Jesus does not meet two of the accreditation standards

Discussion in 'General Distance Learning Discussions' started by Dr. Latin Juris, Dec 11, 2004.

Loading...
  1. Jesus does not meet two of the accreditation standards:eek:




    "If CLU were recognized by the U.S. Department of Education, Jesus Christ would not be allowed to be a teacher at our school, for Jesus does not meet two of the accreditation standards. He does not have an accredited degree, nor does He publish regularly."

    http://www.cluonline.com/2-Accreditation.htm

    What is your opinion, about the religious-sacred reason of Christian Leadership University for not pursue government-recognized accreditation?
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 11, 2004
  2. nosborne48

    nosborne48 Well-Known Member

    They're right. That's also why few if any learned Jews (the Pharisees and the Sadducees) accepted his opinions.
     
  3. ODA PEOPLE do not like that explanation of that christian university

    Nevertheless, I think that ODA PEOPLE do not like that explanation of Christian Leadership University.

    That is why they say, "ODA has no evidence that this is a legitimate provider of postsecondary education meeting Oregon standards" and says that if you have a degree of this religious university, the Religion Clause does not protect you and "the use of such degrees can result in criminal prosecution or civil penalties".

    :eek:
     
  4. Guest

    Guest Guest

    Nosborne: "...if any learned Jews..."

    I guess Paul doesn't count as a "learned" Jew.

    Too bad no one ever told him that!
     
  5. Guest

    Guest Guest

    My opinion?: DUMB!

    Comparing standards, culture, available science, available knowledge against and among the ages and trying to arrive at some correlation is DUMB!
     
  6. Extremely dumb; possibly Alan is right.:D :D :D
     
  7. Guest

    Guest Guest

    I was referring to this:

    not to the Oregon post.
     
  8. Floyd_Pepper

    Floyd_Pepper New Member

    It is not true that Jesus did not have an "accredited" degree - he was a rabbi, hence he had an accredited degree of his times; it is also not true that he did not publish (again, in his times).

    I think that the morality of any religion looks very badly on using the name of the Lord in vain.
     
  9. nosborne48

    nosborne48 Well-Known Member

    Paul is THE exception and a large enough phenomenon to deserve considerable investigation.

    Keep in mind, though, he came along AFTER Jesus' death and didn't begin to preach until many years after the Damascus Incident.
     
  10. Bill Grover

    Bill Grover New Member

    ===

    "many years" Nosborne? Perhaps Acts 9:20-22 should be a part of that "considerable investigation" ?:rolleyes:
     
  11. Rich Hartel

    Rich Hartel New Member

    Let us not forget, that Jesus Christ was also a Jew, and from what He taught and preached, I would say He was quite a learned Jew, also!!

    And as far as Jesus Christ not publishing, I would disagree, the words that He spoke and the parables that He taught were written down, that were and still are being published, in many different langauges and in many different versions, in a book called a......... Bible!! ;)

    Furthermore, what do mean by many years after the death of Christ?

    Rich Hartel

    A.A in Theological Studies, Trinity College of the Bible (present)
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 11, 2004
  12. Guest

    Guest Guest

    It doesn't make any difference when one comes to the Lord as He is a "Living Lord." Becoming a minister of Christ either shortly after His death or 2,000 years later is insignificant.
     
  13. Guest

    Guest Guest

    Can you state, categorically, that no Pharisees or Sadducees ever accepted His teachings? Can you state, categorically, that no Pharisees or Sadduccees ever accepted Him as Lord and Saviour?
     
  14. Bill Grover

    Bill Grover New Member

    ===


    Jimmy

    I wonder if Nosborne's "few if any" is the equivalent of your "categorically none" ? Is "categorically none" possibly a straw man?

    In general those two groups did not accept Jesus's teachings. But I don't find that surprising as neither did they accept each other's doctrines! As you know, the Sadducees were much the liberals of their age. They denied , eg, the afterlife. But this tenet the Pharisees espoused. Learned Jews did not agree with learned Jews! I'm not surprised, therefore, that these groups would in general not accept the teachings of one who was a member of neither group and who, in fact, questioned the virtue of both.

