Before reading this, please make a significant note to yourself. These thoughts and my responses are coming from the church group that God brought me into when I was 20 years old in 1983. The lessons I learned and the memories I've kept from there can be likened to a classic baby-and-bathwater situation, as well as a chewing-meat-and-spitting-bones scenario.
With that said, let's move onward.
The group of churches in which the Lord raised me was known as "The Fellowship". It began with a small church in Prescott, AZ, named "The Potter's House" and blossomed into more than 800 congregations, now approximating about 3,400.
Over the last forty years, a topic that has remained prominent in my memory is that of a Fellowship-wide disdain for Bible Schools. This common disdain, particularly among us less-informed children at the bottom of the church hierarchy, led to many intriguing conversations.
However, it also resulted in poorly trained individuals and stories that fit the accepted narrative. This issue prompted a multitude of discussions, all stemming from a shared sentiment of contempt for formal religious education.
Personally, I vividly remember an encounter at Grace Chapel, situated on Chase Street in Denver, Colorado. A young man and his wife approached the door. The young man extended his hand with a big smile and announced in a clear, proud voice, "I'm an ordained minister!"
I responded, meeting his enthusiasm with my own. Extending my hand to shake his, I said, "My name is Larry, and I don't care! Welcome to church!"
The statement was, and still is, a painfully rude retort that was utterly uncalled for. However, it was born from the topic of this article: a Fellowship-wide mocking of all things related to "higher education," including Bible schools, colleges, seminaries, and so on.
Forty years onwards, I am re-reading "We Can Take the Land," and I scroll down to the last section entitled "BIBLE SCHOOLS." This section contains a bullet list of reasons for the Fellowship's rejection of Bible schools. Considering what has happened to me over the last ten months, and the significance Dr. Mike Heiser's work has accrued in my life, it seems appropriate for me to address each point in turn, guided by the Lord as King.
So, without further ado, let's explore each point made.
Forethoughts
Before we begin our analysis of the assertions below, I would like to emphasize the importance of close and careful reading of both the points being made and scripture, particularly in its broader context. This should also incorporate extra-biblical materials, especially given the revelations of the Dead Sea Scroll materials and another forty years of thought, scholarly work, archaeology, and the influence of numerous other factors.
In addition, I believe it should be candidly stated that the men who made these assertions were not largely conscious of broader church history as we understood it in the early '80s, nor of the treasure trove of data that was discovered in the Qumran caves. The process of analyzing and interpreting this data was ongoing, which would take another couple of decades before it started to yield substantial results. We are now twenty years beyond that period, so we have a deeper understanding than these individuals did forty years ago.
Point by Point - An Evaluation
Bible schools aren't biblical. They are a medieval institution left over from Catholicism, and are used in imitation of the world.
It is possible to assert convincingly that the structure and conduct of Bible schools and colleges that have burgeoned over the past century are entirely inconsistent with not only the biblical model exemplified by Jesus with his twelve disciples but also with the disciples themselves as they later adopted the role of Rabbis for Christ. However, what we need to be cautious of is dismissing education outright. Such a move can lead to ignorant and uninformed individuals proclaiming to be knowing men of God.
NOTE: The person most responsible for the Fellowship, Potter's House church group, Wayman Mitchell, was himself bible college trained. His disdain for it is not totally puzzling, but it is a quirk. This disdain not only showed up in the bible school topic, but in a rebellion against formal denominational structures as well, which is not a bad thing.
When it comes to thinking about aspects of bible school in the first century, here are some relevant thoughts to ponder and mull over.
- - First century view of being a Jewish disciple.
- - John the Baptist: potential Essene disciple and Rabbi.
- - The discipleship of Andrew (Peter's brother) under John.
- - Peter's desire to study and choosing deacons.
- - Jewish religious leaders noting Peter and others as ignorant men who were with Jesus.
- - Paul running a discipleship school in Ephesus.
- - Paul insisting on Timothy studying to show himself approved of God.
- - Paul's own extreme education being put to good use.
