phdapp

door bell

New Deal

high hopes

Put option

night owl

breakfast club

Reading Railroad

I did say that I was not including places like HDS. I understand it is academically rigorous. I know I am generalizing, but what I had in mind are the schools that have moved from conservative to 'moderate' or 'liberal' in the more recent past. They seem to have also moved their focus from academics to practical ministry preparation - again, speaking generally, and it clearly doesn't apply to every situation, but I do see a trend. I know both are practical and academic is important, but the focus has changed. I believe that a strong academic foundation provides the knowledge allowing practical application, thus I would put the focus on the academic if I were designing a program - which I will likely never be asked to do

A conservative view of the Bible would be as described in the Chicago statement on inerrancy. Most schools that agree with this see the need for study of the Biblical languages. Therefore, I would suggest that in many cases, the strength of the Greek and Hebrew departments at the school is indicative of their understanding of Biblical Inerrancy. Of course, this is not always the case, but I believe it often is true. So, I encourage you to evaluate this in making your decision. I had forgotten about Greenville Presbyterian Theological Seminary and Mid America Reformed Seminary in my initial recommendations, but their language programs are among the best. RTS Jackson, WSC, WTS and MARS all also have top notch Biblical Language programs and I assume they are required in the M.Div program at all those schools. Each should offer a MA also, but I encourage you to get a M.Div for your chosen profession. It is true that these terms are hard to pin down, as others have noted. I believe the Chicago Statement well defines the conservative view of the Bible. Thus being conservative would entail the doctrines which such an understanding of the Bible would result in, such as an orthodox understanding of the Trinity and salvation by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone. Concerning Fuller, despite the various people chiming in to rebuke me, I still hold that you will find that many of the professors would not be considered conservative by this definition. Consider the following account from a former Fuller student: If you review the faculty list you will find scholars that take positions that cannot possibly be considered conservative, and I would doubt that even they would accept that label. Further, I would not expect Fuller to be more academically rigorous than a more conservative school. The last president of Fuller seemed to have a love affair with Mormonism. One other note, I entirely disagree with the assertion that conservative schools do not provide a top notch academic environment. If fact, it seems that the more liberal a school is, the more the focus moves away from academics. Review the list of required classes and it seems that the more liberal a school is, the more the focus moves from academics to practical ministry training. I'm sure someone will point out that I am painting with broad strokes here, and that is true. But I find it to be generally true among schools that are conservative or have considered themselves conservative in the recent past. Of course, I expect schools like Princeton, Yale, Chicago and Harvard to be academically rigorous, but they have not pretended to be conservative for a very long time. In fact, it was the liberalism of Princeton that caused many of the professors to leave there and form Westminster Theological Seminary in 1929 (illustrating how long conservatives have separated themselves from such institutions). Modern fundamentalism does have an anti-intellectual element in it and I do take issue with that label. I see a clear distinction between fundamentalists and conservatives. Al Mohler = conservative; Jack Chick = fundamentalist. DA Carson = conservative; Peter Ruckman = fundamentalist. Ravi Zacharias = conservative; Fred Phelps = fundamentalist. Again, people use these terms differently, but in my circles, this is the distinction we make. I wish you the best.

Logos

Plan B: Unfunded PhD program in the UK on a part time basis while working full time, traveling to the UK once a year for the next six years.

I went to a very conservative school and read a lot of liberal scholars... Understanding all sides is a good thing. I wouldn't consider myself a "fundie" - labeling all conservatives as fundamentalists is something liberals enjoy doing.

moon walk

These are mostly decent choices. Of these, I would say that either Westminster or Westminster California will be most academically rigorous. Yes, they are Presbyterians mostly, they do have a baptist program for those who believe in believer's baptism. Second to that on the list RTS and TEDS are likely tied. I would not recommend Wheaton though for their stray away from conservative views of the Bible - just as I would not recommend Fuller. At fuller you would be taught by people that clearly have a different god than the one of the Bible (i.e., universalism, all gods are the same, faith in any god gets you to heaven, among other things your church would likely consider heresy). I serve as an ordained pastor of a congregation similar to what you describe from what I can tell. I would recommend WTS (or WTS CA) to anyone. My M.Div is from elsewhere, but I would have gotten a better education at WTS. Southern Baptist Theological Seminary is also top notch and widely respected both inside and outside of SBC churches, at least among conservatives.

whistle stop

I believe your preparation as a pastor should be at an institution that is of like faith as your own. Yes, you need to evaluate your faith fully. However, you do not need to be taught by people that are not even Christians. That sort of tearing down your faith is silly. If you are a conservative evangelical, I assume you believe the Bible is the word of God and salvation is by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone and that God is as described in the Bible: Father, Son and Holy Spirit - three persons - one God. I suggest you find a school that requires their professors to believe that. Now, I do not believe that a PhD student have the same criteria - the difference is that the PhD isn't pastoral preparation, and I would hope a seminary professor has a good grounding in their faith (likely from a conservative seminary) before going to the PhD program. I would recommend to you Westminster Theological Seminary or Westminster Seminary California. Both are conservative and very academically rigorous. They are most respected among reformed circles - primarily Baptists and Presbyterians, however, you will find the degree to be widely accepted. Some alum you might know include Joel Beeke, Alistair Begg, R. Scott Clark, John Frame, Timothy Keller, Wayne Grudem, Vern Poythress, and Francis Schaeffer. You will notice the faculty is well trained. For example, Sinclair Ferguson got his PhD from University of Aberdeen, John Frame went to Yale, etc. The notion that you need to rule out SBC schools is nonsense too. SBTS is the best of them and is well respected among conservative evangelicals, academically rigorous, and conservative. You might also consider Phoenix Seminary which gained notoriety because of Wayne Grudem being there. Master's Seminary and Reformed Theological Seminary are both possibilities as well. You stated that you want to serve as a pastor, the M.Div program is designed for this. Many schools allow you to pick a sub-field to specialize. Pick the one that interests you, no church will ever care which one you pick (if any). Biblical Studies of course makes good sense if you are teaching from the Bible... Fuller used to be conservative, but is not considered as such any more by most evangelicals. FYI: My undergrad is in computer science and my first career was in IT before I became a pastor and got my M.Div. Knowing your denomination would be helpful. Feel free to contact me in private.

African Safari

Friend Safari

Interestingly, I know of a case where someone had a felony conviction and the cheap background check service they use at PTS had no idea... waste of everyone's time and money.

I was wondering if they used the information to see if your interests were well defined or if you were all over the place and/or to see if they can determine if they are a top choice for you or maybe a safety school. But I really have no idea. I was just trying to think of why they needed to know. My answer changed through the app season because I didn't start out with the same list of schools to apply to that I finished with...

Of course: http://www.aomin.org/aoblog/index.php/webcast/

lol

I'm interested in historical theology. I have submitted 13 applications so far. I am working on 1 more and thinking about a few other programs with January deadlines. Now I need my tax return to pay off my credit card full of app fees. Harvard (religious studies) Harvard Divinity School Vanderbilt - history department Vanderbilt - religion department Duke Divinity School Princeton Theological Seminary Yale Grad arts and sciences (American Studies) Columbia (religious studies) University of Chicago Divinity School uPenn (history) ASU (religious studies) Baylor (history) So, when the application asks you where else you are applying to, do you give them a full list? Why do they want to know that?

I applied to all three...

I was 100% sure that I wanted to do a PhD. However, in my last year of my Master's degree I realized I didn't have time to both do well my last year of Master's work and still get my applications done in any satisfactory way ---- so I waited. Now I've applied for Fall 2014 admission. I graduated in June of this year from my Masters program.