External Educators Critique Louisiana Baptist University

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: External Educators Critique Louisiana Baptist Univer

Our standards aren't as different as you may think, Bill. As a DegreeInfo registrant since its inception, I think you would have to agree that I have promoted substantive academic programs. My position has always been that one should, if possible, pursue accredited degree programs. Each of my three degrees (B,M,D) is either RA or RA/ATS, so I recognize the importance of accreditation. At the same time, I believe that substantive UA programs also exist, and for some this may be a viable route--especially in practical theology.

To be frank, I am in 90% agreement with your post above (in italics). The other 10% is probably of matter of semantics. Where "very rare situations" could be interpreted as 1 in 1000, I would probably not stretch it that far. Perhaps 1 in 992 . My academic studies have been primarily in practical theology, therefore, for the most part, this is the area I allude to when I speak of UA studies.

BTW, the friendship remains strong. Isn't it great how a Calvinist and an Arminian have been predestined to participate in koinonia? It had to have been foreknown.

 

Yeah, by a Gnesio-Lutheran watching you two think you've exhausted all the theological options, but who is nonetheless grateful for what you have to say both publicly and privately.

 

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: External Educators Critique Louisiana Baptist Un

 

===

And we appreciate you.

 

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: External Educators Critique Louisiana Baptis

 

Unk,

It has been decreed that Bill appreciate you.

I have chosen to appreciate you.

 

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: External Educators Critique Louisiana Ba

===

LBU regularly, not exceptionally or rarely, uses faculty with unaccredited docs to teach doc level Bible and Theology. I guess that practice is part of what is excluded in your opining up to this point.

Therefore, could you , then, now include that practice in your opining and speak your mind directly to that LBU practice as to the effects of it on the quality of the LBU programs? Does it at all matter if doc level Bible/Theo is taught by those with accred docs? Yes/No? Matters very little/Matters very much? Why/why not?

 

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: External Educators Critique Louisian

Given the options listed, I would think it "matters very much" that those who teach courses which require exegesis in the original languages hold accredited doctorates. I am defining "matters very much" as meaning "the majority of the time." However, I do believe that substantive supervision "can be" given by "some" who hold UA docs. Such cases, IMO, are the exception and not the rule.

My response (of "not necessarily") to this question in the earlier post related to those rare occasions where substantive work may indeed occur via a prof who holds UA degrees. IMO, an unqualified prof should not be allowed to supervise any level of work, whether B, M or D.

 

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: External Educators Critique Loui

===



Russell

You did it again. You don't answer my question!

I ask you: "Does it at all matter if doc level Bible/Theo is taught by those with accredited docs?"

And your answer is restricted ONLY to those "who teach courses requiring exegesis in the original languages," you again dodge the question and by that dodge exonerate teaching grad level courses in Bib/Theol with unaccred docs !

Courses in Systematic or Historical Theology or Church History or Apologetics are not courses exegeting in the original languages ,and many courses also could consist of book studies in the English Bible. My question encompassed all of these and your answer did not. Again you dodge.

***Using your answer ALL of the unaccredited docs of the LBU faculty work just fine because NO LBU course is an exegesis of the Bible in the original languages. How convenient!***


OK, I give up asking you questions about LBU! I cannot believe that you are not purposely dodging questions.

 

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: External Educators Critique

Bill,

It is amusing that you think I am intentionally "dodging" your question. Let me again emphasize, to the point of redundancy, this is not the case. I thought the basis of your inquiry was in regard to courses which required exegesis. Apparently, this was not the case, so apologies are in order for not recognizing the full scope of your question. Since you asked my opinion, let me share my personal opinion.

In response to the above, i.e., "courses in Systematic or Historical Theology, Church History or Apologetics;" let me also add courses which may have an association with religion/theology/ministry, e.g., paradigm studies, sociology, etc., IMO, it "matters very much" that these courses be taught/supervised by profs with accredited docs. Again, I am defining your phrase "matters very much," to mean "the majority of the time."

Let me restate, however, IMO, there are exceptions to this rule. Cases in point would be such schools as Bob Jones or Pensacola Christian, where a large percentage of faculty hold unaccredited degrees (although most are from BJU), yet they have a substantive program of study. Also, IMO, the exceptions to the rule are "few," but, IMO, some do exist.

Also, IMO, it is to the students advantage to pursue RA/NA programs the vast majority of the time, ensuring at least a minimum level of quality and a high level of utility. There are, however, cases where, IMO, the UA route is an option. Here as well, the cases are "few," but, IMO, they do exist

Now, as to LBU, the quality of their regimen of study, IMO, cannot be determined by one (or a few) student(s). Where on the one hand, much has been stated regarded Jason and his purported lack of scholarship, there is also Craig Hargis. Craig, who holds RA degrees, is ABD at UCLA (I think its UCLA, but it is a RA school), is at the point of completing a GAAP doctorate, who states that LBU's level of study was, for the most part, on par with his other studies. To make assertions regarding LBU's quality, based on one (or a few) student(s), IMO, is somewhat like dishing the entire public school system because a few graduates can't read beyond a 5th grade reading level--and we know this happens more frequently than we would like. So, while I certainly advocate substantive academic programs, which for the most part would fall within the RA/NA camp, IMO, there are a "few" exceptions to this rule.

You will have to make your own determinations regarding LBU and its programs, Bill. LBU is not RA or NA. I have never suggested that LBU is on par with RA/NA in any or all areas. This thread was begun only to state what "some" external educators said regarding LBU, never to suggest that three positive assessments by external educators gave hint to RA/NA equivalence.

Hopefully, I have not been evasive in this response. If this remains your perception, perhaps we should agree to disagree, and put the matter to rest.

