Walston's Potch Dissertation Online

I have to agree with Craig.

It has also troubled me for some time that Rick Walston appears to be fair game, even though he's doing exactly what we ask people who run unaccredited schools to do: he's being honest about the school's lack of accreditation. But a substantial number of people here feel free to cast stones at him because Columbia Evangelical Seminary means he's one of the Bad Guys, and therefore this bird is duly painted.

Truth is that if his dissertation really is substandard (and I don't think it is), then it casts no aspersions on Rick, who is technically under no moral obligation to do any more than his school asks him to do. If it indicates a problem with anything, it's a problem with GST/Potch; and any aspersions cast on GST/Potch will probably (fairly or unfairly) be applied to SATS/Zululand as well, because it's a similar sort of arrangement.

In any event, all of this serves as a pretty good illustration of why I never put my HUX thesis online, and probably why Steve took his thesis and dissertation offline (I seem to recall some clown telling him that it was "turgid," and my backing Steve up; but it was over a year ago, and I could be mistaken). If you put your left foot in instead of putting your right foot out, there are plenty of critics who will be more than happy to jump you in a public forum for it.


Cheers,

 

not worth it

Gert

I hope I am not being arrogant to apply your comment to me. I will take it to heart. While to me to postulate in ones introduction that the historical-grammatical (ie, Greek grammar not English) is to be followed as the method of ones dissertation and then not to use the established grammars and lexica to some might seem arrogent.

But several on this forum favored me with good advice generously sharing their knowledge and helped me find my way into a good DL program. So while I feel as I do, it is not worth it to continue expressing my opinion and by that offend those who have helped me,

 

And this begs the question that I raised in my first post: What does this say about Potchefstroom? I can assure you that none of the better seminaries in the US would accept that as a PhD dissertation. In fact, if the degree is in New Testament (whether as a major or a concentration), it wouldn't even pass as a ThM thesis at my alma mater. Why? Because there wasn't enough effort put forth? No. Because it doesn't do New Testament studies justice, whether from an exegetical or theological perspective.

I have no interest in Potchefstroom either way. I have no bone to pick with Dr. Walston. But I have grave concerns about the way evangelicalism slits its own throat (Walston claims to be an evangelical) by touting work of this nature as being worthy of a PhD (regardless of whether it's Old Testament, New Testament, theology, church history, etc.).

This is not a matter of elitism or academic hubris. It's a matter of presenting the best work in a field where people claim that one's views represent spiritual truth. Nothing less than our best--both as schools and individuals--will do. Doing the minimal amount necessary to earn a degree may get one by, but it's hardly worthy of the responsibility we owe one another in the academic community.

This is a matter of integrity; integrity on the part of the school, integrity on the part of the student, and integrity in the pursuit of truth.

 

Another thing I'd like to point out (after looking over the thesis again): It is clear that Rick's context is theology within the Assemblies of God/Pentecostal tradition. So maybe the reason he does not interact with the (largely rationalistic) work of those outside of that tradition. He is evaluating and examining tongues from within the AG tradition. Many other scholars deny the AG interpretation; why deal with them? It is pointless.

In my thesis writing, I will be looking at a relatively narrow scope of the history/theology of the ministry in my particular denomination. As such, it is not necessary to deal with the ministry trends of the larger church; I will not be interacting with studies of the ministry elsewhere, save on where they touch it.

I had initially proposed an exposition of Reformed thinking within my tradition, but Potch suggested that an overview of 300 years worth of denominational history for this topic was too broad.
As it is, my time frame of study is about 30 years.

Craig

 

Several of the works I previously noted as being standard in the field yet conspicuously absent were written by scholars sympathetic to Walston's theological leanings (e.g., Turner [two books and several journal articles], Grudem [published PhD diss. at Cambridge dealing with the subject of chpt. 8 in Walston's diss.], Keener [author of several published works and a graduate of an Assemblies of God seminary], to name a few).

No matter what way you slice it, the research is inadequate for a PhD dissertation.

 

Ed,

Your points are well taken. I do think that the standards of U.S. schools and foreign schools are different (not better or worse, just different). What is expected here in the States will be different (such as language requirements, etc.) than in Britain or SA. Both systems produce quality scholars. I believe that Rick, for all his shortcomings, seeks to be a quality scholar. His student, James White, seems to excel in this.

I also believe that many schools here in the U.S. take themselves too seriously (the resistance to DL doctoral studies is one indicator).

Craig

 

This is why I invoked the name of Dr. Sawyer of Western Seminary in another thread. Dr. Sawyer, whos academic prowess must be witnessed to be appreciated, minced no words when thinking of unaccredited PhD's.

When my pastoral colleague touted his "PhD" from Louisiana Baptist University and received all the "glory" which accompanied same - those of us who knew better were chagrined.

Kindly,
Steven King

 

Craig, I can't speak to the situation in SA, but I know UK schools hold the highest standards when it comes to biblical and theological studies. Schools like Oxford, Cambridge, Aberdeen and Glasgow (each represented by at least one faculty member in the NT department at my alma mater) are just as rigorous as the better US schools. In fact, they may be even stiffer when it comes to dissertations. And London Bible College, with whom I am negotiating the final details of my PhD thesis, requires the same in terms of biblical and modern research languages.

