Andersonville Theological Seminary

==Liberty's tution rates have gone up some since I graduated with my MA from there. However Dr Caner, the President of the Seminary, has actually talked about getting the tution lowered. Not sure if he will be able to, after all they do have a large overhead. However taking one/two classes at a time, as I did, makes it possible even for someone with a limited budget (like myself). I would rather pay that "higher" price and earn a graduate degree from a well respected Christian seminary (or secular university) then pay hundreds of dollars to a school that is not so well respected in the church/Christian community. Even if the school is not accredited, as Bob Jones was not, it is important to earn a degree from a school that is well respected in the Christian community. Andersonville does enjoy respect among circles within the church. However Christian seminaries/universities that are accredited will not respect degrees/credits earned at Andersonville.

Personally, since college/seminary teaching is my goal (calling), I had to go with a regionally accredited university that is well respected. Since I was not able to finish on-campus at SEBTS due to family issues I had to find an accredited and well respected seminary that would allow me to finish my degree online/distance. Liberty was perfect and, contrary to what you seem to believe, even someone like myself who is far from rich could afford Liberty without going into great debt.

Liberty's, btw, tution is lower than several major seminaries (Dallas Theological, Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, Regent Divinity School, etc).

==But you can tell by looking at the school on the degree. Some of these non-accredited, distance only, seminaries fail to meet basic academic standards. Their graduate programs would barely be accepted as undergraduate at most schools. Again, if a person has a MA degree, a PhD, or a DMin. then people should be able to assume that the person has done proper graduate level/doctoral level work. Many of these distance only, unaccredited, "seminaries" fall so far short of that it is sad. Andersonville is not near as bad as others I have run into. As I said, I think Andersonville could actually gain TRACS accreditation if they put some effort into it. They would probably not have to make any major changes in their programs at all.

 

Andersonville thoughts and reply. Again!

No, they were not required reading. I was just trying to get the most out of the class, and since I was studying Galatians, I might as well give it my best effort. This is what a pastor does. One thing interestingly I noticed. It did not matter who you read, from scholars to fishermen they all had the same outlines and thoughts. Then again, there is nothing new to come up with in the realm of theology. It has already been done before.

Be careful, (For all the Athenians and strangers which were there spent their time in nothing else, but either to tell, or to hear some new thing. Acts 17:21

There are many pastors with Andersonville degrees. If you put the time in don’t be ashamed.
You can hang with the best. :thumbs: :thumbs: :thumbs:


Go ahead and send 20-30,000 bucksto a School.
You can get the skills you need through Godly men. My 5 years of Bible Institute classes were taught by a Godly Pastor who spent 25 years in the inner-city in the same pastorate, and is still there and yes, he taught Greek 1&2. I have seen classes taught by men who never did the work. Yes they have accredited PhD but they never had a church more then 5 years.
Make sure your teachers that teach your Pastor classes are Pastors first.

“Those who can’t do, teach”

 

Andersonville Correction.

I need to make a correction I stated

. The course only has 8 tapes at about 1 hour and 20 minutes. Sorry for the misinformation. The rest of the course requirements are correct.

Ehud :tonofbricks:

 

I attended both the Seminary ext correspondence program through the Southern baptist while a youth pastor and Andersonville and they are about the same even though I liked Andersonville better. I learned alot and for me working from home was great. Harley Howard is a great teacher.

 

==Of course there are. There are many fine preachers with degrees from Andersonville, Covington, and some with no degree at all. I will grant that a person can study by themselves, or through schools like Andersonville (etc), and become a wonderful preacher/teacher. However that in no way implies that Andersonville (etc) is on the same academic level as the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary (etc). There is the accreditation issue as well as the difference in faculty.

==Been there, done that. :laugh: Actually I don't think I spent that much. Though I might be now.

 

Bruce Metzger? Defender of the faith?

How can you call Bruce Metzger, who accepted and used the higher criticism, a defender of the faith? We usually refer to those utilizing higher criticism as tearing down the faith. Also, he did not believe in inerrancy and inspiration as orthodox conservatives define the terms. So, how is he a defender of the faith? He was a scholar specializing in the NT text but I cannot call him a defender of the faith.

