Talk:Columbia International University/Archive 1

Archive 1

Untitled

I have reverted three major edits for the following reason:

• In regards to the requirement concerning doctrinal standards, everything written there was accurate and verifiable. In particular, if you look at the CIU application for employment, the section concerning doctrinal standards explicitly states that Bible teachers (which includes professors of Bible) and individuals in undisclosed positions must affirm premillienialism as a condition of employment, just as they must affirm all the doctrinal standards as a part of employment. I fail to see why this section was changed to “although they may be hired even if they do not hold to that doctrine” since it apparently is not the case. Certainly, the standard is not in place for all positions, but the prior wording and the current wording were both very explicit and precisely mirrored the wording of the employment application.

• The incident with Dr. Rommen occurred. By some accounts it was good that it happened, but others he was really unfairly worked over. Regardless, it happened, it is illustrative of the point, and as it was worded, it made no value judgment as to the propriety of the action.

• The statistics concerning percentages of student enrollment are available on the CIU website, as are the statistics listed in the infobox at the top of the article. There is no specific reason I can think of for deleting them. Furthermore, if the percentages are to be deleted for whatever reason, it stands to reason that the ones statistics in the infobox should be deleted as well since they come from the same page on the CIU website. Since they were not disturbed, it was clear that those statistics were desired and therefore it was my judgment (as the person who originally put it there) that the percentages should have been retained as well. For this reason, I have restored them.

Though there is material in the section of lifestyle standards which I think could stand some work, I will refrain since there seems to be a flurry of activity over this subject and I fear my changes would only be quickly lost in the next flash of edits.

129.252.184.148 21:09, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

CIU Controversies

I question the neutrality of the "Controversy" section. It strikes me as written by someone who is angry or opposed to the former President, in light of how no other controversies are named (yet the school has seen its fair share of controversies over the decades, including the founding President Robert McQuilkin being ejected from the American Keswick associatrion, Robertson McQuilkin demanding the de-segregation of the school before he would accept the Presidency in 1968, Dr. Millert's attempt to eliminate the phrase "Victorious Christian Life", the firing of Dr. Rommen, etc).

Sorry, I forgot to do 64.183.164.137 17:39, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

-- Jack Brooks

Perhaps the firing of Dr. Rommen was not mentioned in the Controversies section becuase it is briefly discussed in the section on Denominational Relationships. As to the other controversies (including the current one), I cannot speak to as I know little about them. Perhaps someone who does have sufficient knowledge of past CIU controversies should edit that section, if it needs to be included at all (I'm not sure it does).

jackturner3 19:16, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:NewCIULogo.gif

Image:NewCIULogo.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 16:54, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

I have reinserted the portion over CIU controversy because while the content is subject to criticism most of what is said seems to be factual. Please edit accordingly. Editing out this entire section is censorship. I would agree that it seems to be written in anger but that's why this is Wikipedia people. Please feel free to edit out the emotional content and expand on the section. I would highly encourage those with the facts about other controversies to please write this information in.

____________________

I expanded the Controversy section, to give it a broader historical overview of that sub-topic. I highlighted two theological controversies pertaining to the so-called Keswick theology, and two social policy controversies pertaining to the school's past practice of racial segregation. I believe the segregation issues have historical significance, as well as balancing the tendency of "controversies" to put the institution in a bad light (in these cases, the actions CIU took were ethically commendable changes in spite of being controversial).

I greatly reduced the material re. Dr. Murray but did not delete it altogether, because although its prior lengthiness was more "insider gossip" than material suitable to an encyclopedia article, the issue itself merits inclusion under the sub-heading due to the fact that it spilled out into the blogosphere. This was a first for the CIU administration to deal with.

I am an alumnus of CIU, having worked there for its extension education office in a variety of administrative/educational roles for 10 years (1986-1996).

Jack Brooks 15:38, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

________________

Conflict over content in Denominational Relationships Section

Correction: I spoke with Dr. Donald Hamilton of CIU (longtime homiletics professor and Doctor of Ministry program director) this week (June 4/07), who informed me that CIU does accept Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox students. So, based on that information from a current administrator at CIU, I removed the material that said that CIU does not accept such students.

I added a paragraph to "Controversies" regarding the firing of Dr. Ed Rommen. My knowledge of the school's interpretation of its own statement of faith as "evangelical Protestant" arises from my employment there (1986-1996), and more particularly to personal friendship with seminary faculty who described to me how the school responded to Dr. Rommen's claim that he could give a bonafide subscription to the statement of faith.

Jack Brooks 12:36, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

I recall a few years ago an Orthodox friend of mine wanted to take a class or two at CIU but was prohibited precisely because they were orthodox. If I'm not mistaken, the requirement to be a member of a Protestant church is also still on the job application form. I'll look into this further as I have time.

jackturner3 20:49, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

I telephoned CIU today and asked them to check this page, with specific regard to their current admission policy for Roman Catholic or Eastern Orthodox students.

