David Cloud's History of BJU

I

illinoisguy

Well-known member
Elect
Joined
Jan 1, 2019
Messages
989
Reaction score
472
Points
63
For those who are interested, a lengthy but very informative article by David Cloud on BJU.

Bob Jones University Past and Present (wayoflife.org)

I don't necessarily agree with all of Cloud's stated or implied criticisms of BJU. He says BJU is going Calvinist - if true, that doesn't bother me. Cloud is critical of the art museum, operas, Psychology Department, CCM, ecumenical connections (Reformed Presbyterians, The Gospel Coalition and a Roman Catholic speaker), etc. He reports that the Sunday morning "church" service on the BJU campus was shut down in 2013. He doesn't care much for Stewart Curter (now with the Lord) - I met Dr. Custer years ago and thought he was very gracious and scholarly. He says BJU promotes the English Standard Version, which is true. (Some years ago, a BJU-alum pastor promoted the ESV in church and sold me a leather-bound ESV for 25 cents - that was one of the nicest things he did before I left that church because of his arrogance, which I assume he learned at BJU).

He implies that C.S. Lewis is promoted at BJU, saying that "C.S. Lewis was an extremely dangerous man, and any Christian school that promotes his writings is not faithful to God's Word and is not protecting Christ's sheep." Having read some of C.S. Lewis' books including "Mere Christianity" and "Miracles," I agree with Cloud's statement, but he has not really documented that BJU is promoting Lewis - he only mentions one man who read Lewis while attending BJU - not necessarily BJU's fault.

He gripes that "BJU has always had a big dating culture which is more a reflection of American pop culture than the Bible." (One of BJU's selling points has always been that it's like a shoe factory - they "build souls, ship heels, and send them out in pairs." I personally don't have any problem with Christian colleges promoting dating and marriage - I always thought that Christian colleges were supposed to function as an effective but extremely expensive dating service. If they ever start to discourage dating, who would want to go?)

Cloud reports that "By 2019, Bob Jones University had lost more than 50% of its enrollment compared to 25 years previously, from 5,000 to 2,400." About 10 years ago a BJU administrator told me their current enrollment at that time was 2,591. Cloud's figure of 2,400 indicates a slight but not catastrophic decline of enrollment in the past decade.
 
illinoisguy said:
For those who are interested, a lengthy but very informative article by David Cloud on BJU.

Bob Jones University Past and Present (wayoflife.org)

I don't necessarily agree with all of Cloud's stated or implied criticisms of BJU. He says BJU is going Calvinist - if true, that doesn't bother me. Cloud is critical of the art museum, operas, Psychology Department, CCM, ecumenical connections (Reformed Presbyterians, The Gospel Coalition and a Roman Catholic speaker), etc. He reports that the Sunday morning "church" service on the BJU campus was shut down in 2013. He doesn't care much for Stewart Curter (now with the Lord) - I met Dr. Custer years ago and thought he was very gracious and scholarly. He says BJU promotes the English Standard Version, which is true. (Some years ago, a BJU-alum pastor promoted the ESV in church and sold me a leather-bound ESV for 25 cents - that was one of the nicest things he did before I left that church because of his arrogance, which I assume he learned at BJU).

He implies that C.S. Lewis is promoted at BJU, saying that "C.S. Lewis was an extremely dangerous man, and any Christian school that promotes his writings is not faithful to God's Word and is not protecting Christ's sheep." Having read some of C.S. Lewis' books including "Mere Christianity" and "Miracles," I agree with Cloud's statement, but he has not really documented that BJU is promoting Lewis - he only mentions one man who read Lewis while attending BJU - not necessarily BJU's fault.

He gripes that "BJU has always had a big dating culture which is more a reflection of American pop culture than the Bible." (One of BJU's selling points has always been that it's like a shoe factory - they "build souls, ship heels, and send them out in pairs." I personally don't have any problem with Christian colleges promoting dating and marriage - I always thought that Christian colleges were supposed to function as an effective but extremely expensive dating service. If they ever start to discourage dating, who would want to go?)

