Mdivs

[preachinjesus]

PreachinJesus thinks it has to be RA to be "excellent."

Well before you run me into the ground some more, let me ask you this:
why is it "snobbery" to say a RA is probably (notice in my language above I never made an absolute statement I left room for some programs) better than a school that doesn't have RA?

Seriously, why?

Regional accreditation is a healthy marker for any school to take up. It ensures that finances are being handled properly. That class sizes are held in check. That faculty are given opportunities for personal growth and have legitimate backgrounds as they instruct future leaders. There aren't little questions lingering about the leadership of the school. There is a foundation of certain academic principles that will allow the school to be viable for years. Your degree will be worth what you paid in, not in terms of what you can do vocationally, but particularly the intellectual fruits. There is someone watching out for the students' best interests. Students can't be mistreated. Faculty are free to disagree with the leadership of the institution. These are just a few thoughts.

I'm not trying to be mean spirited, but I am definitely curious. Why is asking for these things a bad thing? Why do I suddenly get accused of being snooty for wanting legitimate academia to flourish?

I must admit the charge of snobbery is one that take me aback. While I don't shrink back from asking for excellence, I do wonder why holding our institutions to a higher standard is a bad thing? Just wondering...

 

[Havensdad]

Well before you run me into the ground some more, let me ask you this:
why is it "snobbery" to say a RA is probably (notice in my language above I never made an absolute statement I left room for some programs) better than a school that doesn't have RA?

Seriously, why?

Regional accreditation is a healthy marker for any school to take up. It ensures that finances are being handled properly. That class sizes are held in check. That faculty are given opportunities for personal growth and have legitimate backgrounds as they instruct future leaders. There aren't little questions lingering about the leadership of the school. There is a foundation of certain academic principles that will allow the school to be viable for years. Your degree will be worth what you paid in, not in terms of what you can do vocationally, but particularly the intellectual fruits. There is someone watching out for the students' best interests. Students can't be mistreated. Faculty are free to disagree with the leadership of the institution. These are just a few thoughts.

I'm not trying to be mean spirited, but I am definitely curious. Why is asking for these things a bad thing? Why do I suddenly get accused of being snooty for wanting legitimate academia to flourish?

I must admit the charge of snobbery is one that take me aback. While I don't shrink back from asking for excellence, I do wonder why holding our institutions to a higher standard is a bad thing? Just wondering...

"Holding someone to excellence" is demanding that they provide a quality education: NOT demanding that a Christian institution, submits to a secular organization.

I would MUCH MORE trust a ATS school, over a strictly "RA" school> though I know most that have ATS have both.

Also, what are all the "RA" schools going to do, as the government begins instituting policies demanding the "equal employment" of homosexual "Pastoral Theology", and "Biblical Ethics" professors, hmm?

I believe the "Big Six" would, in such a case, drop their RA status. I hope they WILL, as a matter of fact. This is GOING to happen.

 

[TCGreek]

Well before you run me into the ground some more, let me ask you this:
why is it "snobbery" to say a RA is probably (notice in my language above I never made an absolute statement I left room for some programs) better than a school that doesn't have RA?

Here's your statement I took issue with:

"If we are called to ministry we are called to excellence, I don't see schools that buck RA as necessarily being excellent."

There's no "probably" in it.

Seriously, why?

Regional accreditation is a healthy marker for any school to take up. It ensures that finances are being handled properly. That class sizes are held in check. That faculty are given opportunities for personal growth and have legitimate backgrounds as they instruct future leaders. There aren't little questions lingering about the leadership of the school. There is a foundation of certain academic principles that will allow the school to be viable for years. Your degree will be worth what you paid in, not in terms of what you can do vocationally, but particularly the intellectual fruits. There is someone watching out for the students' best interests. Students can't be mistreated. Faculty are free to disagree with the leadership of the institution. These are just a few thoughts.

In most cases, but not all.

I'm not trying to be mean spirited, but I am definitely curious. Why is asking for these things a bad thing? Why do I suddenly get accused of being snooty for wanting legitimate academia to flourish?

