Originally Posted by Havensdad

Why are you guys attacking Bill? The thread is about Newburgh: the questions Bill asked were valid. I could answer Bill's questions, and I am no bastion of textual critical skill.

Originally Posted by Dennis Ruhl

But a perfect translation.

Jimmy - humour?

Originally Posted by Dennis Ruhl

Of course me and 99.9999 % of the free world has no idea what he's talking about.

Originally Posted by Jimmy

I am all humored out, Dennis. We just bought a home and the move has just about literally killed me.

You know when boxers should retire and continue fighting, in one of their last fights, the announcers will say "He got old during the fight."

I got old during the move!

Originally Posted by Dennis Ruhl

At least the price must have been good.

20 years ago in June I bought my farm. I grew up on a farm and require enough land so I can pee outside without an audience. The next move is the pine box move.

Originally Posted by Jimmy

The price was very good. We got a good deal. The home was bought by two Amish brothers and they completely remodeled it--new walls, new roof/shingles, new plumbing, new wiring, new kitchen appliances (stainless steel), new furnace, new hot water heater, etc.

Originally Posted by Jabbezzz

With kitchen appliances, furnace and hot water heater, these two brothers must have been worldly Amish.

Originally Posted by cj-kent

I'm currently enrolled at Newburgh. I'm seeking a Master of Arts in Theology. Price was the main attraction. That and the fact that I never have to leave my home/office. I do value the service they are furnishing me.
---------------------------------
Probably a lower price can be had in some wholly distance accredited schools in the United Kingdom, Australia, or South Africa.
---------------------------------

The faculty, from their credentials and based on the conversations I have had with them, seem to be quite competent.
----------------------------------
That is true. The issue, as you rightly say, is not the quality of the TTS faculty but is the quality of what they require.

My objection to TTS is that for years they lied about the accreditation, acceptance, and rigor of their programs. I was in the TTS PhD myself in 2000.
----------------------------------
However, I do not for one moment think that what they require will give me a degree that is comparable to a Master's at, say, Dallas Theological Seminary. It's simply what I'm able to do now. At the end of the program I'll have a diploma that documents a certain commitment and dedication to furthering myself theologically. I've already replaced one of their texts with a Systematic Theology book I consider more rigorous and in depth. I'm also doing tons of independent study to supplement the course requirements of NTS - which includes self-learning Greek.
-------------------------------------

AS I think you realize, the test of a school is not what it allows but what it requires.

-------------------------------------
I believe that Bill is right. There has to be a certain level of rigor involved in a Master's degree program. I can't begin to summarize even one of Geisler's volumes on Systematic Theology in 20 pages. That's ridiculous. How can I pare down von Rad's OT Theology in just 20 pages? I'm having to write the papers I need to write and then truncate them for my professors at NTS. I need to know Greek to understand all the exegetical evaluations that are employed in the systematizing of theology by each author of each text book.

-----------------------------------

Are you saying that a summary of 20 pp, of eg Geisler vol 1 (of 4) is all that is required ? Were it so, the limit is possibly made so as to not over burden the faculty.

But when I was at TTS, a prof accepted and liked one paper of over 60 pages on the issue of egalitarianism. The same prof later, in my opinion, upon receiving my paper on trinal relationships, evidenced Apollinarian tendencies (see Buswell vs C. Hodge for that argumentation) and a Lutheran sort of incarnational Christology which evidenced a misunderstanding of the Chalcedonian definition and allowed that God could die on a cross. My own Christology, I confess, would be condemned by the 12 anathemas heaped on Nestorius' head by the confused, I think, Cyril of Alexandria.

---------------------------------

Having a diploma at the end will allow me to show people that I was serious about my theological pursuits even though I didn't have the luxury of attending full-time seminary. I pray that someday I will be in a situation where I can do that. I won't however, be referring to myself educationally speaking as holding a Master in Theology degree. I will tell people that I completed the Master of Arts in Theology program at NTS. There's a difference. I can't deny that and be honest with myself and my God whom I serve in ministry. To my fellow Newburgh classmates, don't get so worked up by the criticisms. Accept what you really know to be the truth. You're getting a good education in whatever area you're pursuing. You will gain invaluable knowledge that will give you tools for better ministry. Don't worry about whether or not you can be referred to as Doctor or not. Those are the concerns of the world. Remember Who we serve and why we serve Him.

