Critical Turning Point of American Religious History

An acquaintance who graduated at Southern Seminary, (MDiv '79, D.Min.82) told me this: he remembered the day that he realized he'd been defrauded by his seminary. He was preparing a series of advent sermons, and while studying Is 7:14, he discovered that all his commentaries, recommended by his professors, referred that verse to a pagan myth rather than a prophecy of Jesus. He suddenly began to check other passages and doctrines, and realized in a flash that his faith had been undermined and that he had been cheated. He threw out his entire library and started over, educating himself in the Bible.

I told this story to make the point that the seminaries and the Bible colleges ARE the battlefields. The NBC went bad before the SBC because in the late 1800s, their seminaries became infected by German modernism, while the SBC seminaries snuffed out any flashes of liberalism. After Mullins' influence, (he was conservative himself, but not dogmatic) the SBC seminaries began a gradual descent, culminating in the 70s and 80s.

I believe a history of this period, when written, will show several things:

1. Not all the seminaries went all the way down.

2. The doctrinal standards at the seminaries were so situated that they could be used to fix the seminaries.

3. The power of the president of the convention to eventually replace regents created a window of opportunity for the resurgence.

4. The rot in the seminaries had less than a catastrophic effect on the convention because so many congegations were small and pastored by non-seminary grads who remained conservative.

5. The power and influence of megachurches with their own schools, pastored by men who were conservative in theology was a key.

6. Alternative sources of education like Luther Rice, Bible Colleges like Mid-Continent College and Bryan College, and independent seminaries like Liberty and Mid-America had a huge impact.

7. Though it may never be quantified, the effect of the Scofield Reference Bible and its prevalence among some smaller SBC congregations helped in key areas.

 

It's a shame that your friend's faith was so fragile that he felt like a mature understanding of the origins of the Scriptures undermined it.

To point out the lessons we learned from the other side of the fence (in parallel to yours):

- It is easier to establish a seminary on solid academic principles than to slowly move one into step with the larger theological community.

- The Baptist Faith and Message can be used like a club to squelch academic freedom.

- Self-perpetuating boards can keep denominational sea-changes from destroying the acadmic credibility of a seminary.

- A lack of a seminary-trained clergy can allow the local churches to fall far enough into ignorance and superstition that they do not understand what is going on at the denomination's seminaries.

- The Mega-church rule - give the people what they want and they'll give you lots of money and a Mercedes. You can even found a "seminary" and indoctrinate folks with whatever lunacy you desire.

- People will leave their denominations to go to seminaries that meet their needs and churches will hire people from those seminaries to preserve their local-churcn priorites.

- The absurd theology promulgated by Scofield is still floating around because of the widespread use of Scofield Bibles.

Joshua

 

Please forgive my ignorance, but I haven't heard this position before. I'm being sincere here...not trying to be devisive. What is the argument against Scofield?

 

Generally speaking, the scholarship found in study Bibles is the distilled work of a much wider body of scholars.

Dispensationalism, however, was the pet theory of Scofield (and Darby) and - to my knowledge, had no real history in the Christian scholarly community when it was put in Scofield's Bible. As a result of the widespread popularity of the Bible, however, dispensationalism enjoyed a surge of popularity and versions of it even began to crop up in semi-reputable seminaries.

Joshua

 

Yes. Lots of good pastors who had a calling from God to preach but did not have opportunities for a formal theological education migrated to the Scofield Bible because of the extensive helps, charts, and cross-references and received their theological education from Scofield that was unchallenged by any other view. (It's hard to walk away from someone who has a nice neat system worked out when you haven't taken the time to work through the issues yourself.)

And in that modernistic age, the Bible was too often seen as a self-help book or a book of God-answers instead of a book of revelation and transformation for the reader. Instead of letting the written words of God change the reader, too many Christians (both then and today) work up a theological system or impose a theological system on the biblical text (like dispensationalism) in order to tame some of the more difficult and demanding passages.

 

I am actually no major fan of early dispensationalism--except that it beats Covenant Theology as in Witsius, et. al. However, to refer lefthandedly to Talbot Seminary, Dallas Theological Seminary (where it takes FOUR years to get an M.Div because of the language emphasis), Moody Bible Institute, and other dispensational schools as semi-reputable is a rather curious comment.

 

Irrelevance may not be the right word- after all, the lunacy of the 9/11 highjackers views of Islam did not render their views irrelevant. In fact, the prevelance of religious (sometimes fanatical) fundamentalism amoung the three religions that descend from Abraham has been a source of much bloodshed and oppression over the centuries, and recently (think Salem, Afganistan, Iran,etc). In fairness to Joshua (and I think his ultimate point), these views are generally irrelevant to serious scholars of their respective religions as far as their contribution to theology.
I'm afraid the days are gone when professors from the world's great seminaries will cite a work by an SBC seminary professor. But of course, no one in the SBC will care because everyone else is a heretic.

 

The only thing "irrelevant" about the SBC to me is that nobody seemed to enjoy my parody of what an IMB trustee would say to a defiant missionary couple

 

I wish I could tell you how many pastors I have run into that went to seminary with the Scofield under their arm and returned with it unused and covered with dust. I can still remember the shock when I heard my first lecture about the Second Coming that didn't include anything by Scofield....heretic....my prof is a heretic!
But today I look back and wander how I could have been so duped!

 

[/QUOTE] I'm afraid the days are gone when professors from the world's great seminaries will cite a work by an SBC seminary professor. But of course, no one in the SBC will care because everyone else is a heretic. [/QB][/QUOTE]

For the liberal, "the world's great seminaries" are the ones that major in unbelief, while Talbot, Dallas, Reformed, Westminster, Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, Covenant, etc., are "semi-reputable." What a cruel joke it is...

 

I missed that. Where is it?

 

I missed that. Where is it? </font>[/QUOTE]I think it got deleted. It started out as a PM I sent to Baptist Believer, then on another thread pertaining to BFM2K or something like that I posted it for everyone else to see. What it involved was a satirical example of an IMB couple refusing to sign BFM2K in spite of all their good work over time. The "trustee" threatened to fire the couple if they didn't sign. The "trustee" also hinted that he'd be in touch with Baptist Press to slander the couple if they didn't cooperate.

 

Sounds more like what's already happenning than satire.

 

I think it got deleted. It started out as a PM I sent to Baptist Believer, then on another thread pertaining to BFM2K or something like that I posted it for everyone else to see. </font>[/QUOTE]David, check your PMs. I still had it in my file.

It's a little too realistic. I have a friend who was told not to say a word about the circumstances of his relationship with the [SBC organization] or else the [SBC organization] would start making public statements about him.

 

My "parody" is located on the thread "The BFM 2000 and Related Issues", located in the "Baptist Denominations" forum. I suddenly remembered that's where I posted it.