if the professor already had a history of inappropriate relations with students, and had to leave his last seminary post because of inappropriate relations, why would Fuller, one of the leading seminaries in the country, immediately turn around and hire him with his past problems? a reasonable explanation is that they were looking to hire minorities to fill some DEI quota, very plausible, makes all the sense in the world, especially coming from Fuller based on its hiring history of late.
@@christandculture9342 Yes, I know it is a reasonable explanation. But you could be wrong, and your wording in the video didn't make this clear. You could be dead wrong and actually be slandering Fuller and causing your audience to see ghosts everywhere: DEI at every corner. There are a million reasons a seminary could hire a professor with major past problems, if you don't have tunnel vision and understand you and I don't have any concrete evidence. For instance, maybe Dr. Bantu has person friends in power at Fuller. It would still be corrupt, but not based on DEI. Maybe the folks at Fuller thought the earlier transgression was repented of adequately. Maybe Fuller staff investigated the earlier problems and thought they were not that bad *and on and on.*
Look at the hiring patterns at Fuller over the last 10 years, look at the printed material Fuller puts out to alumni, etc. it all points to a school going "woke." Diversity is a major push at Fuller Seminary, and this is not a secret, it's out in the open. The are pushing from top to bottom for diverse seminary community, not in a natural way, but in a very intentional and planned way. Take away the fact that this professor was a "person of color" he probably would not have been hired, when there are plenty of other academics more qualified looking for positions today. i think you need to do your homework about Fuller seminary and look at the trajectory it's on.
@@christiananswers4054 Look at your own wording "he *probably* would not have been hired" so that's an admission that you're just guessing. *If Dr. Bantu is indeed qualified*, and your *only* evidence is Fuller's outreach to people of color, then I don't think you have any good evidence. After all, you were not in the room during his interview.
![Kodak Black - Versatile 4 [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/VcP_1Ua__vY/mqdefault.jpg)
How would you know who was a DEI hire and who wasn't?
if the professor already had a history of inappropriate relations with students, and had to leave his last seminary post because of inappropriate relations, why would Fuller, one of the leading seminaries in the country, immediately turn around and hire him with his past problems? a reasonable explanation is that they were looking to hire minorities to fill some DEI quota, very plausible, makes all the sense in the world, especially coming from Fuller based on its hiring history of late.
@@christandculture9342 Yes, I know it is a reasonable explanation. But you could be wrong, and your wording in the video didn't make this clear. You could be dead wrong and actually be slandering Fuller and causing your audience to see ghosts everywhere: DEI at every corner. There are a million reasons a seminary could hire a professor with major past problems, if you don't have tunnel vision and understand you and I don't have any concrete evidence. For instance, maybe Dr. Bantu has person friends in power at Fuller. It would still be corrupt, but not based on DEI. Maybe the folks at Fuller thought the earlier transgression was repented of adequately. Maybe Fuller staff investigated the earlier problems and thought they were not that bad *and on and on.*
Look at the hiring patterns at Fuller over the last 10 years, look at the printed material Fuller puts out to alumni, etc. it all points to a school going "woke." Diversity is a major push at Fuller Seminary, and this is not a secret, it's out in the open. The are pushing from top to bottom for diverse seminary community, not in a natural way, but in a very intentional and planned way. Take away the fact that this professor was a "person of color" he probably would not have been hired, when there are plenty of other academics more qualified looking for positions today. i think you need to do your homework about Fuller seminary and look at the trajectory it's on.
@@christiananswers4054 Look at your own wording "he *probably* would not have been hired" so that's an admission that you're just guessing. *If Dr. Bantu is indeed qualified*, and your *only* evidence is Fuller's outreach to people of color, then I don't think you have any good evidence. After all, you were not in the room during his interview.