Walston's Potch Dissertation Online

Hartshorne's Theology and Biblical Languages

Were the dissertation written to answer (among others) the question of how that natural theology is to be evaluated from or compared to a Christian perspective, then your answer, Tom, is of course, that dissertation should use the original languages to apply exegetics to that question. This should be done even at the master's level. .

 

I've never heard of Bethany, so I can't comment.

But this suggests a new point: If the existence of Potchefstroom is an affront to God and to evangelical scholarship everywhere, then aren't the hundreds (literally) of non-accredited Christian schools an outright work of Satan?

I'm gradually making an annotated list of all the CA-approved schools that offer postsecondary degrees. It's a little project of mine, performed largely out of curiosity. Keeping track of the religious schools is difficult, since they pop into and out of existence constantly. (CA has a religious exemption.) Several months ago I copied down the following doctorate granting entries from the BPPVE listing. (Many more only offer bachelors and/or masters degrees.) Several may be California branches of accredited out-of-state schools, and any of them may actually host excellent work, I don't know.

I counted 33 doctorate-granting schools that were approved at the time on the BPPVE listing. That number is considerably higher than the number of accredited Christian schools in California that offer doctorates in religious subjects. I'd guess that this kind of disparity is even higher in some of the Southern states. So I will hazard a guess that a majority of the seminaries in the United States aren't accredited at all. This phenomenon is particularly pronounced on the fundamentalist-evangelical end.

My only point in ths post is to suggest that launching a jihad against Potchefstroom is probably a misguided task as long as a galaxy of far more questionable evangelical schools continues to exist.

1. Calvary Christian International Bible College, Bakersfield.

2. Friends International Christian University, Merced.

3. Anothen University, Santa Maria.

4. Assemblies of God Evangelical Theological Seminary, Whittier.

5. Calvin Bible College and Seminary, LA.

6. Central University, Gardenia.

7. Chinese for Christ Calvin Chao Theological Seminary, Alhambra.

8. Cohen University and Theological Seminary, Bellflower.

9. Eternal Word Graduate School, Carson.

10. International Center for Theological Studies, Burbank.

11. International Christian Univ.-Reformed Presbyterian Seminary, LA.

12. International Theological Seminary, LA.

13. K.P.C.A.- Presbyterian Theological Seminary, Whittier.

14. Logos Evangelical Seminary, El Monte.

15. Puritan State University, LA.

16. St. Andrews University, Pomona.

17. Santa Anita Center for Ministerial and Spiritual Studies, Arcadia.

18. Southern California School of Ministry, Inglewood.

19. World Mission University, LA.

20, Yuin University, Compton.

21. Benjamin University, Buena Park.

22. California Graduate School of Theology, Westminster.

23. California Union University, Fullerton.

24. Newport University, Newport Beach.

25. Pan American Christian University, Cypress.

26. Southern California Theological Seminary, Stanton.

27. Trinity College of Graduate Studies, Anaheim.

28. School of Bible Theology Seminary, San Jacinto.

29. Southern California Bible College and Seminary, El Cajon.

30. Temple of Divine Prophecy, El Cajon.

31. Christian Pacific Bible College, Thousand Oaks.

32. Andrew University, Berkeley.

33. University of Creation Spirituality, Oakland.

 

Originally posted by Tom Head
My suspicion is that he's looking at Rick's dissertation and thinking "That's not fair--you have to do more than that to get a Th.M. from Dallas Theological Seminary!"

Tom, your suspicion is partly correct. I am gravely concerned that what wouldn't pass as a ThM thesis at several stateside seminaries (not just DTS) has been awarded a PhD. But as I've noted several times in this thread, my primary concern is academic integrity within my own tradition. I harbor no bitterness toward Rick Walston because he has a PhD, and I think I've made that clear throughout this thread.

And he may be right, if by "more than that" he means "more detailed New Testament exegesis"; but to the extent that Rick's dissertation is an independent theory-oriented work, I don't see anything wrong with it. Would a Ph.D. in Theology focusing on Charles Hartshorne's natural theology be categorically inferior if it included no Greek at all?

