This is the location for conversations that don't fall anywhere else on FlameFans. Whether its politics, culture, the latest techno stuff or just the best places to travel on the web ... this is your forum.

Moderators: jcmanson, Sly Fox, BuryYourDuke

#624472
Jonathan Carone wrote: April 5th, 2021, 9:04 am I'm better when I study under people from different cultures and backgrounds and see the Bible in a way that is different than an American Baptist view point. We all are.
I have a good Christian friend from Ethiopia. Her knowledge of the Bible makes us all look like babies in Christ. Her family studied scripture 4 hours a day in her homeland before moving here. She aliens with Doc's Baptist doctrine more than yours (woke). In fact she would very politely place you in the liberal category.

Maybe she would say naïve, rather than liberal.
Last edited by TH Spangler on April 5th, 2021, 10:00 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
By Racenut
Registration Days Posts
#624474
I don't know the exact solution to the tenure issue, since any other job in society comes with performance requirements and expectations. Extended contracts with penalties for either side where breaches have remedies may be in order, but my concerns in areas of doctrine and scripture are many. Would today's society instill so much pressure that the Bible would begin to look like Thomas Jefferson's Smithsonian version? Who makes the call when "scholastic scrutiny" redefines what is sin and what is not? I don't believe that God intended the Word to be a mystery only to be unlocked by a chosen few. Early religious leaders made it illegal to translate the Bible so that they alone could espouse their version to the masses. Is this what we want? Who would be the arbiter of such advanced "scholarly knowledge"?
#624475
jbock13 wrote: April 5th, 2021, 7:12 am TH, do you think maybe you might have TDS in that you think Trump needs to be involved with everything anyone does?

I felt like he was a decent president but a university should not exist just to be a rubber stamp for his policies. Rather, it should be about the acquisition of knowledge, not just becoming a talking points memo for the Republican Party.

Even though I usually vote Republican, I can’t stand either party. I didn’t pay $25k a year to learn how to be a good Republican. I spent it learning how to be a Champion for Christ in my career.
And to add to this, there are people who agree that change is indeed needed who were very vocal supporters of Trump. I know that in most articles the Trump endorsement is mentioned but in my mind, and the mind of many others, that doesn't even come into the equation when I think of the changes that need to happen.

I think those who believe everything is fine mean well, but are part of the culture that makes it fairly easy for ministries to cover things up. If we want our University to be the best place possible for young people to be educated then transparency is key.
#624476
Racenut wrote: April 5th, 2021, 9:51 am Early religious leaders made it illegal to translate the Bible so that they alone could espouse their version to the masses. Is this what we want? Who would be the arbiter of such advanced "scholarly knowledge"?
It seems like this is the inverse of your argument. IMHO, this is what the seminary does now- you’re only allowed to espouse what the administration has deemed acceptable doctrine and to question, challenge, or inquire about anything in opposition carries the very real risk of losing your job.

Good scholarly work, the kind that would make LU a leader in Biblical scholarship, means being open to some of your presuppositions being tossed in favor of new information and understanding. If we are committed to God’s truth, we should welcome that in pursuit of His truth. God’s truth should be able to stand up to rigorous interrogation. If it doesn’t, it’s not God’s truth.
User avatar
By Sly Fox
Registration Days Posts
#624477
Once again, the discussion around where those lines are drawn is significant. I consider myself theologically right of most on this board without the pharasaical baggage of my IFB background. So we are not pushing for theological drifts in dogma or even doctrine generally speaking, it is more focused on the preference categories which constitutute a significant portion of Christian worldview for better or worse.
#624478
stokesjokes wrote: April 5th, 2021, 10:11 am
Racenut wrote: April 5th, 2021, 9:51 am Early religious leaders made it illegal to translate the Bible so that they alone could espouse their version to the masses. Is this what we want? Who would be the arbiter of such advanced "scholarly knowledge"?
It seems like this is the inverse of your argument. IMHO, this is what the seminary does now- you’re only allowed to espouse what the administration has deemed acceptable doctrine and to question, challenge, or inquire about anything in opposition carries the very real risk of losing your job.

Good scholarly work, the kind that would make LU a leader in Biblical scholarship, means being open to some of your presuppositions being tossed in favor of new information and understanding. If we are committed to God’s truth, we should welcome that in pursuit of His truth. God’s truth should be able to stand up to rigorous interrogation. If it doesn’t, it’s not God’s truth.
To add:

Most people read themselves into Biblical stories. They apply their current circumstances and their current culture and pick out the verses that make sense. It's why people think Jeremiah 29:11 is such an encouraging verse on a personal level. Most people who claim that verse as their favorite have no clue the context around it.

