Bob Jones University Enters a New Era

[TylerR]

Don wrote:

Dr. Bob Sr meant to build an institution that taught young people how to live, not just how to make a living. Maybe you don’t value that, but I think it is extremely important. This generation needs it more than previous generations did.

Once again, here is the philosophical divide. I don’t think that is the university’s role.

I don’t think there is anything to say about this. You disagree. But my point is you have no real understanding about what this means, and you are dismissing the testimonies of bro. Barkman, Andy, and Adam as to what that meant in a practical sense. There is real spiritual value in the culture the University cultivated.

[TylerR]

• BJU has changed intercollegiate sports. How so, and why does it matter?

I offered this as an example of other changes since you seemed fixated on the rules. Prior to the intercollegiate sports, the emphasis was on intermural athletics which provided training in leadership on a much wider basis, students divided up into 40 or 50 groups or so, giving opportunity for leadership not only in sports but in evangelism and other activities. I don’t have time to explain it all, but it was a valuable experience. These groups still exist but are continually being de-emphasized and will eventually fade off the scene, I predict. Intercollegiate sports has brought in some questionable faculty (in my opinion) and a questionable spirit in addition to making the emphasis on following the “big team” rather than exercising leadership on a wider basis. Please note this is just a quick summary. I don’t have time for lengthy discussion.

[TylerR]

You are clearly passionate about the “old paths” BJU used to take. Tell me why?

Part of it is philosophy of ministry and the objectives for which the school was founded, part of it is for a return to the leadership position the school once occupied in fundamentalism. I see all of these eroding into nothing as the changes are examined on the whole. Individual changes are inevitable, but on the whole I think the University is losing a significant part of its influence and spiritual heritage.

I’ll bow out now, I am off for the rest of the day.

Now it all coalesces.

Everyone should know why people have been talking about ‘cultural fundamentalism’ for so long on this website. There are two separate and distinct ideas at play. One is the vision that Adam and Don (and others) hold to and defend as ‘true’ fundamentalism, which is much more…assertive / authoritarian and some of us (TylerR, myself) insist that true Fundamentalism does not include some of what they want it to.

I bet that’s what the FBFI has continually attacked and labeled as ‘convergence’. It’s a type of ‘fundamentalism’ but isn’t their type of fundamentalism. This type of fundamentalism has a stronghold in the FBFI. The FBFI insists that theirs is the right fundamentalism, and many of their younger generations (like Tyler, Ron Bean and I) disagree if we haven’t already walked away from that vision as… incomplete view.

Honestly, though? I think that war is over and it’s just a matter of time before everyone acknowledges it. The FBFI is fading; it’s being pulled in two directions. Some of it wants to double down and reassert it’s dominance over the younger generation, because that’s how they handled problems, and some of it is grappling with this issue by moving to the ‘harder’ right. But a bunch of us aren’t buying what they are selling anymore. We are tired of that vision.

I’ve been talking about the philosophy at BJU, at least when I was there, and a few of my concerns about current applications. Beyond that, some folks just continually want to hijack the thread and make it about something else, mostly the value of rules, whether Bible colleges even have a place, or whether one’s undergraduate degree should even be a Bible degree. Now you want to discuss “cultural fundamentalism.” Whatever.

Major thread derailment alert. Once again.

Adam, understood, but the places John E. mentioned as changing are things like eliminating outright bans on going to movie theaters, beards, and skirts shorter than tea length. Those things are what “convergents” might see as cultural fundamentalism.

That noted, I do appreciate Don’s comment about the smaller groups that at least used to characterize social/sports life there. Even at my “party school” alma mater, I was blessed by an informal set of clubs consisting of the floor at my dorm, those believers there and at my church, and “Sigma Pi Alpha Mu” fraternity. There may be something to be said for formalizing it, and downplaying the significance of college sports. Decentralization can be a wonderful thing.

You wrote:

Part of it is philosophy of ministry and the objectives for which the school was founded, part of it is for a return to the leadership position the school once occupied in fundamentalism. I see all of these eroding into nothing as the changes are examined on the whole. Individual changes are inevitable, but on the whole I think the University is losing a significant part of its influence and spiritual heritage.

I understand your position and respect it, but what you’re looking for is gone and it won’t ever come back. I appreciate that you were shaped by those experiences, and you wish that atmosphere and those times could continue. But, they just won’t. I don’t think fundamentalist Christian universities are getting worse. I just think they’re becoming different. I think the model you yearn for is the product of an certain fundamentalist Americana sub-culture that is passing away. As far as influence goes, BJU is now regionally accreddited and has several PhD programs for Seminary. It is the most academically robust fundamentalist institution in this entire country, and enrollment is growing. You should praise the Lord for all this!

I am grateful for any Christian university that is committed to instill an uncompromising Christian worldview in its students academic lives, no matter which tent the university belongs to. BJU is committed to this, even if it doesn’t use the same methods it once did. We should all be grateful and wish the institution the best.

