 |
| Since "the wages of sin is death" (Romans 6:23b)-- and since humanistic public schools are extremely sinful--the wages of public schools is death. Almost daily, public school children are sacrificed to the state, with its imposition of an environment that is physically unsafe and that teaches children the way to eternal hellfire through an anti-God curriculum. (Picture from Foster's Bible Pictures.) |
A popular justification Christian parents give for sending their children to public schools is that at public schools their children can be “a light to the world.”
However, a more important question is whether parents are being a light to the world by sending their children to public schools. If they are not, then there is no justification for sending their children to public schools. One cannot do evil in order for good to come.
In any case, we will examine both the matter of children being a light in the public schools, as well as whether parents are being a light by sending their children to public schools.
The standard for determining how one is to be a light to the world is the Bible—not ourselves. And so, what does the Bible say about being a light to the world? In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus says,
"You are the light of the world. A city set on a hill cannot be hidden. Nor do people light a lamp and put it under a basket, but on a stand, and it gives light to all in the house. In the same way, let your light shine before others, so that they may see your good works and give glory to your Father who is in heaven."(Matt. 5:14-16)
Note the connection between shining the light and good works. Shining the light entails good works. So to understand whether one is shining the light, we must understand what good works are. And according to the next few verses, good works are God’s commands as revealed in Scripture:
"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished. Therefore whoever relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven." (Matt. 5:17-19)
So, can children be a light to the world in public schools? More importantly, are parents being a light to the world by sending their children there? To answer this, let us see what God’s word says about the matter.
First, we must ask who God’s law has granted the authority for educating children. According to the Bible, it is parents—especially fathers. And they are to constantly teach biblical theology that is not to be undermined by unbiblical teaching:
“And these words that I command you today shall be on your heart. You shall teach them diligently to your children, and shall talk of them when you sit in your house, and when you walk by the way, and when you lie down, and when you rise.” (Deuteronomy 6:6-7)
"You shall therefore lay up these words of mine in your heart and in your soul, and you shall bind them as a sign on your hand, and they shall be as frontlets between your eyes. You shall teach them to your children, talking of them when you are sitting in your house, and when you are walking by the way, and when you lie down, and when you rise. You shall write them on the doorposts of your house and on your gates, that your days and the days of your children may be multiplied in the land that the LORD swore to your fathers to give them, as long as the heavens are above the earth.” (Deuteronomy 11:18-21)
“Hear, my son, your father’s instruction, and forsake not your mother’s teaching, for they are a graceful garland for your head and pendants for your neck.” (Proverbs 1:8, 9)
“Fathers, do not provoke your children to anger, but bring them up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord.” (Ephesians 6:4)
By contrast, the state has not been granted authority by the Bible to take children away from their parents for the purposes of educating them. Educating children is outside the state's sphere of jurisdiction.
Thus when the state takes custody of children by forcing parents to give them up under threat of arrest (at least those parents who can’t afford private schools or who the state hasn’t approved for homeschooling), then the state has engaged in kidnapping.
And according to the Bible, kidnapping is so heinous that, like murder, it deserves the death penalty:
"Whoever steals a man and sells him, and anyone found in possession of him, shall be put to death.” (Exodus 21:16)
The state, then, is not to engage in kidnapping, but to punish it.
Second, since public schools are based on the religions of secular humanism and religious pluralism (a euphemism for polytheism), then clearly public schools are not an option. Public schools teach evolution, hedonistic sexuality, that all religions are equal, that morals are relative, etc.
Since public schools teach non-Christian religions (indeed, all education is based on some religion or another), sending children to them is no different than sending them to Muslim, Buddhist, or Wiccan schools. Indeed, the word “public school” is a euphemism; they would be more properly labeled temples of humanism.
Since public schools teach non-Christian religions (indeed, all education is based on some religion or another), sending children to them is no different than sending them to Muslim, Buddhist, or Wiccan schools. Indeed, the word “public school” is a euphemism; they would be more properly labeled temples of humanism.
Remember,
Similiarly, Proverbs 22:6 reads:
“Train up a child in the way he should go; even when he is old he will not depart from it.”
 |
| "A disciple is not above his teacher, but everyone when he is fully trained will be like his teacher" (Luke 6:40). Children can be expected to adhere to whatever philosophy they are raised in--whether it's Nazism (as in the above picture), or secular humanism, as taught in American public schools. |
Notice the command given--children are to be trained in how they should go. This rules out public schools as an option, as they in their humanistic curriculum train up a child in the way they shouldn’t go.
Notice too it says “even when he is old he will not depart from it.” If you want your child to live a moral life, then raise him in God’s word, outside of public schools—and if God in His grace blesses your endeavors, your child will not depart from his godly instruction.
However, the opposite is also true: if one trains a child in the way he shouldn’t go, then that child can be expected to live an ungodly life. In short, a child is prone to living out whatever worldview/education he is raised in. As Luke 6:40 reads:
“A disciple is not above his teacher, but everyone when he is fully trained will be like his teacher.”
When the public school student is fully trained, he becomes a God-hating humanist. (After all, to love God is to keep His commandments [John 14:15], and humanism naturally opposes keeping God's commandments and therefore teaches hatred for God [cf. Matthew 6:24].)
Thus contrary to the view that sending Christian children to public schools is part of making disciples of all nations (Matthew 28:19), in public schools it is the (pagan) nations making disciples of professing Christian children. Why do you think professing Christian children so often depart from the faith after years of training in public schools in how to rebel against God?
