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.


Written by Charles Zimmerman Wednesday, 17 October 2012 00:00

Where have they gone & where are they now?  

For the past year, I have been issuing updates on the founding faculty members of Biblical Seminary to see where they are today and what they are doing.  I hope you have enjoyed catching up.  

Before I move on to other topics, I thought I would contact a few other long-term faculty members to see where they are and what they are doing these days.  This post updates us on James Pakala, Biblical’s first librarian. 

 Jim was the librarian when I arrived as a student.  The first time I walked into the library office, I saw a tall man and short woman both wearing surgical masks.  I wondered if I somehow made a wrong turn and entered an operating room rather than the library circulation room.  I soon discovered that the tall man was James Pakala, Biblical’s meticulous librarian and the short woman was his conscientious wife Denise.   

 I must admit that I was sad the day Jim informed me that he was leaving Biblical and headed to Covenant Seminary.  He’s still there, by the way, as you will see if you keep reading. 

1.  What years did you teach at Biblical? 

Arriving at Biblical early in 1973 to complete my S.T.M. begun at Faith, I was there through July 1991 when we moved to Covenant Seminary in St. Louis. Working at Biblical’s Library, I found both a wife and a career. When Bob Vannoy left for a year in The Netherlands, he recommended that I assume Library oversight and when he returned he did not want to resume that and, at the same time, the State wanted a full-time library director in place. Once state-accredited, we could use “Theological Seminary” as part of our name. Meanwhile, Biblical paid tuition at Drexel so I could get my library degree. Denise Marchand and I were married in 1975 and our son was born in 1979. He’s now married to the former Lacey Childs, who grew up in the St. Louis area where they also live. We loved the many years at Biblical and were active in the pursuit of Middle States accreditation as well as library development and collaboration. Biblical is active in SEPTLA (Southeastern PA Theological Library Assoc.) and during my time as president it was a privilege to lead their 25th anniversary celebration in 1986.

2.  What have you been doing since then? 

Arriving at Covenant in 1991 we had many challenges and opportunities. Here’s just one. The Library had two computers, one of which had never worked and the other usually worked but did nothing more than link to Concordia Seminary’s catalog, whose records we had to accept “as is” and tag our symbol onto, thereby receiving periodic microfiche that were not very good either for accurate data or user convenience. Thanks to Denise, within two years a project was done that had taken ten years to complete halfway (that project was one of our mandates in coming). We went live with an automated system by 1993, migrated to a new one a few years later, and then around 2000 and thanks to $12 million in State help and sixty universities etc. banding together we gained amazing 21st century systems/services. Meanwhile, God sent outstanding Staff to help with this and much more. All we can say is Deo gratias!

3.  Tell a favorite memory from your Biblical days. 

When a large tent was pitched on the front lawn for an invite-the-community service, I slept in the tent the night before to provide security. As I recall, someone joined me. Sleep was good as there were no incidents and the weather was great. Another special memory was performing a lakeside wedding for student/alumnus Rick Welsh and his lovely bride.

4.  Contact information: email, facebook, etc. 

This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it  and I’m on Facebook but lack time to look at it much. 

I’m sure that Jim would love to hear from you; why not contact him and catch up? 

Charles Zimmerman is the Thomas V. Taylor Professor of Practical Theology. He also serves as Teaching Pastor at Calvary Church in Souderton. He is married to Kim and they have two daughters, Ashley and Megan. See alsohttp://biblical.edu/index.php/charles-zimmerman 


Written by Bryan Maier Friday, 12 October 2012 00:00

This week one of my students presented a case of an 89 year old single woman who used to live alone but had recently fallen and was thus temporarily recovering in an assisted living facility. She had never married or had children and the majority of her life had been spent being the caretaker for other family members (who were now mostly deceased).

When my student came to visit her, she was withdrawn and resisted any attempts to engage in the activities of the facility.  For example, even though she liked to knit, she refused to join the small knitting circle that was available.  The doctors were considering giving her anti-depressants. The lady said that all she wanted to do was look out the window, watch the birds, and wait to go to heaven (she was a strong believer).

The question for our group was whether this lady needed to “perk up” or gain some kind of purpose for what remained of her life or whether she might need a psychiatric consult with the idea of administering medications. On the other hand, after a life of eight decades of service and anticipation of glory, I wondered if she had not earned the right to restrict her activity to bird watching and thinking of heaven. Of course, this woman may indeed be depressed. She may have years more to live and how will she spend it? Is she exempt from the mandate to love God and love others?

Listening to this case reminded me of Romans 8: 18-23 which speaks of the groaning that all creation endures. In this text, groaning is viewed as a sad but appropriate response to living in a hostile environment. And whether any one of us currently have much to groan about circumstantially or not, heaven still seems to be the preferred option at least to the Apostle Paul who, given the choice, would choose to be with the Lord (Phil. 1: 23). 

I wonder if many of us don’t give heaven much thought because we are so focused on this life.  Death of someone close or our own impending death can intrude and dislodge that thinking. Suddenly we are reminded that there is so much more to this life than this life. So what is a clinically healthy view of heaven, both for this lady and for me?

I don’t know all the answers but if I live to be 80 or 90 years old and my taste for heaven is sharpening, I may not want to knit either.  

Bryan N. Maier, Psy.D. is Associate Professor of Counseling at Biblical Seminary.


Page 18 of 28

BTS 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.

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

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 06 October 2015 - by Derek Cooper
Written on 17 September 2015 - by Manuel Ortiz and Susan Baker
Written on 01 September 2015 - by R. Todd Mangum
Written on 25 August 2015 - by R. Todd Mangum
Written on 20 August 2015 - by Dr. Jonathan Henry
Written on 11 August 2015 - by Jeffrey Monk
Written on 30 July 2015 - by Manny Ortiz and Susan Baker
Written on 28 July 2015 - by Charles Zimmerman
Written on 23 July 2015 - by Susan Disston
Written on 21 July 2015 - by Bryan Maier

Previous Blog Entries

Contact Admissions

800.235.4021 x146

215.368.5000 x146

215.368.4913 (fax)



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 x130

215.368.5000 x130

215.368.2301 (fax)