say, "nuts to your hippie peacenik God; my God says the strong should rule the weak." If he does, there is little hope of resolving the conflict peacefully. But suppose instead his companion gets him to realize that even though God forbids stealing, God also forbids standing idle while your neighbor starves. This realization changes his understanding of the duty not to steal; he suddenly sees that it is not actually "stealing" for his companion to demand that he share what he has without attaching enslaving conditions to it.

6. People can discover cosmic common ground even across religious differences.

This happy ending to the story does not require our desert islanders to be of the same religion. Certainly if the food hoarder is a man who claims to be Christian or even just sees merit in Christianity, his starving companion will find it much easier to change his thinking. There are also important variations among non-Christian belief systems; it will make a big difference to the companion's prospects if the food hoarder is a Jew, Muslim, Hindu, Aristotelian, Confucian, Nietzschean, Randian, utilitarian, pragmatist, or adherent of no organized system of thought. Nonetheless, the important point is that our desert islanders need not reach a total agreement about life, the universe, and everything. They only need to find enough cosmic common ground to settle their conflict.

The Bible teaches us to expect that this resolution can happen. To take only one of many examples, Romans 2 teaches that by God's common grace, all people have God's moral law written on their hearts. This does not just make them morally responsible for their sin; it also changes their behavior. You can appeal to this law, within limits, to establish some cosmic common ground among all human beings.

For example, notice how the media were ultimately shamed into covering the Gosnell trial. That didn't happen because media gatekeepers suddenly converted to Christianity. It happened because pro-life activists appealed to common moral commitments (such as the ethical standards of the journalistic profession) and forced the gatekeepers to recognize their own failure to live up to them.

7. Rights claims grow out of control and destroy society if we don't debate them morally.

Notice that the happy ending on our desert island only comes after they have a frank debate in which they challenge one another's moral and even religious assumptions. There are no militant secularists on hand to shut down the dialogue, claiming that moral arguments are out of bounds in the public square. There are also no small-minded Christian conversionists to insist that until the food hoarder accepts Christ, there's nothing else worth talking about. When people fear or despise moral debate, "nuts to your God" and catastrophic wars over rights are the only possible outcome.

8. Discovering cosmic common ground is a central duty of neighbor-love and good citizenship.

It's important for Christians to reach out and find cosmic common ground with people of other beliefs. We must never compromise the gospel that divides us from the world. But we must also never betray the common humanity that binds us to our neighbors as fellow creatures with a shared nature, nor our membership in our nations and communities. If Christians took the lead in defusing the disastrous rights-wars by discovering cosmic common ground, that would show how the Spirit has filled us with love for our neighbors and shine in the cultural darkness as a beautiful witness to the gospel.

9. Discovering cosmic common ground forces people to see the elements of truth in others' worldviews.

Christians can explain why people are responsible moral agents who have duties (and therefore have rights). For as long as history records, secularists have been struggling to come up with some kind of argument to justify moral responsibility (and therefore rights) without reference to a transcendent cosmic order. It's a fool's errand. We won't be able to have that whole conversation explicitly every time rights come up; still, the more we can prompt people to think deeply about where rights come from, the more plausible the gospel will seem to them.

Normally, people who are deeply immersed in a culture with little gospel influence have great difficulty even understanding the gospel. They don't really grasp its meaning and implications because those things aren't made real within their cultural world. The gospel is gibberish to them.

But suppose Christians took the lead in defusing America's rights-wars. Our neighbors, whose social world is defined by those rights-wars, would see the gospel at work. Its power would have been made real in their world. Some of them would admire it, and some of them would resent it, but they would no longer be able to ignore it.

Most readers of The Gospel Coalition probably aren't familiar with the story of Northland International University. In fact, many readers of this blog have probably never heard of Northland at all. But for more than 50 years God has been doing some amazing things in northeastern Wisconsin at Northland Mission Camp, then Northland Baptist Bible College, and now at Northland International University.

As the camp ministry grew and a small Bible college launched on the property, the school had a decided emphasis on the proclamation of the gospel and servant leadership. Along with that, however, the college was also connected to the fundamentalist movement. This connection led to an uncompromising position on separation from the world in nearly every way and a strong stance against certain types of music and ministry. Not only did the school take strict positions on many of these less-than-clear issues, but it also drew strict lines of separation from those who did not.