Cloud reports that "By 2019, Bob Jones University had lost more than 50% of its enrollment compared to 25 years previously, from 5,000 to 2,400." About 10 years ago a BJU administrator told me their current enrollment at that time was 2,591. Cloud's figure of 2,400 indicates a slight but not catastrophic decline of enrollment in the past decade.
Click to expand...
I think their peak enrollment was just over 3600 students in the early to mid 2000’s.
Cloud is either too dishonest, too dumb or too lazy to research the actual number.
Or all three.
 
Last edited:
illinoisguy said:
For those who are interested, a lengthy but very informative article by David Cloud on BJU.

Bob Jones University Past and Present (wayoflife.org)

I don't necessarily agree with all of Cloud's stated or implied criticisms of BJU. He says BJU is going Calvinist - if true, that doesn't bother me. Cloud is critical of the art museum, operas, Psychology Department, CCM, ecumenical connections (Reformed Presbyterians, The Gospel Coalition and a Roman Catholic speaker), etc. He reports that the Sunday morning "church" service on the BJU campus was shut down in 2013. He doesn't care much for Stewart Curter (now with the Lord) - I met Dr. Custer years ago and thought he was very gracious and scholarly. He says BJU promotes the English Standard Version, which is true. (Some years ago, a BJU-alum pastor promoted the ESV in church and sold me a leather-bound ESV for 25 cents - that was one of the nicest things he did before I left that church because of his arrogance, which I assume he learned at BJU).

He implies that C.S. Lewis is promoted at BJU, saying that "C.S. Lewis was an extremely dangerous man, and any Christian school that promotes his writings is not faithful to God's Word and is not protecting Christ's sheep." Having read some of C.S. Lewis' books including "Mere Christianity" and "Miracles," I agree with Cloud's statement, but he has not really documented that BJU is promoting Lewis - he only mentions one man who read Lewis while attending BJU - not necessarily BJU's fault.

He gripes that "BJU has always had a big dating culture which is more a reflection of American pop culture than the Bible." (One of BJU's selling points has always been that it's like a shoe factory - they "build souls, ship heels, and send them out in pairs." I personally don't have any problem with Christian colleges promoting dating and marriage - I always thought that Christian colleges were supposed to function as an effective but extremely expensive dating service. If they ever start to discourage dating, who would want to go?)

Cloud reports that "By 2019, Bob Jones University had lost more than 50% of its enrollment compared to 25 years previously, from 5,000 to 2,400." About 10 years ago a BJU administrator told me their current enrollment at that time was 2,591. Cloud's figure of 2,400 indicates a slight but not catastrophic decline of enrollment in the past decade.
Click to expand...
Just curious but what is your issue with C.S. Lewis?
 
Norefund said:
Just curious but what is your issue with C.S. Lewis?
Click to expand...
Not answering for Illinoisguy... while I generally enjoy the writings of CS Lews, he had some un-biblical beliefs; he didn't believe the Scriptures (he chose what he wanted to believe); he believed that new life comes through baptism, the Lord's Supper, and belief. Christianity today says that he believed in baptismal regeneration. He also believed in Purgatory... I'm sure there is more if one cares to do the research.
 
Walt said:
Not answering for Illinoisguy... while I generally enjoy the writings of CS Lews, he had some un-biblical beliefs; he didn't believe the Scriptures (he chose what he wanted to believe); he believed that new life comes through baptism, the Lord's Supper, and belief. Christianity today says that he believed in baptismal regeneration. He also believed in Purgatory... I'm sure there is more if one cares to do the research.
Click to expand...
I appreciate the answer.
 
Some C.S. Lewis quotes: On Substitutionary Atonement - "According to that theory God wanted to punish men for having deserted and joined the Great Rebel, but Christ volunteered to be punished instead, and so God let us off. Now I admit that even this theory does not seem to me quite so immoral and so silly as it used to; but that is not the point I want to make. What I came to see later on was that neither this theory nor any other is Christianity. . . . The one most people have heard is the one I mentioned before - the one about our being let off because Christ had volunteered to bear a punishment instead of us. Now on the face of it that is a very silly theory. If God was prepared to let us off, why on earth did He not do so? And what possible point could there be in punishing an innocent person instead?" - "Mere Christianity," pp. 42, 44.

