what is the best or worst seminary to attend?

What Are the Best Seminaries to Attend?

 

Fakescholar, the forum is here to answer people's questions about educational endeavors.

 

Dear Mr. or Ms. Falseteacher
Of course you would never base a decision entirely on the opinions of people you don't know on a site you've just discovered. That said, there are an awful lot of reliable and helpful folks here, many with thousands of posts and/or 10 or more years here. I wish more people used their real names -- heck, I wish everyone did -- so they could be independently researched. But that is not the way this site evolved. Such is life. Best wishes in your quest.

John Bear, M.J. (UC Berkeley), PhD (Michigan State University) JOHN BEAR - Home
Author, 15 editions of "Bear's Guide to Earning Degrees by Distance Learning" (over 500,000 in print)
Author, "Bear's Guide to Finding Money for College" (10 Speed Press/Random House)
Co-Author, "Degree Mills: the billion-dollar industry that has sold more than a million fake degrees" (Prometheus Books)
Degree expert on 60 Minutes (twice), Good Morning America (4 times).
Principal speaker, 3 national conventions of the Distance Education Accreditation Council
Principal speaker, 4 national conventions of AACRAO, the American Association of Collegiate Registrars..."
Contestant on Jeopardy; 8th ranked junior tennis player in southern California in 1953.

 

Depends. Do they offer a legitimate, rigorous education commensurate with the labels they attach to their degrees? Do they have a faculty with excellent academic credentials?

I don't even have a problem with a religious institution offering certifications that would not qualify as legitimate academic degrees to train up people for their churches. They can do whatever they want, why would I care? The problem is when they make their educations out to be something they're not, calling light correspondence courses M.Divs or Th.Ds or the like. Degree titles have a meaning independent of any given educational institution, and that's why there are standards established by legitimate accrediting bodies. When an institution like Andersonville plays dishonest games with this, they become worse than the most ugly of secular mills, because "in the name of God" they're misleading a lot of people and producing unqualified people allegedly capable of filling ministry positions. And if a person claims "Well, the good Lord qualified me!", I'll answer "Then why are you seeking validation of this qualification by the Creator of the Universe from a cheap and tawdry human-made correspondence mill?"

 

This person is a troll. Until a moderator stops the spam, it should be ignored.

 

He is posting the exact same topics that he previously posted under his former pseudo name:

1. http://www.degreeinfo.com/general-distance-learning-discussions/56102-all-unaccredited-seminaries-no-good.html

2. http://www.degreeinfo.com/off-topic-discussions/56105-how-much-can-person-know-college-jam-packed-classes-tests-what-does-do.html

3. http://www.degreeinfo.com/off-topic-discussions/56104-accredited-seminaries-vs-non-accredited-my-accreditation-superior-than-theirs.html

4. Etc.

He is tenacious. People do things for a reason. Does anyone care to guess what his motive is?

 

Awwww, c'mon and show some compassion, me again.

Fakescholar/Falseteacher is obviously very lonely. And psychotic. And typing with only one hand.
:drive:

 

(This post is a c&p of a post that I made a year ago in the American Institute of Holistic Theology thread.)

I see two different issues.

1. Is it justifiable for universities to not maintain sound academics?

2. Is it justifiable for universities to not be accredited?

In my opinion, my answer to #1 would be 'no'. If they slip too far in the academic sense, universities probably shouldn't be awarding degrees with familiar titles (like Ph.D) in established subjects (like comparative religion). These schools needn't disappear, they should just award certificates instead. Even if they are teaching new and unique subjects, they should treat those subjects with the respect that the subjects (arguably) deserve, by doing the best job with them that they possibly can. After all, the innovative university has the opportunity to become the world leader in that particular field of scholarship. They should be trying to promote their new subject in the wider academic world.

