Bob Jones University Granted National Accreditation
Greenville, S.C., November 8, 2006 â Meeting in Nashville, Tenn., the 16-member accrediting commission of the Transnational Association of Christian Colleges and Schools yesterday voted unanimously to grant institutional accreditation to Bob Jones University.
TRACS is a national accreditation body offering institutional accreditation to Christian colleges, universities and seminaries. It is recognized by both the U.S. Department of Education and the Council for Higher Education Accreditation and is a member of the International Network for Quality Assurance Agencies in Higher Education.
"Attaining accreditation is a stamp of approval on our curriculum, faculty, student services and facilities," says Dr. Gary Weier, BJU Vice President for Administration whose responsibilities include oversight of the University's academic program. "It also verifies that we have the processes in place to sustain...
Freewiller: you really should read up on the differences between Calvinism and Hypercalvinism before you toss out ignorant statements. It's really to your benefit. I'm not trying to be harsh here, but I have advised you before to read materials that would educate you on the matter and so far you have not indicated any willingness to do so.
Yamil: "if God has arbitrarily chosen those that will be saved then the Gospel is not much of good news and there is no need for you to go out looking for them"
Point 1: The gospel is ALWAYS good news, how can you even suggest otherwise with such a flimsy argument? NO true christian is promoting the gospel as anything other than the good news.
Point 2: You are using human reasoning when you state there is no reason to take the gospel "to them" This statement is opposition to HYPER calvivism (which I too oppose). I believe in the command to go into all the world... So when you use these arguments, make sure you state that you oppose hypercalvinism.
Point 3 God does not "drag them in" as you stated. This is not scriptural. It is in your imagination, but it is not true. When born again, a man willingly comes to Christ. There is no fighting and "dragging" as you say. Who is promoting such an idea as "dragging men" I do not know of anyone except the human reasoning and arguments of men with no scriptural basis for such an argument. I do believe it is a straw man if ever I saw one. Let's stick to thus saith the LORD, and refrain from attacking good men who love and promote the gospel by using arguments that they themselves never promote.
Then thank God they were not good Calvinists. However, I'm certain they would have assured you that any Calvinism with no desire to evangelize the lost is fatally flawed, such as in the Hypercalvinist system. I agree. And, like them, I do not believe it is inconsistent to be truthful to the call of Scripture to evangelize, knowing that God has ordained that self-same means of preaching the Gospel to effectually call the elect (Acts 16:14 again, and Romans 10:17). We preach the Gospel, and God opens the hearts of and shows grace upon whomever He will. And, for the most part in Scripture, people are only saved in the NT by hearing the gospel preached (one could build a good Scriptural case I think that the salvation of John the Baptist occurred even before his birth, since Scripture says in Luke 1:15 that he would be filled with the Holy Spirit in the womb). In both OT and NT in my reading, people are only saved by God's revealing of Himself to them, which I believe can occur outside of the preaching of the Gospel (in the case of John the Baptist) but would not occurr today. Though it is possible, as I've heard reports of Muslim conversions by having dreams of Christ as Lord and God revealing Himself to them.
"Ah, don't judge a theological system by your personal experience, my friend. To accuse Calvinism of being conducive to evangelical laziness would frankly shock Spurgeon as well as several very Calvinist missionaries such as Carey and the like. You can argue that their actions betrayed their convictions, but historically I think the case can be made that these men evangelized *because* of their Calvinist convictions."
Byron, if you read their Biographies they went against the grain of the Calvinist mindset. They were in conflict with the Calvinist world. If they were Calvinists, then they certainly were not good ones.
Mike from New York: please understand I am not a Hypercalvinist. I disavow that theological system, with vehemence. That does not mean that I have not had errors in my theological thinking before, some of which included Hypercalvinist errors, for which I had to be corrected. So when I say I disavow Hypercalvinism, it is simply meant as a truthful statement of intention.
Also the Hypercalvinist and the Arminian both share a philosophical error in reasoning. Arminians based on their faulty theology assert that man must be able to repent because he is commanded to do so. Hypercalvinists assert that it is illogical to command men to repent when they cannot do so. So they make the command and ability to repent coextensive, which denies the truths taught in the Bible. The Arminian softens Ephesians 2:1 for example and denies "deadness" in sins and transgressions. Hypercalvinists deny that the gospel must be preached to all.
Ah, don't judge a theological system by your personal experience, my friend. To accuse Calvinism of being conducive to evangelical laziness would frankly shock Spurgeon as well as several very Calvinist missionaries such as Carey and the like. You can argue that their actions betrayed their convictions, but historically I think the case can be made that these men evangelized *because* of their Calvinist convictions. They knew God had commanded all to repent and believe the Gospel, and they were faithful to that, knowing that God would also open hearts to believe the Gospel (see Acts 16:14, for example).
The number of elect has not been settled? One's destiny has not been settled? Calvinist or Arminian, if you believe in the omniscience of God and at least accept the absolute foreknowledge of God, then you affirm that election and destiny are both "settled" as to reality and certainty. Open Theism denies the classical definition of omniscience and redefines it so that God cannot know all things (such as free-will choices) from what I understand.
"But, election, predestination, and all of that, are NOT the gospel, of course. Those truths are meant for the study of more mature Christians (and mature Christians have intelligently disagreed for centuries over these truths, which if anything, is a testimony to the depth and complexity of the nature and workings of God). And I believe these truths must be revealed by God.
I'm not even a Calvinist when it comes to preaching the gospel, but a three point Christian. It's all about Christ: Death, Burial, Resurrection. On these three precious truths rests all the glorious grace of God and hope for humankind."