# Puritan Education



## blhowes (Oct 24, 2004)

I'm reading "John Owen, The Man and His Theology" and it strikes me how similar many of the puritans were in the sense that so many of them seemed to start college at such a young age. John Owen was homeschooled and started college when he was 12. I was just wondering if anybody knew what the "normal" age was to start college back then and how the educational system now compares with the educational system back then?


----------



## C. Matthew McMahon (Oct 24, 2004)

The educational system back then blew away what it is today. It was far more intense, and far more academic. Most started very early and the average age to enter Cambridge or Oxford was 14 or 15. But this was a result of good upbringing and schooling done in the home through catechizing and teaching as they went to school.


----------



## Abd_Yesua_alMasih (Oct 24, 2004)

I feel ripped off  you mean I am 18 and only just got into university the start of this year...


----------



## Irishcat922 (Oct 24, 2004)

Sproul was talking about a school I think in Penn. that is patterned after the Medieval system of Education. He said they have children that by the time they are twelve are adept in Latin and Greek and able to read and play classical music. I'd love to enroll our Daughter in a school like that.


----------



## Abd_Yesua_alMasih (Oct 24, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Irishcat922_
> Sproul was talking about a school I think in Penn. that is patterned after the Medieval system of Education. He said they have children that by the time they are twelve are adept in Latin and Greek and able to read and play classical music. I'd love to enroll our Daughter in a school like that.


I wish my parents had put me in one like that  I would have hated it at the time knowing me but it would have been for my own good.


----------



## Irishcat922 (Oct 24, 2004)

Me Too.


----------



## blhowes (Oct 24, 2004)

> _Originally posted by webmaster_
> The educational system back then blew away what it is today. It was far more intense, and far more academic. Most started very early and the average age to enter Cambridge or Oxford was 14 or 15. But this was a result of good upbringing and schooling done in the home through catechizing and teaching as they went to school.


Thanks for satisfying my curiosity. Owen must have been pretty sharp just to have been admitted at the age of 12.


----------



## SmokingFlax (Oct 25, 2004)

I find this topic to be somewhat coincidental as I found myself considering the other end of the educational spectrum today.

This is a nice little bit of perspective on the current state of education in the good old U.S.A. that I happened to read in today's paper...it's absolutely *sickening*. Especially when you consider that these are mostly COLLEGE students we're talking about here:



U.S. Civil War was in 1775? 
12:14 PM CDT on Saturday, October 23, 2004


By STEVE BLOW / The Dallas Morning News



Occasionally I see that "Jaywalking" segment on The Tonight Show, where Jay Leno asks easy questions and people give the craziest answers. 

Or I will hear of another survey revealing that U.S. college students can't find Canada on a map. 

And I wonder: Are people really that dumb? 

We talk about a crisis in our schools, but surely these are not representative of all young adults. Are they? 

I decided to find out. 

It's hardly scientific, but I concocted a little 10-question test of basic knowledge. And I gave it to a variety of young adults last week. 

Jump over there and try it yourself, if you'd like. 

The Questions

1. On this map, put an "I" on India, an "S" on Spain and an "E" on Egypt. 

2. Who is the prime minister of Britain? 

3. How much is 40 percent of 500? 

4. Who is Sandra Day O'Connor? 

5. Finish the quotation: "A rose by any other name would ..." 

6. In what decade did the U.S. Civil War take place? 

7. Name the governor of Texas. 

8. Name a book by Charles Dickens. 

9. 6 x 7 divided by 3 = ? 

10. Who painted the Mona Lisa? 
The results are a good news/bad news kind of thing. The good news: Jay Leno will never run out of material. The bad news: We're doomed. 

Oh, I don't want to be overly dramatic. But I must say that I am distressed by how poorly young adults did on the test. 

I would have expected most people to answer seven or eight questions correctly "“ and a good number to get all of them right. 

But on average, these young adults answered fewer than half correctly "“ 4.8 to be exact. And of the 93 people taking the test, only two got all of them right. Just two! 

If anything, my test takers should be more intelligent than average. Most were college students "“ at Southern Methodist University and at Eastfield and El Centro community colleges. A smattering were young professionals. 

Some seemed to know they weren't measuring up as they took the test. One woman groaned the whole time. Another kept saying, "Oh, this is embarrassing!" 

I had heard that cheating is rampant among students these days, and I saw a good bit of that. 