By the time I arrived on campus as a freshman in 1998, Northland was a pretty separated place. Most types of modern music were off limits, as were most movies, TV shows, and other popular media. In the classroom, we read books by authors like John Piper, R. C. Sproul, and John MacArthur, but they always came with a disclaimer. I spent my last two years on campus wrestling over the theological and exegetical foundations for these practices and felt like we needed to be somewhere more biblically and theologically robust. So in the summer of 2002, we packed up and moved to Minneapolis, where I started the apprenticeship program at Bethlehem Baptist Church.

But I knew this move would lead to a separation from Northland. While I certainly maintained relationships with many on campus, I assumed that I would never be able to have close ties to my alma mater. There was much about Northland to love: a unique emphasis on servant leadership; a humble administration, faculty, and staff; a strong love for the Word of God; and a radical commitment to world missions. But it seemed like the strict separatism and all that went along with it would keep me, and many other alumni from my generation, from having close relationships with Northland. It was a fundamentalist school in every meaningful sense of the word, and none of us expected that to change.

Deeper Root

But God was at work in ways many of us alumni never expected. The centrality of the gospel was taking deeper root at the school, and the results we have seen are encouraging. Over the course of three or four years, Northland underwent some important transformations, including receiving accreditation and changing some of the unnecessary rules. But more importantly, Northland became a place where the gospel is at the center, and rules and regulations are not.

In a recent letter, outgoing Northland president Matt Olson listed some of the changes the school underwent in the last few years. He explained:

• Northland went from the exclusive use of the King James Version in the pulpit and classrooms to allowing other translations.
• Northland went from a demerit system to a discipleship platform for our students. Yes, we still have rules: we still confront, and we still have consequences. We just believe we have a better and more biblical model now. It is built on relationships. We are always looking for better ways to accomplish our mission.
• Northland went from practicing some forms of "secondary separation" to what we now understand to be a more biblical separation. Where we would not have had men like John MacArthur, Rick Holland, Ken Ham, Bruce Ware, or Mark Dever, we would now. We see no reason to separate from these men. We would consider them to be in the spirit of historic fundamentalism; they believe in the orthodox faith, will separate over it, and live godly lives.
• Northland went from only allowing "traditional" styles of music to accepting more modern styles as well. A blend of traditional and current music is used in our programs and chapel.
• We created an overarching name of Northland International University to give our students greater opportunities with the gospel worldwide. The change was driven by our passion to reach every tribe, tongue, people, and nation.

Now there is more hope for Northland than ever. Along with a renewed emphasis on the centrality of the gospel, the school is still committed to a unique emphasis on humble, servant leadership; strong love for the Word of God; and radical giving to world missions (in a 2009 survey, 44 percent of the student body planned to serve overseas). So Northland is worth knowing about and praying for. Especially now. The school is facing some significant challenges in the coming months. In just a few weeks, Olson will be moving on from his role as president of the school. Also, it is no secret that most Christian colleges live and die by their constituencies, and making changes means alienating some of those constituents.

Some of my fellow Northland alumni are upset because the school did not change fast enough or pursue change in the way they would have done it. Others are upset because they thought nothing should change. Ever. Still others are upset because of Olson's departure on the heels of many of these changes. To those alumni and friends, I would simply ask that you to grant the same grace to the institution that you would to a fellow Christian who is growing in grace. We will all make mistakes, and we all have room for growth.

We can all learn from the example of an institution that is willing to further submit itself to God's Word—in spite of the criticism and challenges these changes will bring. So pray for Northland as it searches for a new president and be praying about God's continued work there, knowing that when the gospel moves to the center, amazing things can happen to an individual, a church, and even a fundamentalist school.

Children's story bibles are not Bibles and, it turns out, neither are they for children.[1] My previous article explores the truth of the first statement.[2] Story bibles are illustrated, abridged, expanded, paraphrased, and fallible versions of the infallible book whose name they bear. They are not Bibles. But nor are they for children, at least, they are not just for children. Several pastors and reviewers recommend both The Big Picture Story Bible and The Jesus Storybook Bible for use among adults.[3]

One reviewer of the latter in Christianity Today says, "I'm hoping to invite my adult friends over for an evening with the Story. It will help some of us (well, me) to retool our theology a bit. We'll pass The Jesus Storybook Bible around and read it aloud, taking time to look at the pictures."[4] Tim Keller goes further: "I would urge not just families with young children to get this book, but every Christian—from pew warmers, to ministry leaders, seminarians and even theologians!"[5] Others make similar claims for The Big Picture Story Bible, which one blog-commenter suggests adding to a list of "Books to Read Before You Start Seminary/Divinity College."[6]

This is a relatively new situation. Prior to these story bibles, it is hard to find any such enthusiastic endorsements. What are we to make of this? On the one hand it could highlight the extent of biblical illiteracy and theological immaturity among Christian adults and, more alarmingly, among seminary students. On the other hand, or perhaps in addition to this, it could speak of the quality of these books, although the lack of any sustained critical engagement with them means that claims of their value are largely untested.

