Comparing online seminaries

One might suggest never attending Oxford or the school of the 'sons of the prophets'. I don't believe either of them is/was 'accredited'. Who could accredit the best? I humorously asked this to lead to this. Coupla' questions. How about a school that is attempting to be 'accredited', yet has not arrived there yet? Or do many seriously think in today's PC world that most agencies would today accredit Bob Jones University, e.g.? FTR, I am not against most accreditation, but wonder if it is the be all end all some may assume. A few years ago, e.g. Mid-Continent, in my home state of KY, would have not gotten much acceptance by a lot of agencies. Today, it ranks with any.
In His grace,
Ed

[ February 06, 2006, 04:59 PM: Message edited by: EdSutton ]

 

I apologize in my last post that it regarded 'colleges' as opposed to seminaries. But there is bias, at least sometimes, in the so-called accrediting agencies. Witness the cases of Concordia(s), and SEBTS a few years ago. When the denominations and or boards attempted to return the schools to the position of the historic moorings, they were threatened with the loss of accreditation(sp.?) under the guise of violation of 'academic freedom'. And among the SBC types, vs. CBF types, somehow the CBF 'start from scratch' more liberal schools don't seem to have much problem with getting accredited. I ain't got that 'un figgered out yet, but maybe with enough time...
Ed

 

If they have a difinitive outline for when they plan on being accredited, I'd say fine.

As far as accreditation and "PC", I couldn't disagree more. If we're throwing our hard-earned money at these schools by the thousands of dollars at a time, the least they can do is get accredited. That's not politically correct, it's economically and rationally sound, not to mention responsible.

 

Johnv, Did you actually read what I was saying in the two previous posts? Please reread, if you don't mind. I never said nor am I against accreditation, by any stretch. But I am against one set of standards for an inclusivist type of institution and a defacto different set for a non-inclusivist institution. If Fred Jones has the academic weight and soundness in instruction at the school he founded, and Jim Smith and Lee Brown and whoever have earned Ph.D. and Th.D. degrees from wherever of academic solidity, even one that could make BJU look like a middle of the road institution, and SBTS look like Yale Divinity School by comparison, the 'Academics' are sound enough to warrant accreditation. They deserve to be accredited, regardless of how obnoxious the views, and political leanings, theological ideas, etc. I again repeat, do you think BJU would not have a more difficult time getting the same accreditation today, than when? I think we both know the answer.
In his grace,
Ed

 

Oxofrd is the equivalent of accredited. There is an enduring myth that Harvard is not accredited but it is by its Regional accrediting body.

Dr. Bear mentions that the president of the University of Wisconsin (or equivalent school)once wondered if it would really matter if they were accredited. He felt that likely the reputation of the school itself would keep it going. This is what happened with BJU & PCC. However, even BJU finally realized the necessity of accreditation.

As a side note, I like TRACS (the accreditor BJU is pursuing). TRACS has come a long way and a few years ago was congratulated by the US Dept of Ed in terms of their methodology etc. Frankly, I almost feel as if a school like LRS (whom I respect) is somewhat selling out by pursuing RA. TRACS is a strong Christian accreditor and growing.

 

FTR, I did NOT say anything about Harvard, and not being accredited, for I know that it is. As to Oxford, what exactly do you mean by "the equivalent of accredited". I have been under the impression that Oxford, Cambridge, and a few others are so far above any accrediting issues and standards, that the queston has never arisen. Am I wrong in this?
Ed

 

I recently received my Masters from Eckhart Theological Seminary (www.geocities.com/eckhartseminary/ets.html) in South Korea. The website leaves much to be desired, but the mentor is very attentive, the classes are tough, and the price is right

Peace

 

What is the role of the US Dept of Education in recognizing accrediting agencies related to theological education? Not a rhetorical question, a real one. I assume they are accreditors of accreditors .. which is a good thing. But we would not want or expect the USDEd to ferret out theological biases. It is my impression -- admittedly, not a scientific study -- that TRACS and others like it want only those schools whose confessional basis is on the very conservative side. ATS, on the other hand, applies no confessional standard, but looks principally at resources, faculty training, trustee governance, and the like, and thus lists as accredited seminaries everybody from a Unitarian school to Eastern Orthodox to Southern Baptists to independent conservative schools.

For what it's worth, I am a trustee of a relatively new Baptist institution, unaffiliated with any Baptist body -- the John Leland Center for Theological Studies (www.johnlelandcenter.edu). We have ATS visits this coming week and are hoping to make strides toward full accreditation.

 

I was talking with an aquaintance this week who told me that BH Carroll (current enrollment is now over 500) is hoping to receive thier regional acredidation this summer. their website follows

http://www.bhcti.org/

 

What is the role of the US Dept of Education in recognizing accrediting agencies related to theological education? Not a rhetorical question, a real one. I assume they are accreditors of accreditors .. which is a good thing. But we would not want or expect the USDEd to ferret out theological biases. It is my impression -- admittedly, not a scientific study -- that TRACS and others like it want only those schools whose confessional basis is on the very conservative side. ATS, on the other hand, applies no confessional standard, but looks principally at resources, faculty training, trustee governance, and the like, and thus lists as accredited seminaries everybody from a Unitarian school to Eastern Orthodox to Southern Baptists to independent conservative schools.