On Salvation by Works: "There are 3 things that spread the Christ life to us: baptism, belief, and that mysterious action which different Christians call by different names - Holy Communion, the Mass, the Lord's Supper. . . . Christians have often disputed as to whether what leads the Christian home is good actions, or Faith in Christ. I have no right really to speak on such a difficult question, but it does seem to me like asking which blade in a pair of scissors is most necessary. . . . The first half is, 'Work our your own salvation with fear and trembling' - which looks as if everything depended on us and our good actions, but the second half goes on, 'For it is God who worketh in you' - which looks as if God did everything and we nothing. I am afraid that is the sort of thing we come up against in Christianity. I am puzzled, but I am not surprised. You see, we are now trying to understand, and to separate into water-tight compartments, what exactly God does and what man does when God and man are working together. And, of course, we begin by thinking it is like two men working together, so that you could say, 'He did this bit and I did that.' But this way of thinking breaks down. God is not like that. He is inside you as well as outside: even if we could understand who did what, I do not think human language could properly express it. In the attempt to express it different Churches say different things. But you will find that even those who insist most strongly on the importance of good actions tell you you need Faith; and even those who insist most strongly on Faith tell you to do good actions. At any rate that is as far as I go." -Mere Christianity," pp. 47-48, 115-116.

Lewis believed that Buddhists could be saved: "There are people in other religions who are being led by God's secret influence to concentrate on those parts of their religion which are in agreement with Christianity, and who thus belong to Christ without knowing it. For example, a Buddhist of good will may be led to concentrate more and more on the Buddhist teaching about mercy and to leave in the background (though he might still say he believed) the Buddhist teaching on certain other points." - "Mere Christianity," p. 162.

Lewis believed in evolution - "Perhaps a modern man can understand the Christian idea best if he takes it in connection with evolution. . . . " - "Mere Christianity," pp. 169-171. Read that passage for the context and it will be clear that Lewis accepted evolution, which on p. 50 he described as a "biological fact."

Lewis rejected the inerrancy of the Old Testament: "The Hebrews, like other peoples, had mythology: but as they were the chosen people so their mythology was the chosen mythology - the mythology chosen by God to be the vehicle of the earliest sacred truths, the first step in that process which ends in the New Testament where truth has become completely historical. Whether we can ever say where, in this process of crystallization, any particular Old Testament story falls, is another matter. I take it that the memoirs of David's court come at one end of the scale and are scarcely less historical than St. Mark or Acts; and that the Book of Jonah is at the opposite end." - "Miracles," p. 139.

Sheldon Vanauken, a Lewis admirer, states in his book "Under the Mercy," that Lewis "believed in prayers for the dead and frequent confession. Nowhere in 'Mere Christianity' or his other writings is there any mention of either of the two great Protestant doctrines of salvation-by-faith-alone and Sola Scriptura. . . . . he prepared my mind for the Catholic Church. . . . And, indeed, a great many devoted readers of Lewis have become Catholic." - "Under the Mercy," pp. 217-218. Vanauken gives testimonies from C.S. Lewis followers who were converted to Catholicism by reading Lewis' writings, which Vanauken regards as a good thing. I have read all these books that I have cited, so I am not just taking David Cloud's word for it that Lewis is "extremely dangerous," but I do heartily agree with Cloud on that point.
 
Last edited:
I'd take most of what Mr. Cloud has to say with a grain of salt...at least a spoon full of sugar if we're going to have to swallow much of his hogwash. On some things he is correct, but, even a broken watch is correct twice a day. That doesn't mean it's correct all the time, and Cloud DEFINITELY isn't correct a majority of the time. He doesn't check his facts, blows statistics out of proportion, and is an exaggerator of the greatest degree. I know many of the graduates from BJU, and I have to say they're some of the best people I know.
 
illinoisguy said:
Some C.S. Lewis quotes: On Substitutionary Atonement - "According to that theory God wanted to punish men for having deserted and joined the Great Rebel, but Christ volunteered to be punished instead, and so God let us off. Now I admit that even this theory does not seem to me quite so immoral and so silly as it used to; but that is not the point I want to make. What I came to see later on was that neither this theory nor any other is Christianity. . . . The one most people have heard is the one I mentioned before - the one about our being let off because Christ had volunteered to bear a punishment instead of us. Now on the face of it that is a very silly theory. If God was prepared to let us off, why on earth did He not do so? And what possible point could there be in punishing an innocent person instead?" - "Mere Christianity," pp. 42, 44.