That testing, therefore, is the focus of this article. Although several story bibles have appeared in recent years, the widespread popularity of these two justifies limiting our attention to them.[7] My previous article demonstrates that it is neither an easy nor a quick task to evaluate a story bible. Drawing on the methodology my preceding article develops, this article considers these two popular story bibles with reference to four key relationships:

1. story bible text and Scripture
2. story bible images and Scripture
3. text and image within the story bible
4. the story bible and the child

Not every review of a story bible need follow this sequence, or do so at such length, but I hope in what follows to build on the previous article in two ways: (1) underline the significance and multifaceted nature of these relationships and (2) demonstrate their usefulness as a framework by which to evaluate story bibles.

1. The Big Picture Story Bible

The Big Picture Story Bible (hereafter BPSB), first published in 2004 by Crossway, now includes a companion audio CD (2010) and an eBook edition (2011), reflecting both the book's success and technological advances within publishing.[8] Intended for ages 2-7, it is divided into 26 chapters, 11 covering the OT (201 pages), 15 the NT (225 pages).

1.1. The Relationship between BPSB Text and Scripture

There are four sides to the relationship between the text of a story bible and Scripture: omission, addition, reformulation, and transposition.[9] In other words, we ask, "What has the author left out, added, changed, or rearranged?"

Continue reading at Themelios, an international evangelical theological journal that expounds and defends the historic Christian faith. It is published three times per year by The Gospel Coalition.

In the past several years, interest in faith and work ministry has flourished. Conferences are springing up across America, new books are multiplying, and fervent online articles declaring "all work matters to God" checker cyberspace. Yet we still lack church-based small groups that help laity integrate their faith and work—the very habitual behaviors necessary to prevent this revival from quickly becoming yet another evangelical fad. Much of the heat produced by conferences and books runs the risk of being wasted if churches don't discover a way to form congregational habits that support teaching on vocation in the context of ongoing discipleship.

Vocational groups are just such a habit. British missionary and theologian Lesslie Newbigin wrote in The Gospel in a Pluralist Society,

The congregation has to be a place where its members are trained, supported, and nourished in the exercise of their parts of the priestly ministry in the world. . . . There is need for "frontier-groups," groups of Christians working the same sectors of public life, meeting to thrash out the controversial issues of their business or profession in the light of their faith.

Newbigin understood that in order to bridge the gaping public/private divide, we can't rely on one-time conferences alone, nor can we afford to hand off faith and work ministry to parachurch organizations, often divorced from the local congregation. Equipping laity to unite their Christian commitments to their daily working lives needs to be a foundational purpose of the church. We need "frontier groups"—Christians gathering with others in their field to seek illumination from the gospel for their secular work.

Charles Duhigg's book The Power of Habit: Why We Do What We Do In Life and Business gives insight into why such groups are essential. In the book Duhigg unfolds "the habit loop"—a rhythm of cue, routine, and reward that can be reshaped to overcome nasty habits or form new ones. As it turns out, small groups are the key to making new habits last. "There's something really powerful in groups and shared experiences," says Lee Ann Kaskutas, a researcher on the effectiveness of one of the world's most powerful small group movements, Alcoholics Anonymous. "People might be skeptical about their ability to change if they're by themselves, but a group will convince them to suspend disbelief. A community creates belief."

Vocational groups can be just such communities of belief. Not only do their regular rhythms form habits, but they can also start to convince laity in otherwise daunting work situations that change is indeed possible.

Forming Vocation Groups in Your Church

Here is some counsel for pastors interested in forming vocational groups.

1. Visit church members at their work.

When you consider forming vocation groups, the best place to start is by listening. Visit five to ten people at work, see their craft, and hear of their triumphs and challenges over lunch. Not only will this communicate that you value their work, it will also convince laity you're serious about helping them integrate faith and work. I recently visited one of Denver's most successful businessmen at his office. Over coffee he lamented, "I've been on the board of my church for more than 30 years, and my pastor has never come to my office." Don't let this happen to you. Vocation groups begin with a well-informed pastor who understands the real difficulties of where his congregation spends the majority of their waking hours.