To say what you said is certainly marginalizing those of us who have gone to RA schools but have received a good academic education.

I'll recommend Whitefield over a Liberty. And I know some will take issue with this.

Have you ever used Richard A. Young's Intermediate Grammar? Well, Dan B. Wallace of DTS interacts with it his now famous Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics. Richard A. Young did his PhD at BJU even before it was TRACS accredited. That's why I took issue.

Have you read the fine works of Reformed Baptist, theologian and Christian apologist James R. White? Have you seen those he has debated? He did two doctorates at CES. That's why I took issue.

Don't get me wrong. I'm all for excellent education, whether RA, NA or UA.

I must admit the charge of snobbery is one that take me aback. While I don't shrink back from asking for excellence, I do wonder why holding our institutions to a higher standard is a bad thing? Just wondering...

Maybe your choice of words betrayed you on this occasion.

 

[Havensdad]

I'll recommend Whitefield over a Liberty. And I know some will take issue with this.

No WAY! I am not spending 12 years on a D. Min. (not that you can get one anymore, it seems).

Anyway, I am just kidding on that one. I would agree with you, other than someone such as myself, who will be seeking a job at a church, possibly, one day, can get more distance in most Baptist Churches with Liberty over Whitefield.
But academically, you are probably correct, though I expect the quality of education at Liberty is based on the same thing it is based n everywhere else: the dedication of the person doing it. A person eeking by at Whitefield, is not going to receive as good of an education as someone who is striving at Liberty, and vice versa.

 

[TCGreek]

No WAY! I am not spending 12 years on a D. Min. (not that you can get one anymore, it seems).

Anyway, I am just kidding on that one. I would agree with you, other than someone such as myself, who will be seeking a job at a church, possibly, one day, can get more distance in most Baptist Churches with Liberty over Whitefield.
But academically, you are probably correct, though I expect the quality of education at Liberty is based on the same thing it is based n everywhere else: the dedication of the person doing it. A person eeking by at Whitefield, is not going to receive as good of an education as someone who is striving at Liberty, and vice versa.

Of course, Liberty for movements within the Baptist community! :thumbs:

Sproul and Gentry have doctorates from Whitefield.

 

[preachinjesus]

"Also, what are all the "RA" schools going to do, as the government begins instituting policies demanding the "equal employment" of homosexual "Pastoral Theology", and "Biblical Ethics" professors, hmm?

This is a red herring. The regional accreditting bodies are NGO, non-governmental. They don't carry big "liberal" (whatever that means) clubs and beat up people who disagree with them. They simply want to ensure the best for the students.

I believe the "Big Six" would, in such a case, drop their RA status. I hope they WILL, as a matter of fact. This is GOING to happen.

You're being dramatic. Come on guys let's get off the "they're all out to get us" wagaon and get back to the issues. Your whole issue here is nothing but an overblown red herring.

RA schools offer, to their students, a peer reviewed opportunity that the students can trust. It is truly non-regulatory and exactly what so many social conservatives want. An independent, NGO that certifies organizations and schools. RA offer a better future for their students, by and large, than their non-RA counterparts particularly in terms of manueverable degrees. Look at the how many public figures are getting in trouble over degrees from unRA colleges. If you buck the trend then you better bend over backwards to show how your degree is valued above RA schools.

 

[preachinjesus]

Here's your statement I took issue with:

"If we are called to ministry we are called to excellence, I don't see schools that buck RA as necessarily being excellent."

There's no "probably" in it.

Read the rest of my posts about this. I'm not a one-post johnny around here. There is a corpus of work to consider.

To say what you said is certainly marginalizing those of us who have gone to RA schools but have received a good academic education.

I don't understand this statement. Maybe its too late right now.

I'll recommend Whitefield over a Liberty. And I know some will take issue with this.

I respectfully disagree. There is a wide gulf between them.

Have you ever used Richard A. Young's Intermediate Grammar? Well, Dan B. Wallace of DTS interacts with it his now famous Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics. Richard A. Young did his PhD at BJU even before it was TRACS accredited. That's why I took issue.

