Church leaders and theological and seminary training

[firestormx]

I used to think that seminary is just mans head knowledge. I would have said no pastor should be a seminary graduate as their head is filled with the knowledge of men, and everyone should only be taught by the Holy Spirit. I have changed my mind in that I see a wonderful use for a seminary.

Thank you for your first hand account. I am starting from a similar place in regards to the view on seminary. 

[firestormx]

Some kind of formal training should be expected by a church of anyone applying to be a minister in that church.   Lack of training in theology and doctrine is not something to be praised or exalted. For many, ignorance has actually become a object of pride.

 

In EVERY other context in our lives, we expect those we entrust with important aspects of our lives to, to be educated and wholly competent to handle our affairs.    But for some reason, those who we trust to preach the truth, and lead others to Christ, those we go to for counseling an advice and who have an immense amount of influence in spiritual matters and matters relating to eternity, we think that ignorance is a virtue.   The less educated, the better.

It was your post in another thread that Got me thinking about this. It was a post very similar to this one. One of my hopes is to hear a lot of different view points so I have a lot to consider and take before God. Thank you for the post and for starting me down this road. No man is an island to themselves.

[firestormx]

Often, people point out that Peter and the other apostles did not attend seminary, but this is incorrect.

 

In Judaism of Jesus time, the Pharisees were really the only people who had classes to train more Pharisees to teach. The beginning classes were held in Jerusalem and only those men who were specifically invited to attend could attend. Various leading Rabbi's would select students by calling the students to come and follow them. These Rabbis traveled with their students to teach them, not just in class, but in aspects of life. The Rabbis would say, come and follow me, and if the students left home and followed the Rabbis, they were the Rabbis disciples, receiving their formal education. 

 

Does that sound at all like what Jesus did? Jesus would ask his students to come and follow him. They became the disciples of Jesus. Jesus was recognized by the Pharisees and others as a Rabbi/teacher who was traveling with his disciples. So, the Apostles actually did receive the formal training given in that day.

 

Matthew 8:23 Now when He got into a boat, His disciples followed Him.

 

Matthew 9:14 Then the disciples of John came to Him, saying, “Why do we and the Pharisees fast often, but Your disciples do not fast?”

 

 

 

Matthew 9:11 And when the Pharisees saw it, they said to His disciples, “Why does your Teacher eat with tax collectors and sinners?”

I was wondering if someone would bring this point up. Curious, what was the difference then between Paul's training and the 12's training?

[Qnts2]

 

Often, people point out that Peter and the other apostles did not attend seminary, but this is incorrect.

 

In Judaism of Jesus time, the Pharisees were really the only people who had classes to train more Pharisees to teach. The beginning classes were held in Jerusalem and only those men who were specifically invited to attend could attend. Various leading Rabbi's would select students by calling the students to come and follow them. These Rabbis traveled with their students to teach them, not just in class, but in aspects of life. The Rabbis would say, come and follow me, and if the students left home and followed the Rabbis, they were the Rabbis disciples, receiving their formal education. 

 

Does that sound at all like what Jesus did? Jesus would ask his students to come and follow him. They became the disciples of Jesus. Jesus was recognized by the Pharisees and others as a Rabbi/teacher who was traveling with his disciples. So, the Apostles actually did receive the formal training given in that day.

 

Matthew 8:23 Now when He got into a boat, His disciples followed Him.

 

Matthew 9:14 Then the disciples of John came to Him, saying, “Why do we and the Pharisees fast often, but Your disciples do not fast?”

 

 

 

Matthew 9:11 And when the Pharisees saw it, they said to His disciples, “Why does your Teacher eat with tax collectors and sinners?”

I was wondering if someone would bring this point up. Curious, what was the difference then between Paul's training and the 12's training?

 

 

Paul's training is different. Since Paul was from Tarshish, he was in an area which was well known for schools of training in Greek philosophy. Paul does illustrate a knowledge of Greek philosophy.

 

To be a Pharisee, that means that Paul had to move to Jerusalem and attend a Pharisaical school (advanced training).  Paul was a disciple of Gamaliel. Gamaliel was the head of the school of Hillel which was a Pharisaical school.