Tom, allow me to quote from the abstract for Dr. Walston's dissertation:

"This study is an investigation and exposition of the tÅn pneumatikÅn (spirituals/spiritual gifts) located in 1 Corinthians 12:8-10. The central theoretical argument is that only by understanding the biblical nature of the gifts and the precise biblical nomenclature for each of the gifts shall an understanding of them for our time emerge. There are polemic elements throughout this work for the continuation of the gifts. The primary emphasis of this study is upon the biblical, and therefore, valid identification, clarification, and description of each gift. The function and limitation of the gifts are discussed. Theological and exegetical discussions describing each of these gifts are given including the proper function of each in the church today. Scriptural examples of how each gift operated in the Bible, along with the use of citations and quotations from biblical scholars are given to reinforce the clarification and description of each gift. A special emphasis is given to the theological debate of speaking in tongues as the initial, physical evidence of the baptism in the Holy Spirit, as held by Classical Pentecostals. This work refutes that notion through an exhaustive review of the pertinent passage of Scripture from the book of Acts." [EMPHASIS MINE]

Dr. Walston has clearly identified his work as being primarily biblical and exegetical, even exhaustive in its review of pertinent biblical passages, and based on biblical nomenclature. Since the pertinent passages he's identified are in 1 Corinthians and Acts (i.e., New Testament books), exegesis of the original Greek is imperative. Thus, by his own admission, I don't think we can say Rick has striven to produce a theory-oriented work. He clearly intended it to be grounded in the New Testament.

 

I hope this is true, and this thread can die.

I wonder why this evil-spirited discussion has taken place here, in a secular forum? Don't the Pharisees have a forum dedicated to their own squabbles? What I get out of this debate is that intolerance remains the hallmark of Christianity. The silver lining on this cloud is that I was so disgusted that I decided to forgo our family's usual Sunday morning in church -- so we had a nice relaxing few hours watching the news shows on TV. Thanks!

 

My criticisms of Walston's dissertation have been purely academic, and are thus wholly appropriate for this forum. If critically analyzing something according to existing standards within and without the Christian academic community is your definition of 'intolerance,' then you're taking lexical liberties that few others--Christian or otherwise--would defend.

If someone around here cares to actually engage the evidence regarding the insufficiency of this dissertation (something I've encouraged from the very beginning, and something only Tom Head has fairly attempted to do), then let's talk. Until then, I'm weary of responding to ridiculous accusations that have nothing to do with the central issue of this thread.

And, by the way, Gert, no one is forcing you to read this thread. Your television awaits.

 

Ed, there's a little thing on the left-hand side of each post that lists your total number of Degreeinfo posts. When I wrote the post you are responding to, your total stood at 29. Now it's 31. Of these posts, all but two have been on this thread and on this subject. Your very first post to Degreeinfo was three days ago, and there seems to be no record of you making any other posts to Degreeinfo at all before that date.

Is that mistaken?

I'm just noting that you have not participated in Degreeinfo at all, during its entire history, and then you appear suddenly and immediately try to start a holy war against Potchefstroom University.

I certainly hope so. But the rest of us can only see the posts that you make here, and all but two of them have been attacks directed against Potchefstroom.

You appear suddenly on Degreeinfo and immediately try to mobilize the board to discredit a particular university. If Degreeinfo does become an anti-Potchefstroom propaganda outlet, then all of the participants here are implicated unless we express our reservations.

I've already told you why I find DTS academically wanting. I think that part of the academic study of religion is attention to precisely those foundational issues that DTS settles a-priori with a mandatory statement of doctrine. At DTS, freedom of academic inquiry exists within some pretty severe doctrinal constraints.

My reason for raising this issue is to point out that there are credible reasons to argue that many well known universities are wanting for solid academic reasons. Another example that I gave, which you conveniently snipped from my post, is the currently trendy "cultural studies" that infest so many humanities departments, particularly at prestige universities.