One woman blatantly copied from the man beside her. How else would she have known the Civil War was fought in 1775? 

Some of the answers do make you laugh. I asked for the decade the U.S. Civil War was fought, and answers included 1920s, 1940s, 3rd, 1812, 16th and '70s. I hoped they at least meant 1870s. 

Sad to say, only 28 percent correctly answered 1860s. 

Only 33 percent could correctly identify Sandra Day O'Connor as a U.S. Supreme Court justice. As the first woman on the court, she ought to be widely known. 

Other guesses for Justice O'Connor included singer, actress, announcer, poet, TV show host, mayor of Dallas, "that lesbian comedian" and "the lady from the Terminator movies." 

We hear so much about poor math skills these days. I guess it's some consolation that the most correct answers were to a couple of very basic math questions. 

Seventy-seven percent were able to calculate that 40 percent of 500 is 200. And 88 percent correctly got 14 for 6 times 7 divided by 3. 

Of course, you would expect fourth-graders to do as well. 

I tried to be lenient in my grading. To the question of who painted the Mona Lisa, I accepted "Deventie" "“ after figuring out it was a stab at da Vinci. 

Sixty-one percent got that one right. The most popular wrong answer was "“ incredibly "“ Picasso. 

Only 44 percent could correctly name Tony Blair as the British prime minister. He has been in the news a bit lately! 

Guesses at the prime minister included Margaret Thatcher, Winston Churchill, the queen, Prince Charles, the pope, Donald Rumsfeld and "some British dude, I'm sure." 

Not much better-known is the governor of Texas. Only 51 percent could name Rick Perry. 

Fifty-one percent also were able to name a novel by Charles Dickens. One fellow was warm enough with "Ghost of Christmas Past "“ Scrooge "“ Whatever That's Called." 

A Christmas Carol, I think he meant. I didn't give credit to The Scrooge Who Stole Christmas. 

Great Expectations and A Tale of Two Cities were probably the top two correct answers. 

I was disappointed that only 20 percent of young adults knew that "a rose by any other name would smell as sweet." 

Don't they read Romeo and Juliet in high school any more? 

If so, they're reading some version that says a rose by any other name would ... "not suffice," "be a thorn in your hand," "not live up to its potential" and "be a horse of a different color." 

Next lowest in results was the mere 26 percent who could find Spain, Egypt and India on a world map "“ three important and geographically distinctive countries. 

Is it important for young people to know these things? 

I think so. Basic knowledge of this sort is part of the mental rigor that leads to deeper thinking, to innovation and progress as a nation. 

But maybe we'd rather just roll over and watch Leno. 


..............................................................................................

Being that I spend a bit of time teaching people one on one myself, I'm not at all surprised at this small survey. I've seen dozens of times when a student will come in (for guitar lessons) and swear up and down that they're TOTALLY into guitar and even that they want to "make it their life" (Hah!) only to see hardly a month later that they're crying the blues about how "hard" playing an instrument is...end then quitting. 

I would estimate that _maybe_ 10 percent of people will stick to it when it starts to get tough -which it always does.

I can't prove it but I'm almost convinced that the dearth of quality education and realistic expectations/results is the product of at least a couple generations of an image based culture (over and against a word based culture) that is simply being conditioned to avoid the kind of hard academic work that was once far more common. Also, I hate to say it, but, I think that we simply have too much prosperity and expect everything to be handed to us -at least from the attitudes I've seen recently.

I can't help but conclude that our idolotrous culture is bringing us to the precipice of a new "dark age" if the trend is not reversed. Idolatry destroys the ability think at a high capacity.


----------



## Abd_Yesua_alMasih (Oct 25, 2004)

I was put to shame with those questions  I suppose I can be excused from a few as I am not from the US (ie I didnt know who Sandra Day O'Connor was nor the governor of Texas...etc...) I did know the decade of the Civil War although I couldnt name anything by Charles Dickens as while English might be my supporting major I have never read any of his books. I stumbled over the Romeo and Juliet quote as well. I knew where it was from and everything but I couldnt remember the exact wording. I was fifteen when I last studied it and I think most sane people will agree with me that Shakespeare does not hold the meaning of life.

Now I have said that I am not too sure how well I would do on a New Zealand test either... I got reading a New Zealand history book a few months ago and never realised 20% of our population died during the Musket wars... and there were rather large battles around the earier where I used to live. Very interesting...


