BJU begins accreditation process

[Squire Robertsson]

I can remember the Pillsbury/Lansdale/Maranatha split. Warning, the next may be apocryphal. At one point, PBC withdrew from a varsity basketball tournement because Maranatha had a team in the competetion. One thing is for sure, between 77 and 81, there was little cross polination between the school.

 

[paidagogos]

Originally posted by aefting:
But BJU hasn't repudiated separation or their historical reasons for avoiding accreditation. Obviously, they don't view TRACS accreditation as a compromise, nor did they say that separating from erring brethern was a reason for avoiding accreditation in the past.

I think one could argue, as Siegfried has, that TRACS accreditation involves a tacit approval of compromising ministries and therefore should be avoided. It's a judgment call, though, and BJ has the right to make that call for themselves. Other institutions may choose to avoid TRACS accreditation for the very reasons that Siegfried has posted.

Perhaps you remember Dr. Jordan speaking on the issue of separation and how hard it is to apply Biblical principles on separation consistently. I have a tape where he makes this very point: Sometimes you separate in one instance and you don't in another and the distinctions between the two cases are not always so clear. I think we need to give each other some room in areas that are not clear cut and allow institutions to reevaluate exactly how they apply the doctrine of separation as circumstances change.

Andy

Yes, but no one can convincingly argue that there is no change in the BJU philosophy and positions on matters of accreditation. What’s wrong with them saying that they changed their outlook? Yet, they will deny to the death that they have changed. There appears to be an apparent discrepancy in what is expected of others and what one expects of one’s self in certain circumstances. Nonetheless, they will carry some baggage over into this accreditation business.

Please consider:
1. The several other fundamentalist Christian colleges that they have snubbed and criticized for pursuing accreditation.
2. The students who went to BJU and suffered the consequences of non-accreditation because they believed BJU and the reasons for foregoing accreditation (For example, NC will not grant teaching credentials based on a BJU degree even though some of these people have graduate degrees with lifetime certification in other states.)
3. Their past criticism of TRACS: (1) a compromising association of neo-evangelicals (i.e. a separation issue); (2) the lack of quality in TRACS standards (look at some of the accredited institutions and you will still question the quality); (3) the reputation of TRACS among academia (still a questionable entity even though it has survived for 25 years)

There has been mounting pressure toward accreditation among the BJU clientele for a number of years. The current BJU students are more sophisticated, materialistic, and worldly wise than a generation ago. Fundamentalists have been socially and economically upward mobile since William Jennings Bryan. BJU has changed. The students are Gen-Xers (although they don’t share all the objectionable elements) and they are more focused on self and the good life than older generations of BJ’ers. They want the perks with their Christianity—there’s a diminished willingness to sacrifice and forgo the perks—they want it all. Some are not willing to work for an unaccredited degree at BJU especially since other fundamentalist schools are becoming accredited (translation: they’re losing potential students). The pressure is on (Do you remember the first time that BJU changed direction under pressure?).

IMHO, the TRACS accreditation is just a way of caving in to pressure and saving face at the same time. I am willing to change my mind if BJU will say that they changed their mind regarding TRACS and accreditation.

Furthermore, IMHO, they would have been just as well off to have gone with SACS, the regional accreditor. At least, it would have respectability and standards.

BTW, does anyone remember when Dr. Marshall Neal, et. al. were trying to form an accrediting association for BJU to come under?

 

[paidagogos]

Originally posted by aefting:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />I would assume Siegfried, and I can't commente for sure, but I would assume that they are not viewing this a a theological alliance. New evangelicalism deals with theological alliances, not educational ones. They have, from time to time, brought in people for education reasons that they would not have brought in for theological reasons (i.e, Pat Robertson, Allan Keyes, Cal Thomas, etc.). I assume that they see those things as different than a theological alliance.

I think this is the same reason for BJIII's appearance at Furman (which was questioned earlier in this thread). It was viewed as an educational talk at a local institution. It would be interesting to know if he would have gone if Furman was still an SBC school.


