faculty_blog_header_summer

Written by Susan Disston Monday, 05 November 2012 00:00

Although it may be surprising to churchgoers in missionary-sending churches, the statement “the Bible is about mission” is not generally accepted in Western theology. As John Flett (The Witness of God [Eerdmans, 2010]) observed,

With few exceptions, mission is absent from the all-encompassing theological "system." Mission, it would seem, is unessential when articulating the fundamentals of the Christian faith. The problem here is not simply one of failing to treat one particular ecclesiastical practice. It indicates an omission that is deleterious to the whole dogmatic task: many of the contemporary challenges with theology stem from the absence of mission as a theological category. How it is possible to read the New Testament without reference to the missionary outpouring of the resurrection and Pentecost is a curio difficult to reconcile with even a basic reading of Scripture. 

One of the theological commitments of the missional conversation is to place mission at the forefront of theological thinking in the twenty-first century. Mission is the lens through which the missional conversation interprets and interacts with Scripture and the faith traditions that are represented by those in the conversation. They show that the Scriptures tell the story of mission, citing Jesus’ own words on the road to Emmaus:

Then he opened their minds so they could understand the Scripture. He told them, "This is what is written. The Christ will suffer and rise from the dead on the third day, and repentance and forgiveness of sins will be preached in his name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.” (Lk. 24:45-7) 

“The whole of the Scripture (which we now know as the Old Testament) finds its focus and fulfillment both in the life and death and resurrection of Israel’s Messiah, and in the mission to all the nations, which flow out from that event.” (Christopher Wright, Mission of God [IVP, 2006]). Jesus taught that the story of the Old Testament required both a messianic reading and a mission-oriented (or missional) reading. In other words, Jesus saw mission as a fundamental theological category.

The messianic reading of the Old Testament is tied to the Jewish expectation that God promised a Messiah to come and redeem Israel. The prophets preached about the Messiah and looked ahead to the fulfillment of the promised “hope of the nations.” (Is. 42:4) The hope of the nations was both for the people of Israel and for the nations of the world. “May his name endure forever; may it continue as long as the sun. All nations will be blessed through him, and they will call him blessed.” (Ps. 72:17) It is in the blessing to the world that the messianic promises become missional.               

Psalm 72 echoes God’s promise to Abram: “I will make you into a great nation; and I will bless you.” (Gn. 12:2) God’s initiative with Abraham and Sarah had a purpose that God revealed later to Isaac: “I will make your descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky and will give them all these lands, and through your offspring all nations on earth will be blessed, because Abraham obeyed me and kept my requirements, my commands, my decrees, and my laws.” (Gn. 26:4-5) In this promise God self-reveals that God is a sending God. 

After Jesus’ death and resurrection, through the Spirit, the triune God initiated the sending of the followers of Jesus into the world with the gospel and the ad hoc formation of gatherings of Christians called the local church. Jesus taught that he was the sent one from the Father: “Whoever accepts me accepts the one who sent me.” (Jn. 13:20) Jesus commissioned his disciples, and by extension, those who “believed in the Christ” because of their ministry, to go to the world with the message of the gospel in the power of the Spirit.;

Mission as a theological category speaks to missional leadership of the church. One of the tasks of the church is to translate to gospel so that the surrounding culture can understand it. Missional leadership equips the church to minister in its particular context. 

Mission as a theological category speaks to missional churches. Send congregations will be characterized by sensitivity to suffering that has as its basis unjust systems, privilege, power, and generational sin. Christians are part of the world, but not “of the world” in joining God’s mission to challenge and tear down such cultural constructs.


Susan Disston is assistant dean of curriculum and assessment at Biblical Seminary. http://www.biblical.edu/index.php/adjunct-faculty-theology

 

Written by Phil Monroe Friday, 02 November 2012 00:00

By the time this is posted, I will have just returned from our 8thannual retreat for our MA in Counseling program. This is a retreat where our students, staff, and counseling faculty spend a weekend together learning, playing, eating, and praying.  

