Ladd broke through the sterile debates about whether the kingdom of God was a present, spiritual reality or a future, earthly reality. He popularized a view of the kingdom as having two dimensions: “already/not yet.” Ladd was also one of the first solid evangelical scholars to go outside the fundamentalist camp in order to interact with liberal scholars in the academy, men like Rudolph Bultmann.

For a biographical overview of Ladd’s life and work, I suggest A Place at the Table: George Eldon Ladd and the Rehabilitation of Evangelical Scholarship in America. See my review of this book here:

A Place at the Table is much more than a biographical sketch of Ladd’s life. D’Elia cautiously enters into the theological discussion he describes in order to spotlight Ladd’s contributions to evangelical scholarship and his interactions with scholars from outside the evangelical world. Those who read D’Elia’s book will receive an education, not merely regarding the historical aspects of Ladd’s interesting life, but also regarding the theological debates of the time.

I’ve also interviewed Ladd’s biographer, John D’Elia, about his work and his legacy:

Ladd’s legacy within evangelical scholarship is hard to overstate. I argue in the book that he carved out a place for evangelicals in what was then the threatening and bewildering world of critical biblical scholarship. By demystifying the methods of critical scholarship, Ladd made them available to evangelicals who wanted to use them in their study of the Scriptures. Historic premillennialism, then, is really an incidental part of Ladd’s story. The real achievement in Ladd’s career can be found in the wide range of biblical scholars who sat at his feet and then went on to make their own mark. Those scholars are as diverse as John Piper and Robert Mounce on the
one side, and Eldon Epp and Charles Carlston on the other.

If you’re going to start reading Ladd, let me suggest his book, The Gospel of the Kingdom: Scriptural Studies in the Kingdom of God. Check out my review here:

The Gospel of the Kingdom is illuminating, clarifying and (thankfully) brief. It is amazing that Ladd manages to fit all of this great theological teaching into 140 pages.

There is a reason this book is still in print. It is unmatched in its clarification of what the kingdom of God is, and how the kingdom of God can be already present but not yet here in its fullness.

I’ll close this post with Ladd himself. Here are two ways Ladd defined “the gospel,” one personal and the other in light of God’s kingdom:

“I can only bear witness at this point to what Heilsgeschichte means to me. My sense of God’s love and acceptance is grounded not only in the resurrected Christ but also in the Jesus of history. He taught something about God that was utterly novel to his Jewish auditors: that God is not only gracious and forgiving to the repentant sinner but is also a seeking God who, in Jesus’ person and mission, has come to seek and to save the lost…

God has shown me that he loves me in that while I was yet a sinner, Christ died for me (Rom. 5:8). This is not faith in history; it is not faith in the kerygma; it is not faith in the Bible. It is faith in God who has revealed himself to me in the historical event of the person, works and words of Jesus of Nazareth who continues to speak to me though the prophetic word of the Bible.”

- George Eldon Ladd, “The Search for Perspective,” Interpretation 25 (Jan. 1971), 56 and 57.

“This is the good news about the kingdom of God. How men need this gospel! Everywhere one goes he finds the gaping graves swallowing up the dying. Tears of loss, of separation, of final departure stain every face. Every table sooner or later has an empty chair, every fireside its vacant place. Death is the great leveller. Wealth or poverty, fame or oblivion, power or futility, success or failure, race, creed or culture — all our human distinctions mean nothing before the ultimate irresistible sweep of the scythe of death which cuts us all down. And whether the mausoleum is a fabulous Taj Mahal, a massive pyramid, an unmarked spot of ragged grass or the unplotted depths of the sea one fact stands: death reigns.

“Apart from the gospel of the kingdom, death is the mighty conqueror before whom we are all helpless. We can only beat our fists in utter futility against this unyielding and unresponding tomb. But the good news is this: death has been defeated; our conqueror has been conquered. In the face of the power of the kingdom of God in Christ, death was helpless. It could not hold him, death has been defeated; life and immortality have been brought to life. An empty tomb in Jerusalem is proof of it. This is the gospel of the kingdom.”