2. After a sermon series or class on faith and work, organize vocation groups.

Following intentional teaching on the subject, or even a conference, make the effort to organize vocational groups. Here are some tips:

• Find a group leader. Pray for God to raise up a contractor, lawyer, health care worker, or another lay leader to lead the group. Vocation groups need to be led by laity themselves. They are best suited and positioned to influence others at work. As Jesus commanded his disciples to find a "person of peace" (Luke 10:5), you first need to find the right leader who God will use to bring the gospel to their work and field.

• Make the groups vocation-specific. Some vocation groups include people from a variety of careers. Occasionally this cross-pollination can be good. (One example is The Forge, a diverse group in Denver that gathers monthly to visit Christian leaders in their work environment and then discuss the experience over dinner.) However, most vocation groups are specific to one line of work. Teachers speak the same language as other teachers and apply the gospel in a more specific way when gathered together. The Center for Faith and Work at Redeemer Presbyterian Church in New York City is a great model for career-specific vocation groups.

• If you attend, commit to listening, not leading. The role of pastors in these groups is not to lead but to ask questions and shepherd the group leader outside the gathering. Share your insight but be "quick to listen and slow to speak" as James counsels. Lay leaders might just surprise you with their wisdom.

• Encourage groups to meet at work, not at church or home. Location is key. Make it a conference room, a local pub for lunch, or an art studio. Locating the groups at work will tell the group, "Yes, the gospel belongs here, too."

• Seek partnerships with other churches or organizations. Most churches are too small to have a group for engineers and another for entrepreneurs. Use this opportunity to partner with other churches or local nonprofits to find other Christians working in the same field.

• Center the group's structure around the gospel. Though group structures vary, key elements typically include learning, food, discussion, prayer, and a commitment to action. Yet whatever issues are raised, make sure to continually come back to the Christian story and key doctrines. Without this commitment, discussions tend to devolve into mere ethics (how to be nicer at work), and possibly only a networking event. 

3. Commit to resourcing your vocation groups.

Small groups have a way of petering out. The workbook or DVD series ends, and everybody goes back to their lives. But in order to make vocation groups a real, lasting habit, you will have to resource them. Meet with group leaders. Give them books. Share articles. Sponsor their conference registration fee. Pray for them. Connect them to a mutual friend in their field. Help them pull off a new idea. If possible, hire a part-time staff person to oversee this equipping and organizing.

But whatever you do, don't abandon them. The role of pastoral ministry is "to prepare God's people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may built up" (Eph 4:12). Equipping your congregation for works of service through their vocation is a non-negotiable part of pastoral ministry. Speak to your elder board or executive pastor and ask for the time and resources to infuse new life into your vocational group leaders. The long-term health of vocational groups will require time and money—but ultimately it's a matter of discipleship and mission.

The early church created liturgies—weekly habits of word and ritual—to shape the hearts and minds of parishioners. Today, we need, as author James K. A. Smith has argued, "cultural liturgies" that will shape the imaginations of Christians in their cultural work. Vocation groups can serve as these cultural liturgies by gathering Christians in their fields who will bring the gospel to every corner of creation.

* * * * * * * * * *

The Gospel Coalition has a vision for churches that equip people to think out the implications of the gospel on how we do carpentry, plumbing, data-entry, nursing, art, business, government, journalism, entertainment, and scholarship. That's why we've invited leaders from the church and marketplace to come together for an afternoon to discuss a variety of issues related to the Christian faith and its role in our work and vacation. This free Faith at Work event will take place from 1:30 to 6 p.m. on Wednesday, April 10, following The Gospel Coalition National Conference at Rosen Shingle Creek in Orlando, Florida. Tim Keller, author of the recently published book Every Good Endeavor: Connecting Your Work to God's Work, headlines the post-conference.

We're excited to announce the addition of two dinner panels at our upcoming 2013 National Conference in Orlando. Hosted by our premier sponsor, Reformed Theological Seminary, these free events will aid anyone desiring to better navigate, trust, and cherish God's Word.

There is no need to register separately for these panels, both of which be held on the "RTS Stage" across from the main stage at Rosen Shingle Creek.

Monday, April 8, 5:30 p.m.: Having Confidence in the Scriptures

Panelists: Justin Taylor, Bruce Baugus, John Currid, Chuck Hill, Michael Kruger

Even as they affirm the inspiration, inerrancy, and infallibility of God's Word, Christians sometimes struggle to have confidence in the Scriptures. The Bible is attacked from outside the church and often minimized within the church. This panel will strengthen our confidence in the truthfulness and trustworthiness of the Scriptures, both Old and New Testaments.