 

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: External Educators Criti

===

* Bill replies:

I agree to disagree with you but will respond to unproven assertions that the LBU Bib/Theo doc is rigorous. If it is, then let it be proven.

The matter of the substandard study of God's Word and getting PhD/ThD for work of much less substance and rigor is not something I wish to put to rest. Both the Word and those who study it in genuinely rigorous doctoral programs deserve that.

 

May I suggest an analogy?

Suppose (just theoretically, mind) that there were a notorious flummerer repeatedly referring to his brief time at a certain RA seminary in Indiana. Suppose also (just theoretically, mind) that there were an utter non-flummerer and actual graduate of that same seminary, who didn't talk about it much.

Whose opinion of that school would be reliable, and whose statements in general should be seen as representative of the level of that school? Those of the second individual, right? Why believe a flummerer (or kook) and disbelieve an honest fellow (or normal human being)?

Perhaps the same could be applied to Gastrich and Hargis as exemplars or discutants of LBU. I am sure that we could all find real goofballs who went to or even graduated from the schools we attended, but would find it somewhat rash, or at least chafing, if our schools were judged largely on the basis of a fluke nitwit instead of upon our own illustriousness.

 

===



You are using as your subject what Jason says about LBU. I am using as my subject what LBU says about Jason.

LBU first says that Jason has sufficient scholarship to finish an MA in Bible with a grade point average of 4.0. Lbu secondly says that Jason has attained a level of scholarship which qualifies him to do PhD work in Bible. There is no way to avoid the conclusion that LBU accepts Jason's work as rigorous. But I am not judging the LBU doc program in Biblical Studies just by Jason. That is my first criterion to measure LBU rigor.

My second criterion is language. To use Craig as an argument for the LBU rigor, IMO is faulty. I have not seen the products of Craig's coursework or his dissertation. I do recall, I THINK, that in the infamous Walston dissertation discussion, Craig argued that just because Walston was basing his opining re tongues on NT texts did not mean that exegesis in Greek of the NT texts he interpreted was necessary. I disagree with Craig IF that is Craig's position.

IMO a doctoral dissertation dealing with a Biblical interpretation needs to be based on exegesis in the Biblical languages to be genuinely rigorous. Craig told me that in his LBU program he took not one course in the exegesis of a Hebrew or Greek book. I say a rigorous doc using coursework in Biblical studies requires such courses . A rigorous dissertation in Biblical studies also does. Even to interact with the literature require the use of the Biblical languages.

Consider as example my dissertation on the issue of the subordination of the Son. Wallace in his grammar says that in Phil 2:6 the Son has the morphe of God but not the to einai of God because harpagmon is used as something grasped for not something possessed and that the infinitive suggests a hierarchy in the Godhead. Burk says equality with God by this text is withheld from the Son because "to einai" is not anaphoric. To develop my argument I must interact with the literature including that literature which elicits arguments from the Greek text. Dahms bases practically his whole argument on the meaning of monogenes.

It does not seem to me that very many dissertations in the areas of systematic theology or Biblical studies can be rigorously done without exegesis in the Biblical languages. Since LBU apparently neither tests that skill for entrance into doctoral programs, nor develops that skill in coursework, nor requires that skill in dissertations, I just can't agree that the LBU program in Biblical Studies is rigorous.

I can agree that Craig exceeded what may have been required of him and that he is in general ways a very scholarly and amiacable person. But I don't think that his experience at LBU proves the rigor of LBU. Scholarly work in Biblical Studies requires the use of the Biblical languages.

My third criterion for evaluation of rigor is faculty with accredited docs.

My fourth criterion of rigor is acceptance into RA theo programs.

Jason is not my entire argument, Unk.

 

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: External Educators C

1. Then perhaps we should agree to disagree my friend.

2. Nor do I wish to encourage substandard study.

 

My point exactly.

 

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: External Educato

==

That's fine, let's so agree.

Graduate work in Biblical studies supervised generally by faculty with unaccredited docs , making no use of the Biblical languages in exegesis, and accomplished in a manner of insufficient rigor to prepare one to succeed in accredited programs in Biblical studies IMO IS "substandard study" and needs to be exposed as such.

As I've said before, LBU may adequately prepare pastors, but its doc programs in Biblical Studies need some adjustment.

 

Re: Re: Re: External Educators Critique Louisiana Baptist University

The large differences in essential doctrines would likely separate LBU from wanting any kind of approval from those institutions. In other words, those unversities are widely known as "liberal" (or heretical) in their biblical teachings, so LBU would probably avoid contacting them for any kind of approval. A professor or institution would likely need to affirm LBU's beliefs (Baptist beliefs) before they would be encouraged to judge their university.

JG

 

Re: Question

The first time I heard about LBU was by means of a flyer. It was inside of a CD I bought from Chuck Missler called, "Learn the Bible in 24 Hours." Chuck came to my church and gave an awesome sermon, so I bought the CD. It is excellent as well. Dr. Missler received an honorary doctorate from LBU. Link: http://www.jcsm.net/LBU/LBUAlumni.htm .

God bless,
Jason

 

Re: Re: Question

According to LBU's 2001 website, which listed graduates back through the early 90's, Missler was listed as earning the Ph.D. In the graduate listing, LBU awarded two honorary doctorates per year, none of which were Ph.D.'s.

No reputable schools, IIRC, award the Th.D or Ph.D. as an honorary degree. Honorary nomenclature includes, e.g., Doctor of Divinity, Doctor of Letters, etc. The Th.D. & Ph.D. are earned degrees.

 

Re: Re: Re: Question

Ok. I could be mistaken. Is Chuck's earned degree verifiable? Their archived 2001 site doesn't show it. Link: http://web.archive.org/web/20020617205755/lbu.edu/graduates.htm and http://web.archive.org/web/20011219013347/lbu.edu/alumni.htm .

JG