- from The Gospel of the Kingdom

Not too long ago, I enjoyed a cup of hot chocolate with a friend from seminary. He graduated not long after I did, and he was telling me about how involved he was in his local church. As we were reminiscing about our seminary days, he said something that stunned me:

Too many seminary students act like they’ve arrived rather than they’ve been sent.

Most evangelical institutions will not accept students unless they are recommended by their church and pastor. It’s true that you may choose the seminary you want to attend, but make no mistake – you’ve been sent there. Your church has expressed confidence in your gifts, abilities, and calling. Otherwise, you’d be somewhere else.

Now, anyone who has a passion for God should also want to have knowledge about God. But there’s a point where your theological study is no longer in service to your knowing God. It’s theology for its own sake. It’s theology in service of your grades, in service of your reputation, in service of your own intellectual curiosity. Whatever the case, if your learning about God is not driven by your desire to know God personally, your mind will expand but your soul will shrink. You’ll be consumed with ideas about God instead of God Himself.

Nothing like the local church will help you remember your soul. Stay involved. And spend some time sitting at the feet of saints who don’t have a Ph.D.

Education and mission go together. Why? Because theological reflection is missionary reflection. The apostle Paul did not hammer out the theology of Romans while sitting in an ivory tower. He wrote his letters as a missionary on the move. He wrote with Christians in mind – guiding and shaping their mission too.

Don’t forget your calling. You are not called to seminary. You’re called to mission, and seminary is only a step in helping you fulfill your mission.

Conclusion

The biggest danger in seminary is that in the increase of knowledge, you lose sight of the most important things. The more you know, the more you are likely to forget.

Satan would love nothing more than to transform your joy of attending seminary into an intellectual snobbery that renders you ineffective in ministry. Guard your heart against this paralyzing pride. Weeds grow next to the flowers. The flowers are blooming at seminary. The question is: will you choke out the weeds of pride in your heart or will the weeds choke out a lifetime of fruitfulness?

So don’t forget. Fight to remember. And don’t be the guy who wishes he could do seminary differently.

[This article was written at the request of my friends at Desiring God, in connection with this series.]

Journeys of Faith: Evangelicalism, Eastern Orthodoxy, Catholicism, and Anglicanism, 

Robert Plummer: As I explain in the introduction to the book, I began to notice a trickle of Evangelicals converting to Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy – both from my local church and the seminary where I teach. When I looked for resources that helped in understanding this migration and responding biblically, I had difficulty finding anything helpful. I originally thought about describing and assessing the phenomenon myself but decided that the book would be much more interesting and accurate if recent converts were allowed to tell their own stories.

Robert Plummer: Frankly, I originally did not want to include Anglicanism in this book because Anglicanism is, in some expressions, thoroughly Evangelical. But the publisher convinced me that enough “free church” Evangelicals convert to Anglicanism that it is a related phenomenon we could not ignore. For example, Todd Hunter, former head of the Vineyard movement has recently written a book about his conversion to Anglicanism (see The Accidental Anglican).

Robert Plummer: I have several different hopes for the book, but let me focus on one here – for the Evangelical readership – that it would help us both understand and respond to persons leaving our churches for liturgical Christian traditions. Speaking quite directly… I believe an Evangelical understanding of the gospel, salvation, and the Scriptures is correct. (If I did not, I would leave Evangelicalism.) Yes, I respect persons leaving my faith tradition.

Nevertheless, through the responder sections of the book, I want to lay before potential converts the reasons I think they are making a mistake to leave Evangelicalism. And for those with friends leaving Evangelicalism, I hope this book equips them to make a loving appeal to stay. Chris Castaldo’s riveting account of his journey from Catholicism to Evangelicalism also highlights the strengths of Evangelical claims, I think.

Robert Plummer: Yes, authority is big. Who or what has the final say in matters of faith and practice – Scripture? Tradition? Experience? Or some combination? Obviously, as an Evangelical, I believe Scripture is the final authority, but I also understand the important secondary role tradition plays in all Christian churches – even those that deny they have traditions.

