What makes a book academic?

[DaChaser1]

Academic books are written by scholars and are peer-reviewed.

What is sad is that sometimes the ones seen as being "scholars" are really not, as some deny some of the essential christian truths!

 

[gb93433]

Academic books are written by scholars and are peer-reviewed.

I have had articles undergo peer review and the reviewers came back as the biggest dummies. I have almost 40 years of experience in my field in the industry. Those in academics often have zero to a few years in my field. I wrote another article that was published and I worked with two editors who had several years in the field as a professional. Peer review may or may not mean anything.

What I look for in a high quality book is the quality of references and quality of the authors who are referenced. I also look for references that are from a particular expertise not just a book requested by a publisher so they can sell books. I also look at the requirements of the publisher. For example, I have never gotten a poor book from Eisenbrauns.

 

[DaChaser1]

The issue is akin to the difference between a general practitoner and a specialist in the medical field.

Academic books are written to convey a high level of scholarship, which is often ensconsed in extreme technical language of the field, in biblical studies with precise theological dialog and original biblical languages, with no apology made if the reader cannot follow or keep up the pace of the writer. The work is to inform, challenge, and to advance the cause of the writer.

Popular level books on the other hand can share almost the same information, but they are written to be understood by virtually anyone who picks them up and pursues the content. Assumptions about the level of skill of the reader are often made, and care is taken to explain difficult concepts. The work is to convey a certain idea, which can be informative or not, and the work does not often advance the cause of the writer as much as it conveys things that the writer has discovered already into the general populace.

Then, there is fiction, which is what SOME writings in both camps ends up being, whether intentional or not. The Jesus Seminar comes to mind right away...

Yes, also schoarly works tend to geart towards theological issues, while general more to appication of the doctrinal stances...

Also, more techinal to my understanding would involve items such as Systematic theologies, transmission of biblical texts, and detailed breakdown of each book in the Bible from its historical and doctrinal perspective...

schoarly commentaries refer mainly to the Greek/hebrew texts , giving quite detailed exegesis, while more general give the "gist' of that in a practicle form!

 

[evangelist6589]

Probably the intended audience will determine much of that. I'm surprised the books you listed ended up in seminary classrooms, unless there were many others to go with them.

Another criteria is if the book was intended to be a textbook. None seem to fist your list that I noticed. They are mostly easy-answer apologetics for lay readers and maybe undergrad.

But I might have a critical opinion since I think evangelical education has been greatly dumbed down.

Easy answers for lay people? You kidding? We live in a day of facebook, twitter, and you tube. Any book that I mentioned is off the chart for 95% of evangelical christians.

Yes I have read some good academic books like Ericksons Systematic theology, Archers OTI, Carson & Moo's NTI, among others..

 

[glfredrick]

Easy answers for lay people? You kidding? We live in a day of facebook, twitter, and you tube. Any book that I mentioned is off the chart for 95% of evangelical christians.

Yes I have read some good academic books like Ericksons Systematic theology, Archers OTI, Carson & Moo's NTI, among others..

Those books are just breaking the surface of true academic works.

Try this one if you want a true academic picture:

http://www.amazon.com/dp/0801027411/?tag=baptis04-20

 

[evangelist6589]

Those books are just breaking the surface of true academic works.

Try this one if you want a true academic picture:

http://www.amazon.com/dp/0801027411/?tag=baptis04-20

That book is one book yes. But you need to realize that not every seminary is the same and everyone has a different opinion on things. MacArthur books were used heavily were I attended and perhaps the book you mentioned is used, unless its reformed, and I did not attend a Reformed/Calvinist school. This is one reason why they tried to stay clear of Grudem's systematic theology.

Also one thing you need to realize is that we live in a FB, Twitter, cell phone, and you tube generation. Any book I mentioned is very very academic and scholarly compared to the mean level of education in most churches.

My church for example is very basic in their SS teaching. I wish they were more in depth like a previous church, but that would require more work and more work asked of the people, and they do not want that.

 

[glfredrick]

That book is one book yes. But you need to realize that not every seminary is the same and everyone has a different opinion on things. MacArthur books were used heavily were I attended and perhaps the book you mentioned is used, unless its reformed, and I did not attend a Reformed/Calvinist school. This is one reason why they tried to stay clear of Grudem's systematic theology.

