« Lewis Duncan, Missouri Baptists, and General Atonement | Main | Does overseas missions strategy need reform? At least one SBC professor says it does »



Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


Were the original concerns legitimate?


Big congrats!!! when I think of what your president was going through during this time, my admiration for him has grown by leaps and bounds.

peter lumpkins

Thanks, Lydia. It's been low but he continues to stand tall.

JND, I'm sure the concerns expressed by the visiting committee were legitimate from their standpoint. BPC's consistent claim since April has been, "We are compliant with the Principles of Accreditation. Please inform us specifically how we are not." The full board pressed us to find new evidence to substantiate our claim. We did.

What is more, perhaps the chief piece of evidence substantiating our consistent claim of compliance was our newest composite score of 1.8 for the 2014 fiscal year calculated by the US Dept of Ed, evidence not allowed since the deadline date passed to submit new evidence for review. However, as it turns out, we didn't have to submit it. Our case was apparently made without it.

Bill Mac



Praise His Holy Name. He's still God in the valley.

Scott Shaver


Next they'll be questioning the integrity of SACS....lol

Sounds almost as if complaints against the school had been filed under a wrong institutional name.....lol some more.

The comments to this entry are closed.