First Century Disciple
Being a disciple in the first century was not restricted to the bounds of a classroom, although for some, traditional education in a Yeshiva (i.e., school) was part of the journey. However, discipleship extended well beyond formal education. As a Jewish disciple, this role held a unique position within society, carrying with it certain expectations and commitments that were both religious and communal in nature.
Training to become a disciple often began at an early age, around five or six years, and was extremely rigorous. A key aspect of this education involved memorizing the Torah, the Prophets, and the Writings. By the tender age of ten, a disciple was expected to have memorized the Torah. By the age of fifteen, they should have also committed the Prophets and Writings to memory, despite the fact that many of these texts might not have been available in written form in certain communities (Deuteronomy 6:7; Psalm 119:11).
The relationship between a teacher (Rabbi) and student (disciple) was notably intimate - much more so than the rapport typically seen in modern classrooms. As revealed in 1 Kings 19:19–21, Elisha acted as a disciple of Elijah. He served his master and followed him, thereby setting a precedent for the relationship that future disciples should strive to have with their teachers. It was a connection rooted in respect, dedication, and ultimately, personal transformation.
Discipleship in the first century Jewish context was far from being solely about acquiring theological knowledge. Instead, it sought to shape a lifestyle and an identity. The goal was to learn the ways of the Rabbi through every conceivable aspect - from thought processes and speech patterns to mannerisms and eating habits. Disciples aimed to emulate all that the Rabbi did. As such, discipleship demanded full time commitment. It was not a part-time endeavor, and it certainly wasn't confined to a classic modern classroom environment.
In this process, the focal point was not merely intellectual growth. Moral and spiritual development took precedence. A successful disciple didn't just resemble his Rabbi in thought, but he also mirrored his character and conduct (Luke 6:40).
The Discipleship of John the Baptist
The discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls has shed light on some significant historical aspects, including the life of John the Baptist. Evidently, not only was John the Baptist a disciple of the Essenes, but at the time of Jesus, he was also an Essene Master with disciples of his own, as referenced by Andrew below.
The Bible, however, does not detail the exact age when John the Baptist left the comforts of his home to embrace an ascetic lifestyle in the wilderness. According to Luke 1:80 (ESV), "And the child [John] grew and became strong in spirit, and he was in the wilderness until the day of his public appearance to Israel." The term 'child' in the context of biblical usage generally encompasses a wide age range, potentially stretching up to adolescence. This suggests that John might have left society at a relatively young age.
Given the broader Second Temple Jewish literature perspective, the Dead Sea Scrolls represent the Essene community, which followed a specific form of desert asceticism resonating with John's lifestyle. However, modern scholarship continues to debate the specifics of John's wilderness stay. Some propose a direct correlation between John and the Essenes, while others argue that John's wilderness dwelling might not have been a continuous journey from childhood, but rather could have commenced with the initiation of his ministry.
The Discipleship of Andrew
Andrew's connection to John the Baptist is of significant interest, especially given that Peter, too, shares this connection. Intriguingly, these two brothers embarked on divergent paths. One became a dedicated disciple of John, while the other, Peter, may have begun the journey but failed to complete it.
However, once we comprehend the concept of discipleship to a first century Jew, when combined with John's story and Andrew's discipleship under John—later to become a disciple of Jesus—we are presented with a powerful narrative. This is a story not just about men aspiring to emulate their Rabbis, but also about rigorous training.
With the knowledge we now have, distinct from what was known in the 80s, we understand that the Essene community was highly disciplined. This strictness was not exclusive to the Essenes at Qumran; it was widespread at Essene communities and groups throughout Judea.
It's crucial to note that while many of the twelve disciples might not have been extensively trained in ways comparable to the Pharisees, Sadducees, and Scribal disciples, they were far from being lackadaisical. Andrew, in particular, was undoubtedly a well-trained individual, intellectually and practically, molded in the image of John the Baptist. Without a doubt, Andrew would have led the way in helping the other disciples become disciples in line with Jewish culture and tradition, but flavored and guided by the Messiah, Himself.
Peter, Study, and Acts 6:2
In Acts 6:2, the English Standard Version refers to preaching. However, the original Greek text discusses Peter's desire not to neglect the Word of God; the phrase "καταλείψαντας τὸν λόγον τοῦ Θεοῦ" can be translated as "abandoning the Word of God." This phrase incorporates more than just preaching; it includes deep study, scholarship, and from this foundation, the preaching, teaching, and ministering to people.