 

You are right, and I apologize for making such a blunder. Thank you, Paidagogos.

 

Do any of you all know anything about Andersonville Theological Seminary?




As I am a current postgrad student at Andersonville, I may be able to help you a little.

I have found that the lectures from Andersonville are mostly excellent (especially “Job”), although some of the assessment is a little less than rigorous. On the other hand, some of the assessment is way beyond what would be required for a postgrad subject in a secular university – in my humble opinion.

I guess it comes down to what you are after – rigorous intellectualism in the worldly traditions of the pagan classical world, the Renaissance and the Enlightenment, or a rigorous spiritual education (which you WILL get at Andersonville). There has been some talk on this thread about “recognized” schools. I guess you go to those if you want to be “recognized” by the world.

Be advised that Satan loves to work in the elite academic world (including the topflight theological schools). It serves his purposes like few other types of institutions can. For that reason, the degrees (Masonic?) of this world are not consistent with a life spent walking in the Spirit. Consider what people said about Jesus’ lack of formal training and remember what Paul said about all his great Pharisaical learning.

Andersonville will teach you the Bible that judges you. The more “recognized” schools will teach you to judge the Bible, once you have an amateur’s handle on Greek.

Anyway, ask the Lord what HE wants you to do. Having experienced the spiritual barrenness of being involved with the elite academic world, I heartily recommend Andersonville - but the Lord may have other plans for you.

 

IMO

An issue of concern when choosing a school is the qualifications of the professors:

Again, IMO, Praxis , ie, pastoral studies, may well be taught by one who is less degreed but more experienced.

But I think at the grad level the more academic subjects as languages, whether grammar or exegetics, English Bible, Church History, and Systematic Theology may best be taught , other things as godliness being equal, by professors who have themselves been successful at completing rigorous programs of graduate study in the area of instruction***. Usually this is best evidenced by successfully completing an academic doctorate (PhD/ThD) in an accredited school.

Unfortunately, schools such as Andersonville or Covington often do not employ professors with accredited, academic docs in the area of instruction.

Perhaps this is not wholly the fault of such schools since

(1) Many students are happy to enroll regardless of the academic qualifications of the faculty supposing, perhaps, that the student learns just as well regardless, (Or, perhaps in some cases the student presumes that he already knows all that is necessary and the degree merely witnesses what he knows).

(2) Tuition is so much cheaper at these schools since they do not have to pay what a qualified faculty may require.

I wonder if it is not woeful that money plays such a heavy part in service given the examples of Biblical characters who did not charge much for their instruction.

(3) There is the comparative (in some cases) ease of gaining admission and completing coursework.

I wonder how those who acquire advanced degrees by doing much less than their brethren in rigorous schools harmonize that with the Christian ethic. But I'll try not to be judgemental. Let's just call every brother "Dr." and be done with comparison

I think to say that some evangelical, accredited schools teach one to "judge the Bible" is irresponsible and itself judgemental! Is it not a strawman?

In my experience, NO class or professor , neither in Point Loma Nazarene University (MA in Religion), nor in Western Seminary (MDiv Equivalent, ThM in Biblical Studies) nor in the University of Zululand (ThD in Systematic Theology) nor my own tiny bit of teaching in a TRACS accredited , evangelical school, taught one to judge the Bible. Rather, it led me to better understand what IS the Bible!

The "Bible" is NOT the precise equivalent of our own belief systems ; we are NOT inspired!!, IMO, it is those systems which a quality theological education enables one to evaluate or "judge"! Such "judgement" of systems of belief is to be done with all of the facts we can assemble and assimilate, (and THAT is the function of quality learning IMO), and with all of the humility we can muster. And THAT humility can be the effect of realizing and interacting with the comprehensiveness and complexity of a thorough and rigorous Biblical education.

