Jump to content

MGB: UNT's future nonconference opponents


Brett Vito

Recommended Posts

Out of curiosity, what are Baylor, Notre Dame, and most of the Big East chuch schools' thoughts on this subject? TCU and SMU for that matter.

Baylor, I know from my wife's undergrad education, has a class in either religious history or biblical history that's either universal mandatory or mandatory for most courses of study. One of the first class periods involves the professor discussing inconsistencies between Genesis 1 and Genesis 2, then stopping class early in case the thought that the Bible might not be literal truth is devastating to students in the course.

Apparently, one or two Baylor kids per course will come from upbringings that are seriously challenged by the notion. For the most part, the only real complications come during summer sessions, when students from other schools (she specifically mentioned ORU) with a stricter creationist doctrine are taking classes at Baylor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no denying that theories of origins are a big point of contention for many. We use the same textbooks you guys use but view it from a different worldview. Outside of origins, which is a tiny slice of the educational experience, you wouldn't be able to distinguish any of our science classes from anybody else's.

I'm sorry but you can't compartmentalize this away. This seems to be a clear case of "if faith and science disagree, we have decided faith triumphs." If the theological leadership can decide that for this, they can do it for the entirety of the scientific method if they so choose.

Lack of a PhD is an enormous concern for academia. Sure fans on a message board or even staff at in the athletic department may not care, but the process and experience of original research and and peer reviewed publication is considered to be the seminal event for faculty and leadership at universities.

You didn't address lack of tenure. That is also incredibly important because it shields the faculty from non academic influence, including theological leadership. Which is no doubt why Liberty has chosen this route.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Out of curiosity, what are Baylor, Notre Dame, and most of the Big East chuch schools' thoughts on this subject? TCU and SMU for that matter.

The teaching of creationist courses isn't the issue. I am sure you can take a religious studies course at NT that will do the same, it may even be taught by someone who believes in creationism and not evolution.

The problem is that a non academic leadership then hires, influences and censures leadership and "faculty" in the biology department to teach creationism.

The problem is also that a lack of tenure means the "faculty" can not stand up to this influence since they are at will hires.

Those problems would be a huge barrier, one I don't think could be overcome, when it comes to the NT president voting yes on membership for Liberty... and can you imagine the reaction at Rice?

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Please review our full Privacy Policy before using our site.