To date, I have avoided this debate because I find myself in something of a dilemma by my entry. However, earlier this week I was thrust in the middle of Jim’s and Matt’s discussion, so, against my better judgment, here goes:
First, the dilemma: I agree with Matt in spirit, but I agree with Jim intellectually (or, perhaps, in the flesh). I frequently have a similar response to Jim’s when discussing legal matters with non-lawyers. For example, non-lawyers rarely appreciate why incriminating evidence should ever be excluded from a criminal trial. They often fail to appreciate that the only way to protect the rights of the innocent is to protect the rights of the guilty. Lawyers just assume non-lawyers don’t “get it.”
As do, I’m sure, doctors in matters of medicine, plumbers in matters of plumbing, and Bible scholars in matters of Biblical studies. We are a culture of experts, and expertise is a commodity. So, we guard our expertise carefully, and justifiably so.
The issues I see vis-a-vis Biblical studies, however, are:
1. To some extent, all Christians are charged with being Bible experts. Not that we are, but we should be?
2. Jesus didn’t set up recruiting tables at the top Yeshivas. He picked fishermen, among others. As far as I can tell, Paul is the closest thing to an Old Testament scholar among the bunch, and he came much later.
3. It’s the duty of the church to equip the saints. If there are shortcomings among the saints, it is the church’s fault. I realize there are plenty of half-cocked saints who think they can get saved one day and start a church the next, but doesn’t that just exemplify the problem?
4. If one is called to teach at a seminary, then I would think a Ph.D would and should be required. If one is called as an evangelist, for example, I don’t necessarily see the point. In my opinion, the greatest evangelist of the 20th Century was Billy Graham, and Derek Prince the greatest theologian. Neither had a post-grad in anything Biblical, and it would be hard to argue with their results.
5. Without the guidance of the Holy Spirit, no number of post-nominal letters will make a bit of difference in ministry. And even with the guidance of the Holy Spirit, no one without a string of letters after their name will ever have academic credibility. So what? It is all just another way of dividing the Body of Christ. The Church needs Ph.D.’s, and the Church needs plumbers. The local DIY handyman pastor is not a threat to Joe the plumber, nor is the local Bible thumping cowboy preacher a threat to Joe the Ph.D.
In short, credentials are essential, but only for that for which they are essential. The lack of credentials is irrelevant, except in circumstances where credentials are required.
I have spent my entire life tied to the education system (whether as a student, grad student, adjunct faculty member, or married to and mothered by teachers). In that time I have met brilliant scholars (even religious scholars) who I wouldn’t dare ask for spiritual advice. I have also met remarkable spiritual leaders (sans letters) who I wouldn’t dare ask for legal advice.
Honestly, it all seems like much ado about nothing. I applaud Jim for defending his turf, and I applaud Matt for defending his. Keep up the good work gentlemen. Now, can we all hang out and have a drink?
You can read the back-and-forth here:
Others have written on the subject and didn’t insinuate me into the discussion, so I have not included them. Anyone who has posted on the subject, please leave a link in the comment section.
Update:
#1 by Bob MacDonald on July 17, 2009 - 11:31 am
Peter – thanks for pointing out this debate. I learned a few things I didn’t know and confirmed my prejudices on a few things I thought I did know and may have indeed. I have always noted that authority is a loaded word. The very attribution of authority to something – whether credentials or a text or whatever – has triggered in me both desire and repulsion. Desire that I might have such authority and repulsion that I should trust the authority that is claimed.
When you press deeply and read closely and work faithfully, there you find the Author. There is the source of authority. The expert in philosophy will consider it subjective. The enthusiast will say that’s all there is and be killed for his zeal. The Biblical Studies expert will minimize your contribution and the theologian will count it as a little more evidence for what cannot be seen. But with or without letters – it’s the faithful work that produces the fruit that is worth eating.
I am missing out on some of these exchanges. Thanks again for keeping me in touch.
#2 by petermlopez on July 17, 2009 - 11:39 am
You have very authoritatively said what I meant to in about 1/3 of the words. Well done. Thanks, Bob.