The school of Hillel was different then the school of Shammai (the two main schools of that time). Hillel grew up poor and tended towards an emphasis on mercy. Hillel felt that scripture should be taught for free so had the Rabbis/Pharisees of his school take outside jobs to support themselves in order to teach for free, so that basic education to the masses was free and no one was excluded. Paul continued that Pharisaical tradition from the school of Hillel of working so he could teach for free. Shammai is considered a much harsher strict school with a more rigid interpretation of scripture and law.

 

So, we know Paul was somewhat educated in Greek philosophy, and had an advanced education in the OT as a Pharisee.  Paul was then taught by the Holy Spirit about the New Covenant and the Messiah (although he was also a witness of some of the Apostles, Jesus, etc.  before his conversion). 

 

In other words, Paul did not lack an education, but rather already had an advanced education in scripture before He was on the road of Damascus.    

[firestormx]

 

 

Often, people point out that Peter and the other apostles did not attend seminary, but this is incorrect.

 

In Judaism of Jesus time, the Pharisees were really the only people who had classes to train more Pharisees to teach. The beginning classes were held in Jerusalem and only those men who were specifically invited to attend could attend. Various leading Rabbi's would select students by calling the students to come and follow them. These Rabbis traveled with their students to teach them, not just in class, but in aspects of life. The Rabbis would say, come and follow me, and if the students left home and followed the Rabbis, they were the Rabbis disciples, receiving their formal education. 

 

Does that sound at all like what Jesus did? Jesus would ask his students to come and follow him. They became the disciples of Jesus. Jesus was recognized by the Pharisees and others as a Rabbi/teacher who was traveling with his disciples. So, the Apostles actually did receive the formal training given in that day.

 

Matthew 8:23 Now when He got into a boat, His disciples followed Him.

 

Matthew 9:14 Then the disciples of John came to Him, saying, “Why do we and the Pharisees fast often, but Your disciples do not fast?”

 

 

 

Matthew 9:11 And when the Pharisees saw it, they said to His disciples, “Why does your Teacher eat with tax collectors and sinners?”

I was wondering if someone would bring this point up. Curious, what was the difference then between Paul's training and the 12's training?

 

 

Paul's training is different. Since Paul was from Tarshish, he was in an area which was well known for schools of training in Greek philosophy. Paul does illustrate a knowledge of Greek philosophy.

 

To be a Pharisee, that means that Paul had to move to Jerusalem and attend a Pharisaical school (advanced training).  Paul was a disciple of Gamaliel. Gamaliel was the head of the school of Hillel which was a Pharisaical school.

The school of Hillel was different then the school of Shammai (the two main schools of that time). Hillel grew up poor and tended towards an emphasis on mercy. Hillel felt that scripture should be taught for free so had the Rabbis/Pharisees of his school take outside jobs to support themselves in order to teach for free, so that basic education to the masses was free and no one was excluded. Paul continued that Pharisaical tradition from the school of Hillel of working so he could teach for free. Shammai is considered a much harsher strict school with a more rigid interpretation of scripture and law.

 

So, we know Paul was somewhat educated in Greek philosophy, and had an advanced education in the OT as a Pharisee.  Paul was then taught by the Holy Spirit about the New Covenant and the Messiah (although he was also a witness of some of the Apostles, Jesus, etc.  before his conversion). 

 

In other words, Paul did not lack an education, but rather already had an advanced education in scripture before He was on the road of Damascus.    

 

Thanks for elaborating on this for me. God bless you

[firestormx]

Seminary is not a biblical qualification of a church leader therefore to me it is irrelevant. I know them by their fruit not school association

Thanks for the post

[Openly Curious]

Prepare to the extent that it is in your power to do so and trust God to take care of the rest.

.

[missmuffet]

Some kind of formal training should be expected by a church of anyone applying to be a minister in that church.   Lack of training in theology and doctrine is not something to be praised or exalted. For many, ignorance has actually become a object of pride.

 

I don't think any of us would let a person in the medical field operate on our bodies or prescribe us medicine if we were not confident that they have had the education and training to know how to properly diagnose our problem and prescribe a course of treatment.

 

We would not put our money in the hands of someone to be our CPA  if we were not confident that he was educated, knows the tax laws, as been through the most updated training for the current tax laws an competent to be trusted with our taxes and ultimately our financial well-being.

