Silly TEU

January 10th, 2012 at 9:31 am by David Farrar

NewstalkZB reports:

The tertiary education union is criticising plans for a ‘university’ – saying it makes a mockery of public education responsibilities.

The Church plans to build its own village in South Auckland which would include schools and a university.

President Dr says public universities all provide accredited evidence based high quality public education.

She claims in all likelihood Bishop Brian Tamaki’s university will do none of those things.

Calling it a plan, is giving Bishop Tamaki too much credit. All we have is a press release. He probably has no idea what an institution needs to do to become a university. The Education Act in s162(4)(a) specifies they must do all of the following:

(i) they are primarily concerned with more advanced learning, the principal aim being to develop intellectual independence:

(ii) their research and teaching are closely interdependent and most of their teaching is done by people who are active in advancing knowledge:

(iii) they meet international standards of research and teaching:

(iv) they are a repository of knowledge and expertise:

So up until now, I’m agreeing with the TEU that a Destiny university won’t qualify. But then a swipe at the Govt for some reason:

Dr Grey says the combination of this proposal and the Government’s Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement threatens to open the floodgates for dozens of foreign privately-owned, extremist ‘sham’ universities.

Oh please. A “combination” of this proposal and the proposed TPPA? That is clutching for straws. Is Destiny foreign-owned? Is anything in TPPA going to change the law and criteria for any bid by Destiny?

TPPA could well have something about not discriminating against foreign universities who wish to set up here, but that does not mean the provisions in the Education Act would not apply to then.

Don’t get me wrong. I have reservations around TPPA – especially the intellectual property chapter being pushed by the US. But debate on TPPA should not just be scare-mongering, linking it to Destiny Church.

Tags: , , ,

27 Responses to “Silly TEU”

  1. iMP (2,364 comments) says:

    ‘bishop’ brian will be thinking of a church-based university along American lines, which is an educational appendage to a church campus. there are many schools like this in NZ already and even ‘university’ type training establishments (many denom.s already do this).

    It is just another pulpit for Brian to speak in and to sell his books and dvds through (to students who’ve already paid exorbitant fees). he’ll still call it a ‘university’ just like he calls himself ‘bishop.’

    Destiny really has to be understood as the younger Tamaki brother trying to keep up with his two older entrepreneurial brothers, but doing it thru a religious stream (instead of tourism) as well as an ego-trip.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. BeaB (2,118 comments) says:

    And as long as we keep stumping up millions of taxpayer dollars for Roman Catholic schools, we can hardly object to funding a Destiny school.
    I cannot understand the antipathy to Destiny when other denominations are even more distasteful with their drinking of blood and etaing of flesh not to mention misogyny and paedophilia etc etc. Why is calling yourself a bishop any less credible in Destiny than it is in any other church?
    Or is it just that Tamaki is a flash Maori who can inspire enthusiastic followers and it pisses people off?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. MikeG (425 comments) says:

    “Calling it a plan, is giving Bishop Tamaki too much credit. All we have is a press release”
    but it didn’t stop you saying in your previous post – “…then probably get charged massive rents to live there”. So who’s scare-mongering on very little information?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. Kimble (4,434 comments) says:

    Scaring who, MikeG?

    TEU is trying to scare everyone in NZ? Who is DPF trying to scare? Destiny rent payers?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. Kimble (4,434 comments) says:

    To bring everyone up to speed of where we left off the previous destiny post.

    Hitler is in heaven laughing at all the Jews he killed who are burning with Gandhi in hell.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. MikeG (425 comments) says:

    Kimble – DPF seems to think that the TEU is scare-mongering. I guess DPF isn’t scare-mongering in his previous post, just trying to demonise Destiny on very little information.

    [DPF: Destiny have a track record of exploiting its supporters and sucking money out of them. That is the basis for my suggestion they will continue to do so]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Sofia (856 comments) says:

    Hitler is in heaven laughing at all the Jews he killed who are burning with Gandhi in hell.

    Kimble, this is probably a reasonable indication that anything else you contribute will have very little useful meaning – it brings nobody up to speed on anything other than you thinking.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. backster (2,152 comments) says:

    Well we already have Universities which turn out people well qualified in the subjects of bone carving and flax weaving from halls of opulence.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. Richard29 (377 comments) says:

    Given that Destiny is fundamentally a commercial operation built around a strong brand and operatinf a franchise model this is probably the best comparison:

    http://www.aboutmcdonalds.com/mcd/corporate_careers/training_and_development/hamburger_university.html

    After many years McD’s managed to get their university recognised by a formal training authority – but then again they actually teach useful business skills like operations management…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. Kimble (4,434 comments) says:

    Sofia, if you want to join in thats fine. The previous thread got lost in 2+day oblivion.