Tyler has largely based his objections to BJU style rules on the premise that this approach delays maturity. Not in my experience. The students I went to school with at BJU were more mature, on average, than students I knew at other colleges in the Greenville, SC, area, such as Furman or Clemson. This, obviously, is only my subjective opinion, but it is my opinion based upon my experiences and observations. As a town student, I lived in Greenville and rubbed shoulders with a fair number of students from other colleges when I worked at J. C. Penny’s and Belk’s, and also in my local church. Believe me, BJU students stood out as mature leaders, and were highly sought by Greenville businesses as employees.

It is my observation that college students today are less mature than when I was in college. I suspect this is connected with cultural shifts that have given students more freedom and less responsibility. I founded a church at age 25, which I still pastor today. Looking back, I find that surprising, but at the time, it didn’t seem like a big deal. I don’t know many 25 year olds who I believe could do this today. One reason I didn’t refuse this assignment is because I knew so many other BJU students, my peers, who did the same thing. When students graduated from BJU in the 60’s and 70’s, they were usually leaders who were ready to take a significant role in society, whether in Christian work, business, education, or whatever. Today, it is more common for college graduates to need a great deal more time to mature before being able to handle significant assignments.

G.N. Barkman wrote:

It is my observation that college students today are less mature than when I was in college. I suspect this is connected with cultural shifts that have given students more freedom and less responsibility. I founded a church at age 25, which I still pastor today. Looking back, I find that surprising, but at the time, it didn’t seem like a big deal. I don’t know many 25 year olds who I believe could do this today. One reason I didn’t refuse this assignment is because I knew so many other BJU students, my peers, who did the same thing. When students graduated from BJU in the 60’s and 70’s, they were usually leaders who were ready to take a significant role in society, whether in Christian work, business, education, or whatever. Today, it is more common for college graduates to need a great deal more time to mature before being able to handle significant assignments.

Maybe you’re right. Maybe I am a very unique person. I don’t like to think I am, and my personal experiences argue against it. But, maybe you’re right … :(

I know countless young men who flourished at 18, 19 or 20 years old, had jobs of real responsibility and importance, and rose to the challenge.

Many people did this same thing who went to BJ or other Christian colleges and other secular colleges. So the difference is not between going to a BJU type place or not going. It is something entirely different. For every one of your “countless young men,” there are many more 18, 19, or 20 year olds (or more) who are out getting drunk, playing video games, treating women like dirt, and floating between jobs because they have no discipline and no one has ever expected it of them.

The other side is that many people flourished because of an environment like BJU. They were able to learn discipline and respect, how to dress and how to study, and how to live life. I had a businessman unconnected to BJU who had a lot of contact with BJU students tell me that BJU students had a leg up on students from other colleges because they knew how to dress and they were disciplined and respectful.

You were in the military right? They are known to have a few rules including the length of your hair and what you can wear, what time you have to get up, how your bed should be made, etc. It seems to me like you got most of what you are complaining that BJU is giving. The idea that 18-22 year olds don’t need rules is the strange one.

If you “cannot even fathom the kind of mindset that views 18-22 year olds as children who still need to be ‘trained for life’ ” then perhaps you need to get out more. That is far and away the vast majority of that age group, and all the evidence we need is to look around us.

If the rule way of teaching young people how to live that used to be a distinctive of BJU is an efficient method of accomplishing that goal, what other educational institutions follow that model?

Larry said:

For every one of your “countless young men,” there are many more 18, 19, or 20 year olds (or more) who are out getting drunk, playing video games, treating women like dirt, and floating between jobs because they have no discipline and no one has ever expected it of them.

and we’ve already pointed out that their parents have failed. Furthermore, it’s not apples to apples. We’re talking about children of Christians that should take doctrine and spirituality seriously. You’re including the unregenerate. Al Mohler mentioned this today on the briefing - it is up to the parents to train their child. Not BJU.

Two stories very quickly.

My sister graduated from BJU. Her friend married a guy who was a room leader / hall leader / known leader at BJU while he was there. Two years later, the guy was arrested for pedophila and sexual assault. He’s in prison now and they’re divorced. Did BJU fail in their mission to train him for life? If not, then how did he get to be a rising star in the campus?

Another story - as a GA, I had more privileges than many undergrads. One night I downloaded a copy of the video game ‘Doom’ to play. I was immediately convicted and deleted it before ever opening the ZIP file. Two days later I was contacted by the Dorm Leader, who asked me if I’d done that. I came clean, confessed, and said it was a mistake. BJU removed all my internet access for a month as punishment. How did that help ‘train me for life’?

I could give more stories but I think you see my point. Training for life is good, but draconian rules create a toxic atmosphere that encourages legalism and bitterness, not Christlikeness.