Andy </font>[/QUOTE]Oh, come on now! Yes, I'm sure that this is the line that they will take but they have never allowed this luxury for anyone else. It is also puzzlingly strange that this speaking engagement was never publicized, like Dr. Bob’s other speaking engagements, around Greenville or among the alumni. No e-mails, as was done when Dr. Bob was on Larry King,were sent from his secretary saying please pray for Dr. Bob as he speaks at Furman.

Can you imagine what they would have said about Dr. Lee Robertson (former President and Chancellor at Tennessee Temple University) if he had spoken at Furman thirty years ago. They would have crucified him! Can you separate the educational from the religious here?* No, it was religious education, if you please. The lecture program was sponsored by the Chaplain’s Office for the Religion in Life series. How can one say this was not religious? Dr. Bob’s lecture was about Christianity. The title says it all—it was about religion! Anything else is simply semantics. To parody someone else—all the fancy talk in the world won’t make a wrong thing right or a bad thing good. Talk won’t change the facts. Nuff said.

The SBC connection is irrelevant. Furman is still professedly a Christian (read religious), not secular, institution although they are no longer organically connected to the SC Baptist Convention.

On the other hand, Dr. Bob, III is said to be developing a good relationship with Jimmy Epting, President of North Greenville College, and North Greenville College (SBC). (BTW, this is not an implied criticism of Dr. Epting and NGC—Dr. Epting and the college are to be commended on their quality, growth, and stronger Biblical stance from thirty years ago. Some BJU graduates now teach there. It is, however, a demonstration of a shift in BJU thinking on separation.) In the past, BJU fired broadsides and separated over less.

There are winds of change blowing at BJU.


*NOTE: The fallacy is easily seen if you ask whether a separated Fundamentalist could teach English at an apostate religious institution? Or, can a die-hard Fundamentalist teach history at Notre Dame and maintain his separation?

 

[paidagogos]

Originally posted by aefting:
But BJU hasn't repudiated separation or their historical reasons for avoiding accreditation. Obviously, they don't view TRACS accreditation as a compromise, nor did they say that separating from erring brethern was a reason for avoiding accreditation in the past.

[snip]
Andy

No, this is a plausible, kind, and benevolent interpretation of the facts but it is NOT the OBVIOUS one.

 

[aefting]

The following is a quote from Dr. Bob Jones, Sr. (My Friends, p. 66):

Now, I'm an American citizen. I believe in separation of church and state. I think if I go into a high school to speak, I ought to be a gentleman. Under our system government, I ought not go into a high school and force upon people, who don't agree with me, certain positions that I may accept. For instance, I’d never go into a high school and offend anybody. I go there as a guest, as an American, to go as far as I can on the right road. And I’ve said so many times, compromise is not going as far as you can on the right road. Compromise is going any distance on the wrong road. It’s compromise for me to stand up in my own pulpit or a on a platform where I’m conducting an evangelistic campaign and support something that’s wrong while I preach something that’s right. It’s another thing for me to speak at a Rotary Club or a Kiwanis Club, or in a public school, or some university, and go as far as I can on the right road.

When I was in Japan some time ago, I spoke to the Imperial University; I spoke in a Buddhist school; I didn’t compromise anything. Id didn’t go as far in the Buddhist school as I’d go on the platform at Bob Jones University, but I didn’t sell out Jesus Christ. I went as far a I could under the circumstances. It’s another thing to double-cross Jesus Christ.

BJIII's speaking at Furman seems a bit tame in comparison, don't you think? Just thought I'd throw in a little historical perspective.

Andy

 

[Siegfried]

paidagogos,

Can you give me any documentation of the 3-point BJU criticism of TRACS that you cite. I would like to be able to point people I discuss this with to that information, if possible.

Excellent analysis, by the way.