Peter, trained as a Jewish disciple by Jesus, strived to emulate Jesus in every way. His post-discipleship life as an apostle also encompassed studying the Word of God for the ultimate purpose of ministering to the saints. In essence, it seems that he integrated scholarship into the teachings and demonstrations of Jesus. Of course, he didn't pretend that scholarship wasn't a part of Jesus's lessons; rather, the Book of Acts serves as a testament to this fact, albeit a later revelation.
Ignorant Peter & Co.
Acts 4:13 (ESV) reads: "Now when they saw the boldness of Peter and John, and perceived that they were uneducated, common men, they were astonished. And they recognized that they had been with Jesus."
The Jewish leadership at the time held a preconceived notion that Peter and John were, in their words, "illiterate idiots". It was evident to them that, at that point, Peter and John were not products of Rabbinical schools. They did not present themselves in a manner that the Jewish elite would traditionally deem educated and refined.
This notion brings us to a point of reconciliation with what we observe Peter doing two chapters later in Acts. He is attempting to compensate for his past life and deficiencies by incorporating education and study into his walk with Jesus.
Paul's School at Ephesus
The details concerning Paul's leadership of a discipleship school in Ephesus can be uncovered in the book of Acts, located in the New Testament. Acts 19:9-10 (ESV) states, "When some of them became obstinate, they refused to believe, maligning the Way in front of the congregation. Paul withdrew from them, taking the disciples with him, and conducted daily discussions in the lecture hall of Tyrannus. This went on for two years, ensuring that all the residents of Asia, both Jews and Greeks, heard the Lord's word."
These verses, penned by Luke, share insights about Paul's pedagogical approach and discipleship process in Ephesus. Primarily, Paul resorted to logic and conversation. The term 'hall of Tyrannus' alludes to either a school or lecture hall. It was probably a public area allocated for teaching and discussions, or perhaps even a private home opened up for Paul's use. This aspect of Paul’s ministry, unique to Ephesus, is not explicitly highlighted in accounts of his ministry in other locations.
Likely, Paul disseminated Jesus' teachings, after which the disciples could voice their questions or counter-arguments. Paul would then address these concerns. This teaching approach resembled that of Jewish Rabbis in synagogues. Additionally, Paul demonstrated the flexibility to adapt his strategies to fit Ephesus's unique cultural context.
Therefore, contrary to the assertion that bible schools are a product of Catholic or medieval influences, we see Paul drawing from his personal Rabbinical education, recalibrating it to the Ephesian context. Ephesus was a substantially populated city, housing many educational institutions dedicated to subjects like public speaking. Adopting a leaf from the Ephesian culture, Paul established a school that adhered to local customs and expectations. Thus, if we consider Bible colleges to be somehow "bad", we must confront the question: why would Paul establish one?
Paul & Timothy
In his personal letters to young Timothy, we discover a young man serving as an evangelist, with his mentor encouraging him to study to show himself approved. Considering whether Paul instructed Timothy to attend the local Bible college, we don't have clear documentation. We can only speculate that the relationship between Paul and Timothy, as well as Timothy's relationships with those around him, most likely resembled the dynamics between Jesus and his disciples or a Rabbi and his disciples.
One aspect to note, however, is that Timothy had already been welcomed into ministry, and Paul was merely following up on him. Yet, it was evident that Timothy's education was being integrated and expected of him by his mentor in Christ!
Paul, the man himself
Finally, we arrive at the analysis of Paul, the central figure. From the scripture, we discern that Paul took full advantage of his Rabbinical education and discipleship. He goes to such an extent as to boast about his Hebrew descent in unashamed pride. Paul is unhesitant in making his qualifications obvious to others. However, it is his relationship with Christ that holds the most significance and not his formal education. Paul makes this distinction even more explicit as he addresses the congregation at Corinth, acknowledging that not many who are regarded as wise or well-educated embrace Christianity. And yet, he does not completely dismiss the value of his education.
