What Makes a Good Christian College?

[Dr. Bob]

Can you share 1 or 2 points that you see as salient in recommending or selecting a college for our christian youth?

No sermons needed. Just like to start a list, and I will go with the obvious:

1 - Must be truly a CHRISTIAN college in all aspects, not just in tradition or name.

Your turn!

 

[BHarris]

Must equip students for all aspects of life, not just full-time Christian ministry.

(I liked yours, Dr. Bob)

 

[CorpseNoMore]

(1)In America, the college should be accredited by one of the six regional accrediting agencies. (I know there is some resistance to this in Baptist circles, particulary stridently fundamental Baptist circles, but I think the dangers{at this point in history} are largely myth, and the benefits enormous.)

(2) This one relates to BHarris' post, it should be a broad-based liberal arts curriculum, with multiple majors in the Arts, Sciences, and business, and ministerial students shouldn't have the option to major just in Bible. If they do major in Bible, they should be required to carry a double-major and also then major in English, History, or some such thing. But ideally, it's better for them to major in English(for example), THEN go to seminary.

end of sermon, sorry Dr. Bob

 

[Biblethumper1611]

On the contrary my dear corpsey

...

I feel if it is a Bible College then the only majors should be Bible oriented. I do feel that if it is a bible College they should stress hermenutics and homelitics. History and even English. Its late so please forgive spelling errors....

Now if it is a college like BJU or PCC then I don't see a problem with other majors.

I do respect MBBC a lot ... Especially since doctor Bob isn't on the faculty ...

 

[Billy Boy]

It seems to me that as thumper pointed out there is a difference between a "Christian College" which can be and should be larger in scope than a "Bible College" it's primary courses should Bible in nature.

-----------------------
Rev. Dr. Billy Boy, aka Groomsey, aka William Grooms, lover of all esp. the ladies of the FFF

 

[DocCas]

I agree with Thumper and Billy Boy. The college you select should be determined by your educational goals in life. If you want to be a Medical Doctor, perhaps you should consider a good Pre-med course at a respected, accredited State school, or a respected, accredited Christian school (is there such a thing?). If your goal is to become a teacher, perhaps you should consider a good teaching college. Those with a goal to become an engineer should probably choose a good technical school. If your goal is the Pastoral ministry, then a good Bible college would be appropriate. As I asserted before, "one size does not fit all." However, every Christian college, regardless of whether it has a pre-med, technical, engineering, pre-law, etc., programs, should also have every student at least minor in Bible.

As to the accreditation discussion, that would depend on your goal in life. Any college preparing students for employment in the secular world should be accredited except for exceptional circumstances (Harvard is not accredited, but nobody would question the academic reliability of a degree from Havard). However, if Pastoral Ministry is your goal, accreditation is not all that important, as most churches don't care if a Bible College is accredited by the Federal Department of Education, but only that the college is academically stringent, doctrinally correct, and prepars a student for his Seminary training. However, bear in mind that sometimes thing change in our lives. A man who gets a degree from an unaccredited Bible college, if he leaves the ministry, will probably have a problem securing secular employment on the basis of his degree. I approached it from the other direction. Not being saved until I was 27 I was already a graduate engineer (Nuclear) prior to going to Seminary. After Seminary I worked as a Nuclear Engineering Supervisor for several years prior to entering full time ministry. A man in the ministry should always have a secular profession to fall back on. Even Paul was an accomplished tent maker! We should learn from his example.

[ June 29, 2001: Message edited by: Thomas Cassidy ]

 

[PreacherBoy]

That was a Short post Cassidy!!!

Just Jokeing

 

[UZThD]

As to the accreditation discussion, that would depend on your goal in life. Any college preparing students for employment in the secular world should be accredited except for exceptional circumstances (Harvard is not accredited, but nobody would question the academic reliability of a degree from Havard).

===


Yes I know this discussion was three years ago. But the sheer lack of information in the post requires a response.

Harvard certainly IS accredited as a very simple research would show. It has been accredited by its regional agency since 1929 and the Divinity School by ATS since 1940!!!

 

[Johnv]

Originally posted by Dr. Bob Griffin:
Can you share 1 or 2 points that you see as salient in recommending or selecting a college for our christian youth?

If a lot of hyperfundamentalist Christians criticize it, then it's probably a good school

Seriously, though, I first and formost prefer a school that is accredited or going through the accreditation process. It signifies cirriculal culpanility.

If it is a religious-based school, I prefer a school that is denomonation affiliated or endorsed. It signifies culpability in matters of theological education and application.

Also, I would look at the average GPA of the graduating classes. That's pretty self explanatory.

 

[Stephen Mills]

Originally posted by CorpseNoMore:
(1)In America, the college should be accredited by one of the six regional accrediting agencies. (I know there is some resistance to this in Baptist circles, particulary stridently fundamental Baptist circles, but I think the dangers{at this point in history} are largely myth, and the benefits enormous.)