1. Ask questions and listen. Don’t immediately criticize. Try to understand the attraction of Eastern Orthodoxy.  Visit the church they are attending and graciously observe. Admit your own biases and erroneous preconceptions.
2. Read up on Eastern Orthodoxy in places like Wilbur Ellsworth’s and Craig Blaising’s chapters in Journeys of Faith. Another recommended book is Robert Letham’s Through Western Eyes. Eastern Orthodoxy: A Reformed Perspective.
3. Pray.
4. Speak the truth in love.

But a couple weeks ago, I traveled to Southeastern Seminary to speak on Counterfeit Gospels for their 20/20 collegiate conference. Though it was an overnight trip with significant travel and a packed schedule, I arrived home feeling energized instead of drained. While we were catching up about our time apart, Corina asked me if I was tired. I replied, “Yes, but only physically. Spiritually and mentally, I feel refreshed.”

I started to think about why this conference in particular left me feeling refreshed? Three reasons:

1. Conversations about Mission

After the evening session was over on Friday night, two students from The College at Southeastern tweeted me and asked if I was interested in going with them to Applebee’s. Now, it was already late and I was tired, but since my internal clock was on Central Standard Time, it wasn’t as late as it seemed. And there’s no better way to get a feel for a college than to hang out with a couple of ordinary students. So, I responded to their tweet (surprised them too!) and we headed out to Applebee’s for a couple hours.

What did we talk about? In a nutshell – MISSION.

Oh, we talked about a few other things in introduction. But soon, these guys were bubbling over with what they were really passionate about – evangelism. I heard about the drug addicts they were witnessing to and meeting once a week for discipleship. I heard about the church plants they are involved in and the people their churches are reaching. I heard about the intentional missionary mindset they had in their communities.

In short, mission was the topic of discussion. There were a few times we talked about theological issues in evangelicalism, but even then it was clear that theology was in service to mission. I was refreshed by the unwavering Great Commission focus I discovered in these two young guys. The same was true of my host for the weekend, who told me stories about his mission work in the Philippines.

2. Theologically Rich Worship

Conferences are usually about the speakers, right? That’s why I hadn’t put much thought into what the music portion of the conference would be like. But Matt Papa took the stage and led us in songs he had composed, songs that were theologically rich, contemporary expressions of ancient biblical truth. And the sound of a thousand college students reveling in the finished work of Christ and committing their lives to him in response… well, I’ll just say that it was more than I expected. In a good way.

The renaissance of theologically-minded hymns coming out of the next generation is one of the brightest aspects of evangelicalism today.

3. Gospel-focused friendships

The brothers I was able to spend time with at SEBTS were gracious and hospitable. Our conversations were about the gospel and its implications for personal spirituality, for the mission of the church, and the way we treat each other. It’s true that I already had established friendships with faculty at SEBTS and the speakers at the event. Even so, there’s nothing better than the refreshing conversation that comes from guys who are joyful, focused on the cross, and excited to be making a difference for the kingdom.

The Take-Away

Church ought to be this way. For everyone. We don’t need conferences for this. We meet with the Body of Christ every week.

Our churches ought to be about the mission. (After all, the church is the sign and instrument of the kingdom. We exist to proclaim the good news of Jesus Christ so that more and more will worship Him, know Him, and love Him.)

Our churches ought to have theologically rich worship services, where we exalt God and exult in God.

Our churches ought to be filled with people who have gospel-focused conversations, where we bring the gospel to bear on every inch of life, hold one another accountable, rebuke one another in love, and encourage one another in grace.

Let’s not rely on conferences to give us fuel for the journey. Let’s work to make our churches an oasis of grace, a place for refreshment and empowerment as we seek to fulfill the mission God has given us.

Hermeneutics with Robert Plummer

Plummer’s new book, 40 Questions About Interpreting the Bible, gives an overview of what we discussed in this class. I took Hermeneutics my first semester, and I’m glad I did. This class set the course for me to interpret the Bible carefully throughout the rest of my seminary education and during my initial years of preaching and teaching in a local church.

Ministry of Proclamation with Hershael York

Don’t let the fancy name fool you. This was a basic preaching class. Each student was required to preach in class while being evaluated by Dr. York and the other classmates. But what could have been an awkward situation turned out to be a very encouraging exercise. The ethos of the class valued faithfulness, excellence, and the desire to listen to the Lord speak to us through one another. Even more memorable than the preaching segments were the casual conversations with Dr. York that concerned life, family, and pastoral ministry. There’s nothing like taking a class from a professor who has the life and ministry experience to back up his theory.