We find that the critical aspect of an effective Christian education lies within the context of a close Rabbi-disciple relationship, where the primary aim is to emulate the teacher. Although modern bible colleges in the 20th and 21st centuries may not follow this style of personal mentorship, it doesn't suggest that we should disregard the value of learning. It certainly is not an endorsement for presenting the gospel to undisciplined, unlearned, and uneducated minds and lives. The true balance is derived from revisiting the Rabbi-disciple relationship within each individual church community.
In this perspective, the members of The Fellowship (Potter's House) have an apt understanding. They assert that traditional bible colleges may not be the solution to current issues. Instead, God, through the person of Jesus Christ, has shown us His desired approach. He prioritizes the Rabbi-disciple connection above all else.
Bible schools can't do the job of world evangelism. The world population is growing at a rate of seventy million people a year. That means that every day 194,444 people are added to the population, over and above those who die. The cost of training workers by traditional methods is prohibitive. Even if finances were available, the Bible school method is so slow and inefficient that the church is not even able to keep pace with the rising population, let alone reach the world.
The following text presents a cohesive and cogent argument.
Bible colleges are both expensive and ineffective in producing graduates in a timely fashion. They lack an efficient structure to accommodate the increasing population of students pursuing these studies.
Furthermore, they also fail to mirror the model left for us by our Lord and King. This deviation from the divine blueprint undermines their credibility and efficacy. Their slow-paced academic procedures struggle in keeping up with the escalating numbers of aspiring learners.
Their operations not only impose financial pressure but also, their slow processing is disappointing. This ineffective and expensive method of imparting religious education needs earnest attention and reform for the benefit of those passionate about their spiritual studies.
Bringing this task in-house, back to its proper place within the church is critical.
The Bible school isolates the man of God from practical experience, which is meant to come through the church. For most students, the school begins to take the place of church commitment and worship. This leads to bad habits of discipline and isolates them from the very people they are preparing to minister to.
The nature of the Rabbi-disciple relationship can be likened to a contemporary Pastor-disciple relationship. This is a relationship marked by utter dedication from both parties involved.
The Pastor is expected to commit to the personal mentorship of the disciple. This includes offering spiritual guidance, life counsel, and emotional support. On the other hand, the disciple is expected to offer unequivocal dedication towards the Pastor, showing sincere respect and commitment to mimic his principles.
The goal of the disciple is to become like the Pastor as much as possible. This involves the disciple striving to adopt the Pastor's teachings, perceiving the world through his eyes, and emulating his behaviors.
In this relationship, the disciple aims to absorb the Pastor's wisdom, not merely his words, but also his actions. They aspire to embody the Pastor's virtues and lifestyle, thereby growing in their spiritual journey.
This relationship is, therefore, one of mentorship and learning - a bond where the Pastor commits himself to the disciples' growth, and the disciple, in turn, strives to become as much like the Pastor as they possibly can.
QUESTION: Is it clear yet that every believer is actually a disciple—a disciplined follower of Jesus Christ? How else are we to fulfill our role as kings-and-priests just like our Lord?
All attempts to mass produce disciplines will ultimately fail. Men of God must be handcrafted.
The statement "Factory disciples are not what Jesus made, nor is it what He commanded and exemplified" is wholly true. Disciples are not manufactured on a production line, but rather, they are made and sculpted out of Pastor-to-disciple relationships. Operating within our calling is more caught than taught.
It is in the very process of ministering to people and creating more followers that disciples are formed. The journey of discipleship is not a mass-produced event, but an individual path walked with Jesus. This process, as exemplified by Jesus, necessitates patience, faith, and an authentic bond between the mentor and the follower.
This significant connection becomes the clay in the sculptor's hands, from which another disciple is formed. The disciple's form is not predetermined or uniform, as would be the case in a factory setting, but rather unique, shaped by the intimate walk with Jesus throughout their personal journey.
Therefore, disciples are not derived from a factory model production line, but instead, they are uniquely crafted through personal relationships and life experiences in ministering and following the teachings of Jesus.
The requirements of Bible schools eliminate many who God would use. The requirements of money, previous education, and age would have stopped Jesus and the twelve disciples.