----------



## Contra_Mundum (Oct 25, 2004)

"...although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Professing to be wise, they became fools..."

Romans 1 isn't merely about "religion," when you remember that the fear of Jehovah is the beginning of wisdom.


----------



## dkicklig (Oct 25, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Irishcat922_
> Sproul was talking about a school I think in Penn. that is patterned after the Medieval system of Education. He said they have children that by the time they are twelve are adept in Latin and Greek and able to read and play classical music. I'd love to enroll our Daughter in a school like that.


There is a groundswell of schools adopting what is called the "Classical" model of education. It uses the Trivium method of instruction, it concentrates on grammer, rhetoric and logic.

Check out this site for more info and lists of schools in your area Association of Classical and Christian Schools

[Edited on 25-10-2004 by dkicklig]


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Aug 9, 2005)

From The Cambridge History of English and American Literature in 18 Volumes (1907"“21), Volume VII. Cavalier and Puritan, XIII. Scholars and Scholarship, 1600"“60. Â§ 11. Biblical culture:



> Large portions of the Scriptures were known by heart, not only by ministers, but, also, by the laity, and even by children, who were also well drilled in Foxe´s Book of Martyrs and other histories of persecutions. Whilst French Huguenot children were trained, Spartanlike, to look forward to dying for the faith, English children, from the earliest age, were disciplined in prayer, in reading books of devotion and in the close knowledge of Bible histories and Bible doctrine. Preachers, like Joshua Hoyle, sometimes were occupied for fifteen years in expounding straight through the whole of the Bible, taking a verse at a time. Hoyle, indeed, started again, and went on for another ten years in the same course. Again, Arthur Hildesham, in 1635, in the puritan concentrative manner, gave 152 lectures on Psalm li. Anthony Burgess, in 1656, delivered 145 expository sermons on the seventeenth chapter of St. John, and wrote an expository commentary on the first chapter of 2 Corinthians, filling a folio of 657 pages. Gataker´s Annotations on the Bible (1659) occupied a folio volume; but that is small in bulk in comparison with some other performances. Jeremiah Burroughs filled four volumes in a commentary which failed to finish 13 chapters of Hosea. William Greenhill required nearly 3000 quarto pages for Ezekiel, whilst, for Job, Caryl was not content with less than 4690 folio pages. Theodore Haak, in 1657, published, in two folio volumes, a translation of the Dutch Annotations on the Bible, an outcome of the synod of Dort, in 1618, but this large work includes a translation of the Bible. The English Annotations, in two folio volumes, represents the best English exegetical work of the period, including amongst its writers Ley, William Gouge, Meric Casaubon, Francis Taylor and, once more, the encyclopaedic scholar, Thomas Gataker. As a work of systematic compilation, English effort in this direction was crowned by Matthew Poole´s Synopsis Criticorum Bibliorum (in Latin), in five folio volumes, taking in its survey all available criticisms and annotations hitherto produced. Poole was at work on this gigantic task 1660"“76. 11 By means of compendia, abridgments, epitomes of all kinds, Scripture histories, geographies, concordances, expository lectures and sermons, the vast accretion of Scripture learning was disseminated throughout the land by the 10,000 clergy, not to count leaders of sectaries and voluntary preachers. 28
> Collections of systematic divinity in "œmarrows," "œbodies" and "œsums" were extremely numerous and supplemented Scripture knowledge in all directions. On the subject of church government, innumerable treatises were written, but none approached in solid intellectual power Hooker´s Ecclesiastical Polity, of the Elizabethan period, or Richard Field´s Of the Church (finished 1610). In doctrinal exposition, bishop Pearson´s Exposition of the Creed (1659) must be regarded as a masterpiece of the period. 29
> Some of the characteristics of the time, emerging from the whole of these manifestations of learning in patristic, classical, oriental and Biblical culture must be briefly noted. The medieval conception of the authority of Aristotle and scholasticism was shattered. It was transferred in all its ingrained strength and with infinitely increased brooding awe to the Bible. Science, even, could not yet make effective claim to detachment and self-contained aims. But Bacon´s view of antiquitas saeculi juventus mundi was elaborated in a learned work (1627) by George Hakewill, a vindication of the superior culture and progress of the modern, as against the ancient, world. A spirit of optimism favoured both literary and scientific research, for the age realised its control over the methods and instruments of enquiry. The Greeks and Romans could not retain the absolute allegiance even of scholars, for, after all, they were heathens, and the new light shed on the Bible, and the grand vision of a theocracy on earth, made attractive to the whole nation, learned and unlearned, a willingness to pay the price of knowledge, within the restricted sphere of Biblical studies. Hence, we notice psychologically, there were developed enormous industry in learning, endurance in listening to preachers and teachers, tenacious memory and the power of visualising and concentrating the thoughts on Bible heroes, Bible stories, Bible language and Bible aspirations. Scripture students were indefatigable workers. Bishop Morton was at his studies before four o´clock in the morning, even after he was 80 years of age. Matthew Poole rose at three or four o´clock, ate a raw egg at eight or nine, another at twelve and continued his studies till late in the afternoon. Sir Matthew Hale, for many years, studied sixteen hours a day. For several years John Owen did not allow himself more than four hours´ sleep. Feats of memory are as remarkable for their frequency as for their comprehensiveness, and were practised from early childhood in the repeating of sermons, in the learning of Latin grammar and in almost every academic discipline. Moreover, the number of references to memory testifies to the conscious cultivation of the art. The exercise of visualisation of the Old Testament histories was heightened by stories of martyrs; and the family tradition and household culture that made these events "œreal as life" in puritan homes supplied the mental basis for justifying doctrine and precept. In short, the scholarship and learning of this period, by their direct bearing upon the Bible, permeated and transfigured the national life in a rare degree, giving it, in spite of all its excesses and deficiencies, a strenuousness, sobriety, and, on the whole, a sincerity, probably never so largely sustained, by book learning, in any age, and rarely in any country.



