Yet another Bible College in beautiful Lake Charles.......

[TheoloM]

Titus and Johann:

If you guys decide to form JTTAC as suggested by Titus, please let me know and my school can be your first accredited institution. What do you say, Titus?

TheoloM

[TheoloM]

Titus,

Personally I think you should start JTTAC and give ACI some legitimate competition.

TheoloM

[scottae316]

Is it me or does Oval Bible College just sound funny. It seems a little geometric to me.

[TheoloM]

The name sure sounds strange to me.

TheoloM

[johann]

... in the USA, you and I could form the Johann-Titus Theological Accrediting Commission (JTTAC)...

I don't think either of us has the stomach for that, Titus. We'd need to undergo conscience-suppression therapy.

...if we could find gullible institutions, charge a fee and award them accreditation.

There are no gullible institutions. That's like looking for a gullible organized-crime syndicate. They all know exactly what they're doing. The gullible ones are their students. "Standards? We don't need no stinkin' standards...etc."

Johann

PS. Here's the original line from the 1927 novel - Treasure of the Sierra Madre (B. Traven): "Badges, to god-damned hell with badges! We have no badges. In fact, we don't need badges. I don't have to show you any stinking badges, you god-damned cabrón and chinga tu madre!"

B. Traven was a pen-name, apparently. Interesting guy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B._Traven

[sadi1781]

TITUS: Thats okey you and other think that our doctorate its not legitimate. All doctor in christian areas dont have interesting in be a money maker using the gospel, the bible and teaching of JEsus Christ. We only have very interesting in people know JEsus, love him and lear how the bible can change his life for eternity.

About two months ago, A secular university invite me to a Creation vs. Evolution debate. About 150 students and a 5 doctors panel is present in the room. 3 Atheism, 1 catholic priest and me. The debate have a duration of 3 hours. The priest and me as a pastor and doctor in theology demostrate the existense of god. The authenticity and veracity of the bible. Genesis 1 was under attack. The others 3 doctors have a degree from a secular universities, 2 are a doctors in Phisyc, the other in mathematic and analytic. I dont see any different in my authority of my degree. I speak and the priest the same and prove the existence of God and the biblie authority to speak to the human race today.

What I try to prove i my limit english? Its not only about the diploma or acreditation. You can study in acredited secular university and have no knowledge. For you Im study in a diploma mill college, BUT I HAVE KNOWLEDGE, POWER IN MY DISSERTATION. The atheism doctors with all his diplomas secular acredited work hard to speak against our argument. This is study, this is a real acreditation. When you study in sincerity manner, you dont need study in secular, humanistic, atheism university or organization.

With my studies in Oval Bible College Im learn, real knowledge about God, Creation, and difficult areas of debate. Thats okey all of you think I have a diploma mill. But others doctors, graduate from acreditation secular and humanistic commision universities DONT THINK like you. When I speak to 150 or 200 people, the power of God began to work and people is inteligente, they know who real study the bible and know defend the christian faith.

Be blessed in Jesus

[nosborne48]

Accreditation of religious degrees has always posed special problems. I think that's where TRACS came from.

That's pretty salty Spanish to post in a public place, Johann, classic quote or not. Believe me, among the polite it would get you snubbed. Among some of the rest it could get you shot.

[johann]

Nosborne -

Indeed it was salty - or worse. And I knew it. Although I realize it's not much of a mitigation, please know I wouldn't have posted anything remotely like it, other than as a quote.

I DO apologize, sincerely:

(a) for my bad taste
(b) if I have offended you and/or anyone else. That was not my intent - not for one second.

I assure you, the quote was just that - a quote - and not aimed against any individual or group. Long ago, I saw the quote on another forum - without anyone taking offense, but perhaps the poster had extraordinary luck that day...again, no excuse for my wrongdoing.

Lo siento.

Johann

[sadi1781]

TITUS: I respect your position. But biblical colleges or seminaries, and inclusive theological acreditation comission dont need secular or government acreditation. Many students today are being told that if they want to be successful and compete with the world, they must have an accredited education. I’m sorry, but I don’t find that principle in the Word of God. In fact, for students training to be preachers of God’s Word, there are clear qualifications in the Scriptures. (I Timothy , Titus 1) Graduating from an accredited government institution is not a requirement. This is not stated to downplay academics. We must be honest, that there are many men who have been greatly used of God whose training came from local church-based ministries. Here in my country and in inclusive in EEUU many of our good pastors are Bible college graduates from “nonaccredited” government colleges. Truly, the need in this hour is the power of God! Not secular, government acreditation.

[johann]

Accreditation of religious degrees has always posed special problems. I think that's where TRACS came from.

TRACS and several other CHEA-recognized Faith-based Accreditors - including one accreditor of Rabbinical and Talmudic Schools - AARTS, can be found here: http://www.chea.org/Directories/faith.asp. If a religious school desires NA accreditation, this offers several legit. pathways. Another source of NA can be DETC. Among other religious schools, DETC has accredited Catholic Distance University. http://www.cdu.edu

My point: I'm perfectly OK with a religious school deciding it doesn't need Government-approved accreditation. Such a school can teach according to its beliefs here in Canada, but not confer degrees. In the US, it may well be allowed to issue degrees without having to answer for standards of these degrees. Not that anyone should care - but I don't particularly like that part. I do, however, realize it's legal - in at least 20-odd states. And NOT legal in a bunch of other states, as well.

What really gets to me is any religious school that:

(1) claims it needs no accreditation (or is accredited by God) and THEN
(2) purchases so-called "accreditation" from some unauthorized (and possibly one-man) source

That combo is dishonest - for both parties. Most religions frown on dishonesty. It always creates problems - and this kind is no exception. There's faith-based accreditation -- and, uh... "ungodly" accreditation. No accreditation at all is far better than the latter.