The winds of change are blowing, and they are good winds so far--there just need to be more of them. It reminds me of Gorbachev's companion policies of glasnost and perestroika in 1980s Russia. If I recall correctly, perestroika was change, or restructuring. Glasnost was openness--public awareness of the change. BJU is doing better on the perestroika, but the glasnost has a long way to go.

 

[Siegfried]

Andy,

Three issues with the Jones Sr. quote. First, this probably occurred before the whole secondary separation dogma was systematized in the 60s and into the 70s, I believe. Second, even if one of the Joneses was inconsistent in his personal separation, this does not invalidate all the dogmatic statements that have been made. Let's not try to pretend they didn't happen. Third, you can get away with just about anything in a missions context. From my conversations with fundamentalist missionaries, I have learned that there is a whole lot of cooperation that takes place overseas that would lead to revocation of the Fundamentalist membership card if it occurred in the States.

 

[paidagogos]

Originally posted by Siegfried:
paidagogos,

Can you give me any documentation of the 3-point BJU criticism of TRACS that you cite. I would like to be able to point people I discuss this with to that information, if possible.

Excellent analysis, by the way.

The winds of change are blowing, and they are good winds so far--there just need to be more of them. It reminds me of Gorbachev's companion policies of glasnost and perestroika in 1980s Russia. If I recall correctly, perestroika was change, or restructuring. Glasnost was openness--public awareness of the change. BJU is doing better on the perestroika, but the glasnost has a long way to go.

Off hand, no. I may be able to come up with some documentation from my many boxes of clutter and paper trivia if I have enough time. On the other hand, this came from private and group conversations with various individuals privy to the inner sanctum. Verbal comments, even made before a group, are so hard to document and pin down but written statements have a terrible way of coming back to haunt you.

 

[Circuitrider]

Someone told me last week that a person told BIII that they heard BJU was going to have a football team (BJ does not have intercollegiate athletics). Dr. Bob asked where he had heard such a thing, and that it was not true. The questioner said, well there were always three things that BJU would never allow...inter-racial dating, accreditation and intercollegiate sports.

Maybe you bible colleges better watch out for the BJU teams.

 

[paidagogos]

aefting wrote:

The following is a quote from Dr. Bob Jones, Sr. (My Friends, p. 66):

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now, I'm an American citizen. I believe in separation of church and state. I think if I go into a high school to speak, I ought to be a gentleman. Under our system government, I ought not go into a high school and force upon people, who don't agree with me, certain positions that I may accept. For instance, I’d never go into a high school and offend anybody. I go there as a guest, as an American, to go as far as I can on the right road. And I’ve said so many times, compromise is not going as far as you can on the right road. Compromise is going any distance on the wrong road. It’s compromise for me to stand up in my own pulpit or a on a platform where I’m conducting an evangelistic campaign and support something that’s wrong while I preach something that’s right. It’s another thing for me to speak at a Rotary Club or a Kiwanis Club, or in a public school, or some university, and go as far as I can on the right road.

When I was in Japan some time ago, I spoke to the Imperial University; I spoke in a Buddhist school; I didn’t compromise anything. Id didn’t go as far in the Buddhist school as I’d go on the platform at Bob Jones University, but I didn’t sell out Jesus Christ. I went as far a I could under the circumstances. It’s another thing to double-cross Jesus Christ.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

BJIII's speaking at Furman seems a bit tame in comparison, don't you think? Just thought I'd throw in a little historical perspective.

Andy

Dr. Bob, Sr. was a great man of God whom I admire greatly.* However, this quote came much prior to the hard line separation years in the 1960’s and 1970’s. You must remember that Dr. Bob, Sr. wrote a tract (I have a copy) defending racial segregation as Scriptural. Dr. Bob, III has openly denied this position on Larry King (I have the transcript). In fact, Dr. Bob, III explicitly denied ever being a segregationist. Now, tell me there are no changes. This is much like using Luther to refute Luther depending whether you quote the early Luther (a Popish monk), the middle Luther (transition), or late Luther (reformed). Perhaps we can classify the Jones in some useful fashion. Please consider:

Dr. Bob, Sr. = amiable separation from liberalism and modernism

Dr. Bob, Jr. = hard line separation from neo-evangelicalism and compromise of any stripe

Dr. Bob, III = mellowing separation with a softer touch

Steven Jones = ??? (We’ll soon find out!)