[Edited on 8-10-2005 by VirginiaHuguenot]


----------



## Laura (Aug 9, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Virgina Huguenot_
> From The Cambridge History of English and American Literature in 18 Volumes (1907"“21), Volume VII. Cavalier and Puritan, XIII. Scholars and Scholarship, 1600"“60. Â§ 11. Biblical culture:



I feel ashamed. God grant that we may restore that sort of education to our children. 

Also, it is my experience that Christians who have self-discipline even close to that today are very likely to have accusations of legalism thrown at them - by _other Christians._ 

[Edited on 8-10-2005 by Laura]


----------



## SolaScriptura (Aug 10, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Laura_
> Also, it is my experience that Christians who have self-discipline even close to that today are very likely to have accusations of legalism thrown at them - by _other Christians._



You legalist!


----------



## Laura (Aug 10, 2005)

> _Previously posted by SolaScriptura
> You legalist!  _


_

Ah, but I wasn't at all insinuating that my own self-discipline approaches that. If only..._


----------



## blhowes (Aug 10, 2005)

> _Originally posted by VirginiaHuguenot_
> From The Cambridge History of English and American Literature in 18 Volumes (1907"“21), Volume VII. Cavalier and Puritan, XIII. Scholars and Scholarship, 1600"“60. Â§ 11. Biblical culture:


Very interesting!

I can't help but wonder, though, as I was reading about the discipline and dedication of all those great men of God, if perhaps our present-day culture, educational system, and other factors have gotten the better of me, when, after reading this:



> Matthew Poole rose at three or four o´clock, ate a raw egg at eight or nine, another at twelve and continued his studies till late in the afternoon.



...I felt the urge to yell, "Yoooo Adriennne!!!"


----------



## Augusta (Aug 10, 2005)

Raw egg.


----------



## gwine (Aug 10, 2005)

> Don't they read Romeo and Juliet in high school any more?



Actually you should ask if they ever read Shakespeare way back when I was young and dinosaurs wandered the earth. I'm 52 and never read him in high school or college, even though I had 4 years of English in h.s. (never had to do a term paper, either.)

That said, I watched "A Midsummer Night's Dream" with closed-captioning (I wear hearing aids) about 3 years ago and really enjoyed it. Reading the play afterwards was every bit as enjoyable.

Sad to say, I couldn't answer the rose question. I thought maybe it would end with "still be called a rose." Never read "Romeo and Juliet", but I saw a few minutes of the version starring Leonardo DiCaprio's. Pretty weird.

So much to learn . . .


----------



## Puritanhead (Aug 10, 2005)

> _Originally posted by webmaster_
> The educational system back then blew away what it is today. It was far more intense, and far more academic. Most started very early and the average age to enter Cambridge or Oxford was 14 or 15. But this was a result of good upbringing and schooling done in the home through catechizing and teaching as they went to school.