Johann

[scottae316]

Accreditation of religious degrees has always posed special problems. I think that's where TRACS came from.

TRACS and several other CHEA-recognized Faith-based Accreditors - including one accreditor of Rabbinical and Talmudic Schools - AARTS, can be found here: http://www.chea.org/Directories/faith.asp. If a religious school desires NA accreditation, this offers several legit. pathways. Another source of NA can be DETC. Among other religious schools, DETC has accredited Catholic Distance University. http://www.cdu.edu

My point: I'm perfectly OK with a religious school deciding it doesn't need Government-approved accreditation. Such a school can teach according to its beliefs here in Canada, but not confer degrees. In the US, it may well be allowed to issue degrees without having to answer for standards of these degrees. Not that anyone should care - but I don't particularly like that part. I do, however, realize it's legal - in at least 20-odd states. And NOT legal in a bunch of other states, as well.

What really gets to me is any religious school that:

(1) claims it needs no accreditation (or is accredited by God) and THEN
(2) purchases so-called "accreditation" from some unauthorized (and possibly one-man) source

That combo is dishonest - for both parties. Most religions frown on dishonesty. It always creates problems - and this kind is no exception. There's faith-based accreditation -- and, uh... "ungodly" accreditation. No accreditation at all is far better than the latter.

Johann

I agree with you 99%, but remember as I am sure you do all accreditors started out as not recognized. Also, many Bible Schools and the like would not have a chance with any accreditor. They are very small, have limited resources and small choice of programs. I can see a place for some type of organization that will examine one of these schools and say, it is legitimate, they are not selling degrees. Now I would not call it accreditation, approved, or any type of term like this. I agree that they should not confer academic degrees, diplomas, certificates, or such okay but not degrees without proper accreditation. Unfortunately, these unrecognized accreditors are just selling accreditation. There is one that examines schools that I know of, but does not call it accreditation.

I am considering going back for another Master's from a DETC seminary. I told my wife and she said she want to do it also which was a shock. At $75 a credit it is easily affordable, and is accredited by a legitimate recognized accreditor.

[johann]

I agree with you 99%...

Thanks! That's 'way better than I usually do!

...all accreditors started out as not recognized.

I'm not sure of that at all. Indeed, some (like DETC and ACICS) started long before there was such a thing as CHEA-recognition - or even recognition by one of its predecessors, the National Commission on Accreditation (founded 1949), but I'm not sure that's the same thing. Yes - some, like ACICS, have been around for a long time (100 years +) but their CHEA-recognition has happened only in the last couple of years. I think it's safe to say that all of the "Big 6" Regional accreditors had considerable "recognition" immediately upon founding - between 1885 (NEASC) and 1923, (WASC) IIRC.

I think you may be confusing your "unrecognized accreditor" theory with the acknowledged fact that many good schools were unaccredited in their early days. That's not the same.

I can see a place for some type of organization that will examine one of these schools and say, it is legitimate, they are not selling degrees. Now I would not call it accreditation, approved, or any type of term like this.

OK. What would you call it?

There is one that examines schools that I know of, but does not call it accreditation.

The only place I can think of that does that is USDLA, here at http://www.usdla.org . They call their process "certification." Unfortunately, the first (and only, AFAIK) school they "certified" was Clayton College of Natural Health, which folded soon afterwards. I believe some money -- about $1.5 million -- has been recovered from the owner in a class-action suit and will be repaid to former students. I think USDLA is an organization of sincere enough intentions but it has two drawbacks:

(1) It has allowed some degree mills onto its membership list. These bad "schools" pay to join USDLA in order to cloak their bad names with respectability, getting on the same list with very good schools which are USDLA-members. Sometimes, the worst "schools" will even claim USDLA "accreditation," something USDLA specifically says it does not offer. Once they see the bad guys on the membership list, some "good" schools will be (rightly) gunshy about joining - even though there may be perfectly good reasons for them to do so.

(2) Based on the one-off "certification" - the debacle with Clayton, I don't think it is a reliable "certifier" of institutions -- at least not yet. It obviously wasn't ready - and readiness may still be a long way off - who knows?

If USDLA isn't the "examiner" you were talking about - please let us know who you did mean. I think this is a viable concept (maybe) but I don't know of anyone besides USDLA who has made the attempt.

I am considering going back for another Master's from a DETC seminary. I told my wife and she said she want to do it also which was a shock. At $75 a credit it is easily affordable, and is accredited by a legitimate recognized accreditor.

Great! I wish you and your wife every success!

Johann

[johann]

Scottae -

I forgot - there is another process that basically says "Ok, they're not selling degrees -- but not approved or accredited either." That would be the State-Licensing model - Hawaii and California come to mind. Was that what you had in mind, possibly?

Johann

PS - Quite a few States, e.g. Wyoming & Alabama used to do a lot of this, but have since abandoned such a process. It made them havens for thoroughly bogus schools.

[johann]

Yes - some, like ACICS, have been around for a long time (100 years +) but their CHEA-recognition has happened only in the last couple of years.

Wrong again! I re-checked. ACICS (predecessor founded in 1912) was CHEA-recognized in 2001. For some crazy reason, I thought it was much later. My bad.
However, Both ACICS and its predecessor(s) enjoyed formal recognition of one sort or another long before CHEA came into existence (1996, IIRC).

Johann

[nosborne48]

Oh, I'M not offended. I've heard far worse from my former clients. I'm just surprised that a Canadian gentleman such as yourself would use such language.

I guess it's a little like American Yiddish...we use words as "cute" that are deeply offensive to real Yiddish speakers.