A Critique of Walston on Bethany of Dothan: More Whining!

just an addition

adding to BillDayson's comments:

My MA at Trinity only required 32 semester credits. That's not much for an OT/Theology MA only on the basis of credits.

But when one adds the thesis requirement, including a year to study for the major comprehensive exam covering 80 chapters of the hebrew bible (translation, syntax, intertextuality, commentary, etc.) and 25 volumes of required preparatory reading in ancient near east history, the history of semitic languages, etc. it starts to look bigger than the bethany PhD. Only on the basis of credits, however, it looks pretty small.

I'm not suggesting that bethany is as hard as trinity. But when one includes comprehensive exams as a factor, that changes things. Especially when the requirements are not in the catalog and they tend to change and get bigger during one's degree program!!

Chris

 

Re: just an addition

 

Re: just an addition

 

C'Mon, Bill...................

Both of you guys live in the north east tip of the US, both have myriad degrees, both have RA and non-RA degrees---the only difference I see is that you do no have your own seminary. Do I sense a little jealousy here?

 

Whine On Guys! The fact remains that....

1. Will a Bethany doctorate have RA utility? No!

2. Will a Bethany doctorate qualify one to teach at Harvard, Yale, Princeton or Union? No!

3. Does a Bethany doctorate require the same level of study as a RA doctorate? Perhaps, but maybe not! Some students may do RA equivalent work, others may not.

For a number of men/women, especially in Independent Baptist circles, Bethany is the only formal training they will ever have. Most of those in this particular group aren't going to spend the rest of their lives comparing degrees anyway.

 

Re: Whine On Guys! The fact remains that....

Let's get to the bottom line, Russell. If they have earned a so-called doctorate from Bethany, they are also likely to:

1. Introduce themselves as "Dr. So-and-So."

2. Print business cards with a doctoral title.

3. Pastor, or even plant/start, churches, where they will be called "Dr. So-and-So," and where congregants will assume they have legitimate doctoral degrees and have undergone the same training as anyone else with a similar title.

4. Put out a shingle and act as counselors, charging fees for their services, causing people to think that they have the sme training as professional counselors.

I could develop this further, but the bottom line is that doctoral degrees from schools like Bethany can result in a person becoming downright dangerous by virtue of his or her lack of professional competence.

 

.....................

Bad character read.

Truth is I've always wanted to be called "Rick" ...ever since my 9th grade sweetheart had a crush on Rick Nelson!

 

Re: Re: Whine On Guys! The fact remains that....

Points 1, 2 & 3 all have to do with being called "Dr.," so lets look at these as a group. If the school from which they earned their doctorate required a substantive course of study, similar hours and dissertation as RA, then they might indeed be a "Dr." Yikes, did I say that to Steve, who has a Union Ph.D. with 35 residential days?

Seriously, I have seen all of which you speak. 1) Those who introduce themselves as "Dr. So/So," some of whom have degree mill doctorates, some from unaccredited legitimate schools such as Bethany, etc. 2) Yea, I had a guy sit in my office and give me a business card with Ph.D. printed on it. When I asked the source he uttered the unutterable--a degree mill, sorry, not Bethany. 3) Happens everyday. Charles Stanley is one of thousands who have gone the unaccredited but substantive route for the doctorate. He pastors not such a little flock I might add.

Now for #4. There is a Christian counseling center in Winston-Salem, NC, which has a 1 1/2 hour weekly radio program (the name evades me at the moment), where the owner and his wife have Bethany doctorates. In conversation with the owner I was told that he had never experienced any problems with his doctoral degrees, his B and M degrees were RA.

I disagree that degrees from "schools like Bethany" are indicative of professional incompetence. For some a doctorate from CA state approved schools has met their need, this after earning RA B,M and professional D degrees. Likewise, in the religious disciplines, schools like Bethany may/maynot serve a similar venue---a doctorate which is limited in its utility, but may well meet the need within a more limited context.

 

IIRC, Columbia Evangelical Seminary has moved to a one-room office inside a church in Washington state.


Bruce

 

Re: Re: Re: Whine On Guys! The fact remains that....

I always find it amusing that when Russell doesn't have a valid point to make, he attempts to turn things into a personality contest.

(Remind me, Russell, where did you earn your doctorate? What? You have no doctorate? Quel dommage . . .)

He obviously misses the point, however. An RA doctorate may have one day of residency, or it may have no residency at all. But the mere fact that it is from a regionally accredited institution indicates that it has gone through a significant quality review process. Do I place importance on a residency? Historically, of course I do. But everyone (except, apparently, Russell) knows that residency is only part of a program that must be taken on the whole.

And I'm certainly willing to stack my RA doctorate up against Russell's . . . if he ever earns one.

Nice try, Russell.

 

Re: Re: Re: Re: Whine On Guys! The fact remains that....

