Bible Institute

m02150

BIBLE INSTITUTE

Webster's second definition of institute reads as follows: ":something that is instituted: as a
(1): an elementary principle recognized as authoritative (2) pl: a collection of such
principles and precepts; esp : a legal compendium by an organization for the promotion of
a cause: ASSOCIATION <a research ...> <an...for the blind> c: an educational institution
and esp. one devoted to technical fields d: a usu. brief intensive course of instruction on
selected topics relating to a particular field...."

It is assumed in our context of the Bible Institute we would opt for the final "c" and "d"
definitions, realizing that we desire to have that emphasis upon the Bible rather than any
other technical field.

Let us try and define what a Bible Institute is. We will look at the history of the movement
as well as the practical current application of that concept.

There are several groups in the period of the reformation that required that their ministers
memorize the entire New Testament as "PART" of their training for the ministry. We
might assume from this that the hardness of the course was not an easy road to walk.

Most of the sources checked list A.B. Simpson's Bible Inst. that was founded in 1882 in
New York City and later moved to Nyack and D.L. Moody's Moody Bible Inst. established
in 1886, as the first "Bible Institutes." There were similar institutions by other names much
further back in history.

It should be noted that Mr. Moody was involved in the YMCA and its training program.

The Halle founded by Frederick III, in Halle, Germany was the prime mover in the pietist
movement and the Moravian group. The pietists introduced the Bible institute to England
and some believe this was the forerunner of our present schools.

"One cannot resist emphasizing the link between the Moravian church, with its pietistic
tendencies, and the contemporary Bible college movement. The mission emphasis and
necessity of trained workers, which so occupied the thinking of the Pietests, led to the
founding of schools not at all unlike the early American Bible institute." (P 309;
"CHRISTIAN EDUCATION: ITS HISTORY AND PHILOSOPHY" by Gangel and
Benson)

Peter P. Person in his "AN INTRODUCTION TO CHRISTIAN EDUCATION" page 209
mentions of the early circuit riding preachers of the west,

"Their 'professional' training consisted of a short course in Bible study. The training
institutions that prepared these workers were in reality Bible institutes. The teachers were,
in many instances, refined and cultured men having earned advanced degrees. Some of
them were Greek, Hebrew, or Latin scholars. The training they dispensed was not a
protest against the schooling they themselves had been given, but rather a temporary
solution to a pressing problem."

Mr. Person goes on to make a very interesting statement of the growth of the Christian
educational system.

"Gradually, strictly academic courses were added to the curriculum. The prerequisite of a
high-school education for entering the seminary became a general practice. Gradually the
prerequisite was expanded to two years of college, and finally the theological seminaries
became graduate schools."

The requirement for a high school education grew out of the fact that most applicants had
the same and it seemed wise to take this step of change.

Several books mentioned Harvard, William and Mary and Yale as schools set for the same
purpose as Moody and Nyack. (Gangel & Benson for one. P 310)

It seems that both Simpson and Moody viewed the need as, trained laymen to bridge the
gap between the common man and the clergy.

"We want our best scholarship and talent in the mission field, but we want all who can go;
and with a destitution so imperative, the Church of God should be willing to welcome the
humblest 'prentice hand,' and dispense with full technical preparation wherever she finds
other qualifications for humble usefulness." (This was Simpson just prior to the founding
of his school. P 380 of "AN INTRODUCTION TO EVANGELICAL CHRISTIAN
EDUCATION" by Hakes)

"I believe we have got to have 'gap men,' men who are trained to fill the gap between the
common people and the ministers." (Moody just before the founding of his school. "AN
INTRODUCTION TO EVAN. CHRIS. ED." Hakes)

Hakes continues to describe the schools that were set up.

"The first schools, therefore, were concerned primarily with equipping dedicated young
people with the essential knowledge of God's Word and the practical skills necessary to
become effective Christian witnesses in home visitation, city mission work, Sunday school
teaching, and foreign missionary service. The great majority of students in the early days
were admitted without high school preparation. Many were mature persons in their
twenties and thirties. But in spite of their non conventional academic standards, these
schools met a need and were successful in training many hundreds of servants of Christ."
(Pp 380-381)

Hake goes on to describe the desire to raise the standards of the Bible institute-college to
keep up with changes in the educational needs of the country. The high school graduate
was becoming more prominent and the need to upgrade the curriculum to accommodate
them was part of the change. Many Bible institute-colleges became liberal arts colleges
while the rest maintained their "Distinctive elements in Bible college education...." and
opted to stay as Bible institute-colleges.

