Trinity College of the Bible Theological Seminary?

Who knows, Bill, perhaps you will receive a registered letter, accompanied by four pages of handwritten signatures (ie, administration/faculty), each of whom is writhing in repentance and humbly petitioning you for forgiveness.

 

Why must you guys repeatedly rehash this issue of the shiny sticker. When a student opted to invest $225 in a sticker, should not the small blue/yellow adhesive addition to one's diploma reflect an equivalent amount of gloss?

 

===

I guess this is intended as humor. I guess it is funny to some. But I never said I should be petitioned for forgiveness.

What I've said is that a school intended to prepare Christian leaders should itself exhibit Christian behavior. But Trinity for years claimed to be unexcelled in quality, to be recognized world-wide for excellence, and to enjoy worldwide accreditation. These were lies intended to deceive in order to make money.

All that I hope in regard the the TTS hyperbole is that Trinity reps will admit those deceptions. I never said that TTS should seek my forgiveness. If nations can apologize for mistakes , why can't a Christian school?

Because it would cost Trinity $ !

 

Now, Now, old friend, you and I have bantered for years over TTS......

 

===

yep. sorry for my irritability!

thanks to my rereading Ted's references ancient ires were rekindled.

sorry.

 

ADDENDUM

An update: I have now received a message from Trinity which is short and sweet and doesn't say anything particularly earth-shattering. It simply states that Trinity is in candidacy status and that its next site visit is scheduled for Spring 2006, just as the accreditor stated earlier today (above). But, for what it's worth, I can tell from the way it's worded that Trinity doesn't appear to be interested in asking the accreditor for additional time until 2007 or 2008; and that it hopes that along about August of 2006 it will be announcing to the world that as a result of the aforementioned Spring 2006 site visit, Trinity will be regionally-accredited.

So, there you have it. Assuming the accreditor is as impressed with Trinity next Spring as it appeared to be in the fall of 2003, it looks like we can only sit around in here and express disbelief that Trinity even made it this for another year or so.

I guess we should enjoy it while we can, eh?

But seriously, that's only about a year away. I'm not suggesting that anyone should actually do this, but that's so short a time that someone could, theoretically, sign-up this fall for virtually any of Trinity's degrees, and it would be likely that said degree would end-up being accredited because Trinity will receive its accreditation before said degree could possibly be completed.

But, alas, the $64,000 question: Will Trinity actually become accredited -- ever? Will it fail either the Spring 2006 site visit, and/or subsequent visits, and eventually be forced to withdraw its application altogether sometime in 2008? Or, as Trinity believes will be the case, will the site visit go smoothly in the Spring of 2006 and will, therefore, Trinity be accredited sometime next summer; or, if not, that Trinity will finally get it right in time for a subsequent site visit in 2007 or 2008? And would anyone be willing to bet the cost of a Trinity degree on the latter?

Hmm?

 

Trinity College of the Bible Theological Seminary

Dear Dr Bill Grover,
Sir, unfortunately their degree courses are not up to R A standard.
Maybe they will revise all degree courses and apply again.

Respectfully,
Stae.

 

Re: Trinity College of the Bible Theological Seminary

===

Hi Stae

My hunch is that many changes have been made in the Trinity curriculum since I was a student in 2001. Trinity dropped the PhD/ThD programs I'm sure because the accreditor would not have approved T's candidacy with such . Those degrees should not be earned for taking a number of survey courses taught at the masters level or below. There should be a considerable step up from MA to doc curricula.

For similar reasons, however, I am surpised that the NCA would like the new Trinity DA in Bible as I last looked at it. If one compares DA's in other disciplines with Trinity's in Bible the differences are apparent in prerequisites, languages, and internship. The duration and requisites of the Trinity DA, as I recall, was much less than a Dallas or TEDS ThM program entails!

However, if I were a betting man, I would bet that Trinity does attain RA within a few years. That notion has led me to ponder a personal issue:

In my life I've cut a few corners too sharply. So, I have tried to probe my feelings to discern if , I an old guy just mostly wanting to learn a subject he loves, would consider Trinity's (perhaps to be) RA DA if I didn't have a doc , had the ThM, and if I were yet aware of Trinity's past. I think I can honestly say that I would NOT!

