Trinity College of the Bible Theological Seminary?

Thanks. You were. I liked your comments about the legal aspect of Trinity's situation. That makes a lot of sense. It would be cleaner in some ways if they could offer some apologies, but potentially messy from a legal point of view. IMO There will certainly be sort of a cloud over all they do for some time to come unless there are some very dramatic changes.

 

thanks again Ted.

 

I'm starting to think that maybe regional accreditation won't be enough for some folks. That, to me, opens the door to a whole 'nother debate... that maybe we should have here. I dunno.

Anyway, thanks for your comments.

 

===

Well, no, they're pretty sparse.

Grudem and Erickson (not just in his ST, but also his other monographs on Trinal relationships) disagree with each other at two significant points in Christology, and my agreement with each is where he disagrees with the other:

1) Was the Son eternally role subordinate?
a) No, Erickson and I
b) yes- Grudem

2) Was the Son deprived of the use of divine attributes in the incarnation ?
a) yes, Erickson
b) no, Grudem and I


One of the best treatments on the subject IMO is by the Lutheran reformer Chemnitz: The Two Natures in Christ. Unk referred me to this and after reading it I agree it is very helpful. I also especially like the Antiochenes as Theodoret's, Reply to Cyril, relevant portions in The Damascene, On the Faith, AB Bruce's , Humiliation of Christ, Baillie's, God Was in Christ, Pannenburg's, Jesus God and Man , Grillmeier's , Christ in Christian Tradition, especially vol 1, and Clark, The Incarnation. The diversity among those will really get you thinking!

(Of course, I disagree with Chemnitz on the issue of the divine nature sharing qualities with the human, and I usually find something to disagree with in everything I read on the subject)

 

I think I know what you mean about RA maybe not being enough. My guess is that not many seminaries are RA but not ATS accredited. (Some are TRACS accredited but not RA). Say what you will about ATS, but in regard to curricula, they have been rather decent watch dogs. It will be interesting to see if the quality of seminary programs dimishes if more and more seminaries avoid ATS or even TRACS, and settle for RA.

 

I'll check these out, though I must confess I am more of a practical theology kind of guy.

 

Thanks, Ted. Some very amusing discussions!

 

Pannenberg with an E (well, two, actually).

 

Actually, I was commenting more on the apparent (and I stress the word "apparent," here, beause I may be misreading this whole thing) fact that for all this board's reliance on regional accreditation as the indicator of credibility for every other institution -- the proverbial "gold standard" -- suddenly in Trinity's case, even it's not going to be enough for many people. Old saws like, "...can't have it both ways" come to mind... but I realize that may not really be appropriate, in this case.

I reiterate that I'm not trying to be (or become) a Trinity apologist. I'm simply trying to flush-out the whole Trinity thing, once and for all. I sure could use some help.

I'm also interested in some follow-up on that earlier assertion that Trinity is no longer associated with MDS. While the past certainly can't be erased, it would be nice to know that MDS is no longer an issue for the present.

 

See Trinity. See Trinity run. Run, Trinity, run. Run what? Uh oh, Jane, uh oh.

No, no, no, it's not that RA isn't enough (whatever that means).

It's very simple. Even I get it--so it better be simple.

Schools should not engage in millism--let alone run one and dissemble.

Schools should not play verbal games with the word "accreditation".

Schools should not pass off a program which is manifestly NOT a DA as a DA.

Schools should not keep on doing these things.

Especially not as candidates for regional accreditation.

Most especially not as (absit omen) recipients of regional accreditation.

Regional accreditation is not absolution.

If a school of dubious institutional behaviour gets RA without changing its dubious institutional behaviour, it becomes an RA school of dubious institutional behaviour.

That's simple. Simple simple simple.

Why would anyone want to be associated with any school of dubious institutional behaviour?

That's mystifying. Mystifying mystifying mystifying.

 

Rigor or not, at least this Bethany of Dothan graduate knows better than to say "for I."

 

Today I opened a telephone dialogue with someone at Trinity who is high enough up on its management food chain that he can speak with some authority to some of the issues discussed in this and other threads. He's been around Trinity for the better part of a decade and knows about and can contrast Trinity today with Trinity of the past. Moreover, he is going to hook me up with someone even higher in Trinity's management food chain who, I'm hoping, will help me be able to write here, with authority and accuracy, about the things we've been discussing.

Before I talk with this higher-up gentleman, I want to make sure I can present the issues to him as briefly and succinctly as possible. He is, after all, a busy person; and after the beating Trinity has taken over the years in this place, he's certainly under no obligation to give me the time of day. So I want to make sure the time in his day that he does give me, isn't wasted.