The Sermon on the Mount with Jonathan Pennington

This was a January class in which we worked our way through the entire Sermon on the Mount in five days. Dr. Pennington began the class with some issues of interpretation. The rest of the time was spent discussing the text itself. The big project turned out to be very practical. We were asked to craft 12 sermon outlines from the Sermon on the Mount. I wound up doing 34 because I was planning to preach through the Sermon on the Mount on Wednesday nights. That teaching series lasted more than a year and culminated in my memorizing the Sermon on the Mount and then delivering it by memory at church.

The Reformation with Shawn Wright

What I remember most about this class was the enormous amount of reading and outlining required. I probably did more work for this one class than two or three other classes combined. The good news was that at the end of the semester, I had worked through all the historical research and come out with a deeper understanding of Reformation theology. Because this was a difficult class, there weren’t as many students willing to take it. The smaller class size fostered an open atmosphere for fascinating discussions. I came to appreciate the different theological emphases of the Reformers and the pastoral motivations behind the cultural movement.

Contemporary Theology with Greg Thornbury

This was a “J term” taught by visiting professor Greg Thornbury from Union University. The reading requirements bogged us down in some very difficult and dense work from postmodern thinkers. But the class conversations were spectacular. The main thing that I remember about Dr. Thornbury was his passion for the subject matter that he taught. That excitement rubs off on students, even when the subject matter is difficult to comprehend at times.

(Favorite visual: Dr. Thornbury – eyes closed tightly, totally engaged in his teaching, gesturing like crazy while kneeling on a swivel chair that continued to slowly turn until he was facing the whiteboard and not the class.)

Grateful

Out of all the classes I took at Southern Seminary, I can’t think of one that wasn’t beneficial and enjoyable. I’m grateful for the educational opportunities God has given me, and I look back on all my seminary classes (but these in particular) with the fondest of memories.

 

The purpose of the book is narrow. Witherington isn’t writing for those who want to be serious students of the Bible without becoming teachers. Nor is he writing for teachers of the Bible who have no ambition at becoming published Bible scholars. Instead, his target is a growing number of seminary students who desire “to become a good and even well-published Bible scholar” (20). But even if Witherington’s target audience is narrow, he insists that the learning process must be broad. He writes:

“…to be a serious student, much less a teacher or scholar of the Bible, you must have a love for learning – and not just learning during a particular period of your life, but lifelong learning” (21).

Pushing back against the anti-intellectual climate of some parts of evangelicalism, Witherington lays out the necessity of careful thinking when it comes to the Bible. “Ignorance is not bliss when it comes to the truth of and about God’s word,” he writes. “Indeed, ignorance is the enemy of the truth” (23).

This emphasis on truth-seeking is felt throughout the book. He not only stands against those who embrace ignorance as a virtue (some segments of evangelicalism) but also against those who embrace agnosticism as a virtue (the postmodern turn). “It is important that you do not allow your piety to outrun the evidence or overrule the pursuit of truth in the service of the truth,” he counsels. “Christian Bible scholars above all must be truth seekers” (34).  And truth-seeking means that we are not dealing with ideas, but reality. He goes on to write:

“…in fact the writers of the New Testament are not merely encouraging us to enter a debating club where ideas are thrown around like Frisbees. The New Testament writers believe they are talking about realities – real persons like Jesus, real events like the resurrection, real experiences like the new birth. The moment theological or ethical reflections forget that ideas are ways of talking about such realities is the moment when one has untethered theological or ethical discussion from its historical or real foundation” (69).

There are some wise words of counsel here, particularly in relation to humility and the ability to admit when you are wrong. I love this quote:

“The Bible teacher or scholar doesn’t need someone to invent humility pills; just taking in and taking seriously regular doses of the wisdom of the Bible is enough to humble any normal person” (124).