There simply are too many fine opportunities to do doc work in Bible/Theology by distance education for me to consider a school which has purposely misrepresented itself for profit for so long with NO public acknowledgement of that fault. I would in my hypothesized circumstances more likely consider among RA schools a school like the Baptist Seminary in PA which not only requires very little residence but allows some doc credit for the ThM! Or I would consider a PhD by research in a UK or Australian school where , again, little residence is required. Or I would do what I did: enroll in a good South African program. I would NOT enroll in Trinity!

My concern , however, for such research PhDs/ThDs as the UKs and SAs is that IMO they may be begun with too little foundational preparation. I think in many cases an MA is insufficient to begin doc work in Bible/Theology. But it is regularly done, so what do I know!

While I haven't much researched this, I do know that in the ETS newsletter where schools advertise for profs and where docs to be adverstise themselves for employment, nary a "DA" is mentioned! I'm just doubtful that the TTS DA will arouse much interest in serious academia. My hunch is that it mostly will be sought by those wanting an easier and quicker doc. Nevertheless, I would guess that the Trinity rigor still much exceeds such as Andersonville and its ilk...talk about easy, quicky docs! IMO the purpose of a doc in Bible/Theolgy should be to learn not to be called " doc."

I also think that the Trinity legacy of misrepresentation will not immediately evaporate if T attains RA. I found it, eg, . interesting that one (former?) Trinity prof I know of who has BOTH a South African PhD and a Trinity ThD when listing his availability in the ETS newsletter did NOT mention at all his Trinity doc though he had a past of touting Trinity on the T Delta forum.

Trinity has some good features IMO: it sees the need for qualified profs, its programs do have some substance, and it is offering distance learning, it aspires to RA. Perhaps Trinity's good outweighs the bad. If so, Trinity is better than I but for grace.

 

I just got a much more definitively-worded email from someone much higher up in the Trinity management food chain regarding accreditation, to wit:

• "As indicated on the HLC/NCA website, the candidacy process can last up to 4 years but can be finished in 2. Our goal from the very beginning was to accomplish the task in 2 and that goal has not changed. Our onsite evaluation for initial accreditation is already scheduled for May of 2006 and the visiting team has already been assigned."

So a firm date for next Spring's visit has been set; and they even know who's visiting. Moreover, Trinity's eagerness and resolve is unambiguously evident.

This begs the question: Does Trinity consider itself pretty much ready now and, therefore, is it just putting the final touches on things and generally just polishing and spit shining and getting ready in more or less superficial ways for next Spring's accreditor site visit; or are several more major changes planned during the next 10 months or so and, if so, then what, I wonder, will they be?

I've questioned the need for biblical languages on these boards before. And to everyone's surprise, perhaps, I've come around to the place where I now think they're more important than I once did. However, I still believe there are ways for front-line, in-the-pulpit clergy (as opposed to theological educators, scholars, or church higher-ups) to be effective without them. But, please, I don't want to get into all that here so much as I just wanted to make the point that I think offering theological degrees which do not require biblical languages -- even if only optionally -- is a good thing. I think it's good, therefore, that Trinity offers some... and I hope it will continue to do so.

I'd take that bet, except I think you're right. And I'm thinking it will happen not so much "in a few years," but next summer... that is, if Trinity's apparent resolve is any indicator.

As I finished reading that sentence, I thought to myself, "Oooh! Respecting Bill's opinion as I do, I sure would be interested to know the answer to that!" And then...

...came said answer. Wow. I want to say, "No surprise there," but a part of me keeps wondering why Trinity's getting RA, and maybe my arguments about corporate responsibility and why, therefore, Trinity might not 'fess-up like it probably should, aren't swaying you. Let's see...

Ah. There it is. The no-forgiveness-without-contrition (or at least confession) argument. It's a compelling one, to be sure; and one I respect. My corporate-responsibility argument helps me to see past it, but my disgust with the kind of sensibilities that necessarily attend very kind of misrepresentations to which Bill refers also gives me serious pause. It's a pickle that I just noticed, as I was writing, made me sigh, then shake my head, then shrug in a "how to resolve this?" sort of way.