(BTW, Bobby, IV has already made the journey. Marvin Olasky says that Bobby is a bright kid who is basically in their camp (i.e. neo-evangelical, no longer a Fundamentalist). He also said the Bobby loves his parents and just doesn’t want to embarrass them. Can you imagine the stink that would have been raised in the 1970’s if Jerry Falwell, Jr. went to Notre Dame for his law degree and wrote for Christianity Today? You would almost have to have lived in Fundamentalist circles in those times to know.)


*NOTE: The Jones are/were great and good men but they are/were men nonetheless. I love and admire each of them. Many false and foolish accusations have been made against them because they had the courage of convictions. Against such, I will defend them. We must admire them for standing even if we should disagree with them. However, I cannot rubberstamp every position they take and I do not expect them to do the same for me. Like me, they are wrong sometimes. This is not a question of friendship or loyalty whenever one disagrees with them in good faith over actions or viewpoints. We are not robots. I do hope they consider me their friend because I do consider myself to be their friend.

 

[Scott B.]

I am new on this board -- I actually found this thread while searching for "Tim Jordan" and Lansdale (the pastor and location of my former church). I am also young (I will be entering BJU as a freshman this fall) and potentially naive. However, I believe my perspective could still be valuable to the discussion. Here is how I see the BJU accreditation issue:

First of all, I believe that for BJU to seek accreditation is a positive step. When I was considering which college to attend, my decision came down to Clearwater and BJU -- both excellent schools. My career goal is to do research in artificial intelligence. Since this will require at least a master's degree, an important consideration was whether my graduate schools of choice (MIT and Carnegie Mellon) would recognize my undergraduate college's degrees. Since Clearwater is regionally accredited, this was a major advantage. BJU won my favor primarily because Clearwater's computer science and mathematics programs are still immature. Ten or fifteen years in the future, without BJU being accredited, I would potentially choose Clearwater over BJU (assuming Clearwater will not waver theologically and will continue to improve these majors). This is not to say I have any lack of respect for BJU; I greatly respect the college's fundamental positions and academic excellence.

I think BJU is making a wise move by accepting accreditation (insofar as TRACS is true accreditation). As Bob Jones (Sr., I believe) said, BJU has such high academics that they could join any accrediting association they wanted. While I understand BJU's hesitancy to do anything that would compromise their positions, I believe that accreditation (even regional accreditation) would help more than hurt. What would be necessary would be a binding, codified statement that would terminate the accreditation if the association attempted to force any antibiblical change upon the University. I do not know what BJU's legal structure is, but this could be done, for example, through an amendment to a charter or constitution.

As another poster wrote, I believe BJU has "painted themself into a difficult corner" by so dogmatically refusing accreditation in the past. If they admit they have changed their mind, they could (and would) be accused of compromise. On the other hand, if they continue their current course of essentially side-stepping the question, they will continue to be accused of hypocrisy. I believe that BJU's administration should offer a clear statement explaining why they believe TRACS accreditation is acceptable while regional accreditation is not. Their published statements do not offer a distinct exposition of this difference.

All in all, BJU's decision to seek accreditation is a step in the right direction. As others have pointed out, BJU is run by humans who can make mistakes. In terms of nondoctrinal positions, is it not preferable that if they reevaluate their positions and find them lacking, they modify them? To continue in knowingly wrong dogmatism is not only intellectually and morally dishonest but hurtful to past, current, and future graduates.

 

[dianetavegia]

Thanks for that input Scott and welcome to the board.