This is undeniably true. The majority of Bible school students and graduates do not align with the individuals that Paul describes in 1 Corinthians 1:20-31. Jesus' disciples did not arise from the "middle class" or decorous families of Israel. Ironically, the only one who might have had such a background was Judas, the betrayer.
It seems that Jesus' set of qualifications diverges significantly from those emphasized by most Bible schools.
The Bible school system puts the church on a standard of "mind" not "heart," rewarding wrong motives, and creating an elitist mentality of really having paid too high a price to reach the poor.
This one is a little jumbled. Let's see if we can clean up the thoughts a little:
The structure of the Bible school system puts the church on a standard that values intellect over empathy, thereby rewarding misguided motivations. This structure can breed a mentality of elitism where individuals may feel they have paid too high a price to reach out to the poor.
This wording is much clearer and easier to deal with. Here, we have two core thoughts. Let's take each one in turn.
Intellect over Empathy
The knowledge we acquire intellectually must always fall behind our pursuit of embodying the essence of Jesus. This includes following the aspects of raw law, compassion, empathy, caring, and selfless service to others.
Empowering individuals and acknowledging them as victims of a dreadful, supernatural spiritual war is of paramount importance. This aspect ascends far above the intellectual outcomes of education and schooling.
Elitism and the Poor
Jesus encountered precisely this scenario from products of conventional Jewish rabbinicalism, discipleship, and yeshivas (schools). The Law was transformed into a mechanism for self-aggrandizement, designed to trample on suffering humanity, while feigning care, compassion, and love. Jesus faced this with relentless vigor in his interactions with leading Jews.
The proposition that individuals produced from Bible schools are part of a modern Phariseeism is indeed, a compelling argument. Surely, there are numerous exceptions; however, these are more edge cases as opposed to being the overbearing norm. Hidden behind well-meaning smiles, many pastors are content to view themselves as leaders and shepherds, while perceiving their congregations as mere flocks—mindless, naive, bleating sheep.
The thought of personally cultivating a new generation to pioneer new churches and replicate their attributes never occurs to them. Instead, they fall prey to the establishment indoctrination of promoting 'intelligent individuals' to Bible schools to assume the roles of elitist pastors upholding their local churches, even as the world crumbles around them.
Bible schools tend to put those who can't pastor into the role of pastor trainers.
In my former industry, computer science, we operated under a certain adage: Those who can't, teach.
The common perception was that an individual could achieve a more lucrative and profitable career working directly within the business trenches, as opposed to the relatively limited potential of being a teacher. Therefore, a majority of teachers in my field were not industry experts imparting their accumulated wisdom and experience to the budding aspirants. Instead, they were often just talented students who had graduated and discovered their knack for guiding others through the convoluted maze of college education.
However, this broad generalization certainly does not apply to all teachers. There are excellent educators and mentors out there, some of whom delve into research and also teach on the side. The main strength of these individuals is their vast intellect, which they leverage to stretch the constraints of the industry. Hence, the situation is not as black and white as it might seem.
On a related note, it is noteworthy how Jesus handpicked unlearned teenagers, for the most part, to be his apostles, who succeeded in turning the world upside down with their teachings.
Having said that, while education holds immense importance and we require comprehensive content from scholars who dedicate themselves to rigorous research, it is crucial to filter and simplify this complex material for those working on the ground—in the trenches of churches around the world—who strive to save souls.
The beauty of Dr. Mike Heiser’s approach was that he originated from these very trenches. He was deeply perturbed by the fact that the rich knowledge he obtained from higher education was not being effectively repackaged and disseminated as accessible information for ordinary people, like perhaps you and me.
The system builds into the church a clergy-laity mentality that denies the priesthood of the believer, and develops a mentality that some people need to be really committed and others just need to be saved.
Discipleship for All
The saddest part of every church I have been in since my old 'Fellowship days' is the distinct division along these lines: clergy and laity. Generally, the laity never perceive themselves as part of the ministry process and reaching the local lost around them. They view that as the responsibility of the pastor, his elders, deacons, and other staff.