Yeah, but also in the old days, the founding fathers studied to _pass the bar_ over the course of a few months. Patrick Henry did so for only six weeks! They could sit for the bar, and not have to pay $100,000 to a law school! If only I were born in the 1770s, than I could be an attorney instead of a law school dropout, and never waste so much money... and I could have been largely self-educated like I am anyway.


Too contribute something more serious-- I like how in the _good old days_ scholars would learn for the sake of learning. Education was it's own reward. That was what the medieval university was all about, and some of the best scholarship -- historical, economics, socio-political, and theological -- came long before all the computers and the innumerable libraries that we take for granted today. Today, what passes for scholarship is usually a joke, particularly the theological variety!

[Edited on 8-11-2005 by Puritanhead]


----------



## LadyFlynt (Aug 11, 2005)

We only read portions of Shakespeare (isn't that sad when you only read dummied portions?!). However, I was a real bookworm and had read several prior to highschool. All's Well That Ends Well is one of my favorites.

I'm signing my 4th grader up for Latin in a few weeks (we have a one day a week "school" for homeschoolers in our area...I'll be teaching again this year!)


----------



## Anton Bruckner (Aug 11, 2005)

Can a child begin one of these Christian schools at 2 years old? What is the opportune age?


----------



## LadyFlynt (Aug 11, 2005)

2yrs? Even "back then" 2yrs was still considered a baby and some were still nursing. My own 2yr old can barely speak a couple of sentences and most is still gibberish.


----------



## Anton Bruckner (Aug 11, 2005)

My 2 year old, is the same, but he already surfs on the internet, (pbskids.org and nick.com websites), identifies the letters, counts, identifies animals etc.


----------



## biblelighthouse (Aug 11, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Slippery_
> My 2 year old, is the same, but he already surfs on the internet, (pbskids.org and nick.com websites), identifies the letters, counts, identifies animals etc.



Our 2-year-old twins don't surf the web yet, but they do count, identify letters, animals, colors, etc. And they are beginning to speak in grammatically complete sentences (sometimes).


----------



## biblelighthouse (Aug 11, 2005)

> _Originally posted by blhowes_
> I'm reading "John Owen, The Man and His Theology" and it strikes me how similar many of the puritans were in the sense that so many of them seemed to start college at such a young age. John Owen was homeschooled and started college when he was 12. I was just wondering if anybody knew what the "normal" age was to start college back then and how the educational system now compares with the educational system back then?



For a while, I thought I was smart because I started college at age 15 and got my bachelors degree at 18. But the more I read about guys like Edwards, Owen, Witsius, etc., the more I feel like a bit of a dimbulb. What could I have accomplished had I been schooled like a puritan? I'd probably have a doctorate and a pastorate by now. But as it stands, I am very far from either. At least I'm beginning a long track towards an M.Div. starting next month. But sadly, a classically educated prodigy I am not.

I want to give my kids a *classical* education . . . a good one like most people don't get anymore!!!


----------



## Anton Bruckner (Aug 11, 2005)

> _Originally posted by biblelighthouse_
> 
> 
> Our 2-year-old twins don't surf the web yet, but they do count, identify letters, animals, colors, etc. And they are beginning to speak in grammatically complete sentences (sometimes).


I was always an internet junkie, and my son always like to do what I do. So from an early age, he saw me on the internet surfing, and would you know it, the kid started clicking the mouse etc.

I remember when studying for my final exams in college, that was the first time I saw him picked up a pen and began to scrawl. He even wrote up on my Bible, and damaged Genesis 1. That give new meaning to the phrase, "the earth was without form and void".

Kids are pretty smart, and they develop quickly once they are fostered in such an environment.

My son Jared, already does simple jigsaw puzzles on pbskids.org of Cailou and Barney, and the fix it puzzles of jakers. 

Kids are pretty smart, you just have to set them on the tracks and watch them like a steaming locomotive, hurl foward.


This is why I believe a Classical Education can continue his educational growth, by harnessing his potential and putting it in a system, instead of his learning being at the whims of a Public School environment. I live in NYC, so finding a good school is of the utmost importance. I am thinking about moving out, because there are too many distractions in this city, and the commute to and from work, leaves parents spent without enough time for family. Too much hustle and bustle.

