New Theology Mill

I just ran accross this really sad excuse for a School of Theology. I thought everyone might get a kick out of it (and hopefully be a little saddened as well): Hope School of Theology

Daniel

 

Now aren't you being a little harsh here. They explain all their intentions. I quote from their site:

"We do not sell our degrees. Each student must work hard and complete the required courses to be eligible for degree status. Hope School of Theology is not accredited by any governmental agency because of our beliefs on separation of church & state."

So it should be obvious that they are legitimate. They make you buy books and everything - just like a real school.


clint
(FWIW - I intend this to be a joke)

 

HSOT appears to be a "good ole American school."

1. Students must work hard.
2. Separation of church/state.
3. HSOT president, one Mr. Perez, encourages prospective students to "study to show one's self approved."
4. And for $249 the Ph.D. is a better value than Northwestern International University's Ph.D., which is $395.

 

If you search, you will find countless non-accredited theology schools with little or no credibility.

A solid majority of America's degree mills are religion schools, I'm sure. And probably a solid majority of the nation's seminaries are not accredited.

The reason for this sad state of affairs is that the courts have ruled that governments can't regulate the practice of religion, and that training religious personnel is part of the practice of religion. So just about every state has a *religious exemption* to its state higher education licensing laws, and allow schools of religion to operate without any regulation at all.

Hence countless little Bible seminaries operating out of basements.

 

Try the ULC

At the Universal Life Church if you buy 2 degrees for $25.00 each you get a $10.00 gift certificate plus free ordination.

In 10 minutes I could become Reverand Dennis Ruhl Doctor of Divinity, Doctor of Universal Life. All for $50.00 plus I would be 10/25 through my third doctorate.

Just think of all the respect I would get among my peers.

Got to love the American Constitution.

 

Actually, the concept of theology (the study of God)has always struck me as a trifle odd. I mean, what does one do? Describe God? How? In terms of other gods? Does one analyse a sample? How does one conduct an experiment? Maybe theology should be termed "The systematic and comparative study of opinions about the nature of God"?

Noborne, JD
(who knows nothing about God)

 

You've actually hit the nail on the head: Theology is the study of opinions about God, just as metaphysics is the study of opinions about the universe and epistemology is the study of opinions about valid knowledge. Some folks approach it as if it were a natural science ("queen of the sciences"), but I prefer to think of it as a branch of the humanities.


Cheers,

 

Theology is a rather broad subject are. A mixture of philosophy, logic, syntax (language), and practical areas (Pastoral Counseling). Two of the most difficult courses I took as an undergraduate were regliion courses.

The subject area fascinates me (obviously). One of the interesting things lately was when I perused Mormon apologetics sites. They had some fascinating arguments for some of their theological positions which they attempted to back up from the bible & by appealing to the Church Fathers.

North

 

ODD GOD?

_________________________________________________

Odd to study God?

"Teach me Thy statutes. Make me understand the way thy
precepts"
Ps 119 Quote from God (who knows everything about Nosborne)

You're right! I should have taken up law! That's where the bucks are! And bucks are no trifle!

 

Very Affordable!

Finally, a degree I can afford!

I wonder how much the textbooks cost?

 

I actually emailed and asked about the textbook costs - the registrar said an entire program's worth of used texts would not cost more than $150 on average. Not a bad price for an entire degree though I'm not exactly sure what you would do with it

Daniel

 

Umm. There's a difference between studying Jewish law and attempting to define God. Don't you think?

Nosborne, JD
(Who STILL knows nothing about God but DOES study Torah and Talmud)

 

I'd certainly say so. The guy I'm studying for my dissertation--American rabbi and philosopher Max Kadushin--once wrote that it's impossible to write accurately about God, but that it's entirely possible to write accurately about the experience of God.


Cheers,

 

___________________________________________________

Nosborne,JD

I don't believe I agree. Torah, if by that you mean the Jewish Scriptures, are regularly studied in religious schools from high schools through doctoral studies. Unizul, as many offer a PhD or Thdin (we call it ) Old Testament. These studies by evangelicals are reverently done believing it is God's Word we study. God there defines Himself, we think.