And then there’s this good word of warning:

“It’s precisely when the text does not cough up the results you were expecting or wanting that you find out what sort of Bible teacher or scholar you actually are” (127).

The best part of Witherington’s work is his insistence that biblical scholarship be done in service to the church. “It is not enough to know the Bible if you want to teach it,” he says. “You need to know the God of the Bible” (77). He goes on: “Research by a Christian is never done just for its own sake, or even just to advance knowledge in a given field. It is done in service to the Lord and to His church” (83). Amen!

I resonated in particular with his desire to see more cross-disciplinary conversations in biblical studies. “Not only do we need more dialogue across disciplines, we need more Bible scholars who actually are committed to be biblical theologians and biblical ethicists, seeking to apply the insights they have gained from the Bible to current and pressing theological and ethical issues” (73). Yes, yes, yes! The church is hungry for scholarship that not only gives insight into the meaning of the text but presses those insights into application for today’s world.

As one who is considering future Ph.D. plans, I benefited greatly from the wisdom of Ben Witherington. Is There a Doctor in the House? is a helpful primer on becoming a biblical scholar with a heart for the church.

First, I deplore the way that many evangelicals (particularly those in the conservative circles I run in) belittle Christianity Today. I’ve heard the jokes: Christianity Astray, Capitulation Today etc. Some dismiss CT as if the magazine never takes strong stands based on solid biblical reflection.

I have critiqued CT articles from time to time, but I don’t join the chorus of constant CT-critics. Generally speaking, the issues I sometimes have with CT’s coverage tend to be issues I have with the prevailing sentiments of evangelicalism. CT provides a snapshot of the para-church big-tent wing of evangelicalism, a tent that encompasses Christians with different views on a number of important issues. If I were to agree with everything I read in CT, I would no longer be reading the type of publication that CT seeks to be: an evangelical magazine that speaks from and to village-green evangelicalism.

Enough with that. Now, on to the cover story.

When I first heard about CT doing this profile, I thought, It’s about time! Albert Mohler is highly influential in a number of circles that are, in turn, highly influential for evangelicals. When you put these different circles together, you realize just how much influence Mohler exerts. Three circles stand out:

• The Southern Baptist Convention. (He is a denominational strategist who played an important role in the the Great Commission Resurgence, not to mention the fact that he casts the vision for the Convention’s mother seminary).
• The Religious Right. (Though he eschews the term “culture warrior” and is more nuanced than the typical voices in conservative politics, his cultural analysis is very popular. He has become a sort of spokesman for this wing of evangelical thought.)
• The Reformed Resurgence. (Through his leadership in Together for the Gospel, the Gospel Coalition, and his well-known Reformed theology, he has carved out a role as a guide to young Reformed types seeking church and cultural renewal.)

Looking at Mohler from the perspective of the Reformed Resurgence, the Religious Right, and the Southern Baptist Convention reiterates his status as a mover and shaker for evangelicals. In many ways, he resembles one of his mentors, Carl F.H. Henry. Speaking of Henry, the most ironic part of CT’s cover story is that it paints Mohler as being outside the mainstream of evangelicalism for his complementarian and inerrantist views when, in fact, it is Mohler (and not CT) who is carrying the mantle of former CT editor Carl Henry on these and other issues.

Worthen’s profile of Mohler is not condemnatory. She carefully presents his views on many issues. The best parts of the article are when Worthen is quoting Mohler or summarizing their conversations. She ably describes the building blocks of Mohler’s vision: for Southern Seminary, for the Southern Baptist Convention, for the conservative political movement, etc. Overall, Worthen’s article is neither a hack job nor a puff piece.

That said, Justin Taylor rightly described the article as “condescending.” The tone is negative at times, and Worthen’s condescension comes out in some of the offhanded remarks she makes in her reporting.

For example, when speaking of Southern Seminary’s current theological outlook, Worthen includes a parenthetical remark:

“As proof of the seminary’s current ‘diversity,’ some faculty protest that they are only four-point Calvinists.”

Her sarcasm aside, Worthen fails to understand the administration’s adherence to the Abstract of Principles, which ensures that all faculty fall in line as at least a moderate Calvinist. Her remark assumes that great theological diversity in a faculty is a virtue, whereas Mohler believes it is more virtuous for the faculty to be faithful to the confessional statement of the seminary founders.