#3 by wilma on July 17, 2009 - 11:42 am
I had to laugh when I read your post. My bible reading this morning was this:
“And when I came to you brethren I did not come with superiority of speech or of wisdom, proclaiming to you the testimony of God. For I determined to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ, and Him crucified. And I was with you in weakness and in fear and in much trembling. And my message and my preaching were not in persuasive words of wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power, that your faith should not rest on the wisdom of men, but on the power of God. Yet we do speak wisdom among those who are mature; a wisdom, however, not of this age, nor of the rulers of this age, who are passing away; but we speak God’s wisdom in a mystery, the hidden wisdom, which God predestined before the ages to our glory; the wisdom which none of the rulers of this age has understood; for if they had understood it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. 1 Cor. 2:1-8
My grandaughter Carley who is 17 is in Hungry on a mission trip. She is 17 and went with fear and trembling. I sent her this scripture. Thank God we have “His wisdom and Power”…..but I sure don’t want a lawyer operating on me. LOL I do know some of the “more learned” that I would like to ask to just use the KISS system because when the “pros” speak to laypeople most of the time it is way over our head. Good thoughts today Peter
#4 by petermlopez on July 17, 2009 - 11:46 am
Wilma, thanks, I appreciate you. I hope all is well in the big city.
#5 by Larry Who on July 17, 2009 - 11:49 am
Leonard Ravenhill told the story in one of his books about the backwoodsman who applied for ordination credentials with the Methodist Church as a circuit rider. He had so much twang in his voice, the committee could barely understand him. Plus, his reading abilities were maybe at best in the first grade range.
To receive ordination credentials, the man had to prove he could preach. This is what he said, “I have a burden for souls…” And then he wept for twenty minutes.
The committee granted him his credentials.
Theology has its role in the church, but credentials? I have lots of doubts about their value.
#6 by petermlopez on July 17, 2009 - 11:58 am
Oh, I don’t doubt their value, I highly value my law degree and license, as do, I hope, my clients. But, other than as a source of income for me, they have very little value for other purposes.
#7 by tc robinson on July 17, 2009 - 11:52 am
PeterM, a wonderful post. But I take issue with one little thing: #3 point. According to Eph. 4:11, it’s those who have been gifted in those capacities are to equip the people of God for the ministry.
#8 by petermlopez on July 17, 2009 - 11:54 am
tc, I agree. Please forgive my overbreadth, but I don’t think that really changes the point all that much. Thanks for the clarification, my friend.
#9 by Jim on July 17, 2009 - 11:54 am
uneducated clergy have done more harm than good. for the one or two pious examples of weeping evangelists and missionary children i can tell you 10 horror stories of how so called preachers screwed up churches with profane and idiotic doctrinal nonsense.
cling to piety if you must and contrast it wrongly with intellect. but the bible urges us to love god with all our mind too. and when next time your car breaks down or you’re hauled into court or you have a brain tumor, run right out and find someone who doesn’t know what they’re talking about to help you. i know you won’t, but to be fair you should.
#10 by petermlopez on July 17, 2009 - 12:08 pm
Oh, I don’t doubt that churches have been “screwed up” just as you described, but “idiotic doctrinal nonsense” creeps in everywhere, not just among “uneducated clergy.” And I’m not clinging to piety at all, but, if ministry was limited to Ph.D.ed clergy, there would be about 10 churches worth attending. Then what? The next argument would be over which pastor went to a better seminary. I think we actually agree on more than you’re willing to admit, but there’s a limit to taking such a stance-the gospel would have been preached as far as about Lebanon, Jordan and Egypt.
#11 by Wes on July 17, 2009 - 12:34 pm
Good thoughts Peter. I got here from FB. This is something I’ve wrestled with for some time. But, I believe it maybe a false dichotomy. Nancy Pearcy’s ‘Total Truth’ and all of Dr. David Wells stuff, have really helped me, a bit. One cannot separate the culture from knowledge and knowledge from culture. We live in a post-modern, anti-intellectual, anti-doctrinal age. It’s even weirder living in the post-Bible belt, cause we have so many people that have been incolating against the gospel due to being bible thumped to death instead of loved.
I can’t get no satisfaction, living on the edge, life is a highway I want it my way, is our mantra. And this mantra, like it or not…has entered the ‘results-based’, do whatever ‘works’, American church.
Trusting my experience or trusting my mind above Christ is when pride creeps in with its ugly head . I know this all to well.
Praise God ! Jesus humbles and Jesus saves.
#12 by petermlopez on July 17, 2009 - 1:13 pm
I agree. I am not anti-intellectual at all, quite the opposite, but I think we do tend to fall in the trap of trusting ourselves above Christ, as you correctly point out.