Tuesday, April 9, 5:30 p.m.: Seeing Christ in the Old Testament

Panelists: David Mathis, Mark Futato, Scott Redd, Derek Thomas, Miles Van Pelt

On the road to Emmaus, Jesus helped two disciples see him in the Old Testament: "And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he interpreted to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself" (Luke 24:27). Christians affirm that all of Scripture points to Jesus but often have difficulty seeing how the pieces fit together. This panel will show us Christ in each part of the Old Testament, tracing the crescendo that builds in God's plan of redemption and leads directly to him.

Friends, don't forget to register for the conference. We'll see you in Orlando.

There is a massive difference between a youth group and a student ministry. Too many youth groups search for new ways of making kids vomit and wear matching hoodies with cool logos at Six Flags. As a student pastor, if you feel like an after-school care worker, you are not alone. However, it is your job to obey Scripture and make disciples. Yes, you should attract students to your ministry, but is there gospel depth in your students?

Every year my wife and I sit at high school graduations and watch our students walk across the stage as they transition into another phase of life. Every year I wonder, Will this student be swept away by the culture of the world in college, or will he/she change the culture around them as they live out the gospel? That's the job God has called us to. So how do we present these students mature in Christ? You already know the answer (discipleship), but how? Such faith-spurring relationships don't just happen. As much as we want to be organic, leaders must have a plan to make sure discipleship happens on a ministry- or church-wide basis. Here are five ways of how to implement a culture of discipleship in your student ministry.

#1: Don't run solo.

Jesus didn't just say it, he showed it. If not for Jesus pouring his time into just 12 men on the other side of the world, you and I wouldn't follow him today. You probably can't disciple every student under your care. You need to gather and pour into the right kind of leaders who can go and do likewise. Imagine a whole group of leaders who share the same passion and vision as you scatter around town discipling students. Do not open the door of your ministry to every volunteer in the church. Instead, gather the ones that are teachable, humble, and love the gospel. These are the ones who will follow and disciple.

#2: Don't assume people know what discipleship actually means.

I will never forget the time I sat down with a student pastor from my hometown over lunch and watched him shed tears because for six years he failed to disciple his small group of guys. He was just glad they showed up and laughed at his jokes. He didn't even know how to disciple. The church doesn't need a surge of people without a plan. Many parents and youth leaders have the desire to disciple but don't know where to begin. That's okay, but make sure as you lead them forward that they know what to do and how to do it. Be specific. Give them a list of examples of how they can take simple steps in discipling their students.

At my church, we ask our leaders to view their Sunday school class or small group as their own little flock. The tech guy has his flock of techies, and the worship leader has his musician flock. Together we are daily praying for our flock of students. If I show up at the hospital because a student is sick, I can count on their small group leader being there, too. Most of the time our small group leaders first inform me about problems with a student. These leaders pray for their students daily, Facebook their students weekly, and---yes---even go to their activities.

#3: Meet regularly with your leaders.

If you are not meeting at least once a month with your leaders and talking over the vision in detail, more than likely your leaders are not making disciples. Or even worse, they are creating a different goal for themselves and implementing it. Communicate regularly and clearly. In my first meeting with the leaders at my current church, I told them that they would be able to walk out of the room that night knowing what we were doing and how we were doing it. All subsequent meetings would be spent talking about the same thing with some loving accountability. Some folks chuckled, but they were encouraged to know not only the vision but also the plan, which was clear, concise, and compelling.

#4: Be smart, and ask for help.

The best disciple-making churches don't necessarily spend their time writing new curriculum. Discipleship is nothing new, but understanding your specific flock and discerning how best to minister to them can be tricky. Read your Bible, read some books, make some phone calls to other student pastors, and put together a small guide for your staff and leaders. Make sure they see on paper the goal, plan, and small practical steps they can take to disciple their students. In the last 12 years, most leaders I talk to overlook the simple details. Most of my leaders hear me ask one question on a weekly basis: "Are you praying for your students daily?"

 #5: Build relationships with parents.

If you want to thrive in discipleship and not just survive, then you must talk to parents. Spending time with students comes naturally to student pastors, but parents require a different approach. Take dads out for breakfast or lunch and chat about home life. Ask how you can pray and how you can serve. Never forget parents are the primary disciple makers of their children. Learn to serve the parents if you really want to get to the heart of a child.

Why go to seminary? Why not just take classes online, or learn what you can from your pastor? Why not just get busy doing the work of ministry and learn as you go? Why take the time, why spend the money, why uproot your life?