[Edited on 8-11-2005 by Slippery]


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Aug 28, 2005)

Puritan Hornbook:


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Aug 30, 2005)

Article on Puritan Education


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Apr 5, 2006)

Has anyone read John Morgan's _Godly Learning : Puritan Attitudes towards Reason, Learning and Education, 1560-1640_?


----------



## Laura (Apr 5, 2006)

> _Originally posted by VirginiaHuguenot_
> Has anyone read John Morgan's _Godly Learning : Puritan Attitudes towards Reason, Learning and Education, 1560-1640_?



No, but...*drool*


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Apr 25, 2006)

John Milton, Tractate on Education:



> The end then of learning is to repair the ruins of our first parents by regaining to know God aright, and out of that knowledge to love him, to imitate him, to be like him, as we may the nearest by possessing our souls of true virtue, which being united to the heavenly grace of faith makes up the highest perfection.


----------



## BaptistCanuk (Apr 25, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Irishcat922_
> Sproul was talking about a school I think in Penn. that is patterned after the Medieval system of Education. He said they have children that by the time they are twelve are adept in Latin and Greek and able to read and play classical music. I'd love to enroll our Daughter in a school like that.



My pastor's kids have this type of education. I wish I could have gotten it.


----------



## LadyFlynt (Apr 25, 2006)

Anyone have the name of that school?


----------



## Don Kistler (Apr 26, 2006)

There was no such thing as a high school in the Puritan day. The college was the equivalent of today's high school. So they started college at 13 or so, as did Jonathan Edwards at Yale.

The students were under a mentor who largely taught them all their classes in a very small group. The local minister was often the local school teacher, so students were taught classical languages and Bible at very young ages. This is one of the reasons John Owen's volume 17 remained in Latin until we had it translated some years back. Any reputable scholar or student could read Latin.

The regression is pretty humbling, isn't it? Wehn we were preparing to publish "To the Rising Generation," a collection of sermons by Jonathan Edwards to the youth of his congregation at Northampton, we included some Bible questions he had put together for them. RC Sproul and I looked them over and grimaced at how few of them we knew the answer to!


----------



## BaptistCanuk (Apr 27, 2006)

Yes, the regression is humbling. Our society prides itself on being "intelligent" and for the most part, we don't hold a candle to the people back then. Our society is knowledgable as far as technology, etc. but our public school systems are woeful. 

Like I said, I wish I could have had the kind of education they had back then.


----------



## Ivan (Apr 27, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Don Kistler_
> When we were preparing to publish "To the Rising Generation," a collection of sermons by Jonathan Edwards to the youth of his congregation at Northampton, we included some Bible questions he had put together for them. RC Sproul and I looked them over and grimaced at how few of them we knew the answer to!



That's incredible. So where does that leave the rest of us? Even we, who consider ourselves "educated", would probably be left in the dust by a well-educated teenager of that era. 

Humbling indeed. I know I am.


----------



## Ivan (Apr 27, 2006)

> _Originally posted by BaptistCanuk_
> Like I said, I wish I could have had the kind of education they had back then.



Brian,

I think we should do the best we can to educate ourselves. Look at Lincoln...self-educated. John Bunyan...self-educated. Charles Spurgeon...largely self-educated. 

The key is to read, read, read and then to read more. That is the key to being self-educated. It can be done. I'm 53 years old and I feel I have more to learn then I ever have. You are a young man and obviously have a bright and inquiring mind. 

I think the greatest problem for anyone today is the technology we enjoy, especially television, although that might be a dated concept due to all the the new gadget and gizmoes our there of which I really don't any comprehension. 

Bottom line for all of us...turn off the TV and get a good book.


----------



## C. Matthew McMahon (Apr 27, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Ivan_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by Don Kistler_
> ...



Humbling no doubt. Think of it this way in terms of the "qualified preacher" of today, compared to then...

Today we buy a commentary on, say, Jude, that is about 150 pages, normal print, with exegetical notes and info on the book.
William Jenkyn, for example, wrote, back then, a 1200 page commentary in small print on Jude, double column, with some of the more amazing notes and sermons you would ever read on Jude. Think about it, that's 1200 pages on 1 chapter.

It boggles the mind.


----------



## Ivan (Apr 27, 2006)

> _Originally posted by C. Matthew McMahon_
> It boggles the mind.



Yes, indeed. We waste so much of our time these days. We spend so little time on study and reflection...and it shows.


----------