I suspect that black panther Huey Newton's UC Santa Cruz Ph.D. dissertation (Angela Davis was on his committee) could probably be criticized too. But would that really justify launching a holy war against the University of California? I think that these kind of examples could be produced for most universities. It's a very unpleasant fact of academic life that we needn't accept, but that we shouldn't overreact to either.

 

Touché. In truth, I very rarely watch any television – this forum itself is my chosen time-waster! Though I did indulge using my “found” hours this morning. But I will take the implied suggestion – there are others more interested in (and certainly more qualified for) this discussion than I am.

 

Originally posted by BillDayson
When I wrote the post you are responding to, your total stood at 29. Now it's 31. Of these posts, all but two have been on this thread and on this subject. Your very first post to Degreeinfo was three days ago, and there seems to be no record of you making any other posts to Degreeinfo at all before that date. Is that mistaken?

I fail to see what difference that makes. I am not new to discussions regarding non-traditional education, or even specifically with you. Most of my posts since deciding to register have been on the topic of this thread. So what? Perhaps this is one of few topics that I think is worthy of my time. If another had arisen first or instead, I may have spent considerable time there.

Judging motives is tricky business, and ultimately a red herring to the topic of this thread. Regardless of my motive (which I've clearly revealed and subsequently alluded to), I've raised evidential reservations about a dissertation that should be answered. Answering imaginary issues on the periphery won't do.

You appear suddenly on Degreeinfo and immediately try to mobilize the board to discredit a particular university. If Degreeinfo does become an anti-Potchefstroom propaganda outlet, then all of the participants here are implicated unless we express our reservations.

And I would be the first to encourage you to express your reservations. But those reservations must be based upon evidence regarding the dissertation and school in question--not disdain for Christianity, sentiment for a person or school, etc.

I've already told you why I find DTS academically wanting. I think that part of the academic study of religion is attention to precisely those foundational issues that DTS settles a-priori with a mandatory statement of doctrine. At DTS, freedom of academic inquiry exists within some pretty severe doctrinal constraints.

Scholars and alumni associated with DTS do not skirt foundational issues when interacting with the broader academic community. A number of those scholars write in areas related to history, archaeology, philosophy, linguistics, etc., and where applicable, their Christian convictions are not merely assumed. Their foundations are articulately defended, not taken for granted. And, beside, we're talking about academic rigor, regardless of the tradition represented. That's one of the reasons why I never commented on the position taken by Walston's dissertation; it's simply irrelevant to the discussion. If I follow your reasoning to its logical conclusion, Bill, then every theological institution in existence should be found academically wanting. We all know that's not true.

Another example that I gave, which you conveniently snipped from my post, is the currently trendy "cultural studies" that infest so many humanities departments, particularly at prestige universities.

It was out of integrity, not convenience. Unlike many people here, I won't comment on dissertations outside my field of specialty. I have yet to see woefully anemic dissertations in the field of biblical studies come from highly reputable schools, but I'm open to looking at the evidence. And, again, if such evidence is produced, I will be the first to cry foul.

 

BillDayson,

You said, I'm just noting that you have not participated in Degreeinfo at all, during its entire history, and then you appear suddenly and immediately try to start a holy war against Potchefstroom University..

Quite frankly, I don't find Ed's posts at attack on Potch. I can see how that, perhaps, may be thought to have come about, but that's by far, in my opinion, his main thrust. I'm quite glad he's been as vehement as he has been. Academic integrity MUST stay at a premium; that's what Ed's arguing for. Don't let heat of the debate cloud the issue.

I'll note again that I have no formal education, but man, in the past I've heard some strange classes being offered at the university (accredited, non-DL) level in concomitance to someone's work toward a degree--stuff like "A study of the Rolling Stones" I mean, really, for pete's sake! I cringe at that well above sub-standard dissertations; Ed probably cringes equally at both. It's all about quality, not doctrine. It's about scholarly research, not perfection. It's about maintaining academic integrity and nothing less.

I certainly don't mean you any disrespect, Bill, but as an onlooker, I'm with Ed on this one. I've benefitted greatly from this site just over this thread alone. I can make up my own mind about Poch, Rick Walston, everyone and everthing else on this site. As the Aussies say, "No worries."