 

Sorry, Steven. I attributed that invocation to another in an earlier post. If you still see Jim, please give him my regards.

 

Doesn't that go with the territory? I authored an article critiquing a chapter in a quasi-scholarly work on Jehovah's Witnesses. The author of the book wasn't too happy about what I wrote, and had a thing or two to say about it in various public forums. Did I pull it off-line? No. The aforementioned article was screened by several notable scholars who specialized in that field and found it to be thoroughly researched. Whether or not the reader agrees with me is no bother, but I would be concerned if several people 'in the know' claimed the work grossly skirted substantive sources or issues.

 

Greetings Tom,

First let me say that what I am about to say is ****NOT**** directed at Bill or Ed concerning any of the comments or analysis they have made which is perhaps even accurate and justified.

Disclaimer out of the way.

I have had correspondence with Ric and have enjoyed my virtual communication with him. He seems like a nice and accessible guy & I enjoy the *Coffee Talks* he posts on his site. You are right Tom that Ric gets a rough ride. Would I earn a degree from Columbia E. Sem? No, because of the unaccredited status. Nonetheless he is up front about accreditation. On top of that Ric has had to put up with being fair game over his credentials. He had a Greenwich Ph.D. which was attacked for it's status and his credibility was attacked. Resolution(?), he then went and got a D.Min. from NWGS (TRACS accredited). Well, that was an accredited doctorate but it was not RA and not a Ph.D. Resolution(?), He then went and got a Ph.D. from a GAAP seminary and...........Poor dude!

I also agree with you that I would never post my dissertation on the forum or anywhere else. It leaves you open to natural criticism which is easily accomplished in reviewing any sort of research or methodology. You may be right that Steve removed his for the same reason.

North

 

Ed, I appreciate your thoughtful and reasoned analysis. Are you pursuing your doctorate from DTS (Evangelical Harvard)?

Incidentally, Christianity Today has an excellent article on how Dallas is becoming the new capital of American evangelicalism.

North

 

North, I appreciate your sensitivity. Really.

I have absolutely nothing against Rick Walston, and, stepping outside the bounds of this forum for a moment, I consider him a brother in Christ. But our cause is not helped by the promulgation of work that other biblical or theological scholars outside our persuasion compare to their own. And, ultimately, that cause is bigger than any one of us, including--and beginning with--me.

I have tried to say several times in this thread that I applaud Rick's honesty regarding his school, I appreciate the effort he has put into his studies, and I've often respectfully referred to him as 'Dr. Walston.' In fact, I wish Rick the absolute best in his endeavors. At the same time, I want what's best for evangelicalism, as I'm sure Rick does. So though I've had ample time to post today because it was an off day from work, I've poured time into this thread because I want others to see that the bar must be raised in our own circles.

And, incidentally, whether a dissertation is online or not is really not the point. Sooner or later a dissertation submitted to a legitimately recognized school is going to be pulled off the shelf by someone. And if it's found to be severely lacking in substance, that will be made known. Especially if it was written for a legitimate school.

 

North, I completed my ThM in New Testament studies at DTS, but I'm currently negotiating the final details of a PhD topic with a British institution. The details are found in the following thread:

http://www.degreeinfo.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=4719

The above thread also contains a few thoughts loosely related to matters raised in this thread.

 

That's alright, Ed. Unfortunately, I left Dr. Jim behind in Cali but I do email him from time to time. That professor left an indelible mark on me...

Since I'm nearning the completion of my MBA...I think I'm going to pick up my seminary studies somewhere. Maybe Liberty...

Steven King

 

Good luck Ed!

Incidentally, Ric aside, I agree with your concerns about Evangelical scholarship. Your point was made by a man whose name (British and unusual) escapes me but has been featured on Hank Hanegraaf's program. He talked about ensuring that evangelical Christianity does not become intellectually flabby. To that noble end evangelical Christianity does need to ensure that it adheres to rigorous academic standards (theology was once called the queen of the sciences).

North

 

Os Guinness, perhaps?

 

Now I will be able to sleep. I had the *O* stuck in my head but could not remember the name.

North

 

Our theologians may not be aware of it, but their rather brutal shop-talk is intimidating. If I decide to seriously study scripture, Christian or otherwise, it would have to be in a far more supportive and compassionate environment than this.

I'm not a Christian. I can't see the Christian God. All I can see are those who claim to be infused with His Spirit. When they jump on one of their own and eat him alive, one wonders.

If I learn Greek, it would be because I want to read the Greeks in the original or to understand ancient philosophical terminology that doesn't translate well. At this point in my life I feel less need for additional degrees but greater need for additional understanding. Learning a language would be a labor of love for me that serves a higher purpose, not a hoop to jump through in order to satisfy critics that my education was "rigorous".

There's substance and then there's form. Form sometimes smothers substance and when that happens in religion, it's deadly. (Didn't Jesus speak about something similar?)

That's how the academic game is played, I realize that. But I'm wondering more and more if I want to be a player in that game. I may have earned my last degree and perhaps my lifelong education will now take a new form from here.

I'm not criticizing our theologians. I suppose that what they are doing is entirely right. I'm just trying to explain why what they are doing repels me so viscerally.

They scare me. I fear that if I studied Christianity, I could never win their approval. I'm too much of a sinner I guess, to ever be justified in their academic Law.