Andover Theological Seminary

These are the same questions (minus the online thing) Timothy Dwight had in mind when he stood to address an assembled crowd at the opening ceremonies of Andover Seminary in Massachusetts. Andover, the first seminary in America, opened its doors in 1808. Until its founding, aspiring ministers desiring theological education usually learned what they could through an apprenticeship with a local pastor. However, Dwight, the president of Yale College and grandson of Jonathan Edwards, believed something more than a liberal arts education and a mentor were needed to prepare future pastors. So before the first seminary class was offered in America, Dwight sought to answer the question, Why go to seminary? His answers may be 204 years old, but they can still help us today.

1. Time to Study

Dwight explained that the new seminary would give future ministers sufficient, undistracted time to learn. Too often, he lamented, men began their ministries "very imperfectly fitted for their profession," because they didn't have enough money to "pursue their studies through a sufficient length of time." Andover sought to address this problem by providing instruction, use of books, and, "at least to a considerable extent," housing and living expenses.

The times of free seminary tuition, food, and housing are long gone. Many today go into ministry "very imperfectly fitted" because they don't think they can afford the years or money needed to obtain a seminary education. Of those who do attend, too many are burdened with excessive student loans. Seminaries that can keep tuition low and provide substantial scholarships and grants provide a great service to future pastors and their churches. This kind of investment should be a priority of every denomination and local church. By serving students in this way, churches will also bless themselves with pastors who have taken the time to prepare for ministry.

2. The Library

One of the greatest strengths of Andover Seminary, Dwight argued, was that it would have a library "sufficiently various, and extensive, for the purposes intended." Full-time students have lots of time to read---more than they'll ever have in full-time ministry. Broad and deep reading is one of the main purposes of seminary. Professors are there to teach and mentor, but also to force you to read. As you read, you learn and grow, you learn how to read, and you learn what's worth reading.

You can't afford all the books, journals, articles, and dictionaries you're required to read. That's why strong seminaries and divinity schools have extensive and growing libraries. A good library gives you access to vast amounts of knowledge and distilled wisdom you cannot find online. If you're in seminary, take advantage of the library---you'll miss it when you're gone.

3. The Faculty

Mastering any one of the "branches of theological learning" (Bible, apologetics, systematic theology, church history, practical theology) is enough to exhaust "the utmost talents of a single man." Therefore, Dwight observed, it's impossible for a single pastor to teach all these disciplines to those he mentors. If there were a pastor "ever so competent," his other pastoral duties would make it "impossible for him to command sufficient time to communicate the knowledge, which ought to be considered as indispensable."

The seminary, on the other hand, has professors who devote themselves to a level of study and teaching that isn't possible for a single pastor. Don't misunderstand Dwight (or me). There are things your pastor can teach you that no seminary professor can. That's why local churches must not outsource pastoral training to the seminaries. But there are also things that a good seminary can teach you that most pastors have neither the time nor ability to teach. In most cases, it takes both a good local church pastor and a good seminary faculty to train a good future pastor.

4. The Other Students

"All ministers ought to be friends." And in order to develop friendships, they have to know each other. However, Dwight explained, when "ministers are educated separately and solitarily, this knowledge, in ordinary cases, cannot exist." But at a seminary, "being educated together, being of the same age, pupils of the same instructors, tenants of the same buildings, engaged in the same delightful pursuits, and actuated, as we may reasonably hope, by the same spirit, they can hardly fail to be of one accord, and of one mind."

Good seminaries strengthen the unity between churches by building bonds between ministers. The friendships you build while you're in seminary will strengthen your ministry for years to come. The guy who sits next to you in 8 a.m. Hebrew class may someday lead his church to support your missionaries. The couple you meet at orientation may pray for you and your family for the rest of your life. The classmate you study with for a final may someday labor beside you for reformation in your denomination. So go to seminary, devote yourself to reading, and learn all you can from your professors. But don't fail to invest time in relationships while you're there.

5. The Doctrine

In making his case that such a thing as a seminary was needed, Dwight concluded by assuring his hearers, "The doctrines, which will be taught here, are the doctrines of the Reformation." He went on to explain how Andover's teaching would be biblical and orthodox and beneficial for building up the church. The seminary, Dwight assured his listeners, would exist for the benefit of the churches.

In 1808 there was only one seminary in America. Today there are dozens. But the fact remains that a seminary's most important task is to pass on sound doctrine to the next generation of pastors for the benefit of the churches. Choose a seminary that takes this responsibility seriously, and you will bless both yourself and your future church.