Starkman

 

I sort of think of Bethany as a California Coast University. Not a mill and not equal to RA/ATS/TRACS (or they would be RA/ATS/TRACS).

The dude does have two accredited/equivalent of accredited doctorates and that is not even a question.

As for the Ed deal, I have no idea. He does seem to have an obsession with Ric & PUCHE. It may well as someone suggested be linked to professional envy or other factor which has caused strong reaction/emotional feelings. Such interaction with Professors as he has mentioned means that he likely began this crusade prior to the post. That is not to say his critiques are not valid as those by Bill may be valid. Let's be honest, not every RA dissertation is going to be a gem either or truly original & contributory. Reading some abstracts on the old contentville site certainly made that point.

I guess sometimes we can see other work that gets awarded a certain academic level that is considered equivalent to ours and be upset at the *seeming* disparity. I know at one point after finding out about TESC & Regents I was perturbed. I would not have considered a Bachelors degree from those institutions in any way close to equivalent of my residential B.A. To be hosest I would not consider a U of P Bachelors to be equivalent to my residential B.A. either. Nonetheless, I accept the fact that an accrediting body has made the decision that (TESC/Regents/U of P) does meet at least minimum requirements for Bachelors level work.

North

 

North, I have expressed ad nauseam the reason for my strong response: it is a profound concern for the level of evangelical scholarship (and what passes for it among the naive). Read David Wells', No Place for Truth: Or Whatever Happened to Evangelical Theology (Eerdmans, 1993) and Mark Noll's, Scandal of the Evangelical Mind (Eerdmans, 1994) and you'll see that some people think this topic is important enough to write entire books about.

This has nothing to do with Rick Walston or Potchefstroom per se. If this would have been any other evangelical leader and any other RA or GAAP theological institution, I would have voiced the same concerns with equal vigor.

As for motives that people insist on ignorantly ascribing: an ounce of evidence is worth a pound of presumption.

 

Oops, wrong thread !

While I'm here, I might as well note that it is hot and heavy in here.

Okay, I'm hitting the "back button" now.

 

I'd put my money on professional envy; if you read between the lines, his posts sound an awful lot like "I had to study Greek for my master's, but Rick didn't have to for his doctorate. It's not fair!"


Cheers,

 

I must be missing something here -- I see nothing out of line with any of Ed's posts. He has given his informed opinion of Walston's dissertation, nothing more, nothing less. You can disagree with him or not, but accusing him of having a personal vendetta against Potch, or Rick Walston is a little ridiculous. I thought that what Ed is doing is one of the reasons for this forum?? There have been no personal attacks, just honest critique.

As for Bethany Seminary -- I automatically assumed it was a mill when I received their catalog and noticed that Dad Shuemake was the Chancellor, Son #1 Shuemake was the President, Son #2 Shuemake was the Bookstore manager, and Momma Shuemake is the Bursar. Dad (Chancellor) and Son #1 (President) sign your diploma. In years previous Bethany started its own accrediting agency and accredited themselves. Other than those few items it is a FIIIIIINNNNEEEE institution. Of yes, I forgot, all their students are given permission to check out books at the public library. What a deal! I know they've considered renaming their "school". I have a suggestion for them "Deliverance Seminary". Maybe they could get Burt Reynolds to speak at commencement?

BLD

 

Of course you don't, mate; you started this thread in the first place, remember?


Cheers,

 

Gee Whiz, Tom. I didn't have anything negative to say about Walston or his dissertation when I started this thread. I hadn't even read any of it at the time of my initial posting. I was surfing the CES website to see if there was anything new and noticed Walston's dissertation. I simply wanted to let people see an example of what was required for a doctoral dissertation at Potch. That's it!

As a matter of fact, I've always been a fan of most of what CES is doing and have no axe to grind with Rick Walston at all (even considered working on a degree through them). I don't know why you're so defensive here, but you're definitely barking up the wrong tree with me...

I honestly can't find one single problem with anything Ed has written. Why so sensitive???

BLD