 

None of us would hire someone to represent us in court who had no legal education and was not properly licensed by the Bar to practice law.  

 

 

In EVERY other context in our lives, we expect those we entrust with important aspects of our lives to, to be educated and wholly competent to handle our affairs.    But for some reason, those who we trust to preach the truth, and lead others to Christ, those we go to for counseling an advice and who have an immense amount of influence in spiritual matters and matters relating to eternity, we think that ignorance is a virtue.   The less educated, the better.

 

It seems in that in the Christian world, "education"  has been equated with, "self-righteousness."    The assumption is that people educated in theology spend their days in ivory towers and that is not the case at all.  Many seminary professors are men and women who were missionaries in other countries, especially in third world countries.  They have decades of ministry in the trenches and they bring those experiences into the classroom. They have traveled don the road and know the potholes that are ahead and they bless their students with advice and teaching that will hopefully help them to avoid those potholes when they get into ministry.

 

Much of the time, I have found that those who hate seminaries are people who want to be preachers and teachers, but can't find a church that will accept them because they haven't got a formal education, can offer no evidence of a calling on their lives and simply want to  walk into a church and presume the position of teacher.   Usually people like that have an agenda, and it is not a good one.

 

Not only that, but part of ministry is counseling.   Do you have ANY idea what kind of legal trouble you can get into if you are not a trained, and licensed counselor???  Even pastors have gotten themselves in hot water over that issue.  Ministers who are not licensed counselors who do not have a degree in Christian counseling stand to lose everything I they attempt to fill the shoes of a particular ministry they are not qualified to engage in.

 

Ministry is just as much an intellectual matter as it is a spiritual one.   I pointed out on another thread that the most successful cults in the world are the ones that use the Bible, and groups like the JWs and the Mormons are made up of (better than 50%)  of people who were raised in church.   Their theology is complex; more complex than many realize and they deceive Christians all of the time.  Same with JWs.   So good is their deception that they are considered by some to be Christians.

 

The one thing we DON'T want are preachers and teachers who are not educated and trained in the finer points of theology, which are often needed when confronting  JW, Mormons, SDAs, the Yahwist cult, WoF movement and other groups that promote false teaching using the Bible.    What we want are preachers and teachers who have an above average knowledge of Scripture and readily know how to confront these groups.

 

There are aspects of ministry for which no amount of training can prepare you.   But I think it was CH Spurgeon who said, "If your goal is to chop down a forest, the time you spend sharpening your axe is not wasted.'     A  call to preach is a call to prepare.    A person  who is called into ministry should want to avail his or herself with all available avenues of preparation,  spiritual and intellectual and practical.  We should want to be the best we can be in all areas to do the best job we can for the Lord.  Prepare to the extent that it is in your power to do so and trust God to take care of the rest.

Well said shiloh I agree.

[Openly Curious]

Curious, what was the difference then between Paul's training and the 12's training?

The difference between apostle Paul and the other 12 disciples training was that the 12 disciples walked with Jesus Himself and was taught directly from Jesus as they followed him and left everything to do so. Apostle Paul on the other hand did not walk and recieve the teaching of Jesus directly as the other 12 disciples did but Paul recieved the gospel of Jesus Christ by divine revelation revealed and made known to him by the Holy Spirit of God.

It is said of apostle Paul in scripture....

1 Corinthians 15:1-11 - MOREOVER BRETHREN, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye recieved, ad wherein ye stand;...By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain...For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;...And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures;...And that was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve:...After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep...After that, he was seen of James, then of all the apostles....And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time...For I am the least of the apostles, that am not meet to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God...But by the grace of God I am what I am: and his grace which was bestowed upon me was not in vain; but I laboured more abundantly than they all: yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me...Therefore whether it were I or they, so we preach, and so ye believed...

Paul was the only apostle that did not see Jesus after the resurrectiton as Jesus had been seen by all the others apostle. But Paul did make mention that at last of all he was seen of him also, as of one born out of due time. Paul was speaking here of his experience that happened on the Damascaus road and he was blinded by a bright light and knock off his horse and was blinded for three day you can read this isn the book of Acts 9:4 & 22:14,18. This is when apostle Paul was called to be a chosen vessel of the Lord he was last of the apostles to experience Jesus and it was not in the same time period that the 12 apostles were taught and trained by Jesus nor from witnessing firsthand the resurrection of Jesus from the dead.