People are not typically trained to realize that becoming a Christian involves them directly in the intricate processes of church building and growth. While it isn't expected for every person to pioneer a church, each individual can participate and support the pioneers in building the church they have joined.
One of the most profound and beautiful practices I have observed was in the context of a mother-daughter church relationship, which was beautifully exercised in the Fellowship churches. Mother churches with fledgling daughter churches would dispatch teams for outreach, follow-ups, ministry and music and drama. The mission of those going and on these teams would be to help the pioneer pastor with establishing and launching the local body.
The beauty of this arrangement was in the continual learning and development occurring both ways - a "train-the-trainer" moment, as well as a charge to 'Go Ye', recurring over and over again!
Bible schools rob the church of the dignity it was meant to have in the preparing of workers and reaching a lost world.
The church never shines brighter than when she is continually pregnant, having children, and raising them to become the proud parents of the next generation. It's her duty to nurture these children into adulthood.
Unfortunately, many churches end up being sterile places where growth is attained through robbing other churches around them. They compete for the new folks moving to town. Instead of fostering growth within their own communities, they rely on the transference of members from other congregations.
Therefore, the modern 21st-century church identifies her greatest need as having a robust structure of programs. This includes fine preaching, exciting worship, excellent childcare, quality home groups, and engaging fellowship and hobbies. She thinks that to have a thriving community, it's no longer enough just to provide a place of worship; that somehow, a modern church should be able to meet not just the spiritual needs of its members but also their social and familial needs.
She's lost in quagmire of pandering or marketing like a human business so that she can measure her success is numbers, nickels, and noise.
They [bible schools] violate the indigenous principle.
In a sermon preached by Pastor Wayman Mitchell during the 80s, he recounts an excursion into the interior of Mexico. A team of Fellowship pastors and church members embarked on this journey, dedicating their resources and time to building and pioneering churches in central Mexico.
However, they ultimately ended up being expelled by the Mexicans, who disallowed their return. Was this a significant hindrance? In one sense, it was, but considering the intricately designed discipleship program they left behind, the setback was manageable.
The churches had an inherent discipleship program wherein all church members were encouraged to explore their divine callings in Christ. As a result of this, the indigenous leaders of those churches did not crumble in the absence of the Americans. Instead, they continued to persevere, carrying on with the mission left behind by their American counterparts. The resistance was seen as a minor setback, and it couldn't stagger the unwavering spirit of these leaders whose resilience was rooted deeply in their faith and direct discipleship.
Practical experience while pastoring, tied to regular Bible conferences is a more effective use of God's money.
I should point out that we've gained substantial insights since the 1980s and even the 90s. Books such as "The Organic Church" by Neal Cole, along with his experimental approach of building spontaneous, life-where-it-happens-oriented church meetings, and fostering organic discipleship within them—these methodologies have broadened what the Fellowship set out to accomplish, extending it beyond the confines of traditional brick-and-mortar churches.
Yet, throughout all of this, even Neal acknowledges that conventional brick-and-mortar churches continue to serve a vital function. He suggests that a periodic, large-scale conglomeration of these small undertakings could operate much like the Fellowship's "conferences" (assuming they still do).
To reiterate, we have indeed learned quite a bit in the past forty years and it's incumbent upon us to remain alert and explore Spirit-led perspectives beyond the frameworks others have erected.
The fact that your organization functions in a certain manner doesn't automatically make it desirable in the eyes of the Lord, nor does it guarantee that it's the most needed, useful or beneficial approach for the current circumstances and era. We must willingly discard antiquated methodologies—or "old wine skins"— to let fresh ideas, the "new wine," enter the fray!
Bible schools, while not evil in themselves, are not God's best method.
I must concur with the notion that they are "not evil in themselves." They truly aren't. Their function and goal are indeed valid.
We just need to explore methods of incorporating them into the pastor-disciple relationship within the local church body. This assists in avoiding stripping the church of her role and glory as the proverbial parent of the little ones. Additionally, it emphasizes her responsibility to train these young members herself, personally responsible for marshalling them into spiritual adulthood.
This approach facilitates shifting the focus from solely relying on the likes of baby-sitters and schools, to a more engaged church-based upbringing and orientation.