PhD in Bible

[Paul33]

True. But that one better be grounded in evangelical, historic, orthodox faith.

Sadly, some, not all, who attend liberal academic Ph.D. programs wind up abandoning historic Christianity for the theories of men.

 

[lchemist]

So, which academically strong schools do you recommend and why?

And. which ones you do not recommend and why?

Thank you

 

[Broadus]

Originally posted by lchemist:
So, which academically strong schools do you recommend and why?

And. which ones you do not recommend and why?

Thank you

I recommend your looking into the School of Theology at SBTS. It is academically strong and theologically conservative.

For instance, you may wish to pursue a PhD in the field of Biblical Studies (combined studies in Old and New Testaments including both biblical Hebrew and biblical Greek) and study under Dr. Peter Jentry, professor of OT Interpretation. The following bio is taken from the SBTS catalog:

"B.A., M.A., Ph.D., University of Toronto; Graduate Studies: Dallas Theological Seminary, Jerusalem University College. Dr. Gentry comes to Southern with an expansive knowledge of biblical languages. He served on the faculty of Toronto Baptist Seminary and Bible College for fifteen years and taught at the University of Toronto, Heritage Theological Seminary, and Tyndale Theological Seminary. Dr. Gentry is the author of many articles and book reviews and has given presentations to groups such as the Canadian Society of Biblical Studies and the Society of Biblical Literature, of which he is also a member."

You could, of course, focus upon either the OT or the NT and have other scholars as your supervisor. Check out http://www.sbts.edu/resources/catalog/pdf/Catalog08_theology.pdf .

Blessings,
Bill

 

[gb93433]

Originally posted by Paul33:
Sadly, some, not all, who attend liberal academic Ph.D. programs wind up abandoning historic Christianity for the theories of men.

For me the case was attending a Calivinistic, fundamentalist, rationalistic dispensational church for about ten years. It had not started that way but newcomers changed it. I got to the point where I had so many questions that even the pastor did not have answers for. What he preached often did not coincide with what I read in scripture. But when I went to SWBTS I found out where I had gone wrong. I found out that so much of what I was taught sprang from a Calvinistic, rationalistic, dispensationalist approach. It even brought me to the point of questioning the basis of evangelism and prayer. I thought: If everything was so cut and dried then why do anything?

 

[Paul33]

Yes, I know what you mean.

I do hold to a Calvinistic soteriology, but I think there is a significant difference between Calvin's theology and the Westminster confession.

I don't think, for example, that Calvin believed that Jesus died only for the elect.

Putting a Westminster confession Calvinist together with a dispensational system is an explosive combination. It seems to bring the worst out of both systems and meld them into one rigid, rationalistic theology. And then add in separtistic fundamentalist! Watch out!

Folks of this stripe seldom admit to not knowing something. They've got it all figured out and the rest are going to hell, and there is nothing you can do about it!

 

[paidagogos]

Originally posted by Rhetorician:
[snip]
You choose the school you choose the end product.

My two cents worth.

sdg!

rd

Not necessarily! IMHO, it depends more upon the individual. Big name schools with reputations and more resources do tend to attract higher quality students. An abundance of fellowships helps attract quality grad students too.

Your formula is too simple to cover all the factors.

 

[TexasSky]

Paul33,

What you wrote about "wearing Jesus like a badge" is not a problem that occurs only in the south. Where there are people who claim to be Christians - there are hypocrites.

Its just mean spirited to make the sweeping judgment you made. I could point to Philadelphia or New York or San Francisco or Los Angelos or Des Moines or Chicago and say, "They don't even bother to wear a badge for Christ, they just freely admit they don't like Him."

Can we keep "regional prejudices" out of the discussion and go back to "schools" ?

 

[Paul33]

Did you read the whole post? I included the cultural Christians of the North as well.

Typical Southern hyper-sensitivity!

 

[Pastor Larry]

Knowing what liberals believe and teach is one thing. Sitting under their teaching week in and week out to attain "academic excellence," well, that's another thing.

The time wasted on "their" theology could be better spent learning the truth!

This is absolutely true, Paul. Well said. The pursuit of "academic excellence" is not all its cracked up to be. When people resort to liberal theological schools, we have to wonder what exactly they are pursuing.

Putting a Westminster confession Calvinist together with a dispensational system is an explosive combination.

You can't really put these together since the WCF pretty much excludes dispensationalism.

And then add in separtistic fundamentalist! Watch out!

You still seem to have a real bug in your craw about this. I wonder why this continues. There is no reason for you to be going after separatistic fundamentalists in this manner. It is always fascinating to me that I never see the kind of ire and disdain out of fundamentalists that I see against fundamentalists by people who have left it. It is too bad you have such a negative view.

And no, I am not stalking you. You just happen to post on the threads that I am interested in. So stop posting

 

[Paul33]

Hey, Larry, if you fundamentalists would just love and accept me, maybe I wouldn't be so cranky!

I just love bashing hyper-fundamentalists. Their position is so inconsistent and hypocritical that I can't help taking a shot at them!

I'm praying for you, Larry! Someday you may yet see the light!