**************

All citations are from Timothy Dwight, A Sermon Preached at the Opening of the Theological Institution in Andover (Boston: Farrand, 1808).

Statistics on the religious beliefs of African Americans are part of Western cultural literacy. Many are familiar with the findings that reveal African Americans to be among the most religious ethnic group in America, largely holding a particular Christian expression of belief. In 2009, the Barna Group found that "blacks were the group most likely to be born again Christians (59 percent, compared to a national average of 46 percent) and were the ethnic segment most likely to consider themselves to be Christian (92 percent did so, versus 85 percent nationally)."

Mark Hatcher at an anniversary event for African Americans for Humanism in Washington.

Similarly, in 2011, Barna examined 15 years of religious beliefs among Americans and found that African Americans are "the segment that possesses beliefs most likely to align with those taught in the Bible." Specifically, African Americans were more likely than other segments to say that they believe that God is "the all-knowing, all-powerful, and perfect Creator of the universe who still rules the world today," and were the most likely to engage in church-centric activities, and to read the Bible other than at church events during a typical week. According to Barna's research, African Americans are only half as likely as either whites or Hispanics to be unchurched. Therefore, the announcement of the report justifiably noted, "From the earliest days of America's history, a deep-rooted spirituality has been one of the hallmarks of the black population in the country. . . [and] the passage of time has not diminished the importance of faith in the lives of African Americans.

Growing Atheism

It might seem anomalous to turn from the pages of that report to find that there is a growing atheistic movement within the African American community. Local chapters of organized African American atheistic groups are appearing in major American cities. There are vocal activists for this atheism, including comedians and journalists. Rice University professor of humanities and religious studies Anthony Pinn and Harvard University professor of African and African American studies and of philosophy Tommie Shelby also lend their intellectual muscle to the movement through their writings.

Although equal to its white counterpart in its denial of the possibility of and need for a Divine Being, African American atheism differs in its object of attack from "The New Atheism." Whereas Richard Dawkins positions science against Christian belief and the late Christopher Hitchens attacked Christians' claim of God being "good," African American atheism directs its "no-Creator" tirade at the character of the black church and history of African Americans.

The popular discussion has two primary foci. The first is to suggest that many within the African American community have participated in the Christian faith because "going to church" is a cultural expression of this community. To go against this expression in ages past would have brought the sort of ostracism previously experienced by African American homosexuals. African American atheists tend to employ the "coming out of the closet" language when speaking of sharing their humanist conversion experiences with their family members.

The second focus is the black church itself---or its iniquities. While the church plays a prominent role in the lives of African Americans, the community shows signs of disaster in almost all other social indicators, including education, wealth and poverty, unemployment, marriage, and crime. Thus, the evangelists of African American atheism can point to an apparent absence of divine power among the black church's ardent followers, and thus an absence of a deity.

In contrast, the academic discussion attacks long-held scholarly and popular consensus concerning the place of the church in the success of the African American community. Accurately, the African American atheists demonstrate that many people of prominence in the African American community (from its inception in antebellum period to the present) gave deference to the church for utilitarian purposes---for the sake of the liberation and empowerment of a people given to religion. The images we have of the civil rights movement anchoring itself in fiery worship services and community gatherings in churches local to the nearest protest march mask the quiet internal compromises many of the non-religious made for the sake of uniting with the massive cause for justice.

Pefect Conditions

Just as many discover this anti-Christian organism, it already has evolved into a fully grown system fighting for its place alongside of the church in the lives of African Americans and American society. Observably, a few factors within the African American community have created the perfect conditions for its appearance. Heterosexual marriage is on the decline; as Joy Jones recognized, some African Americans even view marriage as a white institution.  Single African American women are asking whether the church is contributing to their singleness and loneliness, due to the church's high standards for sexual purity and low numbers of single African American men. Following the majority culture, homosexuality is accepted as a family member within the African American community, with many church leaders acting as advocates. Finally, the internet gives African American atheism a powerful communication tool for unifying the movement and preaching its platform.

The non-believers behind W. E. B. Du Bois's veil are correct on one part of their historical analysis: Atheistic tares have grown in the fields home to the Negro spirituals and gospel music, the SCLC, the likes of Martin Luther King Jr., and the founding of many historically black colleges and universities. Yet the inference they draw from this reality is incorrect. The historical presence of atheists of color does not invalidate the black church's role as the uniting force in the survival of the African American community.