(2) This one relates to BHarris' post, it should be a broad-based liberal arts curriculum, with multiple majors in the Arts, Sciences, and business, and ministerial students shouldn't have the option to major just in Bible. If they do major in Bible, they should be required to carry a double-major and also then major in English, History, or some such thing. But ideally, it's better for them to major in English(for example), THEN go to seminary.

end of sermon, sorry Dr. Bob

I absolutely agree. For me, Wheaton has always epitomized what a good Christian school should be.

 

[Broadus]

I agree with the need for accreditation, if not RA, at least with TRACS, which is itself recognized by the USDE and CHEA.

While accreditation does not equal high quality, non-accreditation almost (notice the qualifier "almost") always guarantees substandard quality. In other words, non-accreditated schools typically require much less rigor and quality of work.

I would like for the Christian college to be a liberal arts college. All Christians are not called to the ministry. There are a host of other vocations (callings) for believers, and students are best served when then are taught from a Christian perspective.

I would also want the college to have a sensible entrance requirement. One shouldn't have to score 1400 on the SAT to gain entrance, but neither should one be allowed to enter by barely graduating from high school. Not everyone should go to college. Many should be trained in technical areas.

Sorry, Dr. Bob, brevity is not my strong suit!

Bill

 

[gb93433]

Originally posted by Broadus:

All Christians are not called to the ministry.

Try Mt. 4:19 and Mt. 28:19,20.

 

[UZThD]

Originally posted by Broadus:
In other words, non-accreditated schools typically require much less rigor and quality of work.

===


But then one will ask, "What's spiritually wrong with doing less work ,less rigorously, for the same degrees?"

And another will say, "Accredited schools of more rigor produce prouder graduates."

And a third will add, " Academic rigor results in lack of spirituality."


Yet I cannot fathom how doing less work in God's name for the same degree indicates more devotion to God, or how doing our best for God indicates the worse, pride, about ourselves, or how rigorously learning His Word means we are spiritually unlearned about the One who authored that Word.

So, IMO, a good school is a school which expects the rigor generally required by accredited schools for students and faculty . It unlikely will be developed in the former if it has not been developed in the latter.

 

[Plain Old Bill]

Christian Colleges that teach liberal arts as well as professions should be accredited, no doubt.
"Bible Colleges", that are in essence Preacher/Pastor factories should have thier own accreditation,but their first allegience should be to thier denomination or fellowship.In other words they should equip the student to function as a minister of music/education or as a Pastor or evangelist within thier body.The proper equiping for the lifetime task being the operational idea.It should also be able to prepare the student for seminary training.To me as a minumum I would look for (preacher factories)18 sem hrs of Greek,6hrs of Hebrew,12hrs of Bible Doctrine,12hrs of Theology proper,6hrs of hermeneutics,30 hrs of Bible(combination of surveys and book studies).That is probably more then you wanted to know, but that's the way I see it.

 

[Plain Old Bill]

I would also add that there should be a code of Christian behavior and conduct.

 

[Broadus]

Originally posted by gb93433:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Broadus:

All Christians are not called to the ministry.

Try Mt. 4:19 and Mt. 28:19,20. </font>[/QUOTE]Surely, you jest. Isn't the context of the verses to which you point clear that the apostles of Christ are the primary recipients of these commands? Whatever these verses teach, they certainly don't disprove my statement that "All Christians are not called to the ministry." If you want to point to Ephesians 4:11-12 to make the case that all believers are to be involved in the work of the ministry, then you have a point about the involvement of all Christians.

Let me be more specific, all Christians are not called to the gospel ministry. All Christians are not called to be pastors, vocational missionaries, etc. The point that I am making is that, because not all believers are called into the gospel ministry, not all believers need to be trained in Bible colleges. In fact, I prefer that even gospel ministers have a liberal arts undergrad degree and then a seminary education. I think that it makes for a more well-rounded minister who is better able to address the culture as a whole. Again, that is a preference, not a conviction. Consequently, I would call for a solid, Christian, liberal arts college or university.

Bill

 

[gb93433]

Originally posted by Broadus:
Isn't the context of the verses to which you point clear that the apostles of Christ are the primary recipients of these commands? Whatever these verses teach, they certainly don't disprove my statement that "All Christians are not called to the ministry." If you want to point to Ephesians 4:11-12 to make the case that all believers are to be involved in the work of the ministry, then you have a point about the involvement of all Christians.

Let me be more specific, all Christians are not called to the gospel ministry. All Christians are not called to be pastors, vocational missionaries, etc. The point that I am making is that, because not all believers are called into the gospel ministry, not all believers need to be trained in Bible colleges.

Bill

Do you think Mt. 4:19 and Mt. 28:19,20 makes everyone exempt from the gospel service except the apostles? The context of the entire Bible is past tense. Do you think that exempts each person from obedience?