See, here's my thing in all this (just in case anyone's wondering): Of the religious national accreditors (ATS, TRACS and ABHE), ATS is the only one that doesn't feel too theologically (and politically) conservative... to me, at any rate. And, like it or not, ATS is the only one of those aforementioned three that seems to have any serious credibility among the mainstream denominations. Absent a national accreditor of ATS's stature, only the national accreditor DETC -- or, better yet, regional-accreditation -- would be anywhere near as impressive to me as would ATS accreditation for a place like Trinity. I suppose Trinity could have sought ATS accreditation, but I'm guessing (or at least hoping) that ATS and its "no-degrees-completely-by-distance-learning" rule really ticks Trinity off as much as it does me. I am troubled by the fact that there are not more fully-distance-learning theological degrees out there -- degress which do not require biblical languages, I now boldly add -- that are accredited by a seriously impressive national accreditor like ATS that isn't too theologically (and politically) conservative; or that are accredited by one of the six regional accreditors. Trinity's programs fill a much needed-to-be-filled niche: Credible (or at least I'm hoping that regional accreditation will finally make them credible) fully-distance-learning theological degrees that, despite their theologically conservative bent, profess themselves to be non-denominational; and that don't necessarily require biblical languages; and that have the unassailable and theologically-neutral academic imprimatur of a regional accreditor!

That, as I see it, is Trinity's inherent value in the universe. It's a terribly important need that requires fulfillment... though, again, I wish it were by an institution of considerably more liberal theological ideology than Trinity would at least appear to be. That notwithstanding, this is part of the reason I've been sort of secretly rooting for Trinity. None of that, of course, changes how troubled I am by its past behavior. It's vexing, to be sure.

Interesting. Hmm. So do you believe -- and I'm not challenging you, here, I'm just trying to understand the viewpoint of someone who knows much about this subject and from whom I hope to learn -- that Trinity, in its nefarious (or, if not nefarious, then at least questionable) past, was issuing degrees that conveyed to the student the bare essentials in order for a degree to be awarded without being a flat-out sham with the express purpose of giving ministers a few letters that they could put after their names on business cards; and, if so, that that's still true to the degree (no pun intended) that RA standards will nevertheless allow it?

I think that will be true for people as "in the know" about it as are you; but I believe -- and, again, I'm not saying it's right, but I'm just saying that I believe it will happen -- that most people out there in the universe will not know or care; and that even if they did, RA will trump it. I could be wrong, of course, but RA is really potent stuff. It's even got my attention, in this particular case, as should be obvious by now. And please, no one, presume that I'm some kind of apologist for Trinity. Far from it. I reiterate my earlier-stated suspicion of it; and how troubling I find the more salient prior bad acts of Trinity as pointed-out by Bill and Janko. I'm just trying to analyze and assess the situation with an open mind... and this discourse here, in this thread, is really helping me with that. I'm hoping others reading here are using it that way as well.

Sounds like he knows Trinity's reputation and is hedging his bet... which, of course, is your point. Interesting.

Right there, ladies and gentlemen! This comment helps to illustrate why Bill Grover is so respected here... or at least one of the many reasons why I so respect him, even if I disagree with him on some stuff now and then. I'm not even sure if he's right, in this case, to be so open-minded, either! I mean, for all any of us knows, the accreditor will visit Trinity next May and see the very same infirmities that Bill sees; and decide that too much improvement is needed to grant accreditation. Who knows. But in the face of what we know are his strong anti-Trinity feelings, Bill gives it its due at least for the moment... with a reference to grace as his acknowledgement that forgiveness is a struggle for we mere mortals. I'm tellin' ya', I love this guy! [grin]

 

I have heard that the now respected and TRACS accredited Luther Rice Seminary has some skeletons in the closet, as well. The quality and rigor of their ThD and DMin degrees many years before they were accredited were apparently rather suspect. I guess I'm more willing to forgive these institutional transgressions when a schools goes through a healthy transformation. The accreditation process can bring about dramatic changes. Trinity, hopefully will evolve into a solid school, as well, never to return to its substandard ways. If that happens I'll look at the school differently than I do now. I'm rooting for them too.

 

From a sow's ear to a silk purse. It's one accreditation's higher callings, no? It forgives the institution's sins of the past -- even if said institution skips steps 8 and 9 -- as long as it turns itself around.