BJU puts 1/2 of every penny I spend on Home School Materials for my youngest son in a college scholarship fund for him to use when he finishes school in about 9 years... LOL. I know of no other institution that is so very generous! I'd be proud for Nick to attend BJU someday.

Not only that, but their material is superb! I highly recommend their home schooling materials and find it keeps mom and dad on their toes and involved in their childs education. We use their books.

www.bjupress.com


Diane

 

[aefting]

First of all, I believe that for BJU to seek accreditation is a positive step. When I was considering which college to attend, my decision came down to Clearwater and BJU -- both excellent schools. My career goal is to do research in artificial intelligence. Since this will require at least a master's degree, an important consideration was whether my graduate schools of choice (MIT and Carnegie Mellon) would recognize my undergraduate college's degrees. Since Clearwater is regionally accredited, this was a major advantage. BJU won my favor primarily because Clearwater's computer science and mathematics programs are still immature.

As a BJU math grad, I'd like to welcome you to the University family. I know many of your future professors very well. I ended up going to Clemson University for my graduate degree and even took an AI class while I was there. BJU was just beginning their Computer Science program when I was is school but even their early CS grads did very well in grad school and afterwards.

Andy

 

[Greg Linscott]

Originally posted by Circuitrider:
Maybe you bible colleges better watch out for the BJU teams.

Didn't Bob Jones College have NCAA sports (albeit briefly) in their earliest incarnation? I think they were the Swamp Chickens or something like that...

We just had a BJU ministry team in. What a sharp, genuine, and Godly group of young people! They were a tremendous blessing to our little church.

 

[Scott B.]

As a BJU math grad, I'd like to welcome you to the University family. I know many of your future professors very well. I ended up going to Clemson University for my graduate degree and even took an AI class while I was there. BJU was just beginning their Computer Science program when I was is school but even their early CS grads did very well in grad school and afterwards.

Andy

My aunt was one of those early computer science grads.

I'm actually going to be majoring in mathematics since it is a very flexible major. I may switch to computer science later, however.

 

[Scott B.]

Originally posted by Greg Linscott:
Didn't Bob Jones College have NCAA sports (albeit briefly) in their earliest incarnation? I think they were the Swamp Chickens or something like that...

They did have intercollegiate athletics (though not NCAA) at one point in their very early years, but Bob Jones, Sr. decided against it when it began to take away from the academic and spiritual focus. The one thing he never wanted to happen was for students to come to BJU for the athletics alone. There were also problems in which families would expect BJU to be loosen their rigid academic requirements for good athletes. Bob Jones, Sr. said about intercollegiate foot ball, "We love it too much. I love it too much. We can't do our work and run around the country here playing football. That is not what God called this school down here to do."

BTW, while I'm not sure what the real team name was, other teams referred to BJU as the "Swamp Angels" because of the marshy land at College Point, FL, where the University was then located. That was a derogatory name, however -- not something they called themselves.

Source:
Standing Without Apology, by Daniel L. Turner. Copyright 1997 BJU Press.

 

[superdave]

Someone told me last week that a person told BIII that they heard BJU was going to have a football team (BJ does not have intercollegiate athletics). Dr. Bob asked where he had heard such a thing, and that it was not true. The questioner said, well there were always three things that BJU would never allow...inter-racial dating, accreditation and intercollegiate sports. [Eek!]

Maybe you bible colleges better watch out for the BJU teams. [Big Grin] [Big Grin]

Two out of three ain't bad!! LOL

We talked about this last week, and specifically about the delay due to the large difference between the Accrediting organizations. Maranatha has seen no negative interference or unreasonable demands by North Central, where BJU felt the South East would have created an untenable situation for them with requirements that would have been contradictory to the goals and philosophy of BJ, TRACS should be acceptable for BJ, and they should have no problem with the academic requirements since by all accounts, BJ is a solid school. Maranatha has done nothing by get better academically following their accreditation.