Louisiana Baptist University

Discussion in 'Accreditation Discussions (RA, DETC, state approva' started by Way, Dec 27, 2003.

Loading...
  1. Guest

    Guest Guest

    One would hope that admission to an LBU doctoral program requires a "certain degree of scholarliness." The catalog states, "The person admitted to our Ph.D. program must have the appropriate background...and the research skills necessary to succeed in such a program."
     
  2. Bill Grover

    Bill Grover New Member

    ===

    Again you do not deal with my evidence of Jason who completes an MA at LBU with a 4.0 grade av. and is admitted into the PhD and who thinks that Strong's Concordance is appropriate for use in a doctoral dissertion on the Bible.

    If Jason meets the LBU prerequisites of "appropriate background" and "research skills" then those LBU prerequisites mean absolutely nothing.

    But as I said in the other thread, I give up discussing this with you as you do not respond to explicit questions.

    Thanks for your friendship.

    If the LBU program does not graduate scholars, then the program is not scholarly!
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 5, 2004
  3. Guest

    Guest Guest

    Bill,

    It is difficult to answer the above statements in full, as I do not know the situation. I know RA MDiv grads who were required to do no language studies (none) to earn the degree. Is it possible Jason earned the MA with no language studies? Perhaps so. I simply don't know. Perhaps if he didn't, by the time he gets to the dissertation stage of his program, he will recognize that Strong's is not exactly a doctoral level source. I don't know what his Ph.D. studies are in. Some of the South African research doctorates do not require "any" original language exegesis for the practical theology doctorate. This may or may not be his area of study, I don't know.

    However, IMO, if LBU, at the Ph.D. level, allows dissertations which cite only entry level sources, there would certainly need to be some "belt tightening."
     
  4. Anthony Pina

    Anthony Pina Active Member

    You are too kind, my friend.

    Tony
    (whose field is instructional technology, not systematic theology)
     
  5. Bill Grover

    Bill Grover New Member

    ===

    Russell

    I want you to know that I do value as a virtual friend.

    I agree that we both are somewhat impaired in our data on which to evaluate the LBU program in Bib Studies. IMO, if I had in hand the course requirements I could show you ways they must be deemed wanting.

    In regard to your last paragraph, please search this thread. Here you'll find Jason claiming to cite the reqs of the LBU ThD program from a LBU pamphlet on said program. He says LBU encourages that doc work in Bib Studies use Strong's . Strong is for the (exegetically) weak!


    Here's this problem with using Strong in doc work.Suppose someone was using 1 Jo 5:18 in a dissersation. The KJV reads, "he that is begotten of God keeps himself."

    But, there is the textual issue of which pronoun is the correct reading. There is the grammatical issue of the intent of the aorist verb as to whether it is historical or gnomic. One here needs to ascertain what clues indicate the latter intent by observing examples of aorists in the NT. And, there is the lexical issue of the meaning of gennao.

    Strong has a very brief definition of the verb. In contrast TDNT has 10 pages. But TDNT among its definition includes phrases and whole sentences in the Greek characters and alludes to grammatacisms from the Greek .

    But to compromise in the use of research tools is to compromise the rigor of the studies. If one uses only lexicons or commentaries based on English then that one's research is subject to all manner of criticisms.

    I agree that doc dissertations in practical studies may not require the languages. I also know some schools award the MDiv with no languages.
     
  6. Bill Grover

    Bill Grover New Member

    ===

    Russell

    I want you to know that I do value as a virtual friend.

    I agree that we both are somewhat impaired in our data on which to evaluate the LBU program in Bib Studies. IMO, if I had in hand the course requirements I could show you ways they must be deemed wanting.

    In regard to your last paragraph, please search this thread. Here you'll find Jason claiming to cite the reqs of the LBU ThD program from a LBU pamphlet on said program. He says LBU encourages that doc work in Bib Studies use Strong's . Strong is for the (exegetically) weak!


    Here's this problem with using Strong in doc work.Suppose someone was using 1 Jo 5:18 in a dissersation. The KJV reads, "he that is begotten of God keeps himself."

    But, there is the textual issue of which pronoun is the correct reading. There is the grammatical issue of the intent of the aorist verb as to whether it is historical or gnomic. One here needs to ascertain what clues indicate the latter intent by observing examples of aorists in the NT. And, there is the lexical issue of the meaning of gennao.

    Strong has a very brief definition of the verb. In contrast TDNT has 10 pages. But TDNT among its definition includes phrases and whole sentences in the Greek characters and alludes to grammatacisms from the Greek .

    But to compromise in the use of research tools is to compromise the rigor of the studies. If one uses only lexicons or commentaries based on English then that one's research is subject to all manner of criticisms.

    I agree that doc dissertations in practical studies may not require the languages. I also know some schools award the MDiv with no languages.
     
  7. Anthony Pina

    Anthony Pina Active Member


    I was disappointed by Jason's attacks on the RC/Mormon and his rather stupifying editorial about his visit (makes Protestants look ridiculous). This stuff fits in the same category as those who consider Chick publications to be academic journals.


