Online Vs. in-Person Education: Theological Training Is Supposed to Be Hard

I realize it was a joke. I think it wasn’t a good one because it appears to be mocking people who have engaged in a serious exchange of ideas by making it appear as if they said something they didn’t. It doesn’t contribute anything meaningful to a good conversation. It detracts from it.

[Ben Edwards]

Perhaps this will help. You seem to be missing a couple of things in your reading of my argument.

1. I’m not making an argument for the superiority of in-person theological training in this post—so nothing I’m saying about hardship necessarily rules out distance education
2. I’ve already stated that distance education is the right choice for some people. As has been noted, we have distance education students at DBTS. So it would make no sense for me to say that students who choose distance education options are serving Christ improperly (since I would be aiding them in their failure).
3. I’m not just focusing on hard vs. easy. I’m focusing on good/better but hard vs. not as good/lesser but easy and allowing ease/convenience to be the sole factor in the choice between the two.

Ben, thank you for the interaction and clarification. Please forgive me for being uncharitable earlier. I would just submit to you that on-line seminary education done well can be both “good/better” and easier/more convenient (logistically speaking) than in-person education. Do you consider this a possibility? In that case, if a man makes his choice solely based on ease/convenience (i.e. “good/better but hard” vs. “good/better but easier/more convenient”), is he still a target of your disapprobation and unfit to be a pastor?

I realize it was a joke. I think it wasn’t a good one because it appears to be mocking people who have engaged in a serious exchange of ideas by making it appear as if they said something they didn’t.

For whatever it’s worth, there was no offense taken and Tyler’s comment did get a chuckle out of me. As a wise man once said in a movie: “Why so serious?”

Ok, so maybe that person wasn’t wise. :)

A former superior of mine in the Navy just posted this; he graduated with his MBA, which he obtained with the GI Bill. It goes to Ben’s point, I think. This man isn’t a Christian, but that’s not the point:

If we replace the word “convenient” with synonyms like “appropriate”, “advantageous”, or “conducive”, this would be a whole different discussion.

I think for some, convenient carries the connotation of laziness and possibly even carelessness—like paying $2 more for a gallon of milk at the 7-Eleven.

But convenience can also mean seeking a solution that is not only the most efficient, but most effective. When we make choices—whether we realize it or not—we weigh many factors and come up with the answer that we believe is most advantageous to us.

This choice could be the most responsible choice, or the most self-indulgent. It’s worth the step back to weigh the choice of online vs classroom so each person can determine which option is truly best for them.

Jeff Straub wrote,

Second, I am all for pastoral mentoring , though I seldom see it done right. If your pastor met with you, prayed with you, read books with you, had you into his home, hung out with you, rebuked you, encouraged you, challenged you, instructed you and otherwise was intimately involved in your life, you were blessed indeed. Many students don’t have that kind of a mentoring relationship with their pastor which is really too bad. We at Central strive to have this, not as a substitute to a student’s local church but as a complement to it. It is intentional on our part. Few churches have the intentional mentorship model of say a Capital Hill Baptist and Mark Dever. Now that is intentional mentoring done right!

Not to hijack this thread, but I am curious how many seminaries are addressing this issue and better preparing pastors to be be mentors- especially in places where the seminary model may not be an option for the next generation - I’m thinking Africa or China where even online learning my be restricted by the government.

On mentorship, let’s take a step back from the pastoral world and just consider apprenticeship in general. Think about your job. Think about the role model(s) who taught you how to do the job. Think about who had a formative influence on you in your chosen profession, and why. It’s likely someone who was experienced, patient, kind, a model of competence (not perfection), who took the time to show and teach a craft to you over time. It’s someone who invested in you.

This problem of mentorship isn’t restricted to the pastoral arena; it’s needed in every field. And, pastors certainly don’t have a corner on the market when it comes to advice on how to model what mentorship looks like.

T Howard

No need to submit that scenario, since it’s clear from what I’ve said I must believe that to be the case.

1. As you note, I’m working on the assumption that distance education will almost always be more convenient/easier.
2. The choice for theological education should be based on what is good/better.
3. For some, distance education is the right choice.

Thus, I must believe that there are scenarios in which distance education is good/better and easier/more convenient.

But I don’t think there is a scenario in which someone could make that decision based solely on convenience. As I’ve stated, I believe, all other things being equal, in-person education is superior to distance education. But when you factor in other important issues, distance education might be the right choice. Thus, I don’t think it is possible for ease/convenience to ever be the sole factor in the choice.

Perhaps you are thinking of a scenario in which, after important factors are considered, it seems that the options for in-person education and distance education are more or less equal. Could convenience then be a factor that causes you to choose the distance option? Of course. But it would not be the sole factor, since other factors had to be considered in order to make them more or less equal.

FWIW, if we replaced the word convenient with other words, it would probably no longer mean what I was trying to communicate. I’m using it to mean, as Merriam-Webster states: ” suited to personal comfort or to easy performance.” So words that don’t carry that meaning would not be synonyms here.

[Ben Edwards]

FWIW, if we replaced the word convenient with other words, it would probably no longer mean what I was trying to communicate. I’m using it to mean, as Merriam-Webster states: ” suited to personal comfort or to easy performance.” So words that don’t carry that meaning would not be synonyms here.

