Covington Theological Seminary ??

[paidagogos]

Originally posted by poodle78:
Lanny,
I couldn't agree with you more. I think that the problem some have with our alma mater is not so much the individual courses required as much as it is that they perceive there are too few requirements. I came in from working 8 hours in a factory and sat down at my books and computer for another 3-4 hours and most all day on Saturday. I really enjoyed the studying and learning. It made me feel like I was back at Furman 25 years ago!

As much as I enjoyed learning, I enjoyed meeting the staff and administration at graduation so much more. They seem to really care about each student and about Covington itself. I have recommended Covington and probably will again.

I sure hope they were not as unbelieving and apostate as Furman was 25 years ago. Furman was thoroughly rotten when I was there over 30 years ago. Did you know John Henry Crabtree?

 

[paidagogos]

Originally posted by Lanny:
I have conducted my study through three professional institutions including Covington, and currently hold a Master of Ministry degree. Through this study experience, I have had the "pleasure" of classroom situations where the prof spent 90% of his time expounding his own opinion, and 10% actually applying the text.

I have to say that absorption is the responsibility of the student, and for me, I gained tremendous benefit from Covington's study structure. With Covington, you will not go through one class without having literally examined every page of your text in order to complete the assignments.

(snip)

What text are you talking about? Is it the Biblical text or the textbook? I heartily agree that the Biblical text is more important than anything the teacher says but I don’t think much of a textbook teacher on the other hand.

When I teach, the meat of the course is my teaching, not the textbook. It is my scholarship, my knowledge, my expertise, and my new challenging ideas. After all, I am as competent as the author of the textbook. The textbook is simply a resource tool that I use for students to read and understand on their own. The textbook brings additional information. It is not the course.

Any teacher who teaches it straight from the textbook isn’t worth his salt. Covering the textbook page by page is spoon feeding. It is laziness on part of both the teacher and the student. A good rigorous education dares you to think and to learn independently. The competent teacher shares new information and perspectives from his own scholarship, research, and ideas. He uses the textbook and outside materials as resources for independent student learning. A good teacher challenges you to think, not just swallow pabulum and barf it back up on the exam. Spoon feeding from the textbook and regurgitating is poor teaching and low-level learning (i.e. rote without understanding).

Your post has confirmed my suspicions and created a rather low opinion of Covington. I dare say there’s not an ounce of scholarship in the whole faculty. Anyone, who reads at a minimal level, can rehash a textbook

 

[gb93433]

Originally posted by Lanny:
I have had the "pleasure" of classroom situations where the prof spent 90% of his time expounding his own opinion, and 10% actually applying the text.

He is not a professor who gives out his opinion. I don't want a man's opinion. I want to know what scripture teaches. There is plenty of SYI and too little time to waste it listening to an opinion.

 

[poodle78]

Originally posted by paidagogos:
I sure hope they were not as unbelieving and apostate as Furman was 25 years ago. Furman was thoroughly rotten when I was there over 30 years ago. Did you know John Henry Crabtree?

Only in passing. I was in high school band with his son. Surely he wasn't the same as my OT prof, Theron Price. We went through the OT and he proceeded to tell us what was true and what was allegory/fiction/lies (choose your own word). Fortunately, one course in religion was all I had to take. I can only imagine that Furman has gone downhill, theologically speaking, since the SC Bapt Convention cut them loose in the mid-80s. When that happened, I called and had myself 'coded' so that I would not get any mail or phone calls from them.

I do still pull for the Paladins, though!!!!!

 

[paidagogos]

Originally posted by gb93433:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Lanny:
I have had the "pleasure" of classroom situations where the prof spent 90% of his time expounding his own opinion, and 10% actually applying the text.

He is not a professor who gives out his opinion. I don't want a man's opinion. I want to know what scripture teaches. There is plenty of SYI and too little time to waste it listening to an opinion. </font>[/QUOTE]Actually, I don’t think Lanny was talking about the Biblical text; he was talking about the textbook. He is, I think, spoofing the idea of a teacher giving his own opinions and insights as opposed to going over and spoon-feeding from the textbook. Read my previous post for my opinions on this subject. BTW, you just stated your opinion so we live by our opinions.

 

[UZThD]

I don't want a man's opinion. I want to know what scripture teaches.

===

I do too.The difficulty is that a teacher saying what Scripture teaches may be just opinion.

 

[Nord]

Originally posted by UZThD:

Of course now I'm open to the accusation of pride because I think rigor is Christian.

UZThD,

I agree with you that rigour should be a Christian attribute. We owe God our best. I am not now speaking about Covington as I do not know anything about them. However, Christians should seek not to bring discredit on the cause of Christ in any way (conduct, education, etc).

 

[Broadus]

Originally posted by Nord:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by UZThD:

Of course now I'm open to the accusation of pride because I think rigor is Christian.

UZThD,

I agree with you that rigour should be a Christian attribute. We owe God our best. I am not now speaking about Covington as I do not know anything about them. However, Christians should seek not to bring discredit on the cause of Christ in any way (conduct, education, etc). </font>[/QUOTE]To me, this is the central issue. If, indeed, our chief end is "to bring glory to God and enjoy Him forever," how is God glorified when we opt for a formal education from an institution which cannot meet the minimum requirements of secular institutions, namely, accreditation? Sometimes fellow Christians chide us for being proud of having gone to accredited institutions. Proud for studying at places which meet the minimum? Folks say that there are more important issues than accreditation. I agree. Realize, though, that that if an institution cannot even meet the minimum standards of accreditation, then what does that say about other issues?

As has been pointed out elsewhere, there are exceptions. It is well known, however, that exceptions don't make the rule.

Away with pseudo-humility and pseudo-spirituality attempting to justify substandard institutions of higher education.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[Trotter]

Gee, Bill, you don't pull any punckes, do you?

I have to say that I agree with you 100%. Just wish I' known all this before I gave my money to a diploma mill.

In Christ,
Trotter