I am considering taking some classes from BYU--they're pretty cheap and registration, book ordering, and lesson submission seem quite convenient and well organized. But they're Mormon, and I'm not. Obviously, the instructor's personal faith is none of my concern unless it affects the course content. Has anyone (who isn't Mormon) taken classes there?
My guess is that going to BYU without being Mormon is pretty much the same as going to Boston College without being Catholic . . . it won't make any difference, they're both good schools. Jack
I agree with Jack. Plus BYU is a very well respected school so taking classes should stand you well. North
I've taken a few of their Accounting courses online. Aside from the fact that everybody in the "video lectures" is dressed somewhat better than the average college dweller, I've noticed no difference whatsoever. Oh-- and no unusual body piercings are allowed if you're taking your exams at a BYU location.
I am LDS (Mormon) but know many, many college (and high school) non-Mormon students that have taken BYU independent study courses. If you are not taking a religion course, you won't be exposed to any of our "dangerous" doctrine Tony
Actually, I wasn't worried about being exposed to scary doctrine so much as getting bad grades because I haven't been exposed to it! Thanks to all for your help.
I've enrolled in a few courses in the late 80s and early 90s. (Unfortunately, PTSD prevented me from completing any of them.) They were quite good, history and philsophy. I even enrolled in the LDS version of the King James Bible once! They study it backward: New testament first, Old Testament second. But since very very few schools even teach THIS great classic anymore, I may yet get around to doing this course again to compliment directed study at the graduate level. Why is this important to me? Because the KJV of the Bible was, for several centuries, the very language within which all political debate occured in the English speaking world. How can one hope to re-join the evolution of that debate without valuing the common intellectual currency of the time? Here, I ,too, worried about my outsider status regarding LDS doctrine (BYU students were expected to take these courses only after studying Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants, etc). My expectation was to appeal to the instructor's sense of fair play and simply let him know that while I had once lived in Salt Lake City, I was still an atheist, and let the chips fall where they may! Nonetheless, I was impressed by the clarity of their materials and quality of instruction, especially Malcolm Thorpe. If I wanted to prepare my review of something off the "approved" list of books, he would only commend my interest and write back "go ahead!" Nothing too ambitious or too taxing, but--as always with Independent Study--all requirements went well-beyond the "face time" and lectures that many on campus students found effort enough to see them through. (I know because I dated a few BYU women while I was in Utah--one the daughter of a Prof there.) Unlike them, you'll actually learn a few things from the "Y's" distance learning folks. --Orson
Uh Oh...better not let that secret out. It might negatively affect the book sales and speaking fees of all those "counter cult" ministries. Tony
Hi Orson! Actually, Old Testament and New Testament are each taught in two separate classes: 211 (Gospels) 212 (Acts-Revelations) 301 (Genesis-2nd Samuel) 302 (1st Kings-Malachi) There are also separate courses on the writings of John and Isaiah. Book of Mormon is only a requirement for students who wish to graduate from BYU (so is New Testament). Students who are taking religion courses but do not expect to graduate from BYU can take them in any sequence that they wish. Tony
YES--Tony--I know. Your citation of the course numbering illustrates my point about the backward looking or reverse chronology of the Y's view (and therefore LDS view) of history. In other words, the standing implication is that one ought to interpret the past through the lens of Mormon and NT precedents, since higher numbered courses are normally more advanced than lower numbered ones. This is known as the Whig theory of history--the past confirms the worthiness of the present outcome. Historians today regard this as bad historiography because it telescopes our understanding of the past, overvalues the present, and unduely discounts past alternatives. The irony is that the LDS finds such convenient presentism of Christianity useful and accaeptable--but when applied to (usually Left) politics and secualr history, this is obviously objectionable. So, does anyone notice the convenience of the Church's double standards? --Orson
Ouch! Well, Orson, if your argument about the "Y's" view of history is based upon course numbering sequences, then you will be comforted to know that a visit to the BYU history department's catalog would reveal a course sequence that goes from ancient to modern (U.S. History begins at the 300 level, after ancient history courses). Regarding your assessment of the chronology of religion courses, you would have a point if Book of Mormon or New Testament courses were prerequisite for the Old Testament courses. However, they are not. A freshman can take Old Testament and leave New Testament (or Book of Momron for that matter) until the senior year. If what you say is true, that nasty manipulative BYU would make students take religion courses in a carefully prescribed sequence. LDS believe that the Book of Mormon dates back to 600 BC, which puts it during Old Testament times. Regarding the idea that LDS view history (and most everything else) through the "lens of Mormon and NT," I must plead guilty (and unabashedly so, in fact, proudly so). When I read the scriptures or any other book, I read them as a Mormon (just as you do as an athiest). Since there is no such thing as objective history (or religion), what is regarded as "good" and "bad" historiography changes with the tide of historians. The LDS Church does not object to "left politics and secular history" (otherwise there would be no democrat politicians who are LDS). The Church, however, is not obligated to discard its doctrines and moral standards because of the opinions of some who find them unfashionable or "bad historiography". By the way, did you know that all students who attend BYU Idaho are required to take at least one DL course? (See, here's something to make it relevant for DegreeInfo!) Best wishes, Tony (3 degrees from BYU and still standing)