Similarly, part of Biblical scholarship is learning the culture and audience the Scripture was written to in its time. If we're approaching Scripture solely from American eyes, we miss out on so much of the beauty of it. We also miss out on some of the calling and application the original writers intended.

If we want to be the best Evangelical School of Divinity to train future church leaders, we need people who excel in knowing those nuances and backgrounds. Those scholars fill in the gaps where others might miss out on them. They give us a fuller view of the Gospel so it can impact our lives in deeper ways.
#624479
That is a really good point Jon. My wife read a book recently (Jesus through middle eastern eyes) and it really opened her eyes to a brand new way to read scripture. I have it on my to read list but it has really helped add an additional context to why Jesus taught the way he did.

That has nothing to do with the culture change but it is a really interesting topic.
Jonathan Carone liked this
#624480
thepostman wrote: April 5th, 2021, 12:55 pm That is a really good point Jon. My wife read a book recently (Jesus through middle eastern eyes) and it really opened her eyes to a brand new way to read scripture. I have it on my to read list but it has really helped add an additional context to why Jesus taught the way he did.

That has nothing to do with the culture change but it is a really interesting topic.
I've learned alot about middle eastern views listening Archaeology and Bible Professor, Dr Randall Smith he has a M.A. in Near East Archaeology and a Ph.D. in Comparative Religion with specialization in Judaism. He lived in and raised his children in Jerusalem for 13 years. His parents were close friends when I lived on the OBX, NC.

viewtopic.php?p=619887#p619887
Last edited by TH Spangler on April 5th, 2021, 1:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
#624482
thepostman wrote: April 5th, 2021, 12:55 pm That is a really good point Jon. My wife read a book recently (Jesus through middle eastern eyes) and it really opened her eyes to a brand new way to read scripture. I have it on my to read list but it has really helped add an additional context to why Jesus taught the way he did.

That has nothing to do with the culture change but it is a really interesting topic.
I actually do think it's part of a culture change that needs to happen. We need more diversity across the board in our leadership and faculty.

We are a school of predominantly white leaders (90% in Executive and Senior Leadership) leading a generation that is 49% non-white. There are a total of three non-white executives, and two of those are in the Inclusion, Diversity, and Equity roles. Over half of our total student population (59% - 53% residential and 60% online) are women yet there are only three women (10%) in senior leadership roles. The Faculty is reported to be 81% white. The Board of Trustees percentage is even higher. Our residential minority population has dropped significantly over the last six years to reportedly only 4% black in 2018 (down from 10% in 2007). In convocation, only three of the 13 convo speakers (23%) listed in the archives for 2021 were minorities. In 2020, roughly 9 of 50 events (18%) featured minority speakers.

The generation our school is trying to reach is the most ethnically diverse generation in American history yet our school isn't representative of that at all in leadership or enrollment. It begs the question: Are we striving to be the world's best Christian university or the world's best white Christian university?
adam42381 liked this
#624484
@TH Spangler I like him, you just bring him up any chance you get and it gets tiring. I also don't think he would have any interest in this so it seems pointless to continue to bring him up.

@Jonathan Carone that is a good point and I certainty agree with you. Unfortunately there is a lot of people that have power at LU that hear that kind of talk and instantly think you are just trying to be "woke" or pushing a radical leftist agenda or something like that. We see it on this message board all of the time. It isn't watering down our message or our mission to include diversity in who gets a voice at the table but when one brings it up, you wouldn't know it. I think the core of our mission as an institution is solid and that shouldn't change but this culture that has turned into the good ol' boys club isn't good for our growth and does a disservice to our students, alumni, faculty and our staff.
#624485
jbock13 wrote: TH, do you think maybe you might have TDS in that you think Trump needs to be involved with everything anyone does?

I felt like he was a decent president but a university should not exist just to be a rubber stamp for his policies. Rather, it should be about the acquisition of knowledge, not just becoming a talking points memo for the Republican Party.

Even though I usually vote Republican, I can’t stand either party. I didn’t pay $25k a year to learn how to be a good Republican. I spent it learning how to be a Champion for Christ in my career.
I agree with you to a point. But one has to look at the other side. Every publick, guvmint, skool is a rubber stamp for the left and talking points for the dim-o-craps. It is undeniable. To think that these universities are teaching a balanced curriculum or have balanced outlook on our political or social policies is laughable. Plus we are forced to support the bastions of socialism, even though we might not make use of them.
As I see it, we have moved close enough to the world's view in these matters. In the early years we were waaay to legalistic. But right now, I believe we have reached a pretty good balance. (A little too woke for me, but I have to realize I am older).
With Jr. being gone, the political influence has waned to some degree and will continue to do so, based on the new president. Yes, there are still some on here who still suffer from radical TDS. This too shall pass with time and maturity. Was Trump perfect? Far from it. Were the policies that he espoused better for our country.......... absolutely. Did his personality, delivery, make them less desirable, undoubtedly. I have said many times, it is too late for me, I just care about my kids.
#624486
TH Spangler wrote: Someone call Dr Voddie Baucham ASAP. But you guys didn't like him? :lol:

Also give Shannon Bream a call. I want a copy of her new book.
I have wanted to say this for some time, but I wouldn't want/trust Voddie Baucham as president, just because he didn't have health insurance on himself, if I read his story correctly. In today's world that is not something one should trifle with.

