has anyone ever heard of Southern Baptist School for Biblical Studies in Jacksonville

"So, to be a good school or considered legite you have to be accredited?"

No, but accreditation is a good indicator that the school is at least adequate. Some few very good schools are unaccredited, but to my knowledge all but one are now seeking accreditation.

 

===

Absolutely not. BUT it has to be substantially as rigorous AS the accredited ones. HOW can it be "Christian" to offer and claim a degree with the same nomenclature BUT with 1/4 of the effort???

The issue is not accreditation. There ARE a few unaccredited schools which EQUAL those accredited ones. SO, how can that rigor OR lack of it be measured?

Here's how:

1) ENTRANCE REQS :What are the prerequisites for entering grad work? IF the entrance bar is low, then HOW could the instruction be expected to high? Things would have to be "dumbed down."

2) FACULTY: Do they have accredited docs in the area of instruction? IF they have NOT experienced themselves the rigor of accredited grad studies in the areas they teach , then, explain WHY would we assume they could instruct at that rigor?

3) DURATION: EG. NO accredited doc can be earned in 8-12 mos as it can at Andersonville.

4) LEARNING: Does the grad of a degree program have the skills normally associated with that degree. EG, I have a ThM in Biblical studies. If I could not exegete in Biblical Greek, than I could not do what is expected of a grad in that program. I did a ThD in American Evangelical Christology. If I cannot EG compare the conclusions of Erickson with Shedd on the kenosis and define and contrast their positions on cognate doctrines which allow such conclusions , then, one may question the virtue of my learning.

5) UTILITY: As said, many churches often do not understand or care about Theological degrees (but SOME do). However, utility is not limited to church ministry only. Suppose one felt led to felt led to enter an accredited doc program. In cases as these the issue of the reputation and quality of the school looms in importance.


One more comment: Church leaders according to 1 Timothy 3 are to have the respect of those outside the Church! How can this principle be applied?

It seems to me that if the context is raising children, then one under a Family Court judgement or a Children Services investigation may not have that good repute from those outside the church!

If the context is handling money, then a minister who is a deadbeat about bills and borrows and borrows, may not have that good repute from the creditors outside the church!

But HERE we are discussing ACADEMIC degrees, DOCTORATES! So, who are they outsiders in this case the churchleader should have a good repute with? Academia, of course! Show me, therefore, one qualified academic who has good reasons to judge Andersonville's doc program highly!

 

Steve,

I take it that you're responding to UZThD. Let me give you my perspective---accreditation by an agency recognized by the USDE and CHEA is not absolutely essential in order to be accredited. Bill G. and I have noted that on other threads.

Having said that, rare is the unaccredited school that is really legitimate. Most of them can't obtain accreditation because their faculty itself is poorly trained and their requirements are substandard. Whitefield Theological Seminary is one of the rare exceptions---it is unaccredited yet appears to have a rigorous program.

Sometimes I think that Judges 21:25 is the principle for many conservatives: There is no real authority and no real standards---we will all do that which is right in our own eyes.

In an earlier response I commented on how the world sometimes shines brighter than children of light. You responded with "Outshine according to what? The worlds standards (psycholgy courses,math, etc..)." You missed my point entirely. I wasn't referring to the content of their curricula. I was referring to the fact that if a person has on his resume a degree which from an institution later found to be a degree mill or little more than that, he will be fired. We piously opine that that is not important. After all, God looks on the heart.

Yes, God does look on the heart. I can't help but wonder what is in the heart of those whose institutions grant inflated degress for substandard work and those who affix those academic abbreviations after their names and know that the work is less than what that degree should require.

With the coming of TRACS, conservative institutions are hard-pressed to claim that they reject nationally-recognized accreditation because of refusing to be subject to secularists. The truth is out---they won't apply because they are unable to be accredited.

Bill

 

===

Now, now, don't make it too easy on yourself . YOU search for "South African Theological Seminary." I don't think the doc is described on the site , but it is planned, and Prof Arthur Song former Dean at Unizul is to head it up. You can email SATS through the site with questions.

IMO: the scenario, IF you have a masters in a related area, would be: you would likely be able to earn the ThD (they say D.Th.) by writing a doctoral thesis of around 250 pages. You'd have to get a proposal approved and a Promoter (probably Song , himself--a VERY good man, and a Baptist). If you did not have a masters in the area, you may have to do some course work, or a little ThM (not the four year ATS type) before beginning the dissertation.

Then under your Promoter's guidance you would begin your research. When the disseration is done to your Promoter's satisfaction, a Committee of qualified profs from several schools,with accredited docs in the area, would evaluate it. If it passes, you would have to make recommended corrections, then your degree would be yours--well earned. Takes about three years. I LOVED IT!

Blessings,

Bill G.

 

I agree with most of what you guys are saying, but I like the idea of a doctorate in 12 months.
Remember we need to be good stewards of time.
Seriously though, I have my diploma in biblical studies from seminary ext from southern seminary with about 90 credits from a community college.
If God leads me to contnue in school, I will definitely look at a correspondence school with a good price & one that I can learn more bible, not just have a good name.

 

I understand the sentiment of your post, but I must take a few exceptions.

(1) Yes, we can spend too much time on the Baptist Board. I've almost quit opening it a couple of times, but I've come to understand my interaction can be a part of Kingdom work. After all, pointing guys in the right direction for better training and trying to steer them clear of dubious institutions is a worthwhile endeavor.