You might wonder why we require our students to take time out of their very busy lives to spend a weekend together. Let me give you three reasons.

Learning is more than information exchange

If training competent counselors consists only of acquiring knowledge and techniques, then the best way to deliver such training would be via distance education where a person could load up on content through taped lectures and hotlinks and then view techniques in action via YouTube clips. Even better, we wouldn’t need counselors because a computer program will always outperform in the area of knowledge and skill delivery.

As you know, good counseling and pastoring requires just a bit more: more insight into self and other, more wisdom (when to speak and when to be quiet), and then add in a healthy dose of humility. A retreat provides a great place to focus a bit more on the character of the counselor. In addition, we utilize some other forms of learning: extended dialog with peers and teachers and personal reflection time in order to take stock of one’s spiritual and professional trajectory.

Counseling professionals can be quite lonely

You may not have thought about this before, but a counselor’s life can be quite lonely and isolating. We listen to private pain and cannot share the burden with others. We cannot go home and tell our friends or family about our day. Even when we work in group settings, our interactions with other counselors often consists of passing each other in the hall between sessions. Retreats help build relationships among students that last beyond graduation. Sure, these relationships grow during the rest of the program, but a retreat helps deepen connections in ways that the blur of the classroom does not. In my experience, counselors who maintain strong bonds with other professionals feel less disconnected, continue to learn new skills, and suffer less from compassion fatigue. And one more thing, it is obvious that when MAC cohorts bond together during their program they report coping better with the stressors graduate education places on family, work, and spiritual live.  

We hear God better when we are out of our routine

Retreats, if done well, provide space for participants to hit the pause button on their rat race life and experience time for reflection and listening to God. In the 21stcentury, we have little time that isn’t filled with noise, whether from social media, schedules, or our own anxieties. We believe our programs would be of little value if we graduate well-trained counselors who habitually tune out the still small voice of the Lord. So, during our retreat, we ask students to take some time to be silent. Silence is a spiritual discipline that gets too little attention these days. During an extended period of silence, we want to ask God a few simple questions. “What have you been trying to tell me? Where do you want my attention?”
 

Phil Monroe is Professor of Counseling & Psychology and Director of the Masters of Arts in Counseling Program at Biblical. He maintains a private practice at Diane Langberg & Associates. Recently, they started the Global Trauma Recovery Institute. He blogs regularly at www.wisecounsel.wordpress.com. See also http://www.biblical.edu/index.php/philip-monroe

   

Written by Phil Monroe Wednesday, 31 October 2012 00:00

Biblical Seminary’s tagline says that we are “following Jesus into the world.” It indicates that we desire to participate in God’s mission rather than our own agenda. While this thinking is not new, we are suggesting that it is easy to confuse our mission with God’s mission. We are not alone with this thinking. The Cape Town Commitment also expresses the need to connect theological education to the mission of the church and the mission of the church to that of God’s mission,

The mission of the church on earth is to serve the mission of God, and the mission of theological education is to strengthen and accompany the mission of the Church.

But what is God’s mission?

Ever thought about this question before? Maybe you asked it in a different manner. “What is God really up to?” “What is the whole purpose of this life, this world?” We often ask this during difficult times but of course with less words.  Really!? There’s more, right????

But in less stressed times, what would we say is God’s mission?

  • To save the lost?
  • To get glory?
  • To establish his eternal kingdom?
  • To make himself known?

In Let the Nations Be Glad John Piper argues that glory and worship of God is the prime mission, “Missions exists because worship doesn’t” (p. 15).  Worship of God indeed seems to subsume the other bullet points. God makes himself known by saving the lost and establishes his kingdom to receive the worship he is due.

True. Very true. But, I don’t believe it captures the totality of God’s mission.  Richard Starcher, in a recently published article in Evangelical Missions Quarterly (October 2012), argues, “Mission is about relationship.”  Or, as my colleague Todd Mangum puts it, mission is about redemptive relationships, about redeeming relationships.