For what it's worth, I am a trustee of a relatively new Baptist institution, unaffiliated with any Baptist body -- the John Leland Center for Theological Studies (www.johnlelandcenter.edu). We have ATS visits this coming week and are hoping to make strides toward full accreditation. </font>[/QUOTE]Good luck to you. The, the US DoE serves as a sort of gate keeper but does not involve itself in issues of doctrine. TRACS is indeed conservative and expects schools to be conservative (creationism, etc). ATS is more moderate or univeralist if you like. There are some who would like to see the US DoE not bother to recognize any religious accreditors (ATS/TRACS/AABC) as an issue of Separation of Church & State.

Accreditation is an interesting issue. Regional Accreditation is generally preferred for utlity over national accreditation ATS/TRACS/AABC, etc. The ultility issue is real but in terms of quality, who really knows. I have seen no evidence that ATS or TRACS is any less stringent than RA. In fact a few years ago TRACS was commended by the DoE for its methodology. Lets face it the University of Pheonix (RA) cannot hold a candle to the quality of many TRACS/ATS/DETC schools. I like TRACS because it is conservative and faithful to biblical christianity. Personal opinion is that I am sad to see schools like LRS give in to secular pressures to go with a secular agency (compromise but maybe realistic). Just personal opinion (so please no one get too upset).

On a side note TRACS/ATS are behind (depending on your opinion) in on line learning. ATS will not allow 100% distance learning and TRACs will not accredit schools that do not have campus programs to include libraries. RA schools do not have to have libraries and can be 100 % distance learning. For example (Northcentral University).

Nord

 

I have to get in on this. I'm in my 50's and want to study theology, biblical Studies and Counseling. I have and undergraduate degree from a highly accredited secular University. Over the past year felt the need and call to learn. Financal limitations and stage of life issues dictated that I go the distance education route. I googled Christian Education Distance and there is over 70 pages. There is a lot of repeats though.

I thought about the accredation question and in the end felt that should not be a factor.

Acredation comes from secular sources and thus, may be able to have a degree of control on ciriculum. If accredation is a factor, then maybe that's more importaint than learning what God want's us to know. I havre never even though of or considered where a Pastor graduated from and never would conside if his school was acreddited, as long as he taught the word and love of God.

Most of the great ones didn't even go to Graduate schools, Moody, Billy Graham, A.B. Simpson. If you want to really have a good theological education, accredation is not importaint, remember who gives you the knowledge,the Holy Spirit.

Also, when I looked at the accredited schools tuition was double others.

There are many fine honest, dedicated Conservative fundumentalist Seminaries offering degrees at all levels , with intensive programs and excellet teachers that do not pursue accredation. It would raise costs and cause them to offer courses they don't feel apply.

Finally, I'm doing programs at Tyndale in Texas(not accreditted, Trinity in Indiana, and another place I won't mention. I did investigate Messiah, but noticed they had two programs with emphasis for women only. I asked why there was no men's only program and was told there were more paid positions for woman. News to me.

Anyway I said to much. Last Columbia has an excellent staff and program.

Ley me know what anyone ythinks.

Thanks
Terry

[TFC123 since you are no longer a Baptist (now CMA) you are not allowed to post in the Baptist Only Sections of the BB. Please restrict your post to the sections that are open to All Christians.]

[ March 17, 2006, 07:58 AM: Message edited by: Bible-boy ]

 

One mor thing I see a big concern about what will people think about credability., Thats getting very secular, what do we careb what people think if were learning the right teaching . Just be glad so many people are pursuing the study of God not where.

[TFC123 since you are no longer a Baptist (now CMA) you are not allowed to post in the Baptist Only Sections of the BB. Please restrict your post to the sections that are open to All Christians.]

[ March 17, 2006, 07:58 AM: Message edited by: Bible-boy ]

 

Sorry about the spelling I was carried away

[TFC123 since you are no longer a Baptist (now CMA) you are not allowed to post in the Baptist Only Sections of the BB. Please restrict your post to the sections that are open to All Christians.]

[ March 17, 2006, 07:59 AM: Message edited by: Bible-boy ]

 

Rhetorican,

Thanks, I'll check it out

[TFC123 since you are no longer a Baptist (now CMA) you are not allowed to post in the Baptist Only Sections of the BB. Please restrict your post to the sections that are open to All Christians.]

[ March 17, 2006, 07:59 AM: Message edited by: Bible-boy ]

 

TFC123, what has been your experience at Tybdale? How Calvinistic are they.What is the quality of thier programs?

 

Bill,
See my post on your other thread re Tyndale. I'm only about halfway through my 1st course.

I think you will get your best feel about them in Couch's writting. He may not be there every day but from what I feel so far is he is the one who determines the Epistimology there.

I dofeel comfortable with the lectures, they are well done. Actually they aare done during a real class.

Anything else let me know

Terry

[TFC123 since you are no longer a Baptist (now CMA) you are not allowed to post in the Baptist Only Sections of the BB. Please restrict your post to the sections that are open to All Christians.]

[ March 17, 2006, 07:53 AM: Message edited by: Bible-boy ]