And as ususal, Steve has difficulty with my feeble attempts at humor. I have never discounted the importance of a residency, and in many cases would deem the residency to be essential to a substantive program, i.e., in some disciplines such as medicine, health care, etc. The importance of RA is also understood in terms of broad utility. For some in ministry/theology, and this is the point, the non-RA route has served them well. Of course I speak of non-RA programs which require legitimate work--not degree mills, and also of middle adult (and older) students at the graduate level.

My only doctorate is the RA/ATS D.Min. from Erskine Theological Seminary. Honestly, I have never calculated the residency for the D.Min. until now, but the residency component for my program was:

1. 12 days on campus at Columbia Theological Seminary in Atlanta. This was the initial "core course" taken in conjunction with students from the five RA/ATS seminaries which comprise the Atlanta Theological Association. Six semester hours.

2. 20 days on campus at Erskine's campus in South Carolina. Twelve semester hours

3. 30 days of CPE residency at North Carolina Baptist Hospital's Counseling Center in Charlotte, NC, which was taken in two semesters. Six semester hours.

4. 1 day of residency at Erskine for face-to-face meetings with prof for two courses completed by DL. Six semester hours.

5. 1 day Dissertation presentation/final approval. Six semester hours

64 days of residency for the 36 hour D.Min. Total time in the program: 3 years.

 

When I first received a Faraston (Columbia Evangelical Seminary) catalogue a few years back, it was quite a disappointment (I had purchased Walston & Bear's Guide when it first came out and had high hopes for Faraston/CES). Any institution that would use Walter Martin's pathetically inept "Kingdom of the Cults" as a text for three college courses has serious credibility issues.

Tony Piña
(who grew up in close proximity to Martin's Melodyland Seminary)

 

Russell, your humor is noted. But I think we're engaging in a cocksmanship game if we try to compare residencies. To wit:

You did your 36-semester hour program in three years; I call that a part-time program, since it implies that you carried no more than six semester hours per twice-a-year semester. I did my 106-quarter hour Ph.D. (equivalent to 70.6 semester hours) in two years on a full-time basis.

My god, man, if you really want to play games by declaring your FTF (face-to-face) meetings as residency, I can do the same thing. What you claim as my 35 days of residency covers Union's minimum requirements of a 10-day colloquium, three 5-day seminars, and ten peer days. I did not include my FTF meetings (whether the Certification and Pre-Graduation meetings of my full committee or the numerous meetings I had with individual members of my committee). Moreover, what you listed as "CPE Residency" essentially amounts to an internship (required in any CPR program - and that is a requirement of the ACPE's one-unit program, not an institutional requirement); I did not attempt to mask my teaching internship as "residency."

So let's see . . . if you take your claim of 64 days total residency, then knock off your 30 days of CPE and the day you defended your dissertation (which, according to ATS standards, was not a dissertation per se but a final project), you're down to 33 days versus my 35 days. In fact, if I were to calculate my days the way you did (by including internship, meetings, and multiple outside seminars and workshops), it woul be a lot more than your original 64.

So you were saying?

By the way, I'm delighted to find that you do have a doctorate; I had forgotten about your Erskine D.Min, which is a quite credible degree . . . for a D.Min. Of course, I'm sure you know what Ph.D.'s think about D.Min.'s.

 

Re: Re: Re: Whine On Guys! The fact remains that....

............................

Russell (or whoever):

My own comments concerned the issues of (A) a 96 hour post doctorate in Theological studies , (B) a 20,000 word dissertation, and (C )no use of the Biblical languages for that degree which *doctorate purports to give one the skills to work at the post doctoral level in teaching or in writing .*

re: (A) This dissatisfaction on my part connects only to theological studies. First, observe that the number of units approximate the number required for the standard ministerial MDiv degree. However were all of these Bethany units concentrated in Biblical/Theological studies rather than in ecclesiastical concerns as homiletics or church administration, then 96 grad units might be a respectable number to lay a foundation for doc work in theology (NOT earn the doc). Now, if one looks at pages 35,36 of said catalogue it will be seen that indeed all classes for that degree do in fact consist of Bib/Theol! Therefore, I would admit that the Bethany doc in Theo studies degree might in volume equal the number of Bib/Theo studies in a US ThM. So then, I would admit that 96 units so concentrated might prepare one for PhD theological studies...WERE they to include a significant research experience. But there are reasons to doubt that such research is a part of even the Bethany doctoral program!

re: (B) But could a 20,000 word dissertation be that significant research experience? Seems short to me!

re: (C) Despite my good Unk's chiding of my fixation with the Biblical languages as as requisite for doc studies in Theology, I'll stick by my position here! I will ALSO concede that my main issue is preparation NOT hours. Yet, re PREPARATION, were one to look at the Bethany course requisites for this doc of Theo Studies degree, one would see therein listed a class in the Gospel of John. A fair inference, then, is that one will come away from that program with the ability to understand, work in, and even teach that piece of literature at least at the ThM level. But without the original language of John, without grammar and exegesis, can one do these things? Let's ask the Bethany doc of Theo studies grad a few MDiv (at least Western) /ThM level questions restricting these only to the first chapter of that Gospel account:

(1) 1:18 applies the adjective 'monogenes' to Christ. we know that John's readers were well acquainted with the Septuagint. How does the Septuagint use that adjective to translate the Hebrew? Discuss the context of each usage and form a conclusion.