Originally Posted by Bill

-------------____
As I say, my biggest gripe about TTS is its past history of lies. I wish you well in your studies.

Originally Posted by Bill

-------------____But when I was at TTS, a prof accepted and liked one paper of over 60 pages on the issue of egalitarianism. The same prof later, in my opinion, upon receiving my paper on trinal relationships, evidenced Apollinarian tendencies (see Buswell vs C. Hodge for that argumentation) and a Lutheran sort of incarnational Christology which evidenced a misunderstanding of the Chalcedonian definition and allowed that God could die on a cross. My own Christology, I confess, would be condemned by the 12 anathemas heaped on Nestorius' head by the confused, I think, Cyril of Alexandria.

Originally Posted by Bill

That's right. sorry--old age! It was Trinity that I had in mind. I've no actual experience with the other, and don't know the connection between the two.

Originally Posted by cj-kent

Please clarify what your position is on this subject. I thought the Chalcedon definition dealt with the two natures of Jesus. Please help me understand how that plays into the trinal relationship.

------------------------
Hello

Yes Chalcedon addressed the two natures. Chalcedon also, as Nicaea before it, teaches the eternal generation of the Son by the Father (pro aionon men ek tou Patros gennethenta kata ten theotheta... monogene theon). That doctrine is perpetuated in Greek Orthodox Creeds, some Protestant ones, and it is in the writings of such modern "evangelicals" as Shedd, Dahms, Williams, and Wiley. Also, the KJV/NAS and others in rendering the adjective monogenes as "begotten" perpetuate this (IMO) myth. Thus Chalcedon refers to Trinal relationships as it states that the Father is the (eternal) Cause of the Son . I disagree.
--------------



I'm not sure I get what you're saying your professor was accusing you of. Could you give me a rundown of your Christology and where it diverges from more accepted orthodoxies? I'm trying to learn, but I'm a little on the slow side sometimes. I'd appreciate any tutelage and guidance you could give me.

-------

Please go to www.sats.edu.za , at the bottom you will see "Research." Go to Conspectus. That is the journal of the South African Theological Seminary. There you will see in three editions of the journal my series of three articles entitled "A Review And An Evaluation Of Diverse Christological Opinions Among American Evangelicals." These express my views.They are not necessarily the views of SATS! I am the one accusing the Prof-not vice versa. But his (IMO) error is commonly made!

Apollinarius denied that Christ has a rational human soul. Instead the pre existent LOGOS functions as the mind of Christ. Even Athanasius in The Inarnation implies that! Buswell says about the same. Many moderns as Strong, and my friend at Corban Derickson, and Buswell deny to Christ a full humanity. It seems to me that others deny that Christ execises all the attributes of God though they claim to (I take aseity & sovereignty to be essential qualities of God. These include Grudem, my friend House, Frame, Ware, and Erickson( a Kenoticist).

It was expressed by Cyril of Alexandria that after the incarnation there is in Christ only one nature out of two. Cyril anathematized Nestorius for saying that in Christ are two prosopa which together make one . I agree with Nestorius , Calvin, C. Hodge, Grudem, Theodoret, the Damascene, Clark and others that in Christ are two true natures, divine & human, each nature complete and unmixed with its own faculties of intellect and will, and each capable of experience and action in distinction from the other but never in separation from the one Christ.

This being the case, unlike some Lutheran formulas and Cyril, it is my opinion that God who is impassible and immutable cannot suffer but rather in His humanity, not His deity, Christ obeyed , matured, is limited , and suffered. IMO God the Son is not confined to the humanity , but remains unchanged in full possession of the nature and attributes of God .

---------

Also, I would appreciate any guidance you could give me in pursuing further education that is cost effective. I don't have the liberty to leave and be on a campus. I also have a very limited seminar budget at my church. Thanks for any help you can give and God bless you.

Originally Posted by Bill

----------

Newburgh suggests some very good texts for your studies! May I ask your opinion on some of them?

Fee , of course, is a fine scholar, including his work on 1 Corinthians suggested by Newburgh, but do you think his textual rationale for denying that 1 Cor 14:34-36 are in the autographa is valid?