    Hitler could be in heaven if he had faith and accepted Jesus as his Lord and Saviour. While Gandhi and the Jews would be in hell because they did not. (This is contingent on believing in god.)

    This was in response to the assertion that God is the source of human morality.

    This thread will get there eventually, so lets just skip to the end.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. BlairM (2,321 comments) says:

    This is unprecedented bigotry from the TEU. They shouldn’t be telling Destiny how to suck eggs on the basis of one press release. Once they build the thing and start enrolling students, it is fine to criticise – IF there is issues surrounding the “University” and the Education Act. But there are large numbers of Universities in the United States set up by churches, many of them prestigious schools, and for now it is presumptuous to assume the nature of Destiny’s project will be substandard.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. Sofia (856 comments) says:

    Kimble, I was aware of most of the previous thread and saw how you reach your position dependant on taking one text from the Bible, believing it literally and ignoring the remainder.
    The Bible contains enough contradictions that it cannot be treated literally or it rules itself out. It also contains what seem to be impossibilities, for example, that Noah was the first to cultivate a vineyard and produce wine. So all the krap prior to, and causing God’s displeasure in, the Flood happened without the aid of alcohol?
    Those who take the Bible literally must screw themselves up as you have shown – that Hitler could be in heaven if he had faith and accepted Jesus as his Lord and Saviour.
    While those who do not take the Bible as literal, have to then descide what the accept or don’t – an entirely different problem.
    The Bible translated by Bishop Tamiki will likely be yet something else, which I doubt should be Government subsidised in any way other than Cadbury is.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. Kimble (4,434 comments) says:

    taking one text from the Bible, believing it literally and ignoring the remainder

    2 texts. Ephesians was the most explicit, while John was the best known. The parts that I took, nullify the remainder.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Sofia (856 comments) says:

    So you, Kimble, pick one text that you say quashes everything else.
    I pick another which does the same thing –

    I give a new commandment to you: Love one another; just as I have loved you, you should also love one another.
    John 13:34 – Aramaic Bible in Plain English

    Similar to Leviticus 19:18; Matthew 5:44; John 15:12; John 15:17; Romans 12:10; Romans 13:8; Romans 13:10; Galatians 5:14; Ephesians 5:2; ad nauseam

    And instead of picking out texts, even if you read the entire thing and do nothing else, it is the same as reading the entire 1220 pages of the Lonely Planet Guide to India. You may know a hell of a lot about India, but you still haven’t been there.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. Kimble (4,434 comments) says:

    Sofia, that wasnt a condition to get into heaven. (its just the golden rule anyway, and the Chinese came up with that!)

    The nullity comes from having to believe that the Bible is the word of God, and therefore must be completely correct and logical. It says in one section that all you have to do is have faith. ALL ANYONE has to do is believe in Jesus, and they will avoid the fire. If anyone has to do anything else, then that section is wrong.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. Sofia (856 comments) says:

    Kimble – Sofia, that wasnt a condition to get into heaven. (its just the golden rule anyway, and the Chinese came up with that!)

    So here is another problem.
    You think all the Bible is about is getting to heaven.
    I think it, Christ’s teaching specifically, is about how people should cope with being here and now. “Therefore you shall not be concerned about tomorrow, for tomorrow will be concerned for itself. A day’s own trouble is sufficient for it.” – Matthew 6:34 and many similar.
    To be only motivated by a desire to ‘get into Heaven’ would likely in fact be un-Christlike, as it would be simiply self-centredness.
    And, of course, if Hitler is waiting there, why bother …

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. Sofia (856 comments) says:

    And of course I don’t consider that the text you chose is any more valid than the one I selected.
    You claim yours is the only rule or condition to get into heaven.

    I can equally suggest John 13:34 is the new commandment or rule, and so trumps everything else
    and while the Chinese may have come up with it – the Golden Rule, which shows something in itself – did they take it to the point that you not only treated others as you would have them treat you, but go as far as putting their needs first end to the extent of giving up your life for theirs if need be?

    Where would that leave Hitler?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. Kimble (4,434 comments) says:

    You think all the Bible is about is getting to heaven.

    Incorrect. I know it is filled with unhelpful prattle like that quoteth by thou.

    You claim yours is the only rule or condition to get into heaven.

    Incorrect. It claims that for itself. John 3:16 says WHOEVER believes in Jesus wont burn. Not, whoever does this thing and the others. Ephesians confirms that this means no need to do good works.

    but go as far as putting their needs first end to the extent of giving up your life for theirs if need be?