 

[Pastor Larry]

I think your definition of hyper fundamentalism is historically inaccurate, as I demonstrated previously. I don't have a problem loving and accepting you, and most fundamentalists I know wouldn't have a problem loving and accepting you either. Depending on what you do and believe, they may or may not be willing to work with you.

My goal, personally, isn't about acceptance or "seeing the light" (whatever that means). I just want to be obedient to Scripture. If that makes me "hyper" then so be it, but I don't think it does.

 

[Charles Meadows]

I just want to be obedient to Scripture.

That alone didn't get the Pharisees very far according to Jesus. When doctrine becomes more important than people we have gone awry.

 

[lchemist]

To my original list:

Duke
Notre Dame
Harvard Semitics
Yale
Hebrew Union College*
University of Wisconsin-Madison
University of Michigan *
University of Chicago
Johns Hopkins*
Penn St

After three pages of discussion three of them were affirmed (asterisk) as good schools and only one other school was recommended

SBTS

Without any specific recommendations the following schools were also mentioned:

DTS
Brandeis
SWBTS

Do you know any other?

[ July 12, 2005, 01:49 AM: Message edited by: lchemist ]

 

[Paul33]

TEDS

 

[paidagogos]

Originally posted by Charles Meadows:
As would be expected any of the "bigger name" places are going to involve studying non-fundamentalist works.

Going to an "inerrantist" school is fine. And getting a degree in bible or even an MDiv or DMin is certainly not a problem.

But a PhD is an advanced academic degree. Studying only "inerrantist" works does not constitute academic theology. Even if one maintains an inerrantist position at a "bigger name school" he/she will have to INTERACT with current scholarship, conservative and liberal.

Yeah, fine. What is more important--believing the Bible or having an academic knowledge of unbelieving theology?

 

[Rhetorician]

paidagogos,

Me thinks thou dost protest too much!

It depends on where you want to end up, what specifically you want to teach, and whom you want to be "when you grow up!" Not everybody in the world wants to be a "fightin' fundamentalist" all of their lives?! Some of us believe that there is more to the Gospel than "Saying a prayer" to "be saved" and that the Baptist are relatively new comers on the "theological block" as it were. And, that those "fightin' fundamentalists" are even later-comers who may not even understand who the Baptists are from history?!

One of the biggest missions fields there is--is the secular university! I for one believe that to share the Gospel with the educated--you must be educated; and know all of the ends and outs and their nomenclature in order to know how to apply the Gospel to those who do not say "shibboleth/sibboleth" like a "fightin' fundamentalist." I am probably wasting my breath and arguments here.

I also believe that one can hold to the "Historic Fundamentals" of the early 20th Century and not loose their convictions or understandings of the Gospel and still have a ministry; to those who are "liberal," or "conservative," or "Roman Catholic," or whomever.

That is one of the problems of the "fundy" movement. They are so separated, that by and large they have lost the Gospel and have ended up full of victriol and hyper-Pharisasim. (sp?).

The Monastic Movements of the RC did not work with the devotees trying to separate themselves from the world to maintain personal holiness. And many of the same things that caused it to fail have shown up in the "fundy" movements of out time. Which I might add have failed in the main as well. Like many movements in Church History, what started out with good and Godly motivations, they have gone awry in one or two generations hence.

Some are so concerned with "hyper-separation" that I for one believe that it is just a ruse to cover; either their own insecurity OR their own lack of/or ability to think critically through many of the issues of The Faith (cf. Jude).

"Angry exhortations" welcomed and expected!

sdg!

rd

 

[Charles Meadows]

Paidagogos,

Anyone wanting a PhD in theology should have to interact with theology! Seems logical.

So the student should be familar with Karl Barth as well as John Calvin, with Aquinas as well as Augustine, E.P. Sanders as well as N.T. Wright.

This is not necessary for bible college folk - but then they are not earning advanced degrees.

 

[paidagogos]

Originally posted by Rhetorician:
paidagogos,

Me thinks thou dost protest too much!

It depends on where you want to end up, what specifically you want to teach, and whom you want to be "when you grow up!" Not everybody in the world wants to be a "fightin' fundamentalist" all of their lives?! Some of us believe that there is more to the Gospel than "Saying a prayer" to "be saved" and that the Baptist are relatively new comers on the "theological block" as it were. And, that those "fightin' fundamentalists" are even later-comers who may not even understand who the Baptists are from history?!

One of the biggest missions fields there is--is the secular university! I for one believe that to share the Gospel with the educated--you must be educated; and know all of the ends and outs and their nomenclature in order to know how to apply the Gospel to those who do not say "shibboleth/sibboleth" like a "fightin' fundamentalist." I am probably wasting my breath and arguments here.

I also believe that one can hold to the "Historic Fundamentals" of the early 20th Century and not loose their convictions or understandings of the Gospel and still have a ministry; to those who are "liberal," or "conservative," or "Roman Catholic," or whomever.

That is one of the problems of the "fundy" movement. They are so separated, that by and large they have lost the Gospel and have ended up full of victriol and hyper-Pharisasim. (sp?).