I very much like Morris too, but I'm not sure that in his work recommended by Newburgh on 1-2 Thessalonians is correct when he writes that in 2 Thess 2:1 the 'coming' and 'gathering ' are closely connected as only the first substantive is articulated. Do you agree with him that such a pattern, ie, the TSKS construction, implies such a conclusion?

And, of course, Moo is excellent too in his work on Romans recommended by Newburgh. But,do you feel that Moo's conclusion regarding the force of the preposition in 6:4 is consistent with the NT usage of dia with a genitive substantive?

thanks,

It is reassuring to see that Newburgh does require some good texts. Now, what is required in regard to them?

Originally Posted by Unregistered

I see that you are very proud of your education, and that you seem to hold your education up to others. I have no degree, even though I have attended a Bible college for a short time and have great respect for the professors and those that did attain degrees. I am looking into Newburgh because of the inexpensiveness (?) of the education, and that I can get a degree that I much would like to attain.

I have also notice the colleges that you have your degrees from and I don't see Harvard, Yale, UCLA and USC. Degrees from those colleges would carry a lot more weight and would have been better educations. Can I assume that you settled for lesser schools and educations due to laziness or lack of something. We do what we can and when we can with what we can.

I would think that your extended education would have given you a "Little" humility and caring for the plight of others without bashing based on what "you" accomplished. I have studied in churches under PHD's from Trinity, Harvard, and Berkley. None of them have had the attitude you do.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Hi there - Justin Cohen again -

One final thought - just an opinion - I know of many individuals who have completed Doctoral studies at local Seminaries.

I do not like to engage in ad hominim attacks, but I will state this much - the communication ability (vocabulary, pronunciation, etc.) of some these Doctors leaves much to be desired.
How they were able to get through makes me wonder.

I have also read their Dissertations - for the most part, it appears that they have not contributed to their field very much. I was always under the impression that it should be ORIGINAL research that CONTRIBUTES SIGNIFICANTLY to the field of study.
Some of this stuff is a rehashing of old ideas or so obscure that it is not a contribution because there is not practical reference point or connection to anything which is happening in the real world.

Once again - please correct my assumptions if incorect.

Blessings,

Justin Cohen

Originally Posted by Unregistered

I would like to see a credible Acceditation for Christian schools that operates with integrity without government endorsement.

Originally Posted by cj-kent

I'm currently enrolled at Newburgh. I'm seeking a Master of Arts in Theology. Price was the main attraction. That and the fact that I never have to leave my home/office. I do value the service they are furnishing me. The faculty, from their credentials and based on the conversations I have had with them, seem to be quite competent. However, I do not for one moment think that what they require will give me a degree that is comparable to a Master's at, say, Dallas Theological Seminary. It's simply what I'm able to do now. At the end of the program I'll have a diploma that documents a certain commitment and dedication to furthering myself theologically. I've already replaced one of their texts with a Systematic Theology book I consider more rigorous and in depth. I'm also doing tons of independent study to supplement the course requirements of NTS - which includes self-learning Greek. I believe that Bill is right. There has to be a certain level of rigor involved in a Master's degree program. I can't begin to summarize even one of Geisler's volumes on Systematic Theology in 20 pages. That's ridiculous. How can I pare down von Rad's OT Theology in just 20 pages? I'm having to write the papers I need to write and then truncate them for my professors at NTS. I need to know Greek to understand all the exegetical evaluations that are employed in the systematizing of theology by each author of each text book. Having a diploma at the end will allow me to show people that I was serious about my theological pursuits even though I didn't have the luxury of attending full-time seminary. I pray that someday I will be in a situation where I can do that. I won't however, be referring to myself educationally speaking as holding a Master in Theology degree. I will tell people that I completed the Master of Arts in Theology program at NTS. There's a difference. I can't deny that and be honest with myself and my God whom I serve in ministry. To my fellow Newburgh classmates, don't get so worked up by the criticisms. Accept what you really know to be the truth. You're getting a good education in whatever area you're pursuing. You will gain invaluable knowledge that will give you tools for better ministry. Don't worry about whether or not you can be referred to as Doctor or not. Those are the concerns of the world. Remember Who we serve and why we serve Him.