Last year, I completed a long-term goal: I earned my Ph.D. in biblical and religious studies. I’ve been a theological student for 18 years (I’m a slow learner, after all!), and have benefited tremendously from the teaching ministries of many godly and wise professors, as well as interaction with my fellow students.  However, for this final milestone, I did something rather unconventional in my circles.  I earned the degree from a “liberal” school, and one on the other side of the world, at that.

Don’t get me wrong.  I’m a theological conservative, and a thoroughgoing evangelical.  So were my professors.  My most influential professors were graduates of the Southern Baptist seminaries, Dallas Theological Seminary, Liberty University, and Trinity Evangelical Divinity School. These men and women represent the finest thinkers and teachers in the evangelical Christian tradition, and I’m grateful to have learned from them. 

So why would I choose the University of Pretoria for my Ph.D.?  First, it has a reputation for academic excellence.  UP is ranked among the top 500 (it placed 305 in academic reputation) universities in the world.  My department, the department of humanities, placed at number 292.   There are over 17,000 institutions of higher learning on the planet, so this puts Pretoria in the top 3% of all schools.  When compared to American schools, Pretoria falls into the same category as Syracuse University and The College of William and Mary, and ranks higher than Marquette, Fordham, Baylor, and Loyola, for example. I knew that to earn the degree, I would have to perform at a high level.  Consequently, the degree would carry weight.

But academic excellence is not the only reason for my choice. I was educated in a theological bubble, and I wanted to push the boundaries of that bubble.  My doctoral mentor was Ernest van Eck, one of the prominent scholars and churchmen of the Netherdutch Reformed Church of South Africa.  He is one of the leading lights of social-scientific criticism.  I was schooled in the historical-critical method, and had barely heard of social-scientific criticism when I began my doctoral studies.  From the start, I was forced to look at the biblical text with new eyes.  I had to learn a new approach to hermeneutics, then apply it to the New Testament.  Without compromising my view of the inerrancy of scripture, I had to learn to read it differently, and I could never quantify the benefit this has given me as preacher and teacher of the Bible.

Dr. van Eck’s doctoral mentor was Andries van Aarde, the preeminent “historical Jesus” scholar of South Africa.  Dr. van Aarde was a founding member of the Jesus Seminar, which is about as far left theologically as one can go.  Dr. van Eck’s perspective is not as radical as that of the Jesus Seminar, but neither could I assume that he and I looked at the text from the same perspective.  Suddenly, it was not sufficient simply to assert my theological views on the biblical text; I had to defend them.  I had to articulate them in a way that makes sense and passes muster with someone who may not agree with my presuppositions.  The more I wrote for Dr. van Eck, the more focused and clear my thinking became.  My views did not change, but they did take on a clearer and sharper contrast as I had to re-think how best to articulate them.

Eventually, I found myself writing for Dr. van Aarde as well, since a portion of my dissertation was revised and published as an article in Hervormed Theologies Studies, a scholarly journal of which Dr. van Aarde is the senior editor.  If you are an evangelical who has never had to present your interpretation of a gospel passage to a senior member of the Jesus Seminar, you don’t know what you are missing!  The article went through three revisions before final publication. Yes, it got frustrating, but excellence requires hard work, and frustration is to be expected. In the end, I was a much more capable scholar with a greater understanding of the text, and for that, I am grateful.

I should clarify here: at no time did I experience any antagonism for my theological views; they simply were not mutually agreed upon.  If I wanted to assert the canonicity of a disputed text, for instance, it was not enough to claim inerrancy and move on.  I had to make a strong case for accepting the text, account for the views of those opposed to my position, and reconcile them- before moving on to an interpretation of the text. I was pushed gently but firmly to clarify my views, by a scholar who loves the Lord, loves His Word, and loves the church. 

Based on my experience, I encourage all thoughtful Christians to do two things: first, become absorbed in the bubble of your theological perspective.  I earned degrees from Florida Baptist Theological College and Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary, and also studied at Southern Evangelical Seminary long before I enrolled at UP.  I had a strong grasp of the evangelical theological tradition, and of conservative, historical approaches to biblical text.  These are indispensable.  You may not be in a position to attend a college or seminary, but you can certainly take advantage of numerous resources in print, online, and in your church. In America today, no Christian has any excuse for not learning his or her theological tradition thoroughly.

Second, get someone to push the boundaries of your bubble.  When you feel confident in what you believe, seek out people who are competent to challenge those views.  Read books by authors with whom you disagree (Marcus Borg and John Dominic Crossan have been helpful to me in this respect), and consider their arguments well.  Whether or not you are personally able to refute these arguments may not be relevant- the contrast will help to clarify your own thought.  Find a Christian brother or sister who sincerely believes in evolution, or gay marriage, or doubts the doctrine of inerrancy, or believes that Jesus is not the only way to heaven.  Talk.  Don’t argue- dialogue.  The more your strongly held beliefs scrape up against beliefs that run counter to them, the stronger they should become.  You don’t have to win a debate to benefit greatly from sharing meaningful fellowship with someone who sees things different, and you certainly don’t have to compromise your convictions simply to understand someone else’s.

Your theological bubble should get larger over time, not smaller, and this only happens as you find people who can push its limits for you.