Southern Seminary students aren’t portrayed nicely either. She describes the student visitors to Mohler’s personal library as “goggle-eyed” and gullible.

When it comes to Mohler, Worthen conveys respect for his accomplishments, but she wonders out loud if he is the intellectual everyone thinks he is. She writes of his personal library:

“A self-conscious air pervades the library, in the jumble of cultural artifacts intended to convey worldliness; in the shelves lined with a conspicuous number of Great Books, Harvard Classics, and other pre-packaged sets that seem the fruit of a single-minded mission to conquer a body of knowledge, or at least to give that impression.”

So the library may be part of Mohler’s attempt to come off as smart? As if the man, after all of his academic accomplishments, needs a big library to demonstrate his intellectual fortitude?

Later, she goes further, saying that Mohler is not so much an intellectual or theologian as he is an “articulate controversialist.” She trots out two of Mohler’s controversial positions (though it’s hard to imagine that his creationist views are that controversial for evangelicals, most of whom fall squarely into the Answers in Genesis camp and not Biologos). Because of the space she devotes to controversies, Worthen leaves out Mohler’s more important view of  ”theological triage,” a concept that is very influential for conservative evangelicals seeking to uphold sophisticated theological distinctions and yet engage in partnerships with Christians who hold other views.

Worthen’s most perplexing comment is her charge of elitism. She writes:

“Mohler is just as elitist as the moderates of Old Southern: he is certain he has the truth, and those Baptists who protest simply are not initiated into the systematic splendor of Reformed thought.”

It appears that, for Worthen, elitism equals being certain one has the truth. Is that necessarily so? Cannot agnostics be elitist? What about postmodern theologians who revel in uncertainty and easily dismiss the “ultra-rationalistic” theological viewpoints of earlier evangelicals? What about journalists who are certain that certainty equals elitism? If Mohler comes across as an elitist in this article, a closer reading makes Worthen come across even more so.

In the end, Worthen gets a lot of facts and details right, but she puts them together in a way that makes her portrait of Mohler unflattering. Yes, the article could have been worse. But it could have been better too.

Seminaries today are offering a variety of ways to take classes. If you are a current or future seminary student, you may have some questions about the different types of seminary classes offered. Here are some benefits and drawbacks to the different options.

ON-CAMPUS CLASSES

The benefit of taking classes on campus is that you are in a classroom with students and the professor. Your professor is right in front of you. You can communicate with him easily. Conversations with students in the hall – before and after class – are also beneficial. When the class is good, you can rejoice with other students. When the class is hard, you can commiserate too!

The seminary environment fosters a desire for learning and growth. In my experience, nothing quite replaces the classroom setting on campus with other students.

The drawback to taking classes on campus? As you go from class to class, you will usually have different course mates. Meeting lots of students is great, but you might not be able to build the kind of camaraderie you would like.

EXTENSION CENTER

Taking classes at one of the seminary’s extension centers is much like taking class on campus. A professor travels to the extension center location to be with the class.

The greatest benefit to being at an extension center is that you usually have the same classmates from class to class. Because of this factor, the class becomes a corporate unit, and you can enjoy long-lasting friendships with your classmates.

Furthermore, most of the other students are already in ministry (like you), so the class discussions tend to be more practical in nature. There is little “learning for learning’s sake.” The mindset is, “How can I apply this truth this week in my current church setting?”

The drawback to the extension center is that you rarely have the very best professors. Sometimes, the prominent professors will travel, but many times, that is not the case.

Also, the classes tend to be a little less intensive than those on campus. For example, the on-campus course requirements for a particular course may include two exams and two papers. The same course, taken at an extension center, might instead ask for two exams and only one paper. I suspect that the professors know that students are in full-time ministry and want to ease the load just a bit.

INTERNET CLASSES

The internet option allows you to stream lectures live online, or watch DVDs of the professor going over the lesson.

The benefit of an internet class is that you can work at your own pace. You can take exams and quizzes early if you’d like. (Procrastinators would probably not do well with internet classes, but planners can maximize the flexibility to their advantage.) If you pace yourself, you can finish the class more than a month early.