Scripture tells us many things about the apostle and his education in...Philippians 3:5-7 - Circumised the eight day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, and Hebrew of the Hebrews, as touching the law a Pharisee, Concerning zeal, persecuting the church; touching the righteousness which is the law, blameless. But what things were gain to me those I counted loss for Christ. Yes doubtless and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord for whom I have suffered the loss of all things and do count them but dung that I may win Christ.

Apostle Paul was a very educated man was from Israel the tribe of Benjamin he had been circumcised in his flesh as the law required to be done on the eight day from birth he was and Hebrew among the Hebrews and was a Pharisee when it came to what was in the law he was zealous and practiced and kept the law to a tee and was blameless. Paul was taught at the foot of Gamilal. But in all of his education and zeal for God he was ignorant and blinded to Jesus being the Messiah and when he experienced Christ when he was revealed to him all of his education and who he was in his flesh was no longer important to him as it pailed in comparison to knowing the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus his Lord ss he gave up everything that once was gain to him and counted it as dung so he could win Christ. Apostle Paul's transformation was life transforming as he no longer was the same person again.

You can see a "difference" in how Paul was trained and received the gospel of Jesus Christ which is much different in how the twelve disciples were trained as they walked with Jesus personally while he was on this earth and witnessed first hand the miracles and all of what he taught and spoke to them about even in private....

Galatians 1:11-24 - But I certify you, brethren that the gospel which was preached on me is not after man. For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by revelation of Jesus Christ. For ye have heard of my conversation in time past in the Jews religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted the church of God, and wasted it; And profited in the Jews religion, above many my equals in mine own nation, being more exceedingly zealous of the traditions of my fathers. But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's womb, and called me by his grace. To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; Immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood: Neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles "before" me; but I went to Arabia and returned again to Damascus. Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and abode fifteen days. But other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord's brother. Now the things which I write unto you, behold before God, I lie not. Afterwards I came into the regions of Syria and Cilicia; And was unknown by face unto the churches of Judaea which were in Christ. But they heard only, That he which persecuted us in times past now preacheth the faith which once he destroyed. And they glorified God in me.

Whenever received his divine calling on his life he immediately seperated his own self from others. The Apostle Paul did not even go to Jerusalem to where all the other apostles were at to see any of the twelve disciples. But instead after receiving his divine call to preach the gospel Paul went down to Arabia and then returned again to Damascus. Paul stay at Damascus for a period of three years and then he went up to Jerusalem at that time for the purpose of seeing Peter. Paul only stay 15 days with Peter and never saw any of the other apostles at all except James the Lord's brother. Apostle Paul gospel came by divine revelation of Jesus Christ and not through flesh and blood as Paul was not taught the gospel he preached by any of the other 12 apostles who walked with Jesus while he was on this earth. There is more that I can add to this but I think you can see the differences in how Paul was trained and the way the 12 disciples were trained.

I am not at all opposed to having knowledge as knowledge is power the scriptures say but in the face of Jesus Christ it pales in comparison to knowing the person of Jesus Christ. I have many certificates piled up in my closet from the Berean college and I loved studying the materials they had during the first year of my salvation as they were based solely on the scriptures and nothing else. Materials like that are rare in colleges today as a whole. I read a lot of books also during the early years of my salvation as I just couldn't get enough of knowing God in the face of Jesus Christ. I had my experiences with what certain denominations materials in which they use to train leaders with and there was literally no bible at all in the material. There are some good colleges still out there I believe one can benefit from. But there are bad ones out there as well that will give you any thing but a godly education in which will help you to be an effectual minister of God in your calling to preach the gospel. It pays to do one's homework before entering into the college of their interest. But the best advice I would give if the call of God is on your life is for you to immediately seperate your self from flesh and blood (people) and spend time alone with God and begin to seek him and his purpose for your life. Knowing the scriptures are able to make you wise as those were apostle Paul's words to Timothy as he further told him that all scriptures are given by inspiration of God and are profitiable for.....

[missmuffet]

I have a good friend who went through seminary for a formal training to become a Christian therapist and he is a very good one.