*** However, IMO, even godliness and a good academic qualification are not guarantees of quality learning as that requires good interaction between the prof and the student and results from the prof having opportunity, teaching ability, and the willingness to expend oneself for the learning of the student ; it also requires qualities in the student which enable learning.

Bill G.

 

I would agree with some of the things that you say, Bill, however, I have a different take on things like qualifications. I would much rather a "nobody" lecturer who is a man of God, than a "somebody" lecturer who is not. I have experienced both and I find that the "somebodies" have nothing to offer me. I believe that I have set out the choice quite accurately. The more academic schools always drift into apostasy - that's the whole reason why bible believers start new schools like Andersonville.

It seems to me that you support institutions that design their degrees along the structural lines of the German PhD (highly academic, major focus on original languages, high fees, highly accredited staff). Maybe the degree is called a ThD, but it's really a PhD style program. The whole point is to gain accreditation parity with secular universities. Just remember that the PhD, and the structure and philosophy behind it, came from the apostate rationalistic schools of Germany in the 19th century. Now, I would have an issue with an institution that offered PhD's by coursework - that would be inconsistent with the research nature of the degree. But, then I wouldn't want a PhD. It would mean being subservient to a rationalistic research methodolgy, that denies the existence of God, for at least three years. That is going to affect you spiritually. If a man has a PhD, I don't want him as my pastor.

As for calling people "doctor", aren't "doctor" and "rabbi" the Greek and Hebrew forms for "teacher"? Did not Christ command his disciples not to make men call them "rabbi/doctor/teacher"?

 

The Andersonville men I have met and materials I've seen have been poorly qualified and poorly constructed. They were void of basic theology, church history, and basic Bible content. Maybe Andersonville has changed. I hope so.

 

1. Don't degrees differ from one accredited school to the next?

2. Is a PhD from one accredited school equally comparable to that of another?

3. Are both degrees rigorous alike?

4. Do both expect the same things from their students?

I think it is a serious mistake for someone with a PhD from let's say Andersonville or Louisiana Baptist University, to think he/she is on the same academic level as someone with a PhD from Southern Seminary or Trinity International.

 

TCGreek:// I think it is a serious mistake for someone with a PhD from let's say Andersonville or Louisiana Baptist University, to think he/she is on the same academic level as someone with a PhD from Southern Seminary or Trinity International.


Yes and no. Yes - he has not had to do as much for it. No - a plumber can still be on a higher academic level than someone with a PhD. Not that "academic levels" are all that important. The Bible is not a book that can be understood intellectually. By the way, Andersonville does not have a PhD program (too pagan?). That is one reason I study through it.

 

Accuracy?

Individual degree holders from the same institution are highly variable and even more so between institutions. One cannot generalize about individuals but it is reasonable to say the degree requirements from one school is more rigorous than another. There are incompetent degree holders from the most highly acclaimed and accredited schools and there are a few very competent graduates of less than wonderful schools.

 

[deleted message]

 

I'm glad that you oppose liberal seminaries. I don't think Andersonville is in that boat. Give it a hundred years...

I guess they are trying to offer something a little different from their own curriculum, a curriculum that is almost entirely "just" biblical study in English (biblical study in English is quite good enough for me, especially if a man like Harley Howard is lecturing). The ITS option is something quite peripheral to the seminary, unlike the disease of humanistic rationalism that has consumed the more academic schools.

Andersonville advertising says that:

"Understand, students are not required to take any of these courses (from ITS). As a matter of fact, of the 6,000 plus students we have enrolled, 99.9% choose the Andersonville Theological Seminary course tracks. Feedback tells us that our students prefer the Andersonville Theological Seminary courses. However, you may see a course that you would like to take. Please feel free to do so. Important note: It is imperative that the prospective student realize that Andersonville Theological Seminary does not agree with all of the things that are taught in any given ITS course. We may or may not agree, depending on the subject being taught."

If you want any more information about this topic, I suggest that you contact them. Firstly, I don't know any more about the ITS connection. Secondly, while I am happy to speak in defence of the seminary concerning the Andersonville subjects - because I do them - I am in no real position to speak for them as to why they offer ITS courses. I have given my opinion, but it is just an opinion.

