Talk:Moody Bible Institute

message: a well-informed section on their messianic "judaism" department would be helpful & enlightening.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:540:2:6F24:3945:F70B:BF15:A308 (talk) 06:12, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: anti-semitism

message: I removed the reference to Moody's non-participation in Title IV, as they began participating for the Fall 2010 semester. I will try to insert some more detailed information once I can find citable sources. Laughingfuzzball (talk) 09:58, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Title IV

message: "As part of the process of providing a Bible-centered education that enables students to know Christ and serve Him through His church in vocational ministry..."
Quotes like this are heavy on the Christian POV.  This article should be cleaned up to read more like an encyclopedia article and not a Moody Bible Institute viewbook.  Scrutchfield 21:21, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. I've made a pass through the text and removed or modified a number of similar quotes (the one mentioned above was deleted as unnecessary to the point of the article). I've also removed some text that was a copyvio. Stub and NPOV tags came off, as a result, to. Because the school has an overtly religious purpose, it is appropriate to leave some of the statements in the text that explain how the school achieves its distinctiveness, but hopefully these can clearly be seen as explaining the school's declared purpose in both current and historical lights, rather than reading as promotional copy for the school. I'm certainly open for more suggestions, too. Akradecki 21:43, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: This article is heavily centered around the Chicago campus, with little recognition given to the Spokane branch campus or the regional campuses in Ohio and Florida.  We should incorporate a new section into the article dealing specifically with the different campuses.--Son of thunder (talk) 17:02, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Campuses 

message: The schools announced that the Michigan Theological Seminary will be merged as an insitution into Moody's graduate school by the end of the year. It seems that the Michigan Theological Seminary article should be merged into the graduate section of Moody's article with a redirect from the Michigan Theological Seminary to this section in Moody's article if not now, when it is complete. Novaseminary (talk) 16:22, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I vote to keep the Michigan Theological Seminary article as it exists for the value of historical record as typically found in an encyclopedia.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lmollenkamp (talk • contribs) 19:17, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia is supposed to be up-to-date. The fact that Michigan Theological Seminary will have formerly existed as a separate entity can be (and should be) adequately addressed in the relevant section of the new merged section of the Moody Bible Institute article. In addition, the current and prior versions of the Michigan Theological Seminary article will continue to be available. After the merger, this page would be changed to a become a redirect to the merged section in the Moody Bible Institute article, but the article history will remain with links to prior versions. The only difference will be that when somebody types in Michigan Theological Seminary (or clicks on an outdated link), they will be sent to up-to-date information in the Moody article rather than inaccurate information in a preserved Michigan Theological Seminary article.  Novaseminary (talk) 20:44, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Since the merger is now complete and there was no other dissent, I merged the former Michigan Theological Seminary into, and redirected it to, the Graduate section of this article. Novaseminary (talk) 20:24, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Michigan Theological Seminary article merger proposal 

message: Is there any particular theology they endorse? If so shouldn't it be included in the article? Zantorzi (talk) 04:01, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Theology 

message: An IP changed the school's institutional belief to "old earth creationist" from "new earth creationsist". Another ed, Dougweller, changed it back with this edit. I think Doug misunderstood the reference, though. The reference lists schools on a scale of 1-6. Moody is listed as a five, which corresponds to the following institutional position: "God created all life forms, but they appeared in the general sequence and time frame suggested by evolutionist theory." So, the IP seems to have been correct. I have changed it back to what the IP made it with this edit. This is not a traditional reliable source, but it does purport to report on each school's self-identification in a survey. It isn't exactly clear whether this position must be held by anyone teaching or attending the school, so what exactly this institutional belief means and the weight it should be given (per WP:UNDUE, etc.) is still unclear to me. Novaseminary (talk) 18:06, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Good question, and apologies for not having read the reference carefully enough. Maybe we need to be more explicit about the source. Not just name it, but describe it? Dougweller (talk) 18:32, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: That strikes me as a good idea. I took a stab with this edit, though I'm sure it can be substantially improved upon. I also moved it out of the lead. It didn't appear elsewhere in the article and I'm not sure it is so integral to understanding the institution that it should be in the lead, at least as the lead stands now. Novaseminary (talk) 22:45, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 06:39, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

text: I teach for MBI as an adjunct faculty member, and creationism is a significant topic in my class, The Church and its Doctrines.  I can personally vouch that the textbook we use for this class, "The Moody Handbook of Theology," by Paul Enns teaches young-earth creationism.  The source attributing old-earth creationism to MBI is not reliable.  Moody's own "The Moody Handbook of Theology" which staunchly defends young earth creationism (almost to an extreme) is a much more reliable, firsthand source to use in discussing Moody's position.  In class, we encourage the students to maintain open lines of fellowship and dialog with old-earth creationists and stress the biblical non-negotiable that God is ultimately the creator of the universe.  But this is not the same as endorsing the old-earth position.  This statement should be removed from the article since it does not come from a reliable source and the content of our classes expressly teaches otherwise--let alone the fact that it seems a bit random and out of place for this article to begin with.  There is really no need to disucss the school's stance on Creation on this page at all, since it is not in any way a unique distinctive of the school.  Would anyone be opposed to removing it?--Son of thunder (talk) 19:29, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: In light of the source being challenged (WP:RS) and no indication (supported by a source) of the importance of this fact even if true (WP:UNDUE) and the type of source it is, I agree with removing the mention and have done so with this edit. Novaseminary (talk) 01:06, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Creationism 

message: A related discussion is taking place at Talk:Moody_Publishers#University_press. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me 18:21, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is this a university? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Moody Bible Institute. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110504053449/http://www.moody.edu:80/edu_mainpage.aspx?id=1808 to http://www.moody.edu/edu_mainpage.aspx?id=1808
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:28, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The history section here is a blank between 1900 and 2012. Is there no history? Or are there no sources available to give even the barest outline of the history for these 112 years? Carhutt (talk) 02:47, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  History?