As far as the diversity that Jon harps on in every post, is tiring as well. Diversity, for the sake if diversity, has never been a positive in any organization that I have seen try to implement it. I know I haven't worked in every industry in the world, but I have seen it hurt many organizations personally. To me, any sort of action, taken for the purpose of "diversity" is racist. It is also not equally applied. If it was, we would be insisting on more white players in all sports, but especially in the NBA and NCAABB.
Unfortunately, we are already waaaaay too far down the road, where organizations, guvmint programs are already race-based. If I was a minority, I would be highly ticked. Because of this, many people's first thought is, well is this person in this position because of diversity, or because of their abilities? VERY, VERY sad.
#624487
I'm not a minority and neither are you so all I can really do is try my best to learn from those who are. How can we reach these communities if we don't have many who come from these communities at the table? It is a complicated issue and I know it tends to get dicey because of the poltical rhetoric of the day but to dismiss is all together just isn't going to do anybody any good.

I am also not speaking of just race but also of breadth of experience. We should have people who embrace our mission but still have a diversity of voices. Having voices with the same background is part of the reason the board room has turned into an echo chamber.
Jonathan Carone liked this
#624490
thepostman wrote: April 5th, 2021, 5:31 pm I'm not a minority and neither are you so all I can really do is try my best to learn from those who are. How can we reach these communities if we don't have many who come from these communities at the table? It is a complicated issue and I know it tends to get dicey because of the poltical rhetoric of the day but to dismiss is all together just isn't going to do anybody any good.

I am also not speaking of just race but also of breadth of experience. We should have people who embrace our mission but still have a diversity of voices. Having voices with the same background is part of the reason the board room has turned into an echo chamber.
Personally, I do not dismiss racial diversity or thought, out of hand. However trying to force the issue and fair exercise thereof is the problem. As a university, or society, we cannot reach/help every community or point of view directly. Where does it stop?
Should we make a major push to bring in more Indian, Korean, Arabic students? Why not? Should we hire minorities, or anyone else, who does not support the mission of the university? Why not, they have a different view to share, aren't their views important? Would a more diverse board have gotten rid of Jr. sooner? Do publick universities allow diversity of thought? LOL.
Just like we cannot directly support every human who wants to come to our country. Personally, I believe that the open border, the current admin is supporting, is not the best policy for our country. Right away, people want to call RACIST. Nothing could be further from the truth. My feelings would be exactly the same, if they were all white people. We only have X amount of resources, land, water, food, etc. There is not another country in the world that allows people to immigrate so freely. There is a reason for that and no one is accusing the other countries, that have strict immigration laws, racist. They are looking out for their country and their citizenry. It is only common sense.
I could go on and on and on. If we as a university decide to actively recruit minorities, where do we stop? Should we recruit all 27 genders? Should we recruit all religious minorities? Should we recruit all ethnicities? Isn't it racist or being non-inclusive, to leave anyone out?
Our culture as a university, tends to attract a pretty narrow slice of society. It has been that way since 1971. Just like Christianity attracts a narrow slice of society. The Bible says that the road to heaven is a narrow one.
All of that being said, I believe it is paramount to our survival as a university, that we support our mission first. To remain a distinctly Christian university. If we can do that by attracting a more diverse student body, a better sports program, music program, facilities, better paid professors, etc. I am all for it. But to force diversity of thought or racial makeup of the student body, at the expense of the mission, is not the answer to me.
Major on the majors.
#624497
Either you are getting hung up on the race thing or I'm doing a poor job communicating my point or a little bit of both. I have never claimed to be the best written communicator.

I'd just like to see less of a good ol' boys club. New voices would do wonders. Instead we have a board that refuses to acknowledge their wrong doing in how they handled Jr before we got to the end. So much so, they have given Prevo the same kind of power.
flameshaw liked this
#624499
There are non white christians in America that align with LUs mission and values. Getting those people involved would not change the schools mission in the slightest. There is more than one path to the schools end state. Getting more people involved that agree on the end state but may provide different ideas on how to achieve it can only help.
#624506
thepostman wrote: April 5th, 2021, 9:50 pm Either you are getting hung up on the race thing or I'm doing a poor job communicating my point or a little bit of both. I have never claimed to be the best written communicator.