(2) Quite frankly, I think our Baptist culture puts too little emphasis upon education. Please, don't misunderstand me. We put a lot of emphasis upon academic degrees but too little emphasis upon training. Have you ever seen do many "doctors" in Baptist pulpits? I used to be an independent Baptist, and I was (and still am) amazed at the number of pastors who have obtained DD's (typically an honorary doctorate---one wag once said it stood for "Didn't Do it"). The problem to which I point is a desire to grant and receive academic degrees for substandard education.

(3) You say to "pray and wherever GOD leads you, study there." I agree, but I have a question. How do you determine where God is leading you to study? A feeling of peace? Does not God lead by having one investigate the institution and get counsel from others who have already gone down that road? We have to careful that we don't justify our action (or inaction) with "God lead me." That statement has been used to justify numberless unbiblical actions, from marrying an unbeliever to teaching heresy. Even today we ordain unqualitifed folks to the ministry because they claim that God is leading them. I agree that we plead for God to direct our steps, but we must not be negligent in doing the proper research.

(4) "The Pharisees" looking down upon others includes folks from all sides. A graduate from a legitimately-accredited institution can look down upon those who either never partook of the offerings of higher education or received a degree from a non-accredited institution. One who never attended college can look down upon those who undertook formal education as being too "bookish" and not "led by the Spirit." One who graduated from a non-accredited institution can scoff at those who invested the time and money to go to an RA institution.

I'm not really worried about what others think. I am concerned about what God thinks, and I can't imagine justifying preparation for the Christian ministry that is less rigorous than preparation for "secular" professions. Ours is a high and holy calling! It requires our best, not taking the most expedient route.

May God direct you as you continue to investigate these matters.

Bill

 

accredited institutions=pies in the sky?
proponents of substance in the study of the Word=pharisees?

manomanomanoman

 

Bill G.,

You must have the gift of brevity (although not always exercised!). You distill into a post of a couple of lines what takes me a page.

Bill

 

Okay--find a good mentor and study on your own. Or, check out:

http://www.biblicaltraining.org/index.php?page=leader

It's flexible and you can't beat the price--it's free except for the textbooks. This is seminary level training by some of the guys who wrote the textbooks.

 

And which one is that? IMHO, BJU is going with a second-rate, although legimate, accreditor.

 

Steve,

I take it that you're responding to UZThD. Let me give you my perspective---accreditation by an agency recognized by the USDE and CHEA is not absolutely essential in order to be accredited. Bill G. and I have noted that on other threads.

Having said that, rare is the unaccredited school that is really legitimate. Most of them can't obtain accreditation because their faculty itself is poorly trained and their requirements are substandard. Whitefield Theological Seminary is one of the rare exceptions---it is unaccredited yet appears to have a rigorous program.

Sometimes I think that Judges 21:25 is the principle for many conservatives: There is no real authority and no real standards---we will all do that which is right in our own eyes.

In an earlier response I commented on how the world sometimes shines brighter than children of light. You responded with "Outshine according to what? The worlds standards (psycholgy courses,math, etc..)." You missed my point entirely. I wasn't referring to the content of their curricula. I was referring to the fact that if a person has on his resume a degree which from an institution later found to be a degree mill or little more than that, he will be fired. We piously opine that that is not important. After all, God looks on the heart.

Yes, God does look on the heart. I can't help but wonder what is in the heart of those whose institutions grant inflated degress for substandard work and those who affix those academic abbreviations after their names and know that the work is less than what that degree should require.

With the coming of TRACS, conservative institutions are hard-pressed to claim that they reject nationally-recognized accreditation because of refusing to be subject to secularists. The truth is out---they won't apply because they are unable to be accredited.

Bill </font>[/QUOTE]You said it well! However, I really question the quality of TRACS. IMHO, it falls short of the RA standards. Personally, I think BJU would be better off maintaining their independent unaccredited position with their established reputation than going with a second-class accreditation.

Additionally, I don't think even BJU with a solid academic program could be accredited by SASC because of their administrative policies. It is not so much theological issues or academics with BJU as policies and pricedures. Of course, BJU claims theological problems because they don't want to change their policies. Can anyone specify what the theological issue is? NO,it's administrative policies that they don't want to change.

If there is a theological problem, it is with TRACS because it violates BJU professed doctrine of separation. They would be associating with theological institutions from whom they say they are not to enter a cooperative religious endeavor. With SASC, however, it would be purely a business and academic arrangement. So, what do you think.

 

From what I've seen, the secular accrediting agencies aren't that concerned about the institution's theology. For instance, The Master's College and Seminary is accredited by WASC, Trinity International University/Trinity Evangelical Divinity School is accredited by NCACS, and SBTS, SEBTS, and Liberty are accredited by SACS. Theology just doesn't appear to be an issue with RA's.

Bill

 

What about their philosophy of science?

Andy

 

Steve,

I'm not going to quote the above because, at the end, it may be confusing to others besides you and me as to who said what.

I understand what you say about a bachelor's Bible degree as opposed to "someone with a masters" who "really has 2 years of bible." Actually, an MDiv is a minimum 3-year degree because it was not designed to be built on a Bible or theology bachelor's degree. If you compare a solid MDiv and a bachelor's Bible degree, you will find that the MDiv has at least as much Bible as the bachelor's Bible degree. So someone with a bachelor's in another field and an MDiv (one filled with Bible, languages, theology, and church history) will typically have a broader and deeper education than a Bible bachelor's degree.

BTW, some seminaries are now acknowledging the work of a Bible degree and are awarding advanced standing to those who have their undergraduate degree in Bible or theology.

Blessings,
Bill

 

Whose? SACS accredited Clearwater Christian College and they are creationist. I don't think accreditors demand a specific philosophy of science for the science faculty. As long as they are properly qualified and use acceptable textbooks, they'll pass muster.