(2) In the same verse should the reading be monogenes huios or monogenes theos? Give textually your evidence and account for the different readings. Explain the theological consequences for each reading.

(3) In 1;1 should the predicate 'God" which has no article be indefinite as 'divine' or definite, and why? Explain the use of the Greek article with examples. What is the Christological significance of your conclusion?

(4) Does the preposition 'pros' in 1:1 , rather than meta, indicate a relationship between that verse's two subjects? why/why not? Apply to a discussion of the eternal trinal relations and specifically to Aquinas' definition of 'person.'.

(5) But as the preposition 'en' is not there used, should one conclude the Son is not "in" the Father? why/why not? Discuss the various uses of 'en.' Discuss the Cappadocian doctrine of perichoresis, is it Scriptural?

(6)Why would Roberstson ,the renouned grammarian, say that without the anarthrous predicate noun in 1:1 the Gospel would be teaching Sabellianism?

(7) In 1:13 the Textus Receptus has the verb plural referencing believers then. But Tertullian and Clement of Alexandria and some modern exegetes as Lenski say the Valentinians changed the verb of that text from the singular which then would has Christ's pretemporal Person as referent and subject of the verb 'gennao.' Which reading is correct and why? Contextually explain the usages of that verb as applied spiritually to believers.

(8) Referencing the eternal generation tenet of such creeds as Westminster, a fav doc of your pal Arminius btw Russell who will call the Son Theos but not autotheos!!!, is 'gennao', that verb in 1:13 applied in the early oriental creeds as it is applied Christologically in the New testament? (How could one teach theology without grasping the ins and outs of this central doctrine?)

(9) A glance thru chap one of John reveals the noun 'theos' at times given the article and elsewhere in that same chap being anarthrous. Explain why that is and what effects it might have on the doctrine of God.

(10) In 1:3 which references the Logos' role in creation the preposition 'dia' is employed by the the author. Why did he not use 'hupo' instead? Connect this reference to Colossians 1 and Hebrews 1. Is same preposition used there? why/why not? What is the difference in intent between the two prepositions. Relate that discussion to the economic Trinity and end with a comment as to whether the use of dia should have eternal aspects re trinal relations.

(11) What is the tense of the verb in 1:18? Why is it that tense. Relate the tense to the the doctrine of eternal subordination.

(12) But then what is the tense in 1:5. Why? Discuss the ramifications of that verse to the theory of the eternality of creation.

(13) As 'man' in 1:6 is anarthrous is a referent to the nature of man? why/why not? Relate the discussion to a supposed Baptist (ie John) cult.

(14) Lexically discuss the meaning of 'egno' (knew) in 1:10 using the Hebrew synonyms(as yada) and apply the findings to the view that election is based on divine foreknowledge.

(15) Does John ever use the substantive for 'faith.' Prove your answer and apply it to soteriology and to a definitios of the meaning of faith.

(16) Does aner in 1:13 mean husband? Prove your answer lexically.

(17) As 1:15 begins with the conjunction 'kai' must it therefore connect with 1:14? Prove your answer by the Johannine usage and apply it exegetically to the interpretation of this passage.

(18) Compare the Johannine usage of monogenes as a descriptive of the Son to the Pauline usage of prototokos(first born). Then apply those observations to at least three antenicene writers or creeds. Contrast.

(19) Take and defend grammatically a position on whether 'coming' in 1:9 refers to Christ or men?

(20) 1:33, Lexically, grammatically, and Theologically evince your position on water and Spirit baptism.



These are fairly simple details which any ThM from say Dallas, TEDS, or Western could handily attend to, but could the one graduating with the Bethany doc be prepared by those studies to do such? How could one be enabled to teach (college/seminary level) or write about the gospel of John without the ability, indeed the experience, of working through these and a hundred other issues in that Book?

I may be faulted for conceit, but it seems to me that the really prideful one is the person who ascribes to himself the title "Doctor of Theology" but cannot deal with such basic issues of Johannine theology.

 

No games of comparison intended, Steve. The notation was purely academic to note that my program had a residency component.

What Ph.D.'s think about D.Min.'s? I haven't lost any sleep over it lately!

 

Re: Re: Re: Re: Whine On Guys! The fact remains that....

Bill, I am not informed regarding the details of Bethany's Ph.D. program, however, isn't "the economic Trinity" in Indiana?

 

Re: Re: Re: Re: Whine On Guys! The fact remains that....

I hereby nominate this magnum opus as the post most irrelevant to distance education ever to appear on degreeinfo.com.

 

Thanks, Tony, on the Martin book. Self-serving piffle and worse than useless in dealing with non-Christian religions and/or cults. But then, who needs facts when one has such lovely opinions...

 

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Whine On Guys! The fact remains that....

............

I believe you reference the exhibitionistic trinity.