You are equating ministry with professionalism. The gospel ministry is not about ecclesiastical hierarchy. Show me one verse in the NT where that is the case. What if I showed you some men who have led more to Christ and discipled more than the vast majority of pastors. The man who taught me carpenter work most likely led about 1000 people to Christ. When he died the church could not contain the number of people who showed up. There were many more who could not attend. Not one pastor in that same church ever led as many to Christ as he did nor ever discipled as many. One of the pastors was there 31 years too. The fact was the man I know was educated at a Bible school and chose to be a builder. He knew more about theology than the pastor. He did not need the pastor to do what God has called him to do.

It is a fact that non-pastors have more witnessing opportunities than pastors by about twice.

If you read through the NT all were called to the gospel ministry. Everyone were witnesses. But everyone had a job that helped them to make a living.

How would you interpret Acts 1:8? Is that not the gospel ministry?

Jesus did the gospel ministry without one church. He was never a pastor. Look at the kind of men he called. Where was their office? Where was their church? Where were they educated? What was their professional ministry? How did they make a living? What theological school did they go to?

No church ever grows much because of the pastor. It grows because of the people's obedience to God.

Sometime when you get a chance read http://www.bibleteacher.org/Dm118_8.htm

 

[Broadus]

Ok, so you're not jesting, but you are most certainly wrong that all are called into the gospel ministry. What does Ephesians 4:11-12 mean?

Quoted from gb93433:
Do you think Mt. 4:19 and Mt. 28:19,20 makes everyone exempt from the gospel service except the apostles? The context of the entire Bible is past tense. Do you think that exempts each person from obedience?

When I point to context, that means the passage in which the verses are found. Those are addressed to the apostles. A case can be made, with support from additional Scripture, that by extension the church takes up the task of discipleship initially given to the apostles. Ephesians 4, however, clearly shows that God has gifted the church with certain men to train believers for the work of the ministry. In our day, these certain men are gospel ministers.

I think you're confusing the gospel ministry with personal evangelism. All are called to personal evangelism, but not all are called into the ministry in an official capacity.

Help me understand where you're coming from. Do you believe in local, organized churches? Do you believe in the office of elder (or pastor, bishop, overseer---all synonyms for the same office)? That is the office of the gospel minister.

Quoted from gb93433:
Jesus did the gospel ministry without one church. He was never a pastor. Look at the kind of men he called. Where was their office? Where was their church? Where were they educated? What was their professional ministry? How did they make a living? What theological school did they go to?

Do you not believe in local churches? Do you think that pastors are superfluous? What are you going to do with 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1?

BTW, pointing to the apostles of Christ as not having a theological education won't stand up. They were personally mentored by the Son of God for some three years. Sounds like a pretty good ministerial education to me.

Quoted from gb93433:
Sometime when you get a chance read http://www.bibleteacher.org/Dm118_8.htm

Was Dawson Trotman opposed to the ministerial office? He simply believed that all Christians are to be involved in the work of the ministry. Every believer is to be involved in personal evangelism and personal discipleship to some degree. That is not to say, however, that every Christian is called to the ministry.

Let me be clear. God has called certain men to function in an official capacity to teach and lead local churches. These men are to train and lead all other believers to do the work of the ministry. Consequently, all believers are involved in such tasks as evangelism, discipleship, teaching, etc., but not all are gospel ministers.

And back to the original issue of this thread, my contention is that not every Christian needs a Bible college degree because all are not called into what has historically been called, by Baptists at least, the gospel ministry.

Bill

 

[Palmetto Boy]

I would look for a school that places great emphasis on the heart and academics.

1. Look for a school that emphasizes discipleship and love for God foremost.
2. Look beyond just accreditation at the academic aspects of the school: A) faculty education, publication, & professional experience B) quality of the library C) extracurricular activities (important!) D) track record of graduates getting into grad school...and you can think of other things.

My point is that you should dig deeper than rumors and college rankings to really evaluate the school's curriculum and qualifications.

 

[Palmetto Boy]

One other thing--and I'm not trying to provoke anyone's wrath here. A lot of pastors and Christian school kids seem attached to the concept of attending a small college.

Let me encourage you not to use size as a primary consideration in picking a college. It may be a good change for a small town kid to attend a large college and a city kid to attend a small college. Only God knows!

If you are going to consider size, larger colleges will afford more opportunities and a more diverse faculty. Remember that college is great opportunity to stretch yourself and do things that will require faith.

You don't go to college just to learn from teachers. You also go to learn from your fellow students. The larger the school, the more wonderful personalities and talents you have to learn from. The common argument that you won't get to know anyone at a large college is bogus. There are plenty of opportunities to develop close relationships--dorm life, fraternities/societies, classes, extracurriculars, student work, extensions, etc.

On the other hand some of the small colleges have excelled in cultivating a strong sense of unity and a devotional spirit among the students. My point is that college aspirants shoudl keep an open mind.