God’s mission is redeeming relationships

2 Corinthians 5:11-21 and John 17 remind us of God’s mission to redeem and reconcile broken relationships. We have been reconciled to God and are now on mission to participate in the reconciling of others to God. Jesus prays to the Father about the deep connection between Father and Son and the connection all believers have as a result of that relationship.

My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me.(v 20-22).    

Oh, and notice throughout John 17 that there is a focus on glory. Jesus is glorified. The Father is glorified. But note this: this glory (grace, honor?) is given on to us.

Who cares?

Okay, some readers might wonder what all the fuss is about in talking about relationships. Here’s where Richard Starcher helps us again. The whole point of his essay, “How (Not) to Collaborate with a Majority World Church,” is to identify how we Western Christians sometimes reveal that we think God’s mission is to accomplish tasks more than to restore relationships. He tells the story about a time he brought together a group of Africans to strategize how to equip church leaders in refugee camps. He had a goal: define the need, identify resources, act, and evaluate. He came to realize that while his enlightenment focus might prioritize efficiency, it did nothing to help build trusting and redemptive relationships. Even the wise “plan” to create self-supporting, self-propagating indigenous ministries can promote a policy over authentic, collaborative relationships. As it turns out for Starcher, the Africans with whom he built relationships weren’t all that uncomfortable with a semblance of a parent/child relationship between them. Starcher later muses, “I wondered if my insistence on not allowing our relationship to be described in paternalistic terms was actually an instance of my acting in a self-contradictory, paternalistic manner” (p. 422). The only way he could work through this conundrum was to prioritize the relationship building times in order to reach true collaboration.

The mission of God is all about redemptive relationships, between God and his image-bearers and between enculturated, broken communities.     
 

Phil Monroe is Professor of Counseling & Psychology and Director of the Masters of Arts in Counseling Program at Biblical. He maintains a private practice at Diane Langberg & Associates. Recently, they started the Global Trauma Recovery Institute. He blogs regularly at www.wisecounsel.wordpress.com. See also http://www.biblical.edu/index.php/philip-monroe

   

Written by Todd Mangum Monday, 29 October 2012 00:00

Recently, a group of traditional, original-language-program students submitted to me four questions they said were questions they commonly had and heard among their student colleagues. I thought it might be good to share the questions — and my answers — with you.

 Q. How does Biblical Seminary see the current missional church movement relating to other movements such as the emerging church, emergent church, ecumenical movement, WCC, NAR, Charismatic, IHOP, etc.?  

A. It is worth clarifying right up front that Biblical Seminary is an evangelical Protestant school that has embraced a missional vision. We recognize that not everyone making good contributions to the missional church conversation is an evangelical Protestant and we applaud missional instincts wherever they are found. But we come to the missional conversation unapologetically from an evangelical, Protestant perspective. We are Bible-believing Christians who hold to the full, infallible authority of God’s Word; and, though we recognize that we are prone to error in even our best efforts of interpretation, God’s Word is completely without error, so that all of our ideas must be subject to the authority of God’s Divine revelation. In the end, we at Biblical are missional because we have become so firmly convinced that being missional is biblical.

In being an evangelical Protestant school that is self-consciously missional in theological, hermeneutical, and ministerial approach, we join a conversation and movement that is larger and broader than evangelical Protestantism. We recognize that this can cause some confusion. So, let’s take each of the other movements mentioned in the question in turn.

Emerging church/emergent church:

The “emergent church” is a movement composed mainly of younger Christians disillusioned with and critical of the traditional institutional church. People within the emergent church movement were early contributors and outspoken advocates of the “missional turn” — and provided hopeful encouragement to recognize God’s Spirit doing “a new thing” organically, spontaneously, and unexpectedly among His people. Encouraging leaders of God’s people to not be so uptight and controlling, but to allow His ways and purposes to “emerge” less neatly and less linearly over time, had wisdom to it. We continue to appreciate some of the things they are doing, but leaders in the emergent church movement over time have seemed to embrace positions less and less conducive to evangelical instincts; and we are an evangelical school. 