The Accrediting Association of Bible Colleges became the "means by which Bible institutes
and Bible colleges might achieve academic standing while preserving their central thrust of
preparing young people for Christian service through a Bible-centered program of
education." (P 381; "AN INTRO. TO EVANGELICAL CHRISTIAN EDUCATION)

The Bible institute played a large role in the workings of early fundamentalism.

"In 1910 "Fundamentalism' started as a protest against the rising tide of 'Modernism.'
Fostered by the Moody Bible Institute in Chicago and by the Bible Institute of Los
Angeles, California, it advocated the following five test-points of true Christianity...." (P
534-535 of "A HISTORY OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH" by Lars P. Qualben)

The fundamentalists were not uneducated people, but men that were very able to contend
for their faith.

"The evangelicals also met liberalism with a strong literary apologetic. In 1909 Lyman and
Milton Stewart, California oil millionaires, gave $300,000 to publish a set of twelve
paper-bound books called "THE FUNDAMENTALS". About three million copies were
circulated widely among ministers and students. These scholarly essays by recognized
evangelical scholars were edited by A. C. Dixon, with the help of R.A. Torrey. J.
Gresham Machen wrote many popular books, such as "Christianity and Liberalism (1923),
AND SCHOLARLY WORKS, SUCH AS HIS "THE VIRGIN BIRTH OF CHRIST
(1930). (From "CHRISTIANITY THROUGH THE CENTURIES" by Earle E. Cairns; p
481)

George W. Dollar in his "A HISTORY OF FUNDAMENTALISM IN AMERICA"
mentions that the Bible schools of early Fundamentalism did not emphasis the liberal arts
and that indeed, they could not if they were to remain with a "Bible-centered curriculum."
He indicates that the Bible schools such as Moody Bible institute and others were of
collegiate level. In speaking of some of the smaller schools he mentions, "These were
hardly of collegiate standing but did not claim to be so." (Pp 70-71)

So! To what conclusions can we arrive at from what we have seen?

Let us begin by listing some things that a Bible Institute is not.

1. It is not a liberal arts college or university. It might be of interest to those really
interested in these terms to study their history also.

2. It is not controlled by government or outside sources. It is controlled by its board of
directors.

3. It is not interested in an emphasis other than the Bible and Bible related subjects.

From the Webster's definition we might assume that there is a specialized emphasis on the
Bible as opposed to the liberal arts. The above statement would be backed by the
comments from Church history books as well.

It is indicated by Mr. Dollar that the Bible school movement was not an attempt to move
away from collegiate levels of training - only to move away from the liberal arts, liberal
doctrinal positions, and to move toward the Bible orientation of training.

It might do well to mention that Mr. Dollar saw in his research an attempt to move to a
practical aspect of training as well. There is nothing to indicate in what he said that there
was an emphasis of the practical over the academic.

CONCLUSIONS:

1. Academics are not of themselves wrong nor are they to be absent from the Bible
Institute.

2. Practical knowledge is not of itself wrong nor is it to be absent from the Bible Institute.
The question would naturally arise as to how you build the practical into the student while
in the classroom and not in the ministry. Practical knowledge is limited to being taught in
an academic way within the classroom in the Bible Institute.

By way of practical use of the Scriptures and practical application of the Scriptures to the
life, yes it is a vital part of the Bible School movement.

3. There is strong indication that the level of training, while being in the area of Bible and
Practical use of that Bible, is to be of collegiate level. That is why many of the Bible
school movement have offered academic degrees.

4. A final thought from Mr. Hake will end this study.

"The population of the world, which should be viewed from the perspective of Calvary, is
four times larger that when William Carey began the modern missionary movement. In
another twenty-five years living persons for whom Christ died will number close to four
billion and by the end of the century, seven billion. [Mr. Hake wrote his book in 1964.]
The task to which Bible schools are committed and to which they have contributed largely
is so stupendous that they cannot afford to strive for less than the best in quality of
preparation." (Pp 389-390)

APPENDIX ONE

Hake mentions the definition of a Bible College from the Association of Bible Colleges.

"Bible college education is education of college level whose distinctive function is to
prepare students for Christian ministries or church vocations through a program of Biblical,
general, and professional studies. Included in the concept of Christian ministries are such
church vocations as pastor, missionary, Christian service director, minister of music, and
other specialized forms of Christian service by both lay and 'professional' workers."

He also lists a policy statement from the same association concerning the Christian liberal
arts college.

"1. SIMILARITIES. Both the Christian liberal arts college and the Bible college should be
committed to a Biblical philosophy of education. In both, Christ should be the center of
integration. Both are concerned with the personal development of students. Both seek to
broaden and deepen the educational foundation of incoming students by general education.