    Fortunately, anyone with an I.Q. above room temperature could see that Jason's remarks represent mainstream Protestants about as much as David Koresh represented the main body of Seventh-day Adventists or the Lafferty murderers represented mainstrean LDS. Unfortunately, there will always be a lunatic fringe of almost any movement (religious or otherwise).

    I have met a few of these folks (luckily not many) on theologyreview.com. It indeed is rather bizarre from a scholarly point of view. They usually do not want to look objectively at a subject (whether they agree or disagree). Rather it ends up being filled with shallow one liners about the Pope being the anti Christ. Heck, we had one guy who was a fan of Binny Hinn criticizing the RC for being unscriptural and superstitious. Oy vey. Then we got another guy touting alleged stuff from Malachi Martin about satanic ceremonies and yada...yada.... in the Vatican (zeeesh).

    That's too bad. I was really enjoying my visits to TheologyReview, but promised my wife that I would limit my online posting to Degreeinfo until I finished my dissertation (since my dissertation is in the area of distance learning, Degreeinfo is relevant). I hope to get back there sometime and finish answering questions that people have posted for me (unless the lunatic fringe has taken over--I hope that Stan has not allowed that to happen).

    I have also enjoyed reading Mormon apologetic sites. I in no way agree with Mormon theology, but I enjoy reading and understanding their perspective. Much protestant Mormon critique can consist of back slapping, self congratulatory (aren't we glad we are not as stupid as the Mormons) dialogue. If they were faced by articulate refutation such as Jeff Lindsay's site, they would be in trouble.

    Over the years, I have found it highly amusing when professional "cult-fighters", sporting their unaccredited (or even diploma mill) degrees, have engaged with LDS professors with doctorates from Berkeley, UCLA, Stanford, Harvard and Duke. A couple of scholars with doctorates from Biola (Owen and Mosser)have done a credible job, as has Blomberg (PhD from Aberdeen). Stuff by Walter Martin (Ph.D. Cal Coast) & John Ankkerberg (DMin Luther Rice before accreditation) is embarrassingly bad. James White (ThD Columbia Evangelical) is not at all impressive (though, ironically, White does appear to have a pretty good command of Koine Greek. His MA was from Fuller).

    As a side note, I enjoy hearing folks like Dr. Mitch Pacwa (EWTN) talk about why the Protestants are wrong about the number of books to include in Canon. How the Apostles used the version with the 'aprocrypha' in and the RC church being apostloic chose to follow them rather than a later Jewish council that removed them..etc. It allows you to see things from another perspective.

    The whole history of the canonization of the OT and NT scriptures really deserves to be better known. I think that the whole corpus of New Testament-era apocrypha and how certain books were included while others were excluded is utterly fascinating.

    Maybe doctoral study will benefit Jason. I hope he gets more than just a degree.

    Unless he learns about and applies basic principles of research and scholarship during his studies, I fear that LBU would be producing just another quack "Dr."

    Tony
     
  8. Anthony Pina

    Anthony Pina Active Member

    Unfortunately, Jason has demonstrated that his research skills are FAR below what anyone could reasonably expect from a doctoral level student.

    Tony
     
  9. Guest

    Guest Guest

    If this assertion is indeed correct, then remedial studies would appear to be in needed.
     
  10. Bill Grover

    Bill Grover New Member

     
  11. Bill Grover

    Bill Grover New Member

     
  12. Guest

    Guest Guest

     
  13. Bill Grover

    Bill Grover New Member

    ===


    Only if I continued to stubbornly insist that my misspellings are correct. Only if UZ , knowing no better than I either, continued to award me a 4.0 grade average for those mispellings in a masters in English and then allowed me further ,despite those spelling errors an 8th grader would detect, into a UZ PhD in English.:rolleyes:

    Analogously this is what LBU is doing.;)
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 6, 2004
  14. Jason Gastrich

    Jason Gastrich New Member


    In all fairness to my research on Mormonism, it hasn't even been addressed. You've only provided a link to my visit to a Mormon service. Here is the link to my research: http://www.jcsm.org/Contents/Mormonism.htm .

    Many years ago, I was deceived by a Mormon girl. She said she was a Christian and hid her Mormonism from me for quite awhile. Eventually, I found out, but I was already close to her. This made me research the Mormon religion because I didn't want to simply take what everyone was saying and swallow it. I wanted to discover the truth for myself.

    As you can see on that page, I read Mormon literature, compared it to the Bible, and did a thorough investigation of the church. It simply didn't align with the Bible and it distorted the biblical Christ. It subtracted from His deity.

    Don't take my word for it. Read the page and their literature and find out for yourself. Just don't "pray over the Book of Mormon to see if it's from God or not." That is NOT a biblical way of discovering truth; especially for unbelievers and baby Christians to whom that statement is surely directed.

