Detroit Baptist Theological Seminary/ oops, Sorry! :(

• Posted By James MacDonald on April 26, 2010

Ok, been out of town, on the road for the Lord, etc.  So I haven’t been reviewing all comments personally.  This morning I had to post a number of comments questioning or criticizing me for mentioning Detroit Baptist Theological Seminary in a negative light in my recent video blog about the importance of seminary.  I mentioned in a humorous way that my single course there was a negative experience for me and that the tonality was one of anger.  Seems like the new president found out and wrote a blog http://gloryandgrace.dbts.edu/?p=305 criticizing my comment and some others were pretty offended too.

Deep Breath:
1) I apologize for speaking negatively about a school I took only one course from and haven’t heard a word about in almost 25 years.  I have no knowledge of the current strength or weakness of the school and certainly wouldn’t want someone to comment publicly about what I was like 25 years ago.   My bad, totally.

2) I stand by my statement that the tonality of the school was  anger.  Most fundamentalists were at the time and that was surely the tonality of the movement as a whole.  I often say, “I am still a fundamentalist, but I am not angry about it.” �  I think Jack Van Impe was the one who took the movement to task for their lack of love and was ostracized as a result, (What was the name of that book he wrote?)  I remember a whole class talking about why Inner City Baptist Church had recently withdrawn from the G.A.R.B. because they had ‘gone liberal.’  (wow just thinking about those discussions gives me visions of the ghost of Christmas past)  From my year at Tennessee Temple and the parade of fundamentalists through chapel, to my exposure to Jack Hyles and a number of fundamental churches in Detroit and Ontario, yeah, anger, for sure very angry.

3) The course itself was led by a dignified and gracious man, but the content centered around the co-operative evangelism strategy of Billy Graham and was constantly pejorative.  There was no distinction made between outcomes and motives. The points the course was trying to make were eventually made more effectively, I believe, in a book by Ian Murray called Evangelicalism Divided.  Murray writes regarding the BGEA evangelism strategy, “the policy was seen as a necessary expedient designed sincerely for the best end, namely, to gain a wider hearing for the gospel,” (p.58). The Billy Graham Evangelistic Association didn’t blur the gospel out of malice, or even deliberately. It was the sad result of a good intention to preach the gospel to as many as possible, even if that meant compromising on what Graham thought were some “non-essentials” of the faith.”  (from a review of this good book on the 9Marks blog)

It was the tone of the class more than the content that was offensive to me and I know that many biblicists of my generation struggled with the tone more than the doctrine of fundamentalism.  As an anecdote I remember the professor and students debated a whole class period about whether they would allow Billy Graham to preach in their church, (unlikely to say the least)

4) I am sure it is true that I was too inexperienced to appreciate some of the nuances of my experience at DBTS, and in my disillusionment I chose not to even transfer the credits to my program and Trinity Evangelical Divinity School.  Looking back, that was kind of dumb too.

My journey in ministry has been in pursuit of contemporary ministry forms without compromise of the Word of God.  Looking back, I have found a lot more value in the fidelity to scripture my fundamental roots gave me than I have found in the contemporary forms.  I stand corrected, and thankful.

Categorized as: General