The drawbacks to the internet classes are obvious. You have no camaraderie with students. (The online forums, where you participate with students in a mini-blog, are helpful, but they cannot replace face-to-face interaction.)

Neither do you have easy access to the professor. Internet classes help you work toward your degree, but they are not as satisfying as extension center and on-campus classes.

Another drawback to internet classes is the price tag. For some reason, they are much more expensive than taking classes on campus. I suppose the price is designed to discourage internet classes.

J-TERMS

J-Terms are intensive, one-week courses in months starting with J (traditionally January, June, and July, although a few classes are now being offered in May and December). Most of these classes are on campus, but some can be taken at extension centers.

The benefit of a J-Term is that you can do your reading and writing projects off campus before and after the class actually meets. You can pace yourself to do much of the work ahead of time. Then, when the week of the class arrives, you can knock out the classroom hours, quizzes and exams in a short amount of time. It’s like taking an entire semester’s worth of material and cramming it into one week.

The drawback of a J-Term is the difficulty of sitting in class for so many hours in one week. It’s nice to get it done and out of the way, but even the exceptionally gifted professor can rarely hold the attention of students for that long every day. Still, I have learned a lot in J-Terms and have been thankful for the flexibility they offer.

INDEPENDENT STUDY

The final type of class available is an independent study. You can participate in an independent study only under special circumstances.

For example, I had signed up for an extension center J-Term this summer. The class was later canceled. I needed those credit hours to finish my degree by December. So the professor of that class agreed to do an “independent study” with me.

For the class, I was required to do a significant amount of reading. I participated in several one-on-one conversations with the professor. I did a book review and a longer-than-usual research paper.

The benefit of doing an independent study comes from the way that the class is tailored to the individual student. It also provides ample time with the professor one-on-one. The drawback is that you are not among other students.

CONCLUSION

There is no “best” option for taking seminary courses. Each of the options has been helpful to me, depending upon my stage in life and ministry. The best thing a prospective student can do is consider the positives and negatives and figure out which option best suits the current need.

Those of you who are currently in seminary, what options have worked best for you? Feel free to share in the comments section below…

Published by Oxford University Press, historian Greg Wills’ book, Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, 1859-2009 is now the definitive resource for understanding the history and identity of the oldest of the six Southern Baptist seminaries.

The research in these 500+ pages is groundbreaking. Over a period of several years, Wills combed through more than a million pages of documents. His access to recently-discovered records illuminates the details surrounding the crucial moments in Southern’s history.

Last year, I read and reviewed William Mueller’s book, A History of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, 1859 – 1959. Mueller sought to establish a line of continuity between the Seminary’s founders and the administration in the late 1950′s. What Mueller tried to do, Wills actually accomplishes. Since Mohler has been president, Southern Seminary has been brought in line with the theological vision of the founders.

The book begins by telling the story of James P. Boyce and his tireless efforts to establish a seminary in the south. Boyce brought together the best Southern Baptist minds of the time: Basil Manley, Jr., William Williams and John A. Broadus.

The school’s founding took place in 1859, just two years before the Civil War. The war would temporarily close the seminary and place its future in jepoardy. But the founders exerted enormous energy to raise the financial support needed to give the school long-term viability.

Wills charts the seminary’s path toward liberalism. In the 1880′s, Crawford Howard Toy, an Old Testament professor, was forced to resign because of his higher critical views of the Bible. During the presidency of E.Y. Mullins in the early 20th century, the direction of the faculty moved in a leftward direction. I do not agree Wills that Mullins should be categorized a liberal. Wills uses the term based on Mullins’ methodology, but I would reserve that label for theologians whose doctrinal affirmations actually depart from orthodoxy. Wills is right, however, to point out the importance of Mullins for laying the foundation for the later controversies of the SBC.

The 1958 controversy, in which 13 members of the faculty were dismissed, is described in great detail. The 1958 controversy helps the reader understand the tension of being a left-leaning academic institution tethered to a largely conservative denomination.