#13 by Wes on July 17, 2009 - 12:39 pm
incolating ? lol
I meant ‘inoculated’.
#14 by Bob MacDonald on July 17, 2009 - 1:00 pm
Peter – I think you got it – about as far as Lebanon, Jordan and Egypt – probably not even that far – for Egypt represents the whole world, Lebanon the power and extent of love – (just think of that lovely neck), and Jordan our entry into the promised land – and all these things are a what-do-you-call-that-image synecdoche – pars pro toto.
Part of the problem is that many ‘preach’ without knowledge. As if when God invented voice, he gave it away indiscriminately. Let’s pray that none of us so tied into our various doctrines and mantra do not, as Job says ‘die without knowledge’.
#15 by petermlopez on July 17, 2009 - 1:14 pm
Thank you, my friend. The gospel surely would not have reached you up in Canada, that’s for sure.
#16 by tc robinson on July 17, 2009 - 1:24 pm
Here’s the bottomline: we need both competency and character in the clergy. Oft times we have competence but no character.
Then we may have pastor mr. adorable but no competency.
We need both, whether a PhD holder or not.
#17 by petermlopez on July 17, 2009 - 1:36 pm
Agreed.
#18 by Caribbean Shulamite on July 18, 2009 - 1:31 pm
I grasped your point here (I think): “And even with the guidance of the Holy Spirit, no one without a string of letters after their name will ever have academic credibility.”
Relating to the world and operating within its system (even, against its system) to fulfill God’s plan requires that some of us ‘become all things (in this case, become Ph.D. qualified etc) in order to win some’.
You made very good points here. It made me consider things I never have before.
#19 by petermlopez on July 20, 2009 - 9:28 am
Thanks, CS, I appreciate that.
#20 by Carl on July 20, 2009 - 2:24 am
Let me describe someone of whom I have encountered on a Christian forum:
He claims to have been an ordained minister but is now retired. He refuses to divulge any information as to who or what organization ordained him. He claims to have presented papers to an unamed California seminary and they invited him to teach but he declined. He refuses to name this seminary nor those he claims to have invited him to teach. He rejects the notion that a minister needs to be trained and tested even though Scripture says otherwise. He implies he has credentials but refuses to reveal them. He claims to be qualified to be a minister but cannot detail those qualifications. He claims to know Biblical languages yet makes rudimentary errors. He claims to understand Scripture yet he presents passages out of context with unrelated personal thoughts/teachings with no exegesis and hermeneutics. Furthermore much of his teachings fail to be in harmony with Scripture yet he rejects any and all attempts of correction. He admits that he is self-taught and self-trained by locking himself up in a cabin in the mountains and reading the Bible through several times. I kid you not.
Now I don’t know about anyone else, but when I encounter someone posting doctrines, teachings, etc. expecting all to take it as authoritative yet in most instances fails to line up with Scripture, all sorts of red flags go up. This is when credentials, not necessarily letters followings one’s name earned from an institute of higher learning, are important to know from a layperson’s standpoint.
The analogy I present to illustrate is medical in nature. If someone has a family member suddenly fall ill requiring major surgery, would you take your loved one to anyone claiming to be a surgeon without checking not only their credentials, but also their qualifications, their track record, etc.? I would think so.
I admit, in the history of the Christian church there are many examples of excellent, Godly ministers who never graduated with major degrees.
However…
I can’t think of any examples of legitimate Christian ministers who weren’t trained either formally or informally and tested. Jesus trained and tested the disciples. They, in turn, trained and tested apostles. They, in turn, trained and tested many church leaders including the ante-Nicene church fathers. And they, in turn….
I think you get the pattern.
Therefore in regards to credentials, etc. why should it be any different with any preacher/teacher/minister of God’s Word? Whereas a physician deals with life and death issues, a minister of God’s Word deals with eternal life or death issues. So why should we, as Christian laity, settle for untrained, unqualified, untested ministers when we would not dream of settling for untrained, unqualified, untested surgeons?
I feel that credentials are definitely important and should be known to laity to make the best informed choice possible for following the teachings of a minister.
But even then, one must also be always vigilent and do as the Bereans did and check what is taught with Scripture.
I feel I have Scriptural support for all of this.
Am I wrong for feeling this way as a layperson entrusting much of my Scriptural education to minister/preachers/teachers of God’s Word?
#21 by petermlopez on July 20, 2009 - 9:30 am
Not at all, I agree wholeheartedly.