The Ecumenical Movement (including the WCC, the World Council of Churches):

The older ecumenical movement that originated in the late-19thand early-20thcentury was a movement that emphasized elimination of denominational separation by minimizing the importance of doctrinal truth. We at Biblical are not interested in that kind of “ecumenism.”  We ARE interested in cooperating with fellow believers whenever and wherever possible to engage together in the greater mission of Christ’s Kingdom, despite doctrinal or convictional disagreements.  Here’s the difference: the older ecumenical movement commonly disparaged any doctrinal faith commitments; we embrace a “generously orthodox” approach (and from an evangelical Protestant perspective at that) — with emphasis on BOTH generosity AND orthodoxy. We believe that firm points of central biblical truth can be reliably and confidently discerned not just from our own study of Scripture but also from our judgments of “what is clear from Scripture” being confirmed by the history of studied, Spirit-indwelt teachers and leaders of God’s people over time. “Jesus being the only way to God,” for example, may be an unpopular notion in a world that prioritizes tolerance and acceptance of all sincere beliefs, but this is a tenet of biblical truth not only deemed clearly taught by evangelical Protestants (like us at Biblical Seminary) but in virtually every Bible-believing creedal statement produced by prayerful, sincere, studied Christians since the first century!  So, while we, too, affirm a renewed commitment to cooperating with fellow Christians wherever possible and to prioritizing the common ground we share with Christians of various denominational stripes, we do not pursue that cooperation and unity at the expense of firm commitment to biblical truth in areas of central dogma, deemed core to the Christian faith since the time of the early church. The Lausanne Movement is reflective of the larger movement of which we are a part, rather than the World Council of Churches. 

The Charismatic Movement (including the NAR — the New Apostolic Reformation, and IHOP, the International House of Prayer):

At Biblical, there is some diversity of conviction on how much or how little we should expect “signs and wonders,” “speaking in tongues,” or “miraculous faith healing” to accompany the Spirit’s work in the current era. In general, we would be wary and would encourage others, too, to be wary of self-appointed or self-proclaimed “apostles,” “prophets,” or “faith healers”; on the other hand, we recognize that God can and does heal and sometimes intervenes in miraculous ways on behalf of His children. There is danger in failing to have faith such that mountains could be moved, and there is danger in presuming that God is a “genie in a bottle” obligated to respond to our incantations and self-concerned demands.

Historically, Charismatic and Pentecostal Christians have been a strand of our constituency, student body, faculty, and leadership.  Pentecostal and Charismatic evangelicals are a welcome and contributing portion of our community, like Presbyterian, Baptist, Mennonite and other evangelical members. We are proud of most of the Charismatic and Pentecostal students we have graduated because they have tended to be careful and exegetically and theologically sound. We are not blind to the fact that the Charismatic Movement has had perhaps more than its fair share of “extremes,” charlatans, and scandalous embarrassments in its history; however, we are also not blind to the degree of extraordinary vibrancy, piety, prayerfulness and faith that has been both present and consistently encouraged in this faith tradition. We are also quite aware of the fact that the greatest and fastest growth of Christianity in the world is of the Charismatic or Pentecostal variety — which we see as mostly something to admire and learn from, not something to critique or disparage.

Our approach at Biblical would be to affirm what is strong and good in the Charismatic movement, engage spiritedly but fraternally points of disagreement, all in a spirit of engaging together the mission of God and sharpening one another in that pursuit. We would want to promote alertness to error, danger, or weakness in ALL of our denominational structures, histories, and convictions, but mostly affirm what strengths each have to contribute to the Church as a whole. 