Again, read the rest of the posts on this topic. Are we honestly going to say a degree of an unRA school, like Whitefield or even BJU, is a reputible and transferable as one from a Calvin College, or Reformed Seminary, or Liberty, or Regent College, or one of the six SBC seminaries? I can't see that is the case.

Particularly when we are talking about new students and young students who might not otherwise get the implications.

If accreditation standards weren't that big of an issue, why are thousands of families preparing to flee the Clayton County school system in south Atlanta that is getting ready lose its accreditation? These standards exist to safeguard students and give them a better and educational opportunity. There are too many variables with unRA schools.

Maybe your choice of words betrayed you on this occasion.

I think you've read far too much into one phrase cherry-picked from the rest.

 

[TCGreek]

Read the rest of my posts about this. I'm not a one-post johnny around here. There is a corpus of work to consider.

You said a lot in that one statement.

I don't understand this statement. Maybe its too late right now.

I meant to say NA. :thumbs:

I respectfully disagree. There is a wide gulf between them.

Is RA this wide gulf of yours?

Again, read the rest of the posts on this topic. Are we honestly going to say a degree of an unRA school, like Whitefield or even BJU, is a reputible and transferable as one from a Calvin College, or Reformed Seminary, or Liberty, or Regent College, or one of the six SBC seminaries? I can't see that is the case.

Particularly when we are talking about new students and young students who might not otherwise get the implications.

If accreditation standards weren't that big of an issue, why are thousands of families preparing to flee the Clayton County school system in south Atlanta that is getting ready lose its accreditation? These standards exist to safeguard students and give them a better and educational opportunity. There are too many variables with unRA schools.

Are we talking degree or education here?

Saying that a degree is RA is not equivalent to saying it is an excellent degree. There's no guarantee.

I'll encourage any young person to choose an RA school over an NA or UA school any day.



I think you've read far too much into one phrase cherry-picked from the rest.[/QUOTE]

 

[Havensdad]

This is a red herring. The regional accreditting bodies are NGO, non-governmental. They don't carry big "liberal" (whatever that means) clubs and beat up people who disagree with them. They simply want to ensure the best for the students.

What do you mean by non governmental? There is a governmental oversight. There are governmental standards (CHEA) that they must adhere to.

You're being dramatic. Come on guys let's get off the "they're all out to get us" wagaon and get back to the issues. Your whole issue here is nothing but an overblown red herring.

This is certainly NOT an overblown red herring. Apparently you have not been paying too close of attention to what has been happening in the western states.

RA schools offer, to their students, a peer reviewed opportunity that the students can trust. It is truly non-regulatory and exactly what so many social conservatives want. An independent, NGO that certifies organizations and schools. RA offer a better future for their students, by and large, than their non-RA counterparts particularly in terms of manueverable degrees. Look at the how many public figures are getting in trouble over degrees from unRA colleges. If you buck the trend then you better bend over backwards to show how your degree is valued above RA schools.

For the most part, you are incorrect here, as well. From what I have seen, there is NNE more biased against the Christian faith in general, than the higher up college types who are the people running the RA bodies.

Many "public figures" are not getting in trouble over "unRA" (thats non RA, Mr. college man) degrees. They are getting in trouble over honorary degrees, which are from diploma mills.
For instance, no one would have said anything, had Johnny Hunt had an earned degree from BJU or Whitefield.

 

[TomVols]

Relax Havensdad. I just was saying I didn't see it in the pdf I linked to. If you find where I overlooked it, fine. But it's curious that it apparently wasn't there in 2003, not there now, but was there in between. I'm not questioning your veracity. I'm just making an observation.

There wasn't an MBA back in '04 either. So it's not like Whitefield isn't above making changes.

Once again, you were not accused of lying. I was just making an observation. If you find where I overlooked it in the most recent catalog, I'd be glad to see where my failing eyesight is rearing its ugly head again

 

[TomVols]

Seems like some folks have gotten pilloried over degrees earned at UA institutions, unfairly so IMHO.