A few things:

• Your examples of military life seem to be taken from Hollywood movies. There is a world beyond bootcamp … :) Your examples (beyond haircuts) have no relationship to normal military life. This is a common misconception from people who have never served.
• Your example of 18-20 year olds who get drunk are meaningless. They’re adults, their parents may or may not have trained them well, and they should be held accountable for their own actions. Their churches should disciple them and discipline. The University can operate as a surrogate daycare if it wishes, but they should call themselves by that label - it’d make everything clearer.
• About “discipline and respect;” that is the parent’s job, not the University’s
• About “how to dress and how to study;” that is the parent’s job, not the University’s

My point about 18-20 year olds who “flourish” was about how, if they are given responsibility and treated like adults, most people actually do flourish. Remember the FMF Corpsman. Remember the MM3 in the engineroom. Remember my own anecdote about emergency dispatch. People rise to the occasion if they’re treated like adults and expected to act like ones. I’ve seen it my entire life. That was my point. I am disturbed by those who claim that isn’t possible.

There are hundreds of thousands of young men and women on active-duty right now who would laugh themselves silly at this entire conversation. I feel like I’m arguing over whether the earth is flat. I don’t believe this conversation (e.g. “BJU is goin’ down a slippery slope ‘cuz rules have changed”) would be taking place outside of Baptist fundamentalism. I was saved at 18, went into the military immediately, got married, and learned about the Christian life in a local church in Sicily while I was on active-duty. I didn’t need BJU or Maranatha, and millions of other Christian men and women didn’t need it, either. We learned about the Christian life in the crucible of real life, where we were adults, acted like adults, and held positions of grave responsibility. The local church is where discipleship happens, and the family. The University has no responsibility in these arenas - none, zippedy-do-da, nada, none.

There are many teens in my church who have have (or will have) their AA degree by the time they’re 18. They have real jobs, and are treated like adults. I’d never recommend they attend a fundamentalist Christian university, because it would be insulting to them. Some of them have considered these universities, and recoiled at being treated like children. I don’t blame them - I agree with them!

I believe this really boils down to “cultural fundamentalism,” which is nothing worth fighting for. The fundamentalist Christian university atmosphere ya’ll are looking for is rapidly disappearing, and it ain’t ever comin’ back, and praise God for big favors.

For teenagers who may be reading:

• I understand your frustration.
• I know you’re not children.
• ​The local church is your anchor, not the Christian university
• Get an AA and transfer in, or go completely online, or go military and do university for free and learn a trade and get veterans preference when you get out
• Whatever you do, spare yourselves from this silliness.

[Larry]

I know countless young men who flourished at 18, 19 or 20 years old, had jobs of real responsibility and importance, and rose to the challenge.

Many people did this same thing who went to BJ or other Christian colleges and other secular colleges. So the difference is not between going to a BJU type place or not going. It is something entirely different. For every one of your “countless young men,” there are many more 18, 19, or 20 year olds (or more) who are out getting drunk, playing video games, treating women like dirt, and floating between jobs because they have no discipline and no one has ever expected it of them.

Worth noting is that my first roommate at Michigan State had graduated from a military boarding school, and had had every bit as much discipline, and probably more, than those coming out of BJU Academy, and even some spiritual instruction, I believe. Guess who spent mere hours after his parents had left to find his first party? Guess who spent most of his first year drunk, and guess who I was amazed to see still on campus two years later? Mean drunk, too—thankfully it took well more than four beers to get him to that point. I’m not ready to say that the boarding school was horrible, or his home life, or whatever, but we can easily overstate the impact that such school based discipline can have. “Such regulations have indeed an appearance of wisdom, with their self-imposed worship, their false humility and harsh treatment of the body, but lack any value in restraining sensual indulgence.” Colossians 2:23. In our church circles, we could tell who was going to be on the van to church each week, and who was not—it was a simple task of listening to how they approached life. Putting all of those who walked away from Christ at BJU would have only kept unregenerate people there for as long as it took them to demerit out, I’m afraid.

Living in a military town (I believe our county would be the third most powerful military in the world if we seceded) I personally know or have known dozens of military folks. Usually at least half of my church is military or former military. My experience (and what I have heard from men in all branches) is that the military is not particularly great at maturing men as a whole. In many areas it does expose them to things they would not have had to deal with which has to be helpful. Tyler’s experience was obviously different but I wonder if even that was the exception to the rule. Almost all the younger military guys I know are a lot better at gaming and fornication than paying bills and being responsible. Kind of like many of the non-military guys. My point is that immaturity is everywhere. IMO a Christian college, just like the military, is a half way point between full adult responsibility and still being a kid.

Again, my point is not that the military teaches Christian character. The military analogy is merely a foil for the fact that 18-22 year olds can and do act mature in the real world, if they’re given the chance to, and extended adolescence is not encouraged. And, that is with unbelievers. THink of how much better Christians could do, with a good church behind them!? There are millions of Christians around the world, aged 18-22, from year 33 A.D to 2017, who have never gone to Christian university with a loco parentis ​mindset and have been forced to act like adults, and have flourished.

I wonder how Tyndale survived his teen years? I wonder how the writer of Hebrews, a second-generation Christian, was ever discipled? I wonder how Whitefield ever made it in life without a student handbook close at hand? I wonder how I survived? The only thing people have mentioned is that I’m “unique.” Well, I’m not. Perhaps, if Calvin had gone to BJU, he wouldn’t have killed Servetus … :)

He couldn’t have gone because of the beard. Point taken otherwise.