    I really don't see the relevancy of that point to education , however, but I don't recall that you tried to make it. My hunch is that if a philosopher or a theologian whose teachings were known and respected , and even studied, by millions were to offer to teach a course in the proper faculty of most any university , that university would be very desirous indeed to enlist his/her services regardless of the degrees, or lack of them, that individual possessed.

    IMO Jesus , as represented in the New Testament, demonstrates an exception to formal education as the only way to learn something well. This is very related to one chapter in my dissertation where I argue that Jesus's humaness was the vessel for His growth in knowledge (Luke 2:52) and His human suffering for God was the vehicle by which He learned (Hebrews 5:8) .

    Now, if only I could in my own life muster the courage to emulate that example of His as a way of learning, but no, formal learning is far easier and much less risky than is that method.
     
  15. DRMarion

    DRMarion New Member

    "Accredited by God"

    I had to laugh when I saw this. This is exactly the same thing Herbert Armstrong used to say about "Ambassador College".

    He would say things like "We are accredited by God", and directly proposing that becoming accredited was tantamount to being certified by "the world" which was led by "satan"....:)

    ANYWAY, the bottom line was that although I had a great experience at Ambassador College, its lack of accreditation allowed:

    #1: A very high amount of "institutional inbreeding" by having most professors staffed by Ambassador Grads.

    #2: Being out of sync with most modern scholarship

    #3: Failing to meet academic standards in many areas

    #4: Creating a very large pool of alumni that had to re-do bachelor degrees because the lack of accrediation blocked advancement to Master's level, or credit transfer.

    So, I believe claims of this sort ("Accredited by God", or "Jesus couldn't teach in an accredited University"are bogus,).
     
  16. uncle janko

    uncle janko member

    In which the Mad Priest quietly bangs head on desk

    thud thud thud thud thud
     
  17. nosborne48

    nosborne48 Well-Known Member

    Uncle,

    How about it?

    This isn't my turf, but I believe I am historically correct in saying that no significant Jewish Church long survived? Also that Paul did not begin preaching until he'd worked out the principals of Chiristianity?
     
  18. Guest

    Guest Guest

    I hope Uncle Janko doesn't mind my responding.

    According to Acts 9:20-25, Paul spent time with the Damascus disciples and immediately began preaching in the synagogues.
     
  19. uncle janko

    uncle janko member

    Well, nosborne, would you settle for batting .500?

    The ethnically Jewish contingent of the church seemed to have fizzled out shortly after the Bar Kochba rising, during which Christians were harassed by the Jewish revolutionists for their apparent pacifism, and after which they were targeted indifferently by the Romans as Jews regardless of what the Romans will still have regarded as a weird sectarian dispute among a barbarian nation's religious types. Wilson's "Related Strangers" is probably the best book out there on the period.

    By the time of Chrysostom, sectarian dispute between mainstream and Jesusist Jews has moved through interreligious dispute/debate to the outright Jew-hatred expressed hellishly by Chrysostom.

    As for Paul inventing Christianity, I don't accept that at all. The same sort of people who peddle that also peddle the nonsense that Josiah and his court more or less invented the Torah and that Moses was basically a pigment of a Wellhausian inkblot-imagination. Solomon Schechter once referred to the higher criticism as the higher anti-Semitism. Much of the anti-Paul polemic, and the Paul-as-inventor-of-Christianity stuff, arise out of the same Jew-hating and Gospel-despising German academic setting of the late 19th century. Dungan's "Origins of the Synoptic Problem," read in conjunction with Mosse's "Crisis of German Ideology" (this is before George Mosse became really eccentric), provide a vademecum to the fever-swamps involved.

    Jimmy's NT quote is apt.

    Belated good wishes for Chanukah, too.

    Best wishes from your pal,
    Janko
     

Share This Page