Hardest part of seminary academically?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I've read that book. Quite rigorous and invigorating from the RCC standpoint. Pre-Vatican II theology, though.
Indeed Lane, the Roman apologetic target is in continuous flux. After all, a moving target greases the merry-go-round. If your Vatican II approach is shot down, just shift back to Ott & Trent's approach, and vice versa. For Rome's sake, you can have your cake and eat it too, because consistency is not required in the field of Roman apologetics.
 
I've read that book. Quite rigorous and invigorating from the RCC standpoint. Pre-Vatican II theology, though.
Yes.

The terseness of the text required the students to unpack the summaries by application of numerous other pronouncements from Rome, ECF, etc. I nearly lived in the library throughout the course.
 
Yes, and for anyone like myself who never took English grammar seriously, when you begin to study any foreign language, being confronted with all that grammar stuff, and various parts of speech, you begin to learn all that English grammar you previously ignored, and for which you have a brand new appreciation. I never gave a rip about what a direct object was until I became the direct object suffering from that lack of rip.

That's the experience of a lot of seminary students, I think. If you don't know what an adjective is in English, you're not going to know what one is in Hebrew or Greek, either.

Another thing you realize in studying these languages (or any other two or more languages) is that every language does the same things - they just do them in different ways, unique (more or less) to that language.
 
All of Gaffin's classes were hard in the sense that the concepts were demanding. I don't know that I could single one out. Being prepared for seminary doesn't necessarily involve knowing which classes will be hard. Which seminary are you attending?

PRTS God willing


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Yes, and for anyone like myself who never took English grammar seriously, when you begin to study any foreign language, being confronted with all that grammar stuff, and various parts of speech, you begin to learn all that English grammar you previously ignored, and for which you have a brand new appreciation. I never gave a rip about what a direct object was until I became the direct object suffering from that lack of rip.
Very true. I never understood why people kept posting here that they learned as much about English as they did about Greek when they started studying it. I actually know how to use "who" vs "whom" now!
 
If a seminary is small enough that professors can get to know you, it should certainly be the case that you are introduced to some new ideas. A general flexibility of mind that enjoys learning new ways of looking at things will be a great help for tackling whatever difficult concepts might come up.

A related benefit is that one can be introduced to new and very worthwhile authors. Had I not gone, I don't know that I would have been introduced, for instance, to R.W. Southern, Peter Brown, Steven Ozment, and E. Brooks Holifield. But I happily remember summer breaks when there was time to read such authors beyond the curricular requirements.
 
Last edited:
Be sure to come visit us at First RP sometime :). We meet in the chapel every Lord's Day.

Would not pass up a chance to listen to Craig Scott. Speaking of which, which seminary did he go to?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Would not pass up a chance to listen to Craig Scott. Speaking of which, which seminary did he go to?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'll have to ask him since I don't know the Scottish seminaries that well. I believe he studied in Edinborough.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top