Quote:
Originally Posted by greenbaggins 
Steve, are you really laying the whole problem at the feet of critical text advocates? There are a myriad of issues here, ranging from the fragmentation of the theological disciplines (which I think is much more fundamental, with each discipline viewing every other discipline with great suspicion), to just plain pride/ego, to faulty views of Scripture (this is really a distinct issue from the TR/CT issue). I highly doubt that acceptance of the CT can be blamed for this problem.
|
Steve, as can be adduced from many of my own posts, I resonate with your concern about the future of seminary education. However, with Lane, I would not frame the issue as narrowly as one of TR/CT. It seems to me that the larger issue relates to modernist (the postmodernist is even worse here!) presuppositions when approaching the Bible. The attitude that animates the critical method leads to the objectification of scripture and the exaltation of the critical examiner. Given the pervasiveness of human hubris, any method that leads the reader to confuse his role with that of ruler will inevitably lead to problems.
Reformed theology, more than other varieties of Protestantism, has depended upon an "educated clergy." We are "stuck" with the unintended consequences of that dependence, including drift away from orthodoxy. Other than SBTS, name a seminary that has been around for more than a few decades that was able to retain its original theological convictions without the struggle reported at WTS.
My alma mater, Fuller, didn't take more than two decades to begin retreating from inerrancy. Now, the place is a hothouse for NPP, McLaren/Jones/Pagitt notions, ridicule of traditional theological views in a number of areas, and general latitudinarianism.
If my thesis that intellectual hubris will continually exert a pull away from orthodoxy can be sustained, something must be counterposed to prevent that drift. My provisional theory (and part of the reason I am hanging out with you TR folks these days) is that confessionalism honestly embraced and diligently applied functions as a check on my autonomous reason. The case of WTS demonstrates that such a corrective only works when the trustees, administration, faculty, and constituency take seriously the vigilance required.
What do you folks think?