Where Have All The Dmins Gone?

Re: Re: Is there a place for the D Min. In teaching?

The general rule (not necessarily best case) is that someone with a Masters can (and do) teach Masters level courses. So, could a DMin teach MDiv courses or DMin courses..........yes. However, the person should be teaching within their field. In other words, with a DMin in Counseling (hopefully someday) I could teach Christian counseling/Pastoral Counseling courses at the MDiv or DMin level. Bill G may well be qualified to teach Biblical Studies but should not be teaching graduate Christian Counseling/Pastoral Counseling courses, ......etc. Should a DMIn be teaching in a ThD program..................no (except under exceptional circumstances). The reason would be the depth of knowledge required of a ThD in theology which is in excess of the DMin and frankly fieldwise of most PhD's. Bill with his DMin in Biblical Studies is probably depthwise the equal of many PhD's (eg Touro's 40 credit hour PhD).

Since, I am cranking out opinons I might as well add another based on an earlier observation of Bill G.'s. It may behoove someone to ask a DMin or PhD prof what there degree is in (ie is it relevant to the field), maybe this ought to be listed along with where they earned it from. I remember years ago seeing an Oprah show where she had a guest talking about children (he had written a book) as if he were a therapist. Some brave soul in the audience finally asked him what his PhD was in and he said........English. That set the rest of the tone and shot his credibility.

North

 

Re: Re: Re: Is there a place for the D Min. In teaching?

This is now forbidden in schools accredited by the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools. It will be interesting to see whether all the regional accreditors eventually follow suit.

 

Well put, North.

 

Well, if I can't be right I'll take my marbles and go home.

Seriously, I agree to disagree with you, Bill. But I also agree that you are a brother!

 

............

And to me your friendship is more important than winning the argument.









But I'm still right!

 

Re: Re: Re: Is there a place for the D Min. In teaching?

 

Re: Re: Re: Re: Is there a place for the D Min. In teaching?

................


Masters not teach master level courses in SACS schools??

Hi Ed

I should know better than to challenge you on your statements re what's up in higher Christian Education especially when my question concerns DTS. But I'm feeling pretty frisky right now having just soundly trounced Russell over his Arminian heresyD ). So here it goes:

You say in SACS schools one with a masters can no longer teach master level courses, right? UMMM, but Dallas Seminary is SACS, right? But DTS has several ThMs teaching do they not according to the website?? EG, Hendricks, Glenn, McLaughlin, and Regiers.

Please explain,

 

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Is there a place for the D Min. In teaching?

The policy change is recent, Bill. Go to the SACS website and scan the document entitled Principles of Accreditation. Under the heading "Credential Guidelines," you'll see that faculty teaching graduate level courses must now possess an earned doctorate or appropriate terminal degree. When this policy was instituted, SACS allowed existing faculty members without doctorates but with significant teaching experience to remain in their current positions.

 

Re: Re: Re: Re: Is there a place for the D Min. In teaching?

Doug Cecil holds a professional doctorate and teaches in a professional department (pastoral ministries). I don't see a problem with that.

 

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Is there a place for the D Min. In teaching?

.................

Nor do I. My opinion above to Robert was that this is OK. Cecil was an example of this and not meant to be a criticism of the DTS hiring practice. But I (and North too) opine that were a DMin teaching Historical Theology then that would be a problem. Yet I believe I could support the premise with examples that some accredited colleges with MA in Bible/theology programs have DMins (in ministry) teaching Bib/Theo coursework in these and I think I could find seminaries as well doing this in their MDivs. I believe this has some room for criticism. What we are saying is that the subject taught should be in the area of the doctorate and that one does not acquire omniscience of the several Christian disciplines or the ability to teach in multiple content areas by earning a doctorate in one subject . Of course, it can be countered that certainly if the school does it then they know what they are doing and who am I to question how their school is run or the decisions made by it or its staff. I seem to remember this argument used here before.

 

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: still plugging away

 

Last July, Christopher Green wrote:

> just remember that, with this dissertation of yours, you can't
> just "cut and paste" and get multiple, perhaps FOUR
> doctorates!!!

My father wrote one dissertation and has four doctorates.

He didn't cut-and-paste, though. Doctorates two through four are honorary.

 

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: still plugging away

==



Hi North:

Things are warming up fast, huh. The difficulty OT(1) faces is that other major doctrines as divine sovereignty, Scriptural inerrancy, and even Christology(2) can be made corollaries to the doctrine of God's exhaustive foreknowledge with results which threaten OT's view on God's omniscience. My earlier point was that as late as June 2002 dialogue still was occuring between such as Ware, Wellum, and Highfield on one side and Pinnock , Sanders, and Boyd on the other with JETS(3) as the forum. Inerrancy(4) would seem to be the big issue as that is one of the two(5) pillars of the ETS(5) required belief statement.



1) Open Theism includes the view that God neither ordains all nor even knows all of man's choices, thoughts, and actions. This distinguishes it both from Calvinism and from Arminianism as the latter does not reject foreordination but makes that divine act the effect of God's foreknowledge.

2) re whether Christ demonstrated omniscience.

3) Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society

4) The view that the original autographa of the Old and New Testaments are free from error.

5) the other being theTrinity

6) Evangelical Theological Society

 

Pinnock Lecture

Because Pinnock has been mentioned I thought I'd draw attention to his lecture (taking place at the church I'm on staff at). He is going to be joined by John Cobb on Wednesday. This should be an interesting education opp (though its not much of a distance since my office is just off of the sanctuary!!).

Here's the info

Jeff

 

Re: Pinnock Lecture

Pinnock & the Open Theists have an interesting perspective....that God desiring people's free reponses neither predetermines nore foreknows their moral choices (Christianity Today Jan 03).

I see some holes in their theory but I agree with Olson that in the interest of intellectual freedom among evangelicals, the point of view needs consideration.

North

 

If the ETS rejects Open Theists from membership my opinion is that is will reflect badly on the ETS, not Open Theism or the proponents of the view. To reject those who can sign the ETS statement of faith with no hesitation seems quite absurd.

BLD

 

I agree. I think that a concern over the issue of intellectual perspective is what prompted Olson from Baylor (not an ETS member) and 100 scholars to sign their statement *The Word Made Fresh*. This statement supported geniune diversity & reflection rooted in the authority of the written word/incarnate Word (CT 1-03).

If we stifle intellectual exploration within evangelical Christianity it becomes stale. Had this been the case we would have never got beyond a Roman Catholic understanding of divine providence or beyond a domination by Reformed or Arminians over what it means to be a Protestant. I look at statements made by one side or the other in the Reformed/Arminian debate (not the jesting here) and am uncomfortable with the certitude of those espousing one system of belief over the other as if it came from the lips of Christ. Even Grudem admits that both systems have flaws & biblical support. Of course he sees Reformed theology as less flawed.

The treatment of Pinnock & Boyd almost smacks of accusing them of heresy. I have not researched the issue enough but my understanding is that neither of them deny basic facts of the Christian faith. I am not sure this is less a heretical paradigm than an in house debate. Unfortunately, they are about to get the boot from the house.

North

 

"a domination by Reformed or Arminians over what it means to be a Protestant"

This is why many Gnesio-Lutherans do not consider themselves Protestant--we're just not part of the defining discussions. (The Diet of Speyer notwithstanding...where the term was invented.)

 

===
Hi Unk:


"immensa..sapientia", Augsburg, 1,1

"It then is essentially necessary for Christians to believe that God knows nothing contingently....but that He foresees all things.", Luther , "The Bondage of the Will", [615]

Other Lutherans do define.

Sigh, I just cannot shut up!