But you and Tom are exactly correct that to a great degree we are studying interpretations of that "WORD." Even evangelicals disagree.

An exemplification of why people disagree and an illustration of one function of study is your interpretation of"piqqudim" in that reference. You define it as law. However, it is a general term and particularly in the Psalms is difficult to define( Dic of OT Theology and Exegesis, vol 3.p.665) As the Theological Wordbook of the OT, vol II:732 indicates, "This is a general term for the responsibilities God places on His people."

At any rate, you are welcome to your opinion. And I don't mean to be confrontive.

The evangelical of course holds Scripture to be the norm of truth in a way science holds the laws of nature as it norm . I suppose all religions have their own. Psychiatrists have their own schools of practice, physicians differ on treatments, educators cannot agree on strategies, politicians and economists go in all directions, but people still study all of these disciplines. And, you and I will disagree on this, but I respect your opinion.

 

I think it's worth mentioning here that we're dealing with several different religious gestalts, but I agree to the extent that I think you're right about evangelicalism favoring a very abstract and literal definition of God. When Nosborne and I were talking about defining God versus defining God's law (in a broader sense than piqqudim) versus defining the experience of God, we were talking about our personal ideas of what God is, which don't line up with evangelical Christianity (I'd be surprised if they did, as neither Nosborne nor I are evangelical Christians).


Cheers,

 

_______________________________

Tom

I think we agree that we believe differently. My view is that God has revealed Himself in Scripture in what I think you are calling "law.' I know this is arguable, but if one has arrived at the position that Scripture is true, and Scripture says that God , let's suppose, does not lie ,then regardless of my concern that God has not kept in my experience some promise, I suppose that Scripture not my feelings is stating the divine attribute correctly. It is defining God.

My apologies to those who feel differently. There are many, many opinions. I will now stop expressing mine in religious topics on this thread. Thanks to those who put up with me.

 

Actually I have a question.....and please don't flame, and explanation will do. Given how long ago this transcription happened (we'll assume it did), how do we know we have an accurate............copy, if you will? Do we?

Tony
Knows nothing at all about this subject

 

First, let me stress that there is NOTHING that anyone has said in this thread that is the least bit offensive to me as a liberal Jew.

Second, allow me to point out that Jewish law concerns itself largely with exactly the sort of questions that any other legal system confronts: viz: what is a valid contract, what damages are available for breach, who owns real estate upon death, (Moses gave us two decisions on that one himself), what are the obligations of an employer to his employees, how does one contract a valid marriage and what are the rights of the parties to that marriage, both in marriage and in the event of divorce...

Jewish law is intensely PRACTICAL and REAL. There's very little talk of God in it.

Nosborne, JD

 

_______________________________________________

Tony: Think I can answer this without venturing into religious opinion. Good question. Answer=a comparison of internal and external evidence. This is called textual or lower criticism and is a part of any serious Biblical interpretation. At MDiv level regularly done by many candidates! EG, NT,external evidence=
1) thousands of manuscripts going back to perhaps 35 years of when autographa were composed.
2) quotations by early church fathers from about 125 AD onwards
3) ancient traslations.

FYI when King James Version was written(1611) had only a few 9th c manuscript s. Modern translations are based on insights of manuscripts as early as about 125AD. A few differences not many and most in punctuation and such. By way of comparison check the Encyclopedia Brit on Marcus Aurelius to see what little textual evidence supports those who attempt to cite or interpret "his" words.

This is a very good issue but is one that likely any upper division BA in Bible student is aware of and as said many a theology grad student is quite able to do textual research. Thanks for question. Happy to discuss it further by personal contact but such is really off subject despite my avid interest.

 

Actually, I'd like to continue to see your religious beliefs in this and other threads--as I mentioned yestermonth, it's always helpful to know what other peoples's belief systems are. Nothing offensive here to this discalced unitarian.


Cheers,