I see this as an opportunity for us all to learn something; to potentially improve Trinity's image on these boards (and elsewhere, perhaps), if that's warranted; or, conversely, to confirm Trinity's bad image if, in fact, that's the case; and to, once and for all, bring to this discussion some FACTS so that however it is judged here, it will be based on truth and not rumor or myth or ancient history, etc.

I'm not saying that Trinity's detractors haven't provided facts already. I'm saying that without getting Trinity's side of it, I'm starting to get a little bit uncomfortable with the continued trouncing it's getting here. Don't get me wrong, if it turns out said trouncing is deserved, I'll become one of the trouncers so fast Trinity won't know what day of the week it is. But if it turns out that the trouncing might be unfair or untimely given more recent circumstances; or unfair because said trouncing is based on information that maybe never was accurate, then I want to get that out on the table, once and for all.

Trinity deserves to have its side heard. If whatever its side is ends-up being unconvincing, well, then, we'll find that out soon enough. If, on the other hand, it's revealing and we end-up being pleasantly surprised, then maybe that's something to look forward to.

So I'm going to work on a list of the issues. Then I'm going to post them here and I want you folks to help me refine them and make them an accurate statement of what Trinity's detractors see as the problem(s). Then I'm going to ask Trinity to help me put together a responsive post that I will make here.

Does that sound like a plan; and will you guys participate thoughtfully, respectfully and in the spirit of truthseeking and enlightment in that process? Who knows... if we do this well enough, it may even be taken seriously enough by the folks at Trinity that they will allow the commentary to influence their future actions in some way.

So... are you guys in?

 

Sure, I'll join in this quest for truth, but so we get a feel for the other side ( ie, from Trinity) , I have a suggestion: In addition to your just asking a TTS rep to defend TTS, Gregg, why not ask the Deans of TEDS, DTS, The Master's Seminary , and Fuller (evangelical schools all just as is TTS) what they think of the TTs 82 unit masters/doc combo IN BIBLE w-out any languages?

(ya got me Jimmy, Bethany is ,therefore, best )

 

Thanks for doing this, Gregg. My interest in TTS is more curiosity, but I'll take part too. I have examined their materials and helped a local pastor find research subjects for his PhD in Biblical Counseling at TTS. I like the idea of some institutional transformation.

 

I'm interested too. We have a missionary in our church who is on furlough. He is getting his masters from Trinity and for the most part of has spoken highly of it. He thought it had TRACS accreditation -- why I haven't figured out AND he did NOT know that Trinity was a candidate for NCA accreditation.

I was intrigued enough to look them up right before this thread started and ask for info. They are not quite as hard-sell as some of the other schools I've contacted, but still pretty pushy. The discount bothered me too. When I talked to the admissions advisor for the Master's program, he actually told me that if I registered for the whole program by the next day that I'd get a 50% discount in tuition. I asked him to repeat that as it was sounded awfully close to the 15% discount in the emails I'd received. He did the math for me. It was 50%. This of course is quite a deal, but it was the only offer of its kind that I've had (ok, red flags all over the place).

I do wish UIS, where I'm currently attending, had made me the same offer. *sigh*

 

===

Jimmy: sorry for my dumb come back. I made a grammatical error in writing hastily , and you were right to correct me!

Gregg: I am very willing to be shown with facts that TTS is no longer doing any of its past trickery.

Also, I would not have a problem with a 120 sem hr (NOT 82 which is less than a MDiv) DA in ministry without languages if it included practicum.

But I think a DA IN BIBLE should equal a PhD/ ThD in Bible in prereqs such as languages, and other curricular equivalencies , except for having an emphasis on learning teaching skills and not just research skills. The languages are required to know the subject that the DA supposedly prepares one to teach.

But how can an 82 unit MA/DA combo have any comparison with a DTS or MTS doc with has as its prerequisite a 120 unit ThM? The prereq just to enter doc studeies at MTS or DTS or the Baptist in PA is greater than the cumulative TTS MA/DA combo. TTS smacks of offer the quick and the easy IMO.

The notion that the DA is intended to prepare profs but the PhD/ThD are not is incorrect as profs of Bible commonly have PhDs or ThDs and that often is the stated goal of such programs!

 

No need to apologize, Bill. You and I have come a long way and we are now beyond offering apologies when we kid around with each other.

Part of the reason I posted was to show the double standards of some posters. A few were quick to jump down the throat of another poster who used "their" instead of "there" but no one but me called you on your incorrect grammar usage.

Also, if you check Dr. Douglas' posts, he more often than not will use "it's" when he shoud use "its" and again, no one corrects him.

We all need to play fair on this board.

BTW, I have completed reading your doctoral dissertation and find it fascinating. I disagree on a few minor points but what else is new? Take care my friend and have a very nice weekend.

 

===

You finished reading it? I consider that an evidence of a high threshold for boredom.