    I reckon if they didnt, then the reason is most likely that they decided not to bother writing something no one would ever do. They probably had no reason to want everyone to be sinners in need of salvation. Maybe they werent selling the cure-all-for-all-what-ails-ya!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. Sofia (856 comments) says:

    Well, Kimble, if you wish to take the Epistle of Paul [who never physically met Christ, except when he was arrested] to the Ephesians as Gospel, to the exclusion of all else, that is your problem.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. Kimble (4,434 comments) says:

    So Paul was wrong?

    Why did God let such error into His book?

    Why would it matter that Paul only met Christ once?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. Sofia (856 comments) says:

    Why would it matter that Paul only met Christ once?

    Paul had not exactly seen the light at that time.
    Read the book. It’s in the part you are ignoring.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. Kimble (4,434 comments) says:

    So Paul’s testimony is not admissible?

    We should just ignore everything Paul had to say, and tear his pages from the Bible?

    Or just those pages that conflict with parts that we like? We could do that for all the stuff we now know God didnt really mean (but for which, I am sure, people have been put to death at some point).

    Lets take out all the weird stuff, the contradictory stuff, and the obviously immoral stuff, and keep only the stuff that we reckon should apply to us now. That will leave us with a lot of empty spaces but, hey, thats why they call it a Holey Book, right?

    Oh, and if the parts we take out could form another book then the stuff we “kept” would be the parts missing, and THIS would be why He is called the God of the Gaps!

    It all makes sense now.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. Wayne91 (143 comments) says:

    LOL @ Kimble – thanks for adding some humour to my day. Sofia and your discussion helps to prove to me, without having to read the Holey Book that it is rubbish.

    People can be good to each other without having to bow / pray / believe / give money to / die for/ kill for / maim for / contradict for etc etc….. some mystical being.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. Stephen Day (2 comments) says:

    I think the link between Destiny’University’ and the TPPA is a reasonable one to draw. It’s very likely that the TPPA will have a focus on trade in services and particularly non-discrimination between local institutions and foreign owned ones. Education services are one of the largest, and most contested, areas around which American for-profit providers are lobbying for change.

    If Destiny is allowed to establish a PTE that trades as a university or, more realistically, affiliates closely to a US-based, for-profit university of dubious quality then all other foreign providers could use the TPPA to demand equal access and treatment.

    Destiny ‘University’ is likely to be so small and ridiculous that it would no do real harm to our national public tertiary education reputation (which is important, among other reasons, for export education). But if we had dozens of such institutions all setting up and competing for funding against our eight highly-valued, public universities, (and polytechnics and wānanga) then it muddies the waters. Instead of people knowing that all tertiary education in NZ is a comparatively high standard we end up with a two tier system that confuses students and consumers.

    All TEU is arguing is that there may be instances where we reserve the right to regulate and manage our tertiary education providers – and trade agreements which advocate non-discrimination above all other values could undermine that ability. So, let’s just take these negotiations cautiously, do them in public so education experts, instead of trade experts, can have a say about what is best for our education system, and not bind our selves to a situation where Destiny ‘University’ becomes a widespread model of education for NZ. That seems like a sensible, precautionary approach, rather than silly straw clutching.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. Sofia (856 comments) says:

    Sofia and your discussion helps to prove to me, without having to read the Holey Book that it is rubbish.

    Right from the start I knew this was going to be counterproductive
    However I think I would still have left more of the Bible intact for people to stumble over than Kimble would, as he insists it is all useless except for one text in Ephesians which allows Hitler into heaven.
    Which does seem a little bit silly.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. bc (1,367 comments) says:

    Destiny Chruch College – soon to become our first charter school. Bless!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. Kimble (4,434 comments) says:

    as he insists it is all useless except for one text in Ephesians which allows Hitler into heaven.

    I never said that. I simply said that those quotes override everything else, as they claim to be the only requirement.

    The parts I quoted were used to answer the question, is Hitler in heaven?

    If other questions were posed I could quote other parts.

    Questions like;
    1. Is rape in the top10 worst sins?
    2. If two of my slaves marry and have children, and I have to free the father, can I still keep the mother and children?
    3. How large a stone should I use on my disobedient child?

    Alas, some other questions cannot be answered by the Bible. Such as;
    1. How can God be all just and all merciful?
    2. Where did the idea of the Rapture come from?
    3. Why would a timeless being need 6 days to create the world?
    4. Why would an omnipotent being need to rest after only working for 6 days?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.