In fact, in general at Biblical, our posture is not one in which we believe we have the “final answer nailed down” on every theological, interpretive, or ministerial subject. We do not see ourselves therefore as needing to “guard against” infiltration of fresh ideas, or squelch insights that might challenge our views. Rather, confident in the truth of God’s Word and unapologetically embracing our own evangelical heritage, our missional emphasis makes us open to the Spirit’s leading in adaptive change — in accordance with the unchanging truth of His Word, of course — generous in our regard for the viewpoints, insights, and contributions of fellow Christians, and desirous of cooperation and collaboration in the mission of God wherever possible. We recognize that walking the fine line between sustaining sound orthodoxy and submitting to the Spirit’s leading us to take on new challenges in our ever-changing contexts is a task that is greater than we can ever hope to maintain on our own. This is what keeps us prayerful — and humble.  We believe that is a good thing; in fact, we believe the communal atmosphere and learning environment thus created is a work of God in and among us, for which we are thankful and for which we give God alone the glory.
 

Todd Mangum is the Academic Dean and Professor of Theology at Biblical.  He is ordained by the Southern Baptist Convention.  Todd is the author of The Dispensational-Covenantal Rift, and of several articles seeking to bridge divides among Bible-believing Christians. He is married to Linda and they have three sons.  See also http://www.biblical.edu/index.php/todd-mangum.

   

Written by Todd Mangum Friday, 26 October 2012 00:00

Recently, a group of traditional, original-language-program students submitted to me four questions they said were questions they commonly had and heard among their student colleagues. I thought it might be good to share the questions — and my answers — with you.

 Q. What real, practical difference is made by a “missional approach” in actual on-the-ground ministry? 

A. Several practical implications come immediately to mind: first, a missional approach recognizes that “the Gospel” is about following Jesus, not just believing things about Jesus. It’s the mission of Jesus that is most important to Jesus; with discipleship being about mission, and joining Jesus on task. Becoming a follower of Jesus brings great benefit, of course, in the life to come certainly and in this life, too — with persecution — as Jesus told us (Mark 10:29-31). But we follow Jesus because He is Lord and King, not just for the benefits we gain. 

Embracing a missional approach helps relieve unnecessary tensions between fellow Christians. A missional approach helps us sort mountains from molehills. We can join together with fellow children of God in the mission of God, even debating age-old theological questions or points of dispute — but while on mission together, not sealed off from one another in schismatic cul-de-sacs.

A missional approach re-elevates the central concerns of God’s heart to their proper place of prominence: issues of mercy, justice, and kindness (again, as seen in both Old Testament and New Testament: cf. Micah 6:8 and Matthew 23:23). This realignment ends up potentially refocusing the entire Gospel and biblical message — in a more biblical and Jesus-faithful way.

Too often, in North American Christianity (and other expressions of Christianity around the world), the gospel is portrayed as an easy way to escape from the mess of this world and gain an eternal place in glory, no strings attached and no obligation or effort required on the believer’s part. This framing, intended to accentuate the greatness of Christ’s accomplishments for us (which are indeed great and true!) end up inadvertently creating lazy Christians who, already deeply ensconced in a consumerist culture, make Jesus and God just another set of convenience-providing appliances designed to make the person’s existence happier and more comfortable. A missional approach exposes this self-centered distortion of the gospel for what it is.

Likewise, a missional approach helps frame the gospel for what it is, too: it is God rescuing the world, but not in an escapist or consumerist kind of way — but through the hard work, incrementally and progressively fulfilled, of reconciliation and restoration. Reconciliation and restoration are at the heart of the gospel, not just ancillary by-products. Reconciliation with people close to you that have hurt you; restoration of the broken systems of justice; overcoming barriers of hatred, animosity, or just simple difference with people unlike you — in class, race, ethnicity, culture — these are all rightly recognized as being at the heart of Christ’s mission, the core of the Gospel in a missional approach. 