While some sought the resources of the church for political gain or "the greater good" of an oppressed people, this is not true for the majority. Many members of today's black church attend because their parents, who introduced them to Christ and the church, are believers---believers themselves who are the children, grandchildren, great-grandchildren, and great-great-grandchildren of slaves and freedmen who went to church because they believed in a God who would free them from slavery just as he freed the children of Israel from Egypt. My grandfather, great-grandfathers, and great-great grandfathers, all humble, land-owning (but not well-to-do) farmers, had no ambitions or motives for being churchgoers other than to please Christ, their faithful Lord. The same could be said for the faith of millions of African Americans who preached, prayed, sang, and gave their monies so that their children might follow in the faith as free members in the land of the free.

The African American community, at large, however, still presents a huge mission field ripe for the gospel. The statistics on attendance can be misleading: Attendance should not be equated with conversion, spiritual maturity, biblical literacy, or theological knowledge. Believers should pray for God's mercy upon unbelievers inside and outside of the black church's pews. If the Lord is merciful to us, maybe the atheists, too, will be converted.

Would there be value for biblical counselors to pursue PhD work outside Christian institutions, and what challenges would they face?

There are two good answers to the question above: no and yes.

First, for the no. If you are not a competent critical thinker, I would suggest you not pursue it. If, like much of our culture, you hear with your eyes and think with your feelings, then you will be in trouble. The following warning by Mark Noll and David Wells (1988) gets right to the point.

[The] journey from Word to world is fraught with peril even as it is ripe with potential. Bridges built between God's Word and our world are susceptible of carrying traffic in both directions . . . most of the traffic has been moving in the wrong direction. Twentieth-century people have allowed the cognitive constraints and the psychological conventions of our own day to limit what the Bible may say. This reverses the proper situation. It is the Bible that deserves to prescribe the cognitive horizon for the twentieth century, just as it has been for every century.

Which leads to the second point: If you are biblically and theologically anemic, I would not suggest you pursue PhD work outside Christian institutions. Everybody leans on what they know best. So if your understanding of people, problems, and change is deep and wide in the secular rudiments of the psyche but weak and thin in the faith once for all delivered to you and the rest of the saints, then you will be in trouble. You will function more as a psychologist who happens to be Christian than a Christian who happens to be a psychologist. The academic and professional guilds are persuasive when you function under their presuppositions rather than God's, and powerful when they hold over your head a degree, a license, and a paycheck. Be careful.

If you have a PhD in psychology, counseling, or social work and a "Sunday school degree" in Bible and theology, anybody can guess what will exercise the greatest influence in your work. Prior training in biblical counseling, especially a developed theistic epistemology and biblical psychology, is a minimal prerequisite. Even better would be a seminary degree.

Finally, I would not suggest PhD work outside Christian institutions if you do not have sharp dialogue partners to accompany you on your trek. After I completed graduate school in clinical psychology and attempted to practice as a Christian, I sensed the spiritually vapid nature of my work. God used David Powlison and Sid Galloway as mentors to help me develop a more biblical perspective. They gave me their time and energy---countless conversations, helpful responses to my many "yes, but what about" questions, and many thoughtful e-mails.

Missionary Mindset

But here's when I would say "yes": if you can think and live like a missionary. Missionaries enter into another culture both as learners, and with time, as teachers. They are motivated by love and therefore move toward the culture with a measure of acceptance; they are moved by the mission of God and therefore possess a distinctively divine agenda. Our psychology and our counsel is messianic and revolutionary. There is good reason from our perspective as Christians to view the mental health subculture as a mission field, or at least as a kind of unreached people group. The gospel's psychology subverts the foundational narratives and metaphysical, epistemological, and anthropological presuppositions of the secular psychologies. We don't just offer up junior versions of their non-Christian systems. The secular psychotherapies desperately need redemption, not because they are all wrong, but because they are fundamentally wrong about the most important things.

Our goal, then, should not be simply to obtain a seat at the psychological table, but instead to invite diners in the Mental Health Café to a banquet feast with fare beyond their wildest dreams: a Chef who offers living bread and living water and even life beyond this one. Would not a retooling of C. S. Lewis's inimitable challenge in The Weight of Glory be apropos?

We are half-hearted counselors, fooling about with Freud and Rogers and Beck when infinite joy is offered us by Another Counselor, like an ignorant child who wants to go on making mud pies in a slum because he cannot imagine what is meant by the offer of a holiday at the sea. We are far too easily pleased (modified from Lewis, 1980, pp. 3-4).