The Monastic Movements of the RC did not work with the devotees trying to separate themselves from the world to maintain personal holiness. And many of the same things that caused it to fail have shown up in the "fundy" movements of out time. Which I might add have failed in the main as well. Like many movements in Church History, what started out with good and Godly motivations, they have gone awry in one or two generations hence.

Some are so concerned with "hyper-separation" that I for one believe that it is just a ruse to cover; either their own insecurity OR their own lack of/or ability to think critically through many of the issues of The Faith (cf. Jude).

"Angry exhortations" welcomed and expected!

sdg!

rd

Hey Rhet! Who lighted your fuse? In the post to which you responded, what did I protest? What sparked your rhetoric?

Really, I had hoped better of you. You are spouting the same tired old evangelical clichés. I will agree that most of modern American evangelicalism is mindless and clueless. Even the supposedly educated Christians are not intellectual and perhaps I would say some are anti-intellectual on both ends of the spectrum. It is interesting how the thing curves back upon it. I am highly amused (ROFL) to read pious posts from non-judgmental, tolerant evangelicals cussing and ranting about the narrow, vitriolic, legalistic and judgmental Fundamentalists. So, I play the Devil’s advocate…..hmmmmm pardon me…the loyal opposition to stimulate their wasting and withering neurons and to get the juices flowing. Ho hum (yawn with hand politely covering my mouth)………it gets boring after awhile because not one of them, even the best educated and most intellectual, has anything new, creative or innovative. I even find myself repeating myself repeating myself repeating myself……..Oh no!

I am a pretty good psychologist even though I reject and distain Fraud with his psychoanalysis. Let see now. Why does Rhet rant and rave? Methinks he wants to put that jackass Paidagogos in his place. So, he trots out the standard stereotype of the absurd Fundamentalist. (I really don’t know any who fit the stereotype but there are some who come close.) Rhet, my boy, don’t you realize this size is too small and the wrong style for me. Your stereotype just doesn’t fit me but I don’t know that you can conceptualize a suit that does. Fundamentalists bludgeon you to death with a crude wooden club whereas I neatly pierce you through with my epee. The standard Fundamentalist is suited in dark trousers, white shirt with tie and frock coat. I prefer a more military cut. Fundamentalists are intense of demeanor with a grimace on their faces while pounding on you. I smile and croon when I thrust you through. Like their cousins, the wannabe intellectual Evangelicals, the Fundamentalists are humorless, dry, dull and unimaginative. I enjoy a good belly laugh and I am greatly amused at my own foibles and jokes at my expense. Sometimes my imagination and humor gets out of hand and I offend the prudes, especially pious evangelical ones. I’m a prankster, you see? On the other hand, I am just a laid back Southern good ole boy. Right on, Bubba! So, you’ve drawn a strange one in me. Like Wm. Faulkner, I am probably Count No Count. Comprender?

Now what did cause ole Rhet to spill his brains? Methinks it was something out of his collective conscious if we follow a Jungian line. The rabid Fundamentalists persecuted his immigrant ancestors, who were Roman Catholics from the old country. This has lain dormant and repressed in his collective mind until that rascal Paidagogos unleashed the monster with his irritating posts. Old Paidagogos is a troglodyte of suspicious origin who does not know or understand the modern evangelical political correctness (hereafter referred to as EPC). Shucks, ole Rhet had this EPC stuff memorized from his stuffy old freshman Religion 101 class—you can imagine how long ago that was.

As a final thrust in departing, I find great delight and hilarity in the vast seriousness of the wannabe intellectual evangelicals. As a high school student, I attended that great Harvard of the South, the mighty bastion of elite intellectual Baptist liberalism, Furman University! Even though I was a dumb teenager, I was doubled over in stitches by the cherished veneer of intellectualism. My prof, Dr. John Henry Crabtree, a Harvard alumnus, was so proud of his Bostonian accent although he was from North Carolina. He would say, “Tha wotta in my bath….uh…..baath………. (ROFL----Oh my, this was rich!) Ah, the little games that reputedly sane people play! I love the exposed weaknesses and the foibles of the confident, the conceited, the rich, the self-satisfied, the self-centered egotist, the high and mighty, the self-professed intellectual etc.. I suppose this board is fascinating to me for this very reason. My sympathies and passions run to the common folk who led simple lives in goodness, sincerity and honesty. God bless the common man. My greatest education was among bums in a rescue mission. Forget grad school and musty tomes. I learned the real sordidness of life from bums—some of whom were doctors, businessmen, computer people, skilled craftsmen, etc.

Now, Rhet, mix this up in your blender and see if your stereotyped Fundamentalist falls out. Be seeing you around. Bye.

 

[Paul33]

Charles,

True. But what is sad is that the "universities" don't apply the same principle to "conservative" theology.

Many never read a book by Carson, Grudem, Erickson, Archer, Woodbridge, etc.

It almost mandates attending an evangelical seminary or graduate school before attending a "university" gradtuate school.

 

[Paul33]

Paid,

Your post to Rhet was rich.

You need to turn your sharp and superior psychological wit on yourself.