We have found that the practical implications of the “missional turn” are not only vast and wide, but real and regular. Missional Christians find that the mission of Jesus soon permeates most every interaction and most every objective pursued in life every day.  No wonder Paul says that the “end goal” is “to take every thought captive to the obedience of Christ” (2 Cor. 10:5)!  It doesn’t get more practical than that.


Todd Mangum is the Academic Dean and Professor of Theology at Biblical.  He is ordained by the Southern Baptist Convention.  Todd is the author of The Dispensational-Covenantal Rift, and of several articles seeking to bridge divides among Bible-believing Christians. He is married to Linda and they have three sons.  See also http://www.biblical.edu/index.php/todd-mangum.

   

Written by Todd Mangum Wednesday, 24 October 2012 00:00

Recently, a group of traditional, original-language-program students submitted to me four questions they said were questions they commonly had and heard among their student colleagues. I thought it might be good to share the questions — and my answers — with you.

 Q. How should a student rightly respond to “missional ideas” they find new, different, or challenging? 

A.  The Bible, of course, is the final authority here at Biblical Seminary. A student is correct to subject any ideas they hear to the authority of the Word of God. At Biblical, we ENCOURAGE the spirit of the Bereans, who “received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily, to seewhether these things were so” (Acts 17:11).

This is consistent with the best of missional thought, theology, and ministry worldwide. Consider the Cape Town Commitment, a statement of missional Christianity affirmed by the global members of the Lausanne Movement. Immediately after urging all seminaries to conduct regular “missional” audits of their curricula, that document makes the following statement: “We long that all church planters and theological educators should place the Bible at the center of their partnership, not just in doctrinal statements but in practice.”

Now, we do expect that students come to Biblical to learn, not to be argumentative, hostile, or obstinately oppositional. The kind of educational environment we seek to cultivate is a community of active learners, not one of either passive recipients or obnoxious debaters.

One energizing but potentially unnerving quality about a missional approach to theology and ministry is that we are all learning to a degree as we go. Because God is bigger than our theological boxes and because God is resourceful in how He goes about accomplishing His mission, we can expect to be surprised at how God is working sometimes, and to see God raise up unexpected people or work through surprising circumstances to get His will accomplished. Adaptability and flexibility are part and parcel of what it means to be missional — within the parameters of the character of God and the revealed will of God, of course.

We expect that students engaging missional ideas at Biblical will find themselves stretched, challenged, and sometimes perplexed. Not only do we suggest that this will happen, we encourage students — and regularly encourage ourselves — to get used to this discomfort.  This is the “new normal,” part of what it means to be engaged in mission with an “untamed God.”
 

Todd Mangum is the Academic Dean and Professor of Theology at Biblical.  He is ordained by the Southern Baptist Convention.  Todd is the author of The Dispensational-Covenantal Rift, and of several articles seeking to bridge divides among Bible-believing Christians. He is married to Linda and they have three sons.  See also http://www.biblical.edu/index.php/todd-mangum.

   

Written by Todd Mangum Tuesday, 23 October 2012 00:00

Recently, a group of traditional, original-language-program students submitted to me four questions they said were questions they commonly had and heard among their student colleagues. I thought it might be good to share the questions — and my answers — with you. 

Q. Please explain what is Missional Theology and why this has become a new focus at Biblical Seminary.

A. “Missional theology” is the phrase used to describe the conversation and movement that began to take root around 50 years ago. Missional insights initially were prompted by Christian missiologists and missionaries who asserted that “the mission of God to reach and restore the world” is not just a part of theology or a part of the church’s ministry, but is the heart of theology and ministry.

Lesslie Newbigin was one such influential figure who typified the start of the missional movement. A missionary to India for 40 years, he found that when he returned to England, his once “Christian country” had become “post-Christian,” in need of the very missions work he’d been doing in India. While Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever, the methods necessary to engage people afresh with Christ’s message and mission are ever changing, as varied as the contexts and cultures of the human world.

