Withdraw Bible College from UPC
 

If the president/founder of a bible college wants to withdraw out of the upc will he be able to keep the bible college he founded?

Someone like a Nathaniel Wilson who's Bible School is tied into his chrch, could pull out his Bible School...

But no one could pull out CLC, IBC, TBC, Gateway.....

That depends upon ownership of the property and such. You could conceivably have a situation where the founder pulls out and takes the name only, the property belonging to some sort of district of other entity.

The UPC "endorsed" Bible Schools are not owned and controlled by the UPCI itself (the exception being UGST). Rather each school meets certain standards and acknowledges specific beliefs in order to attain an endorsement from the UPCI. Both the school and the UPCI and walk away from that agreement at anytime and for any reason.

What happens to the property and such then depends upon ownership.

Thanks for answering my question

It would be extremely difficult to pull them out. In the case of Gateway, which is owned and controled by the Missouri District of the UPCI you would have to have a situation where the majority of churches in the MO district wanted to pull the whole district out. Then they could go whatever direction they pleased.

Or you could have a situation where the Missouri District came to be overtaken by some strange new doctrine- say one involving canned ravioli. The canned ravioli may be so offensive to the rest of the org that HQ rescinds its endorsement of the school. (That might seem silly, but have you seen the canned ravioli there?)

What about a Bible college started by a Missionary?

Wow, that would be interesting - just from the geo-political angles.

Property in many developing nations is so often determined by who totes the most AK47's. So the ownership of land and buildings, while subject to law, may be as shaky as the regime holding power- something to keep in mind when praying for our missionaries.

My understanding is that the schools that are endorsed by the UPC FM division are under the ownership and control of the national church bodies. For example a UPC Bible School in Kenya is owned and controled by the legal entity known as the UPC of Kenya. It's constitution and manual would describe anything else further.

In some countries, the "church" has to be licensed by the government in order to operate. For practical purposes, in some countries you have denominations sort of lumped together under such licenses. I don't think property ownership is effected, but again, the whole paradigm of freedom that we're used to in North America goes out the window in far too many places in the world. Setting up a school is a real gamble and and an act of faith.

Overseas, the Bible Schools are under control of the organization....in a few instances Missionaries have bought properties in their own name and when there was a split/division it got ugly as to who owned the Bible School....

Loaded question. I suppose you are referring to the one that was bought and paid for with FMD money.
A missionary is an employee of Foreign Missions - the school or property does not belong to him, it belongs to his employer who paid for it.

Next question?

Looks like we will see, doesn't it.

:D

aren't these non-accredited colleges? Doesn't that kinda make them pretend colleges?

Isn't this like asking if my imaginary friend is in a fight with you if I'm in a fight with you?

RC, you may not know but there are secular colleges that are also not accredited, and never intend to be. Why? Because they refuse to be regulated by the government or some independent liberal body. But, many them have degrees that are more readily accepted by companies and schools that know them than those from other accredited schools.

Some schools are set up to serve a particular industry or segment of society, and those who are in that industry or segment need nothing but the schools reputation, faculty and staff listings, etc., to determine that they receive that school with honor.

Such is the case of our Bible Colleges. They are received of the fellowship with as great an honor, or greater honor, than another accredited school.

BTW, UGST was founded with a desire to eventually be accredited, thus making it easier to afterwards accredit our undergraduate schools. You first must have unaccredited doctorates before accredited doctorates. Then you get accredited bachelor's where they were unaccredited before. Almost every movement has gone through this cycle. It takes years. We are about 2/3 of the way through that cycle.

Oh, BTW. Almost every movement that has sprung up has lost its originality of doctrine, focus and passion when it does get all the way through the cycle. It tends to become more blended with the other denominations. Or, we could just say they become more mainstream, whichever sounds more appealing.

????

Urshan Graduate School of Theology....is that what you're asking?

Yes.

Thanks.

Yeah, I am fully aware of all that as someone who is seriously considering a Bible college of some sort as a transfer destination...

I was just being difficult and thought hte "imaginary friend" line was humorous...

Don't know about the others - but CLC is not owned or financially supported in any way by the Western District or Headquarters. It is owned and supported totally by Christian Life Center. I don't see my pastor pulling out over Res 4 - but IF he did, the college would go with him, I feel quite confident. :hypercoffee

I thought IBC was operated by Calvary Tabernacle too.... *shrug*

How can UGST being accredited help the other schools? They are all independent of each other.

Ummmmmm.... not by what i've been told.... I recall that the Missouri District transferred ownership and all financial responsibility in it's entirety to the new Gateway Foundation (which is a seperate entity from the UPC)....

It is.