I'd just like to see less of a good ol' boys club. New voices would do wonders. Instead we have a board that refuses to acknowledge their wrong doing in how they handled Jr before we got to the end. So much so, they have given Prevo the same kind of power.
Amen, we agree 100%.
I only get hung up on race and diversity issues, in response to people who are always hung up about race and diversity issues. The LU cultural change needs to be a spiritual one. Everything else, will take care of itself. 8) 8)
#624508
Jonathan Carone wrote: April 5th, 2021, 3:01 pm
thepostman wrote: April 5th, 2021, 12:55 pm That is a really good point Jon. My wife read a book recently (Jesus through middle eastern eyes) and it really opened her eyes to a brand new way to read scripture. I have it on my to read list but it has really helped add an additional context to why Jesus taught the way he did.

That has nothing to do with the culture change but it is a really interesting topic.
I actually do think it's part of a culture change that needs to happen. We need more diversity across the board in our leadership and faculty.

We are a school of predominantly white leaders (90% in Executive and Senior Leadership) leading a generation that is 49% non-white. There are a total of three non-white executives, and two of those are in the Inclusion, Diversity, and Equity roles. Over half of our total student population (59% - 53% residential and 60% online) are women yet there are only three women (10%) in senior leadership roles. The Faculty is reported to be 81% white. The Board of Trustees percentage is even higher. Our residential minority population has dropped significantly over the last six years to reportedly only 4% black in 2018 (down from 10% in 2007). In convocation, only three of the 13 convo speakers (23%) listed in the archives for 2021 were minorities. In 2020, roughly 9 of 50 events (18%) featured minority speakers.

The generation our school is trying to reach is the most ethnically diverse generation in American history yet our school isn't representative of that at all in leadership or enrollment. It begs the question: Are we striving to be the world's best Christian university or the world's best white Christian university?
This is one of the few times that I think a call for diversity isn't being woke but rather being strategic. I disagree with most public or government institutions with quotas demanding minority representation. It is inherently discriminatory. There is no defeating that. But the idea that anything mentioning outreach or global ministries is 2:1 of WASP is absurd. Any good leader knows that they should surround themselves with people that make them the dumbest in the room. Frankly, the people that can share why and how to bring the Good News to the world have been in those soceities. It isn't woke, it's strategy.

We all have to remember that what is tactically smart may not also be strategically intelligent. I would argue that Doc's Politically Incorrect was tactically brilliant, but a strategic nightmare. Standard preface of thanks to Doc, but how many people are more Evangelical in opposition to all things Liberty because of comments made to enforce Political Incorrectness? We have to remember that the Vision of the University is in support of taking the Gospel to the world, loving God with all our heart, soul, mind, and strength, and loving our neighbor as our selves.

The Word is offensive, not for the sake of being offensive but because it is Absolute Truth. It is sharper than any sword and is the only offensive weapon in the Armor of God. It can handle itself. It doesn't need me to offend on its behalf. I should be busy loving His children.
#624509
Sly Fox wrote: April 5th, 2021, 10:38 am Once again, the discussion around where those lines are drawn is significant. I consider myself theologically right of most on this board without the pharasaical baggage of my IFB background. So we are not pushing for theological drifts in dogma or even doctrine generally speaking, it is more focused on the preference categories which constitutute a significant portion of Christian worldview for better or worse.
Well put. While Fuller has gone the route of being more liberal than some of us would like, there are other seminaries such as Dallas Theological Seminary that have remained conservative for years and have made significant impact in Christendom in scholarship and publishing. Growth and influence does not necessarily equal compromise.
#624511
Jonathan Carone wrote: April 5th, 2021, 9:04 am Over 1/3 of the faculty have most of their advanced degrees from Liberty. We cannot be a world leader in theology, apologetics, and evangelism when we do not have diversity in experience, training, and approach.

Forget skin color. This right here is LU’s biggest Diversity problem
#624515
thepostman wrote: April 6th, 2021, 7:35 am Which was more my point than race. I obviously think their is some need for that but it is far from the only thing.
I wasn’t calling you out specifically. I was just highlighting a point that was getting overlooked. This is a great place to start. Once LU starts doing that (and it’s better than it used to be) a lot of the rest will take care of itself.
LaTech

Looks like we'll have to win with pitching cause t[…]

JMU for 6 games

The fact of the matter is, JMU and Liberty could n[…]

NCAA Realignment Megathread

Honestly, the ACC should've taken Wazzu and Oregon[…]

Dondi Costin - LU President

HEB is alright, but honestly Trader Joe's is my fa[…]