As theologians and biblical interpreters and scholars grappled with the insights being proposed by missiologists, a fresh and bigger view of God gradually began to emerge. Christian thinkers and leaders began to see more clearly that the God of the Bible is not just a passive God who basks in worship, but is an active God on a mission —  a mission that He has undertaken at great cost (giving His own Son to accomplish it). And part of what unfolds in tracing the mission of God through the progressive revelation of the Bible is a recognition that God considers establishment of justice, mercy, and kindness as central to His purposes and central to the “good news,” the Gospel, and not just by-products that emanate from something else that is central. This is true in both Old Testament (made clear especially by the prophets — see Micah 6:8) and New Testament (made clear especially by Jesus — see Matthew 23:23).

Biblical Seminary was in a way poised especially well to tap into the insights of “the missional turn.” Though we were founded originally as a Reformed fundamentalist school, the school’s founders consisted of Allan A. MacRae, an Old Testament scholar, and Dr. Jack Murray, an evangelist. Biblical was founded to merge in a unique and unusual way the depth and rigor of academic biblical scholarship with practical outreach and passion for the lost. These twin concerns have always been integral to Biblical’s “DNA.”

And yet, on the other hand, the focus of “missional theology” puts everything in fresh light. The gospel is found to be richer, deeper, and more far-reaching than the “ticket-out-of-hell” to which it’s commonly reduced in other evangelical approaches. Missional theology encourages ministers, Bible readers and theologians to interact with God and follow God as a Divine Person, rather than as a composite of finely nuanced philosophical concepts as He too often is conceived of in traditional systematic theologies.  And missional theology emboldens the minister and leader of God’s people to recognize that what we as God’s people do is more important to God than just what we profess to believe

Some of the adjustments of “missional theology” are slight and some aspects of missional theology have always been present to some degree in the best of evangelical theology. We recognize that. Even still, at Biblical, we believe the nuances of missional theology taken together make for a remarkable improvement in: 1) reading the Bible; 2) doing theology; and 3) engaging in ground level ministry and evangelism.

 
Todd Mangum is the Academic Dean and Professor of Theology at Biblical.  He is ordained by the Southern Baptist Convention.  Todd is the author of The Dispensational-Covenantal Rift, and of several articles seeking to bridge divides among Bible-believing Christians. He is married to Linda and they have three sons.  See also http://www.biblical.edu/index.php/todd-mangum.

   

Page 14 of 23

Blog Mission

The purpose of this blog will be to expand the influence of our faculty, maintain contact with our graduates, and invite other friends to think with us about important biblical and theological ideas.

Biblical's Faculty

Biblical’s Faculty:

We are committed to ongoing engagement with culture and the world for the sake of our witness to the Gospel, and to continual learning from Christians in other cultural settings.

Latest Blog Entries

Written on 22 September 2014 - by R. Todd Mangum
Written on 19 September 2014 - by R. Todd Mangum
Written on 22 August 2014 - by Philip Monroe
Written on 01 August 2014 - by Susan Disston
Written on 18 July 2014 - by Charles Zimmerman
Written on 11 July 2014 - by Bryan Maier
Written on 09 July 2014 - by R. Todd Mangum
Written on 04 July 2014 - by R. Todd Mangum
Written on 02 July 2014 - by David Lamb
Written on 23 June 2014 - by Philip Monroe

Previous Blog Entries

Follow Biblical

Follow us on the following sites and receive notifications on upcoming events and blog entries:

Follow Biblical on facebookFollow Biblical on Twitterg+_64_black

Contact Admissions

800.235.4021 x146

215.368.5000 x146

215.368.4913 (fax)

 

admissions@biblical.edu

Stay Connected with Biblical

Follow us on the following sites:

Follow Biblical on facebookFollow Biblical on TwitterFollow Biblical on YouTubeg+_64_black
Or simply call us at...
800.235.4021 x146 or 215.368.5000 x146

Support Biblical by Giving

800.235.4021 x162

215.368.5000 x162

215.368.7002 (fax)

 

development@biblical.edu

Home

Site Login