On Salvation by Works: "There are 3 things that spread the Christ life to us: baptism, belief, and that mysterious action which different Christians call by different names - Holy Communion, the Mass, the Lord's Supper. . . . Christians have often disputed as to whether what leads the Christian home is good actions, or Faith in Christ. I have no right really to speak on such a difficult question, but it does seem to me like asking which blade in a pair of scissors is most necessary. . . . The first half is, 'Work our your own salvation with fear and trembling' - which looks as if everything depended on us and our good actions, but the second half goes on, 'For it is God who worketh in you' - which looks as if God did everything and we nothing. I am afraid that is the sort of thing we come up against in Christianity. I am puzzled, but I am not surprised. You see, we are now trying to understand, and to separate into water-tight compartments, what exactly God does and what man does when God and man are working together. And, of course, we begin by thinking it is like two men working together, so that you could say, 'He did this bit and I did that.' But this way of thinking breaks down. God is not like that. He is inside you as well as outside: even if we could understand who did what, I do not think human language could properly express it. In the attempt to express it different Churches say different things. But you will find that even those who insist most strongly on the importance of good actions tell you you need Faith; and even those who insist most strongly on Faith tell you to do good actions. At any rate that is as far as I go." -Mere Christianity," pp. 47-48, 115-116.

Lewis believed that Buddhists could be saved: "There are people in other religions who are being led by God's secret influence to concentrate on those parts of their religion which are in agreement with Christianity, and who thus belong to Christ without knowing it. For example, a Buddhist of good will may be led to concentrate more and more on the Buddhist teaching about mercy and to leave in the background (though he might still say he believed) the Buddhist teaching on certain other points." - "Mere Christianity," p. 162.

Lewis believed in evolution - "Perhaps a modern man can understand the Christian idea best if he takes it in connection with evolution. . . . " - "Mere Christianity," pp. 169-171. Read that passage for the context and it will be clear that Lewis accepted evolution, which on p. 50 he described as a "biological fact."

Lewis rejected the inerrancy of the Old Testament: "The Hebrews, like other peoples, had mythology: but as they were the chosen people so their mythology was the chosen mythology - the mythology chosen by God to be the vehicle of the earliest sacred truths, the first step in that process which ends in the New Testament where truth has become completely historical. Whether we can ever say where, in this process of crystallization, any particular Old Testament story falls, is another matter. I take it that the memoirs of David's court come at one end of the scale and are scarcely less historical than St. Mark or Acts; and that the Book of Jonah is at the opposite end." - "Miracles," p. 139.

Sheldon Vanauken, a Lewis admirer, states in his book "Under the Mercy," that Lewis "believed in prayers for the dead and frequent confession. Nowhere in 'Mere Christianity' or his other writings is there any mention of either of the two great Protestant doctrines of salvation-by-faith-alone and Sola Scriptura. . . . . he prepared my mind for the Catholic Church. . . . And, indeed, a great many devoted readers of Lewis have become Catholic." - "Under the Mercy," pp. 217-218. Vanauken gives testimonies from C.S. Lewis followers who were converted to Catholicism by reading Lewis' writings, which Vanauken regards as a good thing. I have read all these books that I have cited, so I am not just taking David Cloud's word for it that Lewis is "extremely dangerous," but I do heartily agree with Cloud on that point.
Click to expand...
I think I'll read Mere Christianity now. Thanks for the quotes.
 
Interesting. When I visited the BJU campus with some teenagers from my church in 2014, the recruiters boasted that they had 4,500 students on campus during the 2013-2014 academic year. Naturally, I assumed that the approximately 2,400 people the University now has represented a precipitous drop in enrollment. Does anybody here have an idea as to why BJU representatives would have given such flagrantly erroneous information if it were not true?
 
I know few people who haven't read Mere Christianity. Neither they nor I came away with belief in the sacraments or other trappings of Romanism. (The Anglican Church is Rome's stepchild).

In additon, Miracles, The Abolition of Man, The Pilgrim's Regress, Surprised by Joy, The Screwtape Letters, and Reflections on the Psalms were the biggest helps in removing the scales from my eyes to some degree.

Lewis was a light in the shadow of Materialism that enveloping the world.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top