And my answer to #2 is 'maybe sometimes'. If a school has an unusual but justifiable teaching methodology that a regional accreditor won't accept, and if there is isn't any alternative accreditor, the school has the choice of abandoning its methodology or not being accredited. I'm thinking of Dharma Realm here, which back in the 1970's tried to blend Western academics and monastic-style Zen/Ch'an practice. I think that's a very justifiable methodology for teaching Buddhism, but WASC wouldn't buy it. Dharma Realm has subsequently moved away from that early vision and is now a WASC candidate. Another kind of example are the several small seminaries that are operated by particular religious denominations for the limited purpose of training their own clergy.

But I want to emphasize that even these non-accredited schools need to be credible in academic terms if they are awarding degrees. Arguing that there's a reason for them to not be accredited isn't an argument for their being academically unsound.

 

To proceed with a proper answer, please define: authentic, information, experienced, knowledgeable, and fools. Thank you.

 

All of the op's threads have been merged into one thread and moved to the off-topic sub-forum.

 

Give your posts time to get through moderation. Only duplicates have been deleted.

 

In reference to your quote (above), can you please give an example of someone who is giving false information?

 

The first thing you need to do, Falseteacher, is become literate, gain a commanding grasp of the English language. Your accusations will then at least be more credible. First thing you do is learn the proper use of an apostrophe. It's kind of this thing that most people learn in the fourth grade. OK, snark over.

 

Here's the problem: if you are at all indicative of the educational level of graduates of Andersonville, you are a walking, talking indictment against them. Your writing is on a level that is commensurate with junior high school. You need to educate yourself, earn a bona fide education. It takes many years and a great deal of sweat and toil. Andersonville does not provide that. They are a mill, and again, if you have or have had any affiliation with them, you are a testimony to this fact.

 

You are indeed a troll, and not a very clever one at that.

If you knew the first thing about the subject you're attempting to pontificate about, you'd know that Dr. Bear's "engagement" with the FBI was to help them uncover and prosecute diploma mills by being, among other things, an expert witness in court.

As the saying goes, sometimes it's better to keep silent and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth (or in this case, your fingers) and remove all doubt.

 

False Teacher = False Scholar = Entertainment Value

Falseteacher, you call others names and you make false criminal allegations against others -- and then when you are questioned about it, you claim to be a martyr. Falseteacher, stop crapping in your own nest and then blaming others for the smell. As Bruce aptly noted, you are not a clever troll. People put up with you because it has entertainment value, similar to watching a train wreck -- people just have to stop and stare in disbelief. LOL

 

Thus far, Franciscan University of Steubenville has been the most academically challenging and rigorous online program that this writer has ever participated in, more-so than prior secular coursework (and degrees) that were previously completed. It is like a marathon. However, it has also been the most informative academic program to date.

 

False Teacher, which theology program are you a graduate of? And if you care to share, what is your testimony for the Lord Jesus Christ? Also, you still have not responded to this question: Click here

 

That looks like an impossible question to answer.

People adhere to different religions or to none at all. They come from all manner of denominations and historical traditions within those broader religions. Some are interested in careers as clergy, others want to deepen their understanding and their skill as practitioners. Others are primarily interested in comparative religion or in the history and philosophy of religions. Some of these might have academic ambitions, others not.

So a prospective student needs to begin by identifying his/her interests and reasons for wanting to study religion.

Then he or she needs to identify a list of schools consistent with those interests.

At that point the student needs to inquire into these schools' academic reputations, into who their faculty are, into what their course titles look like, and into any other distinctives that a department might have.

For many of us cost, admissions requirements, whether the program offers DL, financial aid and considerations like that factor in too.

My guess is that two different people are apt to come up with two very different lists. For me, a school not being "Biblical" (a deal-killer for you) might be a strong positive, since I'm not a Christian. I have no problem with Catholic universities if they have strengths in areas I'm interested in.

 

If you want to discuss and debate unaccredited seminaries or unaccredited schools in general, you're more than welcome and even encouraged to do so. I happen to think there is some value in unaccredited schools, provided they are sincere and legitimate in their goals and methods.