"2. DISTINCTIVE OBJECTIVES. From this point the Bible college and the Christian
liberal arts college become distinctive in their objectives. The liberal arts college goes on
from a foundation of general education in the humanities and sciences to prepare students
by liberal arts majors for many professions and vocations. The liberal arts therefore
distinguish the chief subject matter of the liberal arts curriculum.

"Bible colleges, on the other hand, are specialized. Their distinctive function is to prepare
students for Christian ministries and church vocations. This they do through a program of
Biblical, general and professional education. The bible major therefore is at the heart of
the Bible college curriculum. However, a Bible college may offer liberal arts majors
provided these are in addition to and do not displace the required Bible major or alter the
objectives of Bible college education.

"3. CENTRAL PURPOSE. The central purpose which characterizes Bible institutes and
Bible colleges is to prepare students for Christian service at home and abroad either as
full-time or lay workers. The first bible schools in America were established for this
purpose." (pp 383-384 Hake)

He goes on to make a very good statement concerning the Bible college and the Bible
institute.

"One other distinction needs to be made - the difference between the Bible institute and the
Bible college. Essentially, the two types belong to the same family of educational
institutions, and the distinction in types has come to be more or less superfluous, as is the
case with other types of college-level institutions of specialized education. Both seek the
same goals and both are committed to a Biblical philosophy of education. Where there is a
difference it is usually one of length of program. The Bible institute is generally a
three-year, non-degree-conferring institution, while the Bible college offers four- and
five-year programs leading to degrees. The longer period permits the Bible college to
include one more year of general education that can be incorporated in a three-year
program. The Accrediting Association of Bible Colleges recognizes that both types of
schools can operate according to college-level standards, and so membership is open to
both."

APPENDIX TWO

So, to what definition have we come for a Bible institute?

May the following be suggested?

SINCE:

1. a Bible institute is ministering primarily to high school graduates,

2. a Bible institute is maintaining a strong Bible emphasis,

3. a Bible institute is training young men and women for ministries in full or part time lay
ministries, and

4. a Bible institute is sharing a strong world-wide missions emphasis,

THEN:

1. a Bible institute is a college level training program,

2. a Bible institute is teaching primarily Bible centered and Bible related courses,

3. a Bible institute is transforming students into workers able to minister full or part time in
church related ministries, and

4. a Bible institute is challenging and training its students toward fulfilment of their part in
the great commission, both here and abroad.

PRACTICAL APPLICATION OF THIS DEFINITION:

1. We should teach academically on the college level.

2. We should endeavor to teach practical experience through our Christian Service
department as well as internship programs when available.

3. We are to teach the practical value and application of the Word of God in all areas of
Christian living. This includes all class work. Any way to make the Word practical to life
should be used.

4. All classroom work should be related to the world's need for Christ and how the learning
relates to filling that need.

5. We should train the student to be able to communicate the worlds need of Christ to all
people no matter what their educational, cultural or economic level.

APPENDIX THREE

In light of the current criticism of education and educational institutions of all levels and
breeds it may be well to consider how we should relate to the Christian education of our
day.

1. Education is not wrong, nor is it sinful. It is the misuse of education and knowledge that
is wrong. It is the lustful seeking after knowledge that is wrong.

2. God leads different men and women to prepare for their life's work in different and
varied ways. One may not need Bible education at all, for he may have received his
training from God Himself through years in the Word and through godly men that have
taught them in informal settings. Others due to their environment in younger years may
need extensive education to be established in their beliefs and to be able to do the work that
God has called them to.

Realizing that God leads different people in different ways should bring us to the
realization that we are all prepared by God for the purpose for which God has planned for
us.

Realizing this should cause the believer to reexamine his condemnation and critical attitude
toward those that have higher education.

3. The seeking of man's education and degrees for the purpose of adding to one's "pride
of life" is very definitely not appropriate. It might be well to add that it is believed by this
writer that very few men with higher education sought that education for these purpose's.
It might also be added that most of this writer's aquaintances have accepted higher
education at the definite leading and provision of God.

4. Since wisdom is a by-product of properly used knowledge, and since wisdom is held
highly in the Proverbs, then we as believers should seek to properly use that knowledge
which God has given us to wise ends.

5. The other problem that arises out of this study is that some are proud of not having a
higher education. Higher education is for the betterment of man, be it Christian or secular.
Pride of life is wrong according to I John, whether it be lack of something or excess of
something.

A quote may help us understand.

"Being proud of ignorance is ignorance.
"Being proud of education is ignorance.
"Being joyful of God given knowledge is wisdom." (sld 9-12-89)