Christopher Hylton claims to have a “Doctorate of Theology [from] Piedmont Bible College of Theology,” but he bears false witness for the sake of pride. For starters, it is doubtful that a “Piedmont Bible College of Theology” ever existed. There was once a Piedmont Bible College that merged with other schools and now exists as Piedmont Divinity School within Carolina University (a college with a flimsy accreditation claim and a troubling percentage of adjunct faculty). In any event, this institution does not confer theology doctorates (Th.D.). It does not confer divinity (D.Div.) or philosophy (Ph.D.) doctorates either. It narrowly offers a “Doctor of Ministry” (D.Min.) in “biblical preaching, church revitalization, and ministry.” No dissertation is required. It is a non-academic, thirty-six credit online program “designed for those who aspire to excel at the highest level in the practice of ministry.” There is no claim of theology anywhere—not in the name, not in the program, not in the degree. So Hylton’s website is false, as is his LinkedIn claiming a “Ph.D.” in “Theology/Theological Studies.” For the sake of pride he misrepresents the authority of his words. Since when is truthful preaching not self-evident? Since when does truth not stand on its own? Does he not know the fate of Ananias? Of Nebuchadnezzar?
Hylton’s conduct reminds me of another blogger’s post on televangelists buying fake doctorates from fake schools because calling themselves “doctor” produces better financial contributions. Shameful. The First Amendment allows for freedom of expression, but the Ninth Commandment requires honesty.
This other blogger (who attended seminary) explains that D.Min. is only just barely a doctorate. It is a professional practitioner’s degree. So D.Min. means that its holder is a professional minister, but not an authority on the nature of God (theology, Th.D.) nor on the nature of religion (divinity, D.Div.). Clergy typically pursue the far easier D.Min. for a pay bump or congregational appeasement. But I’ve never heard of any legitimate clergyman misrepresenting the degree or field of study.
The “doctor” honorific (as in Dr. Smith) harkens to Latin roots. As an adjective, doctus means ‘learned.’ As a noun, doctor means ‘professor.’ The most common doctorate is the academic Ph.D. which abbreviates the Latin Philosophiæ Doctor. In this context, “philosophy” signifies the pursuit of knowledge and the meaningful understanding of things. A person might earn a Ph.D. in many fields like chemistry, biology, physics, anthropology, mathematics, history, literature, kinesiology, business, economics, computer science, philosophy, engineering, art history, psychology, etc. A Ph.D. represents academic expertise acquired through pursuits of knowledge which we call research. Some doctorates are for professional practitioners like Psy.D. (clinical psychology rather than academic psychology) and Ed.D. (education professional rather than education researcher). Those who earn these doctorates are expertly knowledgeable in their fields and are occupationally licensed by regulatory agencies to work in specific real-world settings. The same is true of lawyers (J.D.), physicians (M.D./D.O.), dentists (D.M.D./D.D.S.), veterinarians (D.V.M.), and pharmacists (Pharm.D.). Then there are optometrists (O.D.), audiologists (Aud.D.), and chiropractors (D.C.) who really shouldn’t be doctor at all (and not too many decades ago they were not). The doctor honorific evolved to be synonymous with physician and so everyone doing anything with the human body wanted to be doctor. Is chiropractor on the same level with medical oncologist (M.D.) or oncology pharmacist (Pharm.D.) or cancer biologist (Ph.D.)? Veterinarians know more about mammalian vertebrates than any chiropractor or optometrist! Worse, in the 2010s “naturopathic doctors” (N.D.) emerged. That isn’t a doctor of any kind. It sounds convincing, but it’s just witchdoctor charlantry.
This shit bothers me because it dilutes the solemnity and integrity of the doctorate. I earned my doctorate from an accredited R-1 institution that requires a bachelor’s degree, a master’s degree, sixty graduate course credits, an additional minimum thirty research credits, a minimum year of in-person attendance, and a committee-approved dissertation.
What specifically bothers me is Hylton’s self-serving, self-aggrandizing dishonesty in stating an even faker subject matter expertise. Hylton spins outright lies and demonstrates his complete ignorance of doctorates. The letters have specific significance. The discipline has meaning. The letters and the discipline go hand-in-glove. Hylton evidently knows that his letters and words confer a lesser expertise. Why else upgrade them? The mere fact that a department teaches a course or two on theology does not establish a theology credential. It is akin to a person claiming to have studied at Harvard or Cambridge after attending a weekend campus seminar. His diploma damn sure does not say “doctor of theology” nor “doctor of philosophy” so he knows he “bear[s] false witness” contrary to Exodus 20:16. How does Hylton reconcile his substantial embellishments with his supposed studies of “biblical preaching, church revitalization, and ministry”? The person who does not live truth cannot teach truth. The person who teaches truth needs no credential to validate that the teaching is true. What then is gained by imposter credentials?