At the last Regent breakfast at the New Orleans SBL, I had the opportunity to share with some friends that I had become an investor. After finishing my PhD in 1996, I was an adjunct for a year and a half, and after that I began to teach pro bono in Africa for period of eight years between 1998-2006. During that period, my wife and I started the Barnabas Venture, so that we could raise funding for scholarships to make up for the lack of qualified African professors in French-speaking Africa. Then, with some spare time on my hands between trips to Africa, I began to dream about how we could make more money so that we would be able to give even more than ever before. That is when I began to take some serious risks in our personal and registered DIY trading accounts.
When I shared this with Prof. Rikk Watts who presided the Regent breakfast he was extraordinarily positive. I particularly appreciated his encouragement to “thrive”. I spent some time one evening with a number of Regent alumni, both men and women (Prof. Watts was there too), and I appreciated their joie de vivre, as we had a time of sharing in the apartment of an alumnus, and then we went to listen to live jazz music in New Orleans. I took my leave after listening to some spirited trombone solos. It was a great time.
Recently someone asked me in the comments section if I was going to sue Prof. Stackhouse. I pretty much hold that as Christians we can be wronged because Christ forgives us. This person then said that he/she was planning to sue Regent because of being forced to accept Intelligent Design. I find that unacceptable. I am not interested in winning a battle in the courts. The courts are predominantly leftist institutions and I am a conservative. I hate it when those who can’t get their way through legislation force their agenda through court-made law. This is an usurpation of democracy. I would hope to be able instead to make cogent arguments for my views and hopefully win in the court of public opinion.
I am now told by a member of the Regent staff that my blog is being read with “great interest and passion”. This surprises and daunts me. And I feared that my blogs would be misinterpreted as the rantings of malcontent. But I admit that my recent postings are based upon a narrow experience with just a few from the Regent community: debates with the student PoserorProphet, interactions with full-time Prof. Stackhouse on his blog, and my recent reading of some writings of a summer-school professor, Dr. Diewert. But this is an admittedly small sample of what Regent College has to offer and I am by no means writing off the school. So I asked a few people what they thought, including a full-time professor at a theological school with years of experience in administration. For the most part, they have encouraged me not to back down. Indeed, I had the impression that as someone outside of academics, I am able to say certain things insiders might wish to say, but for various reasons are not permitted. E.g., I can openly argue that the diversity created by affirmative action has seriously lowered quality–a position usually only maintained by retired professors who no longer fear repercussions for expressing unpopular opinions. I can also see why students would be reluctant to criticize the administration or a faculty member, or why fellow professors would hesitate to criticize their colleagues.
I am an alumnus and an historical supporter of Regent College and no lawsuit has entered my head. I am appalled by the person who suggests taking a lawsuit against Regent. But I’ve questioned the wisdom of allowing certain anti-capitalist and anarchist tendencies to find a home at Regent because I am wondering aloud in the blogosphere how those who are making the money which supports theological education, through risk taking and hard work, should react when that education evidently promotes views which if implemented would undermine their ability to “thrive”–and this doesn’t apply to Regent College only. Obviously Regent is a wonderfully diverse place and there must be some differences of opinions, at least I hope that there is. And one could question why I would chose the public space called “the internet” to try to initiate a discussion. Well the answer to that is quite simple: It seems entirely appropriate to me to express the disagreements that I have with the views of Prof. Stackhouse, PoserorProphet or Dr. Dave Diewert, here in the blogosphere, because that is where I became acquainted with their views.
The Righteous Investor 
As a recent Regent grad, I wanted to let you know that you have indeed run across a small sample of Regent College’s current (or recent) population. It is not, by any means, a part of the population that should be ignored – but a part that needs to be read in balance with the whole in order to provide a “whole” picture of Regent College (or, indeed, of the church). All three of the voices you mention are known to me. And, for the most part, I would say these voices are an important counter to some of the more generally held views in the church, which are perhaps generally held without any thought of the reason behind them. If you would like to hear from more voices, and thus gain a clearer picture of the school, Regent College now offers its chapel talks as free downloads at regentaudio.com.
I’m also somewhat saddened by your comments regarding affirmative action, but as I was not a part of that initial conversation, I will not delve too deeply into that at this point. I will, however, note the following: While I don’t necessarily agree with the basic principles behind affirmative action, I do see some value in changing the world of academia to be less vividly male. And I say that with no bitterness – but only recognizing that there is value in having both sexes involved in the education of young minds (or minds of any age), and realizing that most male professors are able to put more time into their jobs because they have a wife taking care of home and family. Instead oft dismissing affirmative action as lowering the quality of education, it might be more appropriate to take the more complex route of recognizing that there is a very real underlying problem that affirmative action is attempting to address – whether or not you feel affirmative action is an appropriate solution. I think my question to you would be: if not affirmative action, then what? I don’t mean that to sting, however, it’s a question I am also asking of myself.
Thanks for making me think!