Tommy reconstructs his censored comments

Tommy F emailed the following report on what happened at the Brad Cooper blog last week. From what I recall from reading the original discussion, his report here is substantively correct.

The gist of my various posts are below (3 were deleted from BCoop’s site). I have not made any attempt to make them either more polite or more pointed. This posting represents both the spirit and, to a large degree, the letter of what I wrote on BCoop’s site. In the originals, there were no offensive words, no expletives, and no personal attacks. In other words, there was no good reason to delete them. You’ll just have to take my word for it.

Apparently 15,000 people don’t care at all that their pastor and his leadership team have 0 seminary degrees among them. Or perhaps they just don’t know, which is why BCoop needed to delete my posts. This is conjecture, of course. But, if the information was incorrect, he could have simply corrected it. If it is true, but he didn’t want it to be publicized, well that takes a slightly different approach, doesn’t it? I call it the enema approach to blogging (H/T: Ace Noble).

On a less personal note: I find it disturbing that a youth minister’s blog feels it necessary to delete posts recommending theological education. Are they against education? Theology? Or just the combination of the two? Seriously.

I confess that I think highly of ministerial education. Is it perfect? No, but I think if all things are equal a seminary trained minister has a wider breadth of knowledge and has shown the proper dedication of basic preparation for his/her calling. I think it’s clear that Paul had a high view of training, the parchments (the scriptures), and clear teaching when he advised Timothy. For a few passages related to this, see: 1 Tim 1:6-7; 1 Tim 5:22; 1 Tim 6:20-21; 2 Tim 3:14-17; 2 Tim 4:1-4; 2 Tim 4:13.

On to the tantalizingly delete-worthy posts:

1) Theblakebutler wrote:

“@ Tommy F- I believe you need to make a distinction between apostles and disciples here if you are going to split hairs and cause dissension.”

My response:

I should begin by saying that I am not trying to cause dissension. As I see it this is a difference of opinion and perspective: I prefer my church leadership to have deep theological training, while others, apparently … not so much.

Blake asked whether I should make a distinction between apostles and disciples. This distinction is important and vital, and I’m glad he brought it up.

From the angle of apostles and disciples, the argument against going to seminary relies precisely on not making a proper distinction. As I understand it, the argument (at its simplest) runs as follows:

The 12 (apostles) never went to seminary, so why should I/we (21^st century disciples)?

There is a big difference between ministering with Jesus in the flesh for 3+ years, listening to him teach, watching him perform miracles, and observing how he dealt with people (both those sympathetic to Jesus’ ministry and those opposed), compared with the situation that Christians find themselves in today.

In fact, I would argue that it is impossible to parallel the experience of the 12 with any discipleship training that could be experienced today. The approach has to be different. Distincitons need to be made between 1^st century followers of Jesus and 21^st century ones.

I would argue further that the 12 experienced both ministerial on-the-job training while learning the requisite teaching required, and still they were stunned by the crucifixion, and were completely surprised that he rose on the third day. All of this, after following him for 3+ years.

Following the example of the 12 as a reason to avoid seminary is a fool’s errand. Too much time has passed, and Jesus is not walking the earth any longer.

On to the other substantive point made by theblakebutler:

“Tommy writes all of the time on other outlets about not preaching from the word, but I cannot find anywhere where getting a degree certifies and qualifies one to stand in a pulpit. Are you claiming that this should be an addendum to the Gospel? Yes we are to equip ourselves, but can a relationship with the father not simply be enough?”



My response:

I do not think that a degree qualifies one to stand in the pulpit, but often it can prepare someone to know what to say and do, once there. But, more importantly a theological education trains one to know what is erroneous and what is true. In other words it has the effect of preparing one for what should be said (truth), as well as what should not be said (error).

Overall, it seems to me that those who say seminary is an option for full-time ministers are trying to divide what Jesus joined: teaching and training coupled with ministry experience.

2) BCoop was not impressed with my follow-up comment, and came back with this gem:

“NS has a rule”…. id beg you to not make assumptions — you know how that can be perceived…

My original reply to BCoop (before he hit the delete button) was:

NS gives advice to young people re: seminary every time they utter the word cemetery regarding ministerial education. In fact, NS has a unified message regarding theological education. They don’t think it’s worthwhile. BCoop, this is not an assumption. It’s a conclusion drawn from evidence:

1) NS leaders explicitly call seminary cemetery. Not exactly a glowing endorsement, is it?

2) No one on their leadership team has completed a seminary degree. No, not one.

I suppose it’s not a rule in the sense that it’s in their operating manual, but it’s a unified stance regarding language and hiring practice. And I am fairly certain that these two points communicate a level of expectation from the students who look up to them and seek guidance. The combination of calling ministerial education cemetery and not having anyone on the leadership team with a seminary degree communicates loud and clear to high school and college students how NS views seminary: “don’t go. Don’t waste your time. We didn’t.”

3) Spencer wrote:

“I’ve been in the trenches four years w/o a degree. i have a friend who is graduating from four years of bible school this month with a degree in youth ministry.

“i’d put my experience versus his academics any day.”



I have a very simple two-fold reply:

1) Any Bible College that allows a ministerial student to finish without substantive ministry experience is not a very good one. If all s/he has is 4 years of classes, and no experience, then your friend should have gone elsewhere.

2) The posting relies on faulty logic. In the scenario Spencer presents, both individuals need to complete their training: he has 4 yrs of ministry, but no education. His friend has 4 yrs of Bible college, but no experience. Neither is fully prepared in my view.