Also one thing you need to realize is that we live in a FB, Twitter, cell phone, and you tube generation. Any book I mentioned is very very academic and scholarly compared to the mean level of education in most churches.

My church for example is very basic in their SS teaching. I wish they were more in depth like a previous church, but that would require more work and more work asked of the people, and they do not want that.

I can only suggest that your education was lacking... That is not a dig nor a perjorative, just is what it is.

I find it interesting that in attending a Baptist Bible School and Seminary that are rather well known now for moving in a Reformed direction that I was exposed to ALL SORTS of different doctrines and worldviews, and yet those who are against such things are not. Who actually has the facility to deal with a wide range of beliefs and doctrines? The one who has only seen one side of all the doctrinal issues or one who has read all sides?

 

[DaChaser1]

I can only suggest that your education was lacking... That is not a dig nor a perjorative, just is what it is.

I find it interesting that in attending a Baptist Bible School and Seminary that are rather well known now for moving in a Reformed direction that I was exposed to ALL SORTS of different doctrines and worldviews, and yet those who are against such things are not. Who actually has the facility to deal with a wide range of beliefs and doctrines? The one who has only seen one side of all the doctrinal issues or one who has read all sides?

My story is opposite side in this, as was educated in Assemblies of God school, so received theology from the ole "Pentacostal perspective!"

wasn't until converted to baptist have read calvin, Erickson, Grudem etc!

 

[glfredrick]

My story is opposite side in this, as was educated in Assemblies of God school, so received theology from the ole "Pentacostal perspective!"

wasn't until converted to baptist have read calvin, Erickson, Grudem etc!

Did the additional scholarship help or hurt your overall perspective, and would you say it is worth having read both sides?

 

[evangelist6589]

I can only suggest that your education was lacking... That is not a dig nor a perjorative, just is what it is.

I find it interesting that in attending a Baptist Bible School and Seminary that are rather well known now for moving in a Reformed direction that I was exposed to ALL SORTS of different doctrines and worldviews, and yet those who are against such things are not. Who actually has the facility to deal with a wide range of beliefs and doctrines? The one who has only seen one side of all the doctrinal issues or one who has read all sides?

Actually in Systematic Theology and in OTI I read all kinds of authors. My education was far from lacking.

 

[glfredrick]

Actually in Systematic Theology and in OTI I read all kinds of authors. My education was far from lacking.

And yet you have little exposure to some of the primary writers of the Evangelical realm... Hmmm....

 

[Greektim]

Actually in Systematic Theology and in OTI I read all kinds of authors. My education was far from lacking.

One might argue that reading "all kinds of authors" does NOT makes the education thorough or academic. For my OT intro's, I only had 1 textbook (Hill & Walton's). For NT intro's, I only had 1 textbook (Carson & Moo; though I also read Kohstenberger et al's text as well). So I'm not sure that such is a great determining factor. Plus, survey courses are very basic anyways. Even Syst Theo is survey (even if it takes 4 courses to survey the land of systematic theology). So perhaps we should not be evaluating survey classes and really examine 700 (or 7000) level classes.

 

[glfredrick]

One might argue that reading "all kinds of authors" does NOT makes the education thorough or academic. For my OT intro's, I only had 1 textbook (Hill & Walton's). For NT intro's, I only had 1 textbook (Carson & Moo; though I also read Kohstenberger et al's text as well). So I'm not sure that such is a great determining factor. Plus, survey courses are very basic anyways. Even Syst Theo is survey (even if it takes 4 courses to survey the land of systematic theology). So perhaps we should not be evaluating survey classes and really examine 700 (or 7000) level classes.

Agreed... :thumbs:

Most don't even realize the depths of study on any given issue until they are mandated to go beyond their comfort zone in applied study. I recall Bruce Ware's course in NT Theology where we had to process a book a week -- cutting edge stuff, most of which we vehemently disagreed with -- but so as to understand the arguments and whom was making them we read and studied and debated and derived biblical conclusions.

 

[DaChaser1]

Did the additional scholarship help or hurt your overall perspective, and would you say it is worth having read both sides?

In a sense, thankful that had NO religious upbring to speak of, and the Lord saved me while in secular College Freshman year, so NO gridlock to undo!

Could learn from the Bible and have a "clean slate!"

So learned the pentacostal way, but NEVER saw all of their theology as being biblical, than while baptist coud read and study theologies that appeared
more" true to the Bible...

What is interesting is that while in AoG circles, rarely talked/read on arms/cal debate, that all seems to just be "hot" issue in baptist circles!

being exposed to charasmatics/pentacostalists has given me insight into why and how they view scriptures as they do, which helps a lot in inetractions here on BB!

I currently think that while they are dubious at best in having a real biblcal/systematic theology, do thinkthat at times we baptists seem to be "Just the Bible.period", and do think in a way afraid to see if there just might be 'something" the Lord just might want to in and thru us on indiviual and assembly basis!

Sometimes do think even great baptists of past wrote on experiencing more empowering/fullnes'promptings that God gave them while ministring on Lord behalf!

 

[DaChaser1]

Agreed... :thumbs:

Most don't even realize the depths of study on any given issue until they are mandated to go beyond their comfort zone in applied study. I recall Bruce Ware's course in NT Theology where we had to process a book a week -- cutting edge stuff, most of which we vehemently disagreed with -- but so as to understand the arguments and whom was making them we read and studied and debated and derived biblical conclusions.

Interesting how that much of what is classified as being 'scholarly" books are very well written and detailing with interaction on the texts and other authors on the discussion point of theology...YET

their very education seems to "have driven them mad", as many seem to be able to touch the nuances of the greek/hebrew, interact with other various points/authors, yet fail to see that when one come in inspect the Bible an the God of that book...

He stands to judge us, not us to try to learn so much that we end up knowing many things in Bible, yet miss the reasons why written, to have those facts draw us closer to God and better apply His principles!

its like those who know all there is about say sotierology, yet fail to "make it simple" and tell others about jesus dying for them, and need to place faith in him, and not going off into 30 pages discourse on just what method of salvation God would use to save them!

 

[gb93433]

Agreed... :thumbs:

Most don't even realize the depths of study on any given issue until they are mandated to go beyond their comfort zone in applied study. I recall Bruce Ware's course in NT Theology where we had to process a book a week -- cutting edge stuff, most of which we vehemently disagreed with -- but so as to understand the arguments and whom was making them we read and studied and debated and derived biblical conclusions.

I had a professor who also required much the same thing. Some students called the professor liberal, and got mad and agitated in class. They could not articulate their own faith very well when challenged.

It is easy to say a few words about a verse or two but quite another to write on those same verses.

 

[DaChaser1]

Agreed... :thumbs:

Most don't even realize the depths of study on any given issue until they are mandated to go beyond their comfort zone in applied study. I recall Bruce Ware's course in NT Theology where we had to process a book a week -- cutting edge stuff, most of which we vehemently disagreed with -- but so as to understand the arguments and whom was making them we read and studied and debated and derived biblical conclusions.

how about a class where the cals would read and write upon the best scholars representing Arminian views on sotierology, and visa versa for the Arms regarding calvinism!

 

[glfredrick]

how about a class where the cals would read and write upon the best scholars representing Arminian views on sotierology, and visa versa for the Arms regarding calvinism!

We did that in the world religions class and others (after 9 years of Bible college and seminary at an Advanced M.Div. level, I have been exposed to a LOT of alternative material) and not just for the differing perspectives within Christianity, but for all the major world religions as well.

How many here could articulate the belief system of the Jains in southern India? :laugh:

 

[gb93433]

In my first pastorate a lady told me that her dad was getting into Mithraism and asked if I knew anything about it. One of my classes came in quite handy.

 

[DaChaser1]

We did that in the world religions class and others (after 9 years of Bible college and seminary at an Advanced M.Div. level, I have been exposed to a LOT of alternative material) and not just for the differing perspectives within Christianity, but for all the major world religions as well.

How many here could articulate the belief system of the Jains in southern India? :laugh:

That would hard, as many here seem to have hard time seeing the difference between how say how cals/arms view salvation, as well as catholics and protestants!

IF we cannot figure out where we differ in those areas, how can we expect to tackly christianity vrs alternatives to jesus as means to be saved to God?