Few things in life seem more Christian than that!

 

Forgiveness seems hardest for those who feel they have been personally affronted. Rather than taking the first step, many wait for the other party to request forgiveness.

Sometimes there is a standoff and someone must make the first move.

 

Good point. Begs the question: Does avoiding the request for forgiveness (which, of course, requires an admission of sin) and skipping straight to modification of behavior for the better -- living it, as the most convincing indication of all that one has seen the light -- count as the first move?

And, for the benefit of the cynics among us, does what Trinity's doing count as "living it"; or is it only starting to take the high road because if it doesn't it won't achieve its accreditation goals? Moreover, if that's all it is, should Trinity be faulted for it; or should we see its recognition of that goal as the high road, and its subsequent pursuit thereof, as a tacit indicator of the very repentance that Bill (and I, to some degree, too) seeks?

 

souls dead by the O-hi-o

It's not their past misdeeds that bother me. It's the ongoing MDS clown show.
[The academically reputable The Master's Seminary has complained about this one, too.] It's the ongoing nomenclature problem (that is, lie). It's the ongoing Canterbury dog-and-prelate show. It's NCA lying about Newburgh's application--saying to me in voice and print that there had been no contact of any kind two or three days before TCBTS announced successful achievement of candidacy.

Giving NCU grief over SCUPS is understandable (though I can see some merit to SCUPS); giving TCBTS a pass on MDS just beats me. I don't care if they do get RA. This is a chillul ha-Shem.

If there were a "healthy transformation", in PatsFan's very useful term, hey, great, whoopsie-doodle-Hoosier-daddy! I don't mind being contra mundum on this; I mind the smell of BS, which jes' ain't nohow the sweet fragrance of "repentance", whatever that means for an organization. RA+BS still will smell as sweet.

Nu mai nu mai nu mai...

 

Re: souls dead by the O-hi-o

Hence the reason I mentioned, earlier, that I am sighing, shaking my head, and shrugging as I read and write here as if to say, "How to resolve this?" These are such excellent points you make. What to do? And why, it's reasonable to ask, do these things seem to be of no concern to the accreditor? Is moral turpitude not a consideration?

 

Ted and Uncle, do you remember if there is a degreeinfo thread that describes the MDS issue that you guys are referring to? Reading between the lines it sounds like Trinity was suggesting that they had a relationship with John McArthur's school and it was really MDS. Am I close?

 

I found a thread about the MDS issue. I can definitely see why people feel so strongly. I wonder if many schools with sleazey pasts have done the public confession and repentance thing? It does seem like the healthiest way to change. Do you think it is simply that schools are afraid RA evaluators will judge them harshly? I really do think an accredited Trinity will look very different than what we are seeing now. I think it might gain some dignity, though, I agree it won't be totally deserved.

 

Thanks for the responses. I received a package to review from Trinity this week, and I left it in the padded mailer on my kitchen counter. I do not want to be associated with a "Christian" school with the history that Trinity has.

Instead, I've sent a couple of email inquiries to South African Theological Seminary requesting US prices for courses, and more details about the enrollment process. From everything I've read on these boards it looks as if SATS could be my best option for price and quality, and it is accredited.

Any current or former students of SATS?

Thanks for all of the information as I am extremely happy I found out the information on Trinity before I spent my money on their degree program.

 

Excellent choice. Currently, for the Th. M., the prices are as follows:

The total cost is $2350, of which you are required to pay $1175 on enrollment and $1175, 12 months later.

Enjoy your studies.

 

I don't know. I simply feel some former TTS students will not be satisfied until they receive a personal apology from TTS. I am not sure even an apology on their web page would suffice as it would be a general apology and not a personal one.

Forgiveness is one of those difficult aspects of the Christian faith. There are those who feel we must forgive everyone whether they repent and ask us to or not.

Then there are those who feel since the entire Christian faith is based on repentence prior to God's granting of forgiveness, we don't have to forgive anyone who has committed a personal affront unless they apologize, repent, and request forgiveness.

Tough process, no easy solutions. I suspect most of us lie somewhere in the middle. We can easily forgive someone who has committed a personal affront if it is not so severe.

If it's severe, then we want them to apologize, repent, and beg our forgiveness.