When it comes to ministry and education, it’s not either/or. It’s both/and.

Another thought on comment vaporization

A few posts last week referenced BCoop’s deletion of Tommy and Twit’s comments, and I wanted to return to the topic briefly to explain why the incident warranted the attention I gave it.

Simply, blog moderators shouldn’t delete comments without a good reason, which would include comments that are off topic, libel, spam, and ad hominem attacks. I’m not questioning BCoop’s right to delete a comment or remove a commentator’s posting privilege; I’ve removed a couple of comments from this blog myself.

The problem with the Tommy and Twit comments was that there was no good reason to delete them, and, I would argue, an affirmative obligation to keep them on the page once the discussion began. Cooper had asked for advice, which Tommy offered.

Cooper responded and refuted Tommy’s suggestion, inviting Tommy to explain or defend himself, which he did. If Cooper didn’t want Tommy playing in his sandbox, the time to shut him down was when he offered the first comment. Once Cooper disagreed and engaged Tommy’s idea, he really needed to let the discussion play out.

From what I recall, Tommy offered several detailed and substantive responses on the difference between us and the disciples, and on NewSpring’s apparent institutional contempt for seminary. Twit, as you know, joined in with a Spurgeon quote supporting book learning. Tommy’s responses took some fine thinking and time in writing, and Twit’s took some research to find. Deleting them was an act of bad faith.

If Cooper felt that the comments section was getting too long, he could have simply shut the post down to further comments and left it at that. That’s done fairly regularly, especially for old posts or for long discussions that have gradually veered far afield from the original point.

The value of seminary and formal learning was certainly appropriate to the advice that Cooper had asked for.

Instead, it seemed that Cooper was worried that Tommy was winning the argument.

That, my friends, should not be a sufficient reason for deleting entries.

BCooP tweets @TommyF

Lot’s of LIPS TALK, few LIVES EARN THE EQUITY to be HEARD. If people are non-responsive to us, perhaps we should examine our lives…

Tommy, you obviously need a lot of examination.

UPDATE: Tommy, now he has a question for you.

Question: Where are you hiding?

Not to pile on…

…but one would have thought this wasn’t the best day for Cooper to be posting questions like this:

To pursue excellence, the only way to REALLY know our strengths and weaknesses is to ASK others…. Who you asking?

Who knew this was actually leadership advice?

From PN:

Keep something in mind about the internet…it is a place for cowards to hide.

The quote that NewSpring didn’t want you to read

NewSpring’s youth pastor, Brad Cooper, found it necessary to delete this quote from Charles Spurgeon that our friend, Twit, had posted in a discussion on his blog about the merits of an educated clergy.

We do not know what the books were about, and we can only form some guess as to what the parchments were. Paul had a few books which were left, perhaps wrapped up in the cloak, and Timothy was to be careful to bring them. Even an apostle must read. Some of our very ultra Calvinistic brethren think that a minister who reads books and studies his sermon must be a very deplorable specimen of a preacher. A man who comes up into the pulpit, professes to take his text on the spot, and talks any quantity of nonsense, is the idol of many. If he will speak without premeditation, or pretend to do so, and never produce what they call a dish of dead men’s brains—oh! that is the preacher. How rebuked are they by the apostle!

• He is inspired, and yet he wants books!
• He has been preaching at least for thirty years, and yet he wants books!
• He had seen the Lord, and yet he wants books!
• He had had a wider experience than most men, and yet he wants books!
• He had been caught up into the third heaven, and had heard things which it was unlawful for a men to utter, yet he wants books!
• He had written the major part of the New Testament, and yet he wants books!

The apostle says to Timothy and so he says to every preacher, “Give thyself unto reading.” The man who never reads will never be read; he who never quotes will never be quoted. He who will not use the thoughts of other men’s brains, proves that he has no brains of his own. Brethren, what is true of ministers is true of all our people. You need to read.

Renounce as much as you will all light literature, but study as much as possible sound theological works, especially the Puritanic writers, and expositions of the Bible. We are quite persuaded that the very best way for you to be spending your leisure, is to be either reading or praying. You may get much instruction from books which afterwards you may use as a true weapon in your Lord and Master’s service. Paul cries, “Bring the books”—join in the cry.

Incendiary stuff there, Rev. Spurgeon. Just as well you didn’t live in an Internet age.

Give me “authentic” advice, but make sure I agree with it first

Over on another outlet, Brad Cooper asked readers for advice for people going into the ministry. Our friend, Tommy, suggested in his usual diplomatic way that seminary might be a good idea.

A spirited discussion ensued and lasted on the site for about a day and a half.

Tonight, it’s been sucked down the memory hole. Deleted. Wiped. Gone.

Twit Conway was also annihilated.

That is bad blogging form. Here’s the proof from the way the site looked this afternoon.

One of Tommy’s comments was a response to Blake. Now we’re left with Blake’s response to Tommy, but not the argument he was responding to. It makes curious reading if you don’t know what happened.

The deleted discussion was about the merits of seminary, in counterpoint to NS’s repeated characterization of it as a cemetery. Twit Conway made the egregious error of quoting Spurgeon. (I assume that now that they no longer have to devote their time to two fora, they might reappear on these friendly pages and tell us what happened. T&T, did you get an explanation or notification from BCoop?)

Apparently disagreeable thoughts are too disturbing for some leaders. It would be nice if they could apply the same passion for ideological purity to what they put on stage during worship.