Want Some Answers ???


Back Ground.

I met Trevor at his home church. Without time for a decent discussion I emailed to encourage him in his ministry and to explain scientifically and theologically why I believe the earth is not (as the evolutionists say) billions of years old. I believe a respectful, warm and courteous email.

Hi Trevor

I was half expecting you might reveal the great error of my ‘young earth’ ideas. Instead its a great side-track. Apparently I’m deceptive and my education from charlatans. You write,

>>Hi Mark Many thanks for your email. You write, “I'm impressed by your defence of the faith. Having a doctorate in theology and a PhD in Christian apologetics myself.” It looks like all your undergrad and post grad was through the one organisation? It would be interesting to know what you did before becoming interested in Bible study. It does seem odd to have an extensive webpage devoted to defending your doctorate.http://www.answers.net.nz/Other/brag101.htm<<

The ‘intro’ indicates that page is “Only for Sceptics". I would need another just for you “devoted to defending” my doctorates. It’s not "odd". Read it, "A Skeptic website DENIED my qualifications, insisting Christians are "'stupid and dishonest". That's young earth creationists they speak about.

Funny but almost every young earth creationist needs to ‘defend’ their qualifications or studies. And they are dammed if they do, and dammed if they don’t. And persecuted, rejected by colleges, treated with intolerance and censored, called 'brainless fools', deceptive and even ‘wicked’. Nor permitted to submit papers critical of Darwinian evolution to colleges, or they will be failed. Teachers critical of evolution are cautioned, or fired.

It would be ‘interesting to know’ why my friendly email resulted in you searching the internet, [and my website] looking for muck on me. And my personal encouragement to you, was responded with ridicule. Of a personal nature.

>>That page has some quite bad things on it. Three points would be: 1) The website for NCIUT looks like it’s been under construction since 2000. It is a single page and is not active. NCIUT is not listed on the State Board website as being authorised for anything. http://icuf.org/schools. And the FCPC is not an accreditation agency http://fcpcamerica.org/<<

Perhaps not making enough money in their mail-order degree scams? :) Not like those State funded multi-million dollar atheistic evolutionized universities.

So what if “the FCPC” is [or isn’t] a “accreditation agency". Their role is to provide ‘private faith based institutions’ with creditability. And “distinguish quality religious based member colleges from dishonoring religious based degree mills". You didn’t read that. Go to http://fcpcamerica.org/ under “CPCA Certified FCPC Members” and read. No 21 on the list - “New Covenant International University Lake Worth, Florida [Link]”. You didn’t see that.

>>2) Name dropping various universities in bold type (like Auckland and Chicago) while there is no educational link at all is deceptive. <<

If no “name dropping”, how else would you know the standard of their thesis?

It’s not “
deceptive”. Bold type so one can understand (if able) the same “guidelines” and “manual” are used with NCIU (as specified by Auckland and Chicago univs.) Students follow the same instructions. In bold so those who criticize could check.

>>3) The seven additional “accreditation organisations” listed are not recognised by either the US Department of Education (USDE) or the Council on Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA). In fact, internet references concerning them indicate that they are accreditation mills and support mail order degree mills. To quote from the CHEA website,

“Degree mills and accreditation mills mislead and harm. In the United States, degrees and certificates from mills may not be acknowledged by other institutions when students seek to transfer or go to graduate school. Employers may not acknowledge degrees and certificates from degree mills when providing tuition assistance for continuing education. “Accreditation” from an accreditation mill can mislead students and the public about the quality of an institution. In the presence of degree mills and accreditation mills, students may spend a good deal of money and receive neither an education nor a useable credential.”<<

This is topsy-turvy here. Whether "seven additional" organisations are [or not] “recognised” by CHEA or USDE is relevant. Read my webpage. It says, “Accreditation, Affiliation and Membership are held with the following organizations” ie cross-credit acknowledged among themselves. Most colleges/univ. do that

I can't find any “
references concerning them” on either USDE & CHEA websites. So the quote from CHEA is deceptive. Why would organizations in “Taiwan” or “Canada” be mentioned anyway?

Do you really think the “National Chaplains Association”, “National Christian Counselors Association” or the “Association of Christian Pastoral Councilors” etc etc are “degree mills”? And if not mentioned by "USDE" are "mail order degree mills"? How ridiculous!

Why not email Dr K Dyson. nciu.admin@newcovenant.edu He was made a Fellow of the International Academy of Educators in the USA in 1990. Why do that, if he runs a degree mill?

>>I think a more positive way of approaching this would be just to acknowledge the school for what it is, not for what it isn't. If you learnt something from your educational experience, then that's the important thing, not the attaining of a few letters. I have friends with non-academic "degrees" and they recognise them for what they are.<<

‘I think a more positive way of approaching this would be just to acknowledge’ you shot your mouth off before asking this student the details of his study. And constructed fabricated stories from garbled quotes.

And I disagree with you. Why over-look an “important thing” about a good “education experience” ie rigor, discipline and comprehensive schooling. Nothing wrong with seeking the heights and recognition.

>>This issue needs honesty and transparency. If people cannot trust Christians in what they say about themselves, how can they be trusted with what they say concerning Science, Christ, or the Bible? Yours faithfully, Trevor Mander<<

Yes the typical response most young earth creationists get, by one avoiding the issue. Are you dealing with the issue in 'honesty or transparency'? You attack the messenger, not the message with a disappointingly rude reply.

The bottom line is not how you regard me, my schooling, but how you regard God’s Word. Since I'm regarded as dishonest, if you are really serious about “transparency”, can I give you Dr Jonathan Sarfati's book “Refuting Compromise”? “A comprehensive and biblical based” study on this issue. Or sign you up free for the Creation magazine. Let me know. The fact is, the long age myth is not a scientific fact. Plenty of scientific experts say so.

Finally, could I say respectfully; that in church; you remove your hat during a service? You might not know why. But it’s a real eye sore to see that kind of disrespect. Kind regards, Mark

(no reply as yet)