The later years of the 20th century were filled with controversy, as the Southern Baptist Convention reaffirmed its commitment to conservative theology and sought to bring the seminaries in line with the prevailing sentiments of Southern Baptist constituents. Wills recounts the battle for the seminary’s theological direction, expressing his agreement with the conservatives. Yet he seeks to portray the facts in a clear and objective manner.

Anyone interested in Southern Seminary or the history of the Southern Baptist Convention simply must read this book. I could not put it down! Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, 1859-2009 is a magnificent achievement.

Related Posts:

A History of Southern Seminary
The Other Side of William Whitsitt
Duke McCall: An Oral History
John A. Broadus: A Living Legacy
E.Y. Mullins: A Man of Books and a Man of the People

The Whitsitt controversy surrounded a “discovery” that Whitsitt made regarding the origins of the Baptist movement. Whitsitt wrote in an encyclopedia that Baptists “invented” immersion in the 1600′s. Of course, as a Baptist himself, Whitsitt did not intend to imply that Baptists were the first to baptize adult believers, only that they recovered the practice.

But Whitsitt’s discovery came at the time when the Landmark movement was gathering steam. T.T. Eaton, B.H. Carroll and other Baptist leaders were arguing that there had been an apostolic succession of Baptist churches (and thus baptism by immersion) since the first century. Whitsitt argued that the historical documents indicate that Baptists recovered the practice and that the idea of succession could not be sustained historically.

Slatton’s biography is a fascinating look at Whitsitt’s life. Whitsitt remains a pivotal figure in the history of the Southern Baptist Convention. He was the bridge between the founding generation and the second generation of Southern Seminary leadership.

Slatton was given access to Whitsitt’s personal documents and his “secret” diary. Surprisingly, Whitsitt comes across as quite arrogant. He calls James P. Boyce, the first president of Southern Seminary a “dunderhead.” He goes off on people who disagree with him, and he expresses disdain for friends as well as enemies.

But readers must also keep in mind that Whitsitt also talks about himself negatively. Many times, after preaching a sermon, he will dismiss his own delivery and content as sub par. He seems to be rather self-deprecating, so that his harshness with others is also reflected in his harsh treatment of himself.

Most interesting is Whitsitt’s sympathy for his colleague and roomate, Crawford Howell Toy, who left the seminary because of his unorthodox views of inspiration. Whitsitt appears to agree with Toy, even though he remained at the seminary.

Usually, after reading a biography, I better sympathize with the protagonist. Not so with Whitsitt. Before reading this book, I had seen Whitsitt as a good man and conservative scholar who became involved in an unfortunate controversy over Baptist history. Since Whitsitt was right on the issue of Baptist origins, I had seen him as a beleaguered hero of academic freedom.

Now that I’ve read this book, I am glad that Whitsitt left the seminary. The attitude he reveals in his diary, the sympathy he confesses for a colleague who became a Unitarian, and his disdain for his Baptist brethren have caused me to lose respect for the man himself. Southern Baptists were wrong to oust Whitsitt for his views on Baptist history. But perhaps the seminary was actually better off because of his removal.

Slatt recognizes the complexity of Whitsitt:

“He was a complex man. At one time he predicted Baptists eventually would drop their insistence on immersion – and should. In his most important published work, however, he identified immersion as their defining practice.

He agonized over the narrowness of his fellow Southern Baptists and whether he could stay with them in good conscience. Later, when the issue was joined, he took his stand as a Baptist to the bitter end – and a Southern one at that!

He argued that he had been assailed for the mere assertion of a mere historical fact, and that the issue was not doctrinal. Yet he consistently argued that at stake in the controversy was the essential Baptist doctrine of the universal spiritual church, and that it was the foundation on which the Baptist vision of the church stood! – surely a doctrinal issue.” (327)

W.H. Whitsitt: The Man and the Controversy gives us the long-overdue biography of a man at the center of a theological and denominational storm. James Slatton’s work is an unflinching portrayal of Whitsitt and his research is a gift to all Baptists who wish to learn lessons from Baptist history.

written by Trevin Wax  © 2009 Kingdom People blog

Related Posts:
John A. Broadus: A Living Legacy
A Man of Books and a Man of the People
A History of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary