All Comments for: From the Seminaries to the Pews | Christianity Today

Free Newsletters:

RSS Feeds |

Audio |

Twitter

Home > 2007 > August (Web-only)

Christianity Today, August (Web-only), 2007 |

Theology in the News

From the Seminaries to the Pews

The 'new perspective on Paul' gets the popular treatment.

Collin Hansen | posted 8/31/2007 08:59AM

Seminary is not reality. That much became obvious to me the moment I met my classmates and began looking over syllabi for classes on Greek, Hebrew, missions, and biblical theology. No congregational ministry ...

[Reader Reviews]

Average User Rating:

Rate and Comment on this article

Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 comments.

Page: 1

Show All

kc	Posted: September 05, 2007 5:33 AM

I am not sure who to 'blame' (seminaries or the flock) but it seems many in the flock are choking on milk - not meat. Our small church (125-150) is being torn by dissension over a disciplinary matter that is caused by a division within the pastor's family. Rather than the obeying the milk of 'going', forgiving and restoration, both sides have hunkered down, sad to be splitting the church, but feeling defending their 'rights' is worth the fallout. Would a new perspective on Paul help here? Bill Gaither sings a song that says "I don't want to spend my life writing songs that answer questions that no one's asking anyhow." I'm not opposed to the seminary's responsibility to wrestle with the larger issues but how do those issues benefit the seeker in the pew? Maybe seminaries are wrestling with the bigness of Paul and the Reformation rather than wrestling with the bigness of God. Maybe they are answering questions that only serve the publishing houses - not the person in the pew.

Gene	Posted: September 02, 2007 4:47 PM

From my experience the average church goers has been nurtured on milk and they choke on meat. At Christmas, someone read a peace of emotional pap (really, no Biblical substance whatsoever) and it made one woman in my congregation weep, she was so moved by it. Yet this same woman will sit hollow-eyed at in-depth Bible teaching - and most likely go home believing she has not been fed because her emotions have not been stirred. I'm with the person who made the comment to the effect that the church is more to blame than the seminary - and I say that never having attended seminary. //// Another comment was made to the effect that we 2000 years later are arrogant to think we see what billions of others have missed. I am finding that the modern church is, in at least some areas, very much in the dark with truths the early church took for granted. For example, the "New Exodus" motif of the synoptics. We may simply be rediscovering what has been lost to generations of Christians.

R. Scott Clark

Posted: September 02, 2007 10:18 AM

There is a volume that addresses all three audiences, profs, pulpit, and pew on the NPP and its step-child, the Federal Vision: Covenant, Justification, and Pastoral Ministry (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 2007). http://www.wscal.edu/bookstore/store/details.php?id=917 This volume contains essays by Michael Horton, Iain Duguid, and Steven Baugh that address the NPP directly and essays by David VanDrunen and R. Scott Clark on where we (the evangelical and Reformed worlds) are and how we got there and historical and theological essays by W. Robert Godfrey and Clark. It includes essays on the pastoral practice of the Reformation solas in preaching (Hywel Jones) and counseling (Dennis Johnson). Guy Prentiss Waters, who did his doctoral work at Duke with Richard Hays has also published two volumes on these same questions: http://www.wscal.edu/bookstore/store/details.php?id=359 http://www.wscal.edu/bookstore/store/details.php?id=890 More stuff here: http://www.wscal.edu/clark/fvnpp.p

Tosin

Posted: August 31, 2007 4:24 PM

"As far as the New Perspective on Paul, Why? 2000 years later we all the sudden come up with something that the BILLIONS of people that came before us didn't see? How arrogant of a view is that?" I'm sure Steve didn't mean to imply the following, but that's a very good argument for Catholicism or Eastern Orthodoxy ( both of which have a view of soteriology much closer to that elaborated in the NPP than to reformed evangelical soteriology)!

http://jesusfordummies.blogspot.com

Posted: August 31, 2007 1:48 PM

Hansen makes an interesting point, but seems to fail to understand that the migration of an idea from divinity school to pew tends to take time. Why else would CT have taken so long to address this topic, which CT itself has helped make "hot"? The real problem with Gathercole's introduction to NPP is that by lumping all the so called proponents together, he presents a distorted mischaracterization that would not be recognizable to any of the actual proponents themselves. Wright for one has addressed many time each objection or concern raised by Gathercole, which essentially makes his lumping Wright in with the crowd and then pretending his critique equally applies, not only an unhelpful disservice to Wright, but essentially a dishonest critique. Or perhaps, Gathercole has not read enough of Wright to understand this. Either way, CT should take the time to correct this gross mischaracterization of someone as important as Wright, whose work deserves to be widely read.

Steve

Posted: August 31, 2007 12:54 PM

As a student of one of the largest Suthern Baptist seminaries in the world I find that Pastors today, for the most part, seem to have failed to engae their people in the Word of God. I started a class I was not real excited about, but as I study I learn more and more about Christian Education. It is not completely the pastors job to instill Bible knowledge and truths, the congregrant MUST be taught how to learn and study on there own. One of my text books says something like this " if all we do as pastors is have a congregation sit and learn as we teach them all they have learned is to sit down and let me feed them". Pastors need to teach there leadership to teach the students to teach themselves by delving into Gods Word in a manner to learn. As far as the New Perspective on Paul, Why? 2000 years later we all the sudden come up with something that the BILLIONS of people that came before us didn't see? How arrogant of a view is that?

Matt K

Posted: August 31, 2007 12:36 PM


I've been wondering since the first article in the series, will CT publish an article by a pro-New Perspective author? If a vigorous debate on the topic is in order, couldn't we find a respected New Testament scholar to offer a counter point?

steve bailey

Posted: August 31, 2007 12:11 PM

Just a small, picky comment. I bristle at the implication in the opening statement of the 3rd paragraph. "Evangelicals" are not the only ones with a high view of Scripture. The situation is somewhat more complex than that. I wish Evangelical writers wouldn't hint at a certain kind of Christian superiority because of what is considered, narrowly sometimes, I think, as a "high view" of Scripture. There are many Christians who wouldn't label themselves "Evangelical" in the American sense of the word that have "high views" of Scripture. Helpful and valid views of Scripture come in a number of shapes and forms. And, by the way, I'm looking forward to Piper's book. I guess I will approach it with a "high view" of NT Wright and a "lower view" of Piper, although I'm willing to listen to him.

Sam	Posted: August 31, 2007 10:50 AM

"More than that, it's dangerous. Christian colleges and seminaries can grow detached from the churches they serve. Hazardous ideas can percolate for decades without so much as a nod from most churchgoers. And parents wonder why their undergraduate daughter or seminary son graduates with odd ideas about everything. So they blame the theologians and the cycle continues." Regarding this quote from above, perhaps it's churches that have grown detached and disconnected from what it means to continually exegete and practice the Scriptures? Perhaps it is many churches who have allowed severely "hazardous ideas to percolate for decades" which have them looking more like the world around them--defined by the world--not looking like the church? Perhaps it is many seminaries (of which I am a gradute of one of the largest in the world) who are not confusing their students but rather turning them--rightside up--in the hopes of recovering an engaged and infomred hermeneutic not based on amuseme

Page: 1

E-mail this page

Write CT

Print this article

Post a comment