ATS preferable over RA? Why? RA is considered the gold standard. ATS is particular endorsement, as opposed to accreditation, much like AACSB in the business world. ATS lost much of its prestige years ago when it tried to muscle the Big Six and they threatened to walk, taking the ATS's biggest customers away.

And I'd recommend Whitefield over Liberty as well But maybe I'm biased since I'm Reformed. :laugh:

 

[TomVols]

If accreditation standards weren't that big of an issue, why are thousands of families preparing to flee the Clayton County school system in south Atlanta that is getting ready lose its accreditation? These standards exist to safeguard students and give them a better and educational opportunity.

Losing SACS at Clayton Co schools is an entirely different matter when you're talking about elementary or HS. Lack of accreditation means no college will look at you, or you'll be faced with a very arduous path just to get in the door. I faced the same situation when my HS almost lost its accreditation over budget issues thanks to an inept county govt and school board the summer before my senior year. Colleges are far more picky than employers, so a reputable UA college degree can get you somewhere. An UA hs diploma gets you nowhere higher ed-wise.

I've been a minister, banker, school teacher and university administrator. I graduated from an unknown college. Not once was I ever asked about my accreditation. Not once.

 

[paidagogos]

I'm not an academic snob. I only have a BA. Simply put, though, unaccredited schools are too expensive for what they provide, especially on the master's level.

You won't be able to teach in any reputable institution. Even the "good" unaccredited schools prefer accredited degrees.

You will have a very difficult time entering higher programs at reputable institutions. This is even the case among accredited schools. Some ATS schools won't even accept regionally accredited seminaries' degrees. They'll laugh at the thought of an unaccredited one.

Unaccredited schools are NOT equal to accredited institutions, not even the best ones. Why? The utility of their credits. You may learn a lot, but your transcripts will be almost worthless.

If you are interested in a quality distance ed. program with tutors, the South African seminaries are an excellent choice. They are reasonable in price, too.

I'm sorry but I think your post is overly generalized. Look around and study the situation a little more carefully and you will find many exceptions to your generalizations. There are no hard and fast rules in this game. This is not to say that your post has no valid points but the points are overstated and too sweeping.

 

[paidagogos]

Losing SACS at Clayton Co schools is an entirely different matter when you're talking about elementary or HS. Lack of accreditation means no college will look at you, or you'll be faced with a very arduous path just to get in the door. I faced the same situation when my HS almost lost its accreditation over budget issues thanks to an inept county govt and school board the summer before my senior year. Colleges are far more picky than employers, so a reputable UA college degree can get you somewhere. An UA hs diploma gets you nowhere higher ed-wise.

I've been a minister, banker, school teacher and university administrator. I graduated from an unknown college. Not once was I ever asked about my accreditation. Not once.

Tom, even high school accreditation is not necessarily that important. Literally thousands of home-schooled and Christian school kids go to the best of colleges without graduating from an accredited high school. Two families in my church had sons within the past two years graduate from West Point and the Air Force Academy, one from an unaccredited Christian school and the other homeschooled respectively. These are two very competitive admission programs.

 

[paidagogos]

Well before you run me into the ground some more, let me ask you this:
why is it "snobbery" to say a RA is probably (notice in my language above I never made an absolute statement I left room for some programs) better than a school that doesn't have RA?

Seriously, why?

Regional accreditation is a healthy marker for any school to take up. It ensures that finances are being handled properly. That class sizes are held in check. That faculty are given opportunities for personal growth and have legitimate backgrounds as they instruct future leaders. There aren't little questions lingering about the leadership of the school. There is a foundation of certain academic principles that will allow the school to be viable for years. Your degree will be worth what you paid in, not in terms of what you can do vocationally, but particularly the intellectual fruits. There is someone watching out for the students' best interests. Students can't be mistreated. Faculty are free to disagree with the leadership of the institution. These are just a few thoughts.

I'm not trying to be mean spirited, but I am definitely curious. Why is asking for these things a bad thing? Why do I suddenly get accused of being snooty for wanting legitimate academia to flourish?