My personal preference would be for them to end that connection.

 

paidagogos:// Individual degree holders from the same institution are highly variable and even more so between institutions. One cannot generalize about individuals but it is reasonable to say the degree requirements from one school is more rigorous than another. There are incompetent degree holders from the most highly acclaimed and accredited schools and there are a few very competent graduates of less than wonderful schools.



That is quite true.

I saw a huge variation in the academic abilities of the graduate students at the highly academic secular universities I have dealt with. And they all graduated - well most of them did. A genius might finish a doctorate in 2 years and make some amazing breakthrough, and a "normal" person might take 6-8 years to finish a far less impressive doctoral thesis that is just a minor footnote in academic history. Yet, they are both entitled to call themselves "doctor".

 

The idea that research doctorates (Ph.D., Th.D.) from evangelical seminaries are just programs filled with people theorizing ways to demean the Word of God is a bromide. Some Ph.D seminars are quite practical in their end. But I know that being critical on spec is an easy way to score cheap points.

 

why either or?

[quote=Gideon I would much rather a "nobody" lecturer who is a man of God, than a "somebody" lecturer who is not.

==============

Me too, sometimes, depending on the subject, however:

I hope you are not implying that lecturers who believe in and have good academic backgrounds at accredited seminaries as TEDS or Dallas are not men of God or that there is something about being well studied that prevents godliness?

I don't understand why anyone would suppose that academic qualification and godliness are mutually exclusive. Neither do I understand why one who is godly is supposed to be prepared to teach just on that qualification. If one even looks at the Pauline requisites for elders, one sees that education in the apostolic tradition is required.

But the apostolic tradition, that is, the New Testament, is an exceedingly difficult subject given that we are distanced from it by language and social changes and a whole lot of doctrinal baggage accumulated over centuries. I think only a know it all sort of pride would allow a different view , ie, that the NT rather is simple to grasp (not saying that's you!)

So, how does mere "godliness" enable one to teach, say, the hypostatic union or Trinal relationships? That is, if one is teaching Christology , how does "godliness" determine whether Alexandrian or Antiochene Christology, or Cyril or Theodoret, had it right.

Or, are Grudem and Dahms or Erickson and Warfield correct that economic Trinal relationships do or do not equal eternal ones?

Or is Hoover's and NT Wright's research or Wallace's and Burk's right that harpagmos in Phil 2:6 or the articulated infinitive there requires that Christ not have or have relational equality with the Father.

Or is Hodge or Chemnitz right about the communication of attributes?

As these questions show, Evangelicals much disagree even about the subject of what Christ is. We do not even agree about what NT adjectives used of Christ as monogenes and prototokos mean. In my opinion "godliness" without learning does not qualify one to opine on such questions and saying it does suggests that "a man of God" may be inerrant. We cannot even agree, as to the meaning of "The Son of God " as the writings of Boettner and Dahms show, but both are godly men!!

These questions also indicate that learning does not make one inerrant either! But it does provide tools and abilities to research so that one can best reach his own view.

But to avoid interacting with such data because one has not acquired certain skills and knowledge to be had in good theological programs, and then to say that being "a man of God" renders such learnings unnecessary when teaching may indicate not real godliness but pride! (not saying you are)

And just HOW does this sort of godliness only enable one to deal with such data ? But if such data are not interacted with in grad theology, how is that grad teaching and learning? It is not!

I submit that mere godliness, as important as that is, does not prepare one to teach theology.

Perhaps in some cases it is godliness that motivates one to become better prepared!

In my opinion such argument about godliness vs. academic preparation is but a ploy to justify substandard education in a field of study that deserves our utmost efforts!!!

Knowing one's subject well does not require that he lack godliness. Being "a man of God" is not the equivalent of being able to teach about God at a graduate level of study!

In my opinion being "a man of God" is not a substitute for being an educated "man of God"! In my opinion the second phrase does not fit many who teach in or graduate from some substandard grad programs in theology.