Part of what makes convenience a slippery concept is that it’s easy to freight other ideas to it…. because they often go with it

• Convenient and lazy
• Convenient and self-indulgent
• Convenient and cheap/low value
• Convenient and short-term focused

And then there’s the problem of overvalued convenience relative to other factors. (Which probably overlaps with “cheap/low value”)

So we probably all want to say don’t make education choices out of laziness, self-indulgence, short-term thinking or overvalued convenience. At the same time, nobody thinks that when all other factors have been properly weighed, inconvenient is better than convenient.

[Ben Edwards] FWIW, if we replaced the word convenient with other words, it would probably no longer mean what I was trying to communicate. I’m using it to mean, as Merriam-Webster states: ” suited to personal comfort or to easy performance.” So words that don’t carry that meaning would not be synonyms here.

That is sort of my point—your intent is to use ‘convenience’ with a somewhat negative connotation. However, the Bible uses the term (and terms like it, such as “commodious”) to convey something that is suitable or seasonable or a proper fit. That may be why some are taking issue with your stance—because convenience itself is not a bad thing. As you pointed out in your article, motivations are what make something good or bad.

And let’s face it—there are always going to be students, online and residential, looking for ways to skate through school. Ah, the stories I could tell… but there are only so many ways schools can winnow the wheat from the chaff.

I think it’s also important to note that attitudes about college in general have changed. Students and parents are factoring in the cost-to-benefit ratio of university when many employers will accept work experience regardless of whether one has a degree. As CTI notes:

The rise of nondenominational churches, for example, means that fewer pastors are required to hold a seminary degree…

When the need is not viewed as urgent, a degree can be obtained at a lower cost, and churches offer training in the form of non-degree courses and workshops with eye to keeping young people ministering in their home church, I think incurring debt to enroll in a residential program is a tough sell, especially in today’s education climate.

However, I tend to agree with author Tom Nichols, who said in his book The Death of Expertise:

These are dangerous times. Never have so many people had access to so much knowledge, and yet been so resistant to learning anything.

When I was looking to get seminary training, I had a full-time job, a house, and three kids that were about to enter their teen years. My plan was to (1) find a new job in the general vicinity of the seminary, (2) sell my house, and (3) move to the area to attend in person. I was going to fund my seminary training via the proceeds from the sale of my house. I had several interviews with companies in the areas I was targeting, but nothing panned out. I was really quite surprised, but I took it as the Lord’s leading not to uproot my family for this training.

Subsequently, I started to look at online options and ended up getting an MBS completely online via Virginia Beach Theological Seminary. The downside was that I didn’t really get to know the professors or other students very well, but I did get what I was looking for, and that was more advanced theological training. I also had full access to the Emory University theological library here in Atlanta, and so I had access to all the resources I needed to complete my papers and projects. I was also able to pay for my classes with the salary from my current job, didn’t need to go into debt, sell my house, or move. Those were all positives.

Online education was not my first choice, but I”m glad that option was available to me.

That is sort of my point—your intent is to use ‘convenience’ with a somewhat negative connotation. However, the Bible uses the term (and terms like it, such as “commodious”) to convey something that is suitable or seasonable or a proper fit. That may be why some are taking issue with your stance—because convenience itself is not a bad thing.

A good hermeneutics course should be pursued whether online or in person because it would remind us that a word means what an author intends it to mean. That the Bible (or someone else) uses the term differently is really quite irrelevant. If people are taking issue with Ben because they are using a different definition of convenience, then they aren’t taking issue with Ben at all.

[Larry]

A good hermeneutics course should be pursued whether online or in person because it would remind us that a word means what an author intends it to mean. That the Bible (or someone else) uses the term differently is really quite irrelevant. If people are taking issue with Ben because they are using a different definition of convenience, then they aren’t taking issue with Ben at all.

Along those same lines, a good linguistics course should be pursued as well, because if an author uses a word that has more than one connotation, but author decides to focus on one specific connotation to the exclusion of the others, then the author risks some misunderstanding taking place. If the author writes in a way that doesn’t clearly deal with the potential misunderstanding, then the author really is the one to take issue with.

While Ben certainly doesn’t need me to defend him, I will say that I think Ben was more than clear in his comments. There was really little potential for misunderstanding for people who actually read with an intent to understand Ben’s point (rather than read with the goal of refutation, which often leads to an unsympathetic and even partial reading). Virtually every objection raised was addressed in the initial post, particularly regarding the topic of convenience.

For instance, Ben said, “One of the biggest selling points for online education is its convenience. You can now get your degree without any real disruption to your life. Fit your training where you want it in your schedule!” By this, he was explicit about the definition of convenience he was using and the mindset he was addressing.

But if that wasn’t enough, he quotes Wallace who says, “some students are simply lazy. Online classes are, frankly, more convenient. Numerous pupils in theological institutes live on or close to campus but take courses online. Why? … often it is because they want the sheepskin with as little effort as possible. Countless numbers could make the sacrifice but view the degree as more important than the education. They intentionally settle for second best.”

So again, I think Ben was sufficiently clear in his comments for those who were willing to read and understand them.