I must admit the charge of snobbery is one that take me aback. While I don't shrink back from asking for excellence, I do wonder why holding our institutions to a higher standard is a bad thing? Just wondering...

Hey buddy, have you taken freshman chemistry at a large accredited university lately? Class size? And what about the TA's doing the teaching? Come on! Accreditation is no guarantee of quality or high standards.

 

[paidagogos]

If you DO NOT require a doctorate (or more usual, a M. Div.), and 50 people want to fill your pastor position, How are you supposed to "see" that they have actually put the work in, and the study? The ungrounded, uneducated pastors are the ones who often lead people astray into weird cults...

I think the system we have is a good one. I just think that accreditation bodies like ATS, TRACS, etc. are the answer, rather than accreditation by secular bodies.

Yeah, and the ones who know a little Greek and a little Hebrew are the ones who give meaning to a text outside the original intent. A little knowledge can be a dangerous thing too if it is incorrectly used. Some guys just can't resist the temptation to show off what they know, not realizing the limits of their own ignorance.

A faithful pastor who is a student of the Word need not be at a disadvantage. I don't accept your statement: "The ungrounded, uneducated pastors are the ones who often lead people astray into weird cults..." The self-serving and unscruplous shepherds are the ones who lead the sheep astray. It is more of a moral problem than an intellectual one.

 

[TCGreek]

Paidagogos, you're a voice of sound reason. :thumbs:

 

[StefanM]

I'm sorry but I think your post is overly generalized. Look around and study the situation a little more carefully and you will find many exceptions to your generalizations. There are no hard and fast rules in this game. This is not to say that your post has no valid points but the points are overstated and too sweeping.

You make a valid point. I should have phrased it differently. I am aware of some important exceptions (like BJU), but I think my post applies in the majority of cases.

 

[Havensdad]

Yeah, and the ones who know a little Greek and a little Hebrew are the ones who give meaning to a text outside the original intent. A little knowledge can be a dangerous thing too if it is incorrectly used. Some guys just can't resist the temptation to show off what they know, not realizing the limits of their own ignorance.

A faithful pastor who is a student of the Word need not be at a disadvantage. I don't accept your statement: "The ungrounded, uneducated pastors are the ones who often lead people astray into weird cults..." The self-serving and unscruplous shepherds are the ones who lead the sheep astray. It is more of a moral problem than an intellectual one.

Bro,

I am NOT trying to diminish the fact that one can be an awesome preacher without formal studies. But unless someone is an established preacher, you have no way of knowing if they have the necessary knowledge, without it. Period. And I know there are exceptions to the rule, but MOST people with, say, an M. Div. from a reputable Christian college/seminary, know more than those without. I am not saying this is an absolute statement, but it is a general truth.

If you MEMORIZED the Bible, but had a faulty hermeneutic (like, say, the medieval church), it would do you little good, and would actually cause much harm. We NEED good Christian Seminaries and Colleges...

I just think the accreditation thing is a non issue. You can have a perfectly fine College/Seminary, without government sanctioned Accreditation, or any, for that matter.

 

[PilgrimPastor]

Seems like some folks have gotten pilloried over degrees earned at UA institutions, unfairly so IMHO.


ATS preferable over RA? Why? RA is considered the gold standard. ATS is particular endorsement, as opposed to accreditation, much like AACSB in the business world. ATS lost much of its prestige years ago when it tried to muscle the Big Six and they threatened to walk, taking the ATS's biggest customers away.

And I'd recommend Whitefield over Liberty as well But maybe I'm biased since I'm Reformed. :laugh:

I like Whitefield's programs and theology... but I would have to recommend Liberty over them... perhaps it is because I am a Liberty grad

When it comes to ATS I am totally at a loss as to why so many conservatives tout them as any kind of standard when they also credential the Starr King School of Ministry, Union Theological Seminary, Chicago Theological Seminary, and other radically theologically liberal schools... Don't get that AT ALL. I'd rather USE MY BIBLE in a meaningful way at an unaccredited or "lesser" accredited (whatever that means) school...