Jack Brooks 20:19, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

What was the outcome and is it available in writing? jackturner3 14:55, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Just moments ago I spoke to a staff worker in the graduate school's admissions office about whether the school accepts Roman Catholic or Orthodox students. He said that he knew for a certainty that currently there are Roman Catholic students studying there. They are, however, required to affirm agreement with the CIU Statement of Faith as a condition of admission and graduation. So I would surmise these students must be Roman Catholic in family association, but not Roman Catholic in a theological sense. I left it this way: I exhorted the fellow with whom I spoke to make sure the director of his department is made aware of this article in Wikipedia, and that someone ought to review it for up-to-date accuracy. I think I will leave it to them to edit that topic. I contributed to the "Controversies" section because I worked for CIU during the time period that two of the incidents occurred, and I had personal access through the university library to old books and files which referred to the other matters.

64.183.164.137 16:43, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

It seems like the controversy over the content in this section, Denominational Relationships is related to personal interest here. It is obvious that CIU has doctrinal criteria for admitting students into its various programs, and it follows the guidelines that it has set for itself. It is clear that CIU has doctrinal standards for its faculty members, and it has been discussed in this Wiki article specifically as it relates to Dr. Rommen's situation. It seems a bit contrived to demand that a precise doctrinal standard be described in this Wiki article that is more rigid than the doctrinal standards that CIU is willing to impose upon itself and require of its students. Because CIU is inter-denominational and enrolls students from the charismatic movement and high-church liturgical backgrounds, free-will dispensationalists and five point Calvinists etc. ... the doctrinal statement is necessarily broad in its scope. Therefore, CIU can accept Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox students who read the statement of faith in a way that agrees with their beliefs and the beliefs of their ecclesiastical bodies - most of the doctrinal points, after all, are based upon the historic creeds of Christendom which were born of the early church its councils. Both Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox students embrace these creeds and confessions, and while the various protestant denominations lay claim to them as well, they are interpreted in different ways by each body. If CIU wishes to more rigidly define its doctrinal statement in order to exclude Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox students (something that some contributors to this Wiki article appear to desire), then it will, by necessity, diminish the inter-denominational nature of the institution. CIU does not appear to be inclined in this direction.

The purpose of a Wiki article is to give facts, not to force an agenda. It is helpful that the Wiki gives a bigger picture than the school website or course catalogue, but it is inappropriate to try to advance a "cause" through this public-facing website. If there are genuine concerns about denominational relationships and affiliations, then go to the administration and/or the board and raise your concerns.

In the interim, it appears that CIU is willing to allow those outside of the Protestant Evangelical church to study in its institution and benefit from its strong emphasis on missions, biblical studies, evangelism, etc., then it is doing a noble thing. I am certain that Catholics and Orthodox do not agree with many of the teachings at the school, but these "teachings" are not, at present, required for admission and graduation. One could likely cobble together a belief system identical to that of a traditional Roman Catholic or Eastern Orthodox Student by gleaning various "beliefs" from its vast and incredibly diverse student body. This is simply the nature of the beast. Until CIU decides to adopt a strictly Anabaptist, Reformed or other rigidly defined doctrinal system, I think it would be best to let CIU decide who is a suitable student and who is not. It clearly has different, well-defined standards for its faculty - this is quite reasonable.

___________________________________

I agree with the previous poster to a degree. It should be clear to the reader that CIU is, theologically speaking, a conservative, Protestant, evangelical institution. It has a longstanding historical connection to the Keswick movement, a strong unofficial relationship with the Southern Presbyterian Church (much of which became the Presbyterian Church in America), and an internal history of favoring Reformed theology and criticizing dispensationalism, within the general boundaries of evangelical doctrinal pluralism. It should not, however, be implicitly lumped in with militantly Fundamentalist schools such as Bob Jones University or Liberty University.

Jack Brooks 03:43, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Img540.jpg

Image:Img540.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 00:40, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:NewCIULogo.gif

Image:NewCIULogo.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 08:59, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Redirection Issue

Should there really be a redirect from "Columbia Bible College?" This doesn't seem to be necessary--the names are completely different. This might even represent a conflict of interest. Nathanbrisk (talk) 23:00, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

The original name of the institution was "Columbia Bible College." It is still frequently referred to by that name in the local area. However, if a conflict does arise, it would be very easy to change the redirect page to a disambiguation page. -- jackturner3 (talk) 13:39, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Columbia International University. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090214080828/http://sacscoc.org/Dec2008AccreditationActionsandPublicDisclosureStatements.asp to http://www.sacscoc.org/Dec2008AccreditationActionsandPublicDisclosureStatements.asp
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.sacscoc.org/2008%20December%20Actions%20and%20Disclosure%20Statements/Columbia%20International%20U.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:31, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

Notable Alumni

Hi. I was just passing through and noticed that "Higher Life Movement" is listed as being one of CIU's notable alumni. Of course, an alumnus of a college is supposed to be a person, not a phenomenon or a thing. Looks like an error, but I haven't been following this page so I don't want to mess anything up by "fixing" something that was done intentionally. Maybe somebody watching the page would like to address this issue.

180.183.144.153 (talk) 10:39, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. Good catch! ElKevbo (talk) 17:23, 8 July 2018 (UTC)