    Read the Bible and use it as a litmus test for the truth. Compare other doctrines and religions to it. If you do this, then you won't have to shoot the messenger and you'll see that Catholicism and Mormonism fall short of Orthodox Christianity and the biblical gospel of salvation by faith in the biblical Jesus Christ. http://gospel.jcsm.org

    I have a discussion board for discussing these things. It's for intellectuals and it's called Inerrancy.com - http://inerrancy.com . You're welcome to sign up for a membership. However, fake names and handles aren't allowed and all members must verify their identity before posting. These rules have provided a very good atmosphere of maturity and honesty for intellectual debate.

    Sincerely,
    Jason Gastrich
     
  15. uncle janko

    uncle janko member

    The thread hath burped.

    Look, son, you have no business representing either LBU or anything else pertaining to orthodox christianity. You said a while back that you didn't care what LBU's position was on learning Greek. Fine. Let LBU alone, then.

    When you attended a Roman Catholic mass--and your write-up of the event shows what can only be called ostentatious ignorance, since the procedures of the Roman Catholic mass are well-known both to adherents and critics of that church body--you referred to the recitation of the Nicene Creed as a profession of faith in Jesus and the Virgin Mary and labeled it odd but not overly disturbing.

    So you don't care for the inerrant Word of God in the Greek original, you don't care about a solid fundamentalist school, you despise the Latter-day Saints, Roman Catholicism gives you the willies, and Nicene orthodoxy strikes you as odd. But you maintain a forum for intellectuals, while you forbid posting to your main forum. Good for you, mate! There's nothing like raising standards, after all.
     
  16. Anthony Pina

    Anthony Pina Active Member

    Jason,

    Actually, I have gone to your "Mormonism" page and have followed every link (the ones that worked, anyway). I only addressed the one page because it was referenced directly by Charles. This thread has nothing to do with LDS beliefs and I did not want to take it too far out of its context, so I limited my remarks to a few of the many outrageous items on that page.

    I am sorry that your LDS lady friend decided to keep her religious affiliation from you. My non-Mormon colleagues, friends and I are very comfortable about sharing our differing views with each other in a respectful manner. This is also true of my friends her on Degreeinfo. I saw no such respect on your website.

    You claim to have "read Mormon literature, compared it to the Bible, and did a thorough investigation of the church". Pardon my skepticism, but your lack or accuracy about even basic doctrines and beliefs of the LDS church and your proof-texting of scriptures, while ignoring Biblical verses that contradict your positions suggests, rather, that you have simply read the four "books" listed on your title page (three of which are low-grade anti-Mormon works and the other is a US News article). The references from LDS writers are simply taken out the the anti-Mormon books. There is no evidence that you are even aware of anything written by LDS scholars within the past few decades, as each of your tired anti-Mormon arguments has been refuted long ago.

    This thread is not the place to debate your interpretation of LDS doctrine. Bill Grover started a thread discussing LDS beliefs a while back, and his questions were sincere and scholarly. If you wish to start a new thread to engage an "off-topic" dialogue, I'm all for it and prepared to list the enormous quantity of errors on your website. This way, Degreeinfo members who are not interested in the topic won't be burdened.

    I found it deliciously ironic that you state the following on your "Identify False Prophets and Teachers" page:

    "don't be fooled by Mormons who ask you to pray about their religion or Book of Mormon.”

    And then in the very next paragraph (entitied “My Prayer”) you ask the Lord to:

    "Give us great discernment so we can identify truth and lies. Make us very wise and give us great knowledge."

    So, praying for truth, knowledge and wisdom is desirable, just as long as you are not praying about the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints...I get it.

    May God bless you.

    Tony
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 8, 2004
  17. Guest

    Guest Guest

    Tread forward with a circumspect demeanor, Squire Janko. Thy Carpathian anger hath been roused from its sedate surroundings. ;)
     
  18. uncle janko

    uncle janko member

    You're right. We Carpathians react badly, especially around Christmastime, to people whose "degrees" and dumbth put real schools in a bad light, and give immemorial ignorance a bad name.
    All it takes to put me back in a good mood, though, is a trip down memory lane:

    http://www.ce-review.org/99/3/women_lovatt3.html
     
  19. Guest

    Guest Guest

    You cracked me up brother Janko. Jason really out to be rather embarrassed by the whole thing. If he is not it goes to show what an accredited education may do for him and what he is lacking by messing with the schools he has...if he is sheepish then there may be hope for him.

    Jason, it has nothing to do with your perspective (I do not embrace Mormon Theology) & everything to do with intellectual integrity/analysis. You lack depth and that is why folks are amused by your references to maintaining intellectual discussion boards. I am being honest with you and I hope with a little introspection you will see some problem areas in your back yard. You look relatively young and there is time to learn and grow. Don't be in a hurry (judging by your sites) to try and pretend that you are at the top of the intellectual heap. Learn...grow...develop.....there is so much joy in it.


    North
     
  20. Guest

    Guest Guest

    North,

    Is this a nouthetic counseling technique from the ACCS program? ;)
     

Share This Page