Thus contrary to the view that sending Christian children to public schools is part of making disciples of all nations (Matthew 28:19), in public schools it is the (pagan) nations making disciples of professing Christian children. Why do you think professing Christian children so often depart from the faith after years of training in public schools in how to rebel against God?
Not only this, but when parents give their children to the state in the name of the Great Commission, they neglect giving their children a Christian education—and thereby neglect their Great Commission duties to them. What Great Commission duty is greater than to one's own family?
Even if parents teach their children God’s word with what little free time their children have left after school and homework, it’s an uphill battle trying to counteract the effect the constant bombardment of humanistic thought has on them.
Third, some hold that their children are somehow beyond being infected by the evils of public schools. But Scripture says the opposite:
“Do not be deceived: ‘Bad company ruins good morals.’” (1 Corinthians 15:33)
At public schools, children are surrounded by both wicked teachers and wicked schoolmates. Of course their morals will be ruined.
Public schools are higher centers of learning for rebelling against God. Just as prisoners, due to exposure to other criminals, often become worse criminals than before they came in, those who attend public schools, due to exposure to many other sinners, often become greater sinners than before they came in.
Simply put, the public school is an arena where children come together and pool their natural sinful depravity—and each becomes more wicked in the process. “A little leaven leavens the whole lump” (Galatians 5:9).
How much more does a lot of leaven, that is, entire classrooms of sinful children? Sending children to public schools then harms them:
“Whoever walks with the wise becomes wise, but the companion of fools will suffer harm.” (Proverbs 13:20)
Fourth, children are to receive consistent, biblical discipline—something that public schools do not provide.
“Folly is bound up in the heart of a child, but the rod of discipline drives it far from him.” (Proverbs 22:15)
What do public schools do? They encourage the folly in a child’s sinful heart by rejecting Scripture and teaching humanistic curriculums. And, they reject disciplining children with the rod for bad behavior.
This is serious. Public schools, by not driving the folly from children’s hearts, allow that folly to fester. This is why so many public school children become criminals.
Scripture also says, “Whoever spares the rod hates his son, but he who loves him is diligent to discipline him.” (Proverbs 13:24)
 |
| When the state--backed by coercive force-- forces parents to send their children to public schools, it has engaged in the heinous crime of kidnapping. |
And so sending one's child to public schools is to hate him, since public schools are an atmosphere where biblical discipline is denied and rebellion and folly are encouraged. Parents must be diligent to discipline their children--which can only be done in the context of a biblical education.
Fifth, public schools are not safe. By now it should be clear that public schools are not spiritually safe, as they teach children to hate God. They are also not verbally or physically safe.
In public schools, on a daily basis children are subject to ridicule and bullying. Drugs and sex are rampant. Children even die in school shootings and gang violence. The Sixth Commandment demands that children be protected from such dangerous environments that risk their physical safety.
And so back to the original questions: can children be a light to the world in public schools, and can parents be a light to the world by sending their children to public schools?
No. Given the corrupting influences in public schools, and since God’s word teaches how leavening corrupting influences are, to the extent professing Christian children are a light through obeying and teaching God’s commands in public schools, we can only expect it to be the exception, and not the rule—and that even in the exceptions, such children sooner or later could become corrupted and regularly disobey rather than obey God’s commands. In short, we can expect professing Christian children in public schools to become more and more sinful as time goes on.
And, the act of parents sending children to be discipled by anti-Christian humanists in public schools is clearly a violation of God’s word, and thereby sinful.
Sin--whether it's the sins that children commit through public school corruption, or it's the sin that parents commit by sending children to public schools--is darkness, not light. Christian children in public schools is thus not a light to the world, but darkness to the world.
Since “the wages of sin is death” (Romans 6:23b)—and since humanistic public schools are extremely sinful—the wages of public schools is death. Almost daily, public school children are sacrificed to the state, with its imposition of an environment that is physically unsafe and that teaches the way to eternal hellfire through an anti-God curriculum.
Sending children to public schools then is human sacrifice. It is sending children to their deaths—sometimes physical death, but especially spiritual death.
“Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him if a great millstone were hung around his neck and he were thrown into the sea.” (Mark 9:42)
11 comments:
As a college freshman attending UC Irvine, I have seen firsthand the effects of sin made plain in the dorm life. However, I was raised in a Christian home and sent to private Christian schools from K-12th grade. I admire the use of Biblical passages and the point the author is trying to drive home, but I have one question that needs answering: When does a child become an adult? Only when this question is answered can the issue of public school vs. private/home schooling be completely answered. My understanding is this: When a child becomes an adult (referring to Christian maturity, not age of majority), he/she takes his faith into his/her hands, and chooses to believe the Truth, or to reject the love of God. Obviously this age is variable--which leads me to my last statement: This article CANNOT apply to all "children" of the covenant. After all, some "children" may be more spiritually mature (and, in this case, spiritually able to defend themselves and become a positive influence, instead of being influenced by evils) than adults.
Correct me where I'm wrong, please!
And great post, thanks a ton. :)
I have a direction of thought for Joseph, though I am still learning a lot myself.
I believe a boy becomes a man in a sense when he is ready to start a family, take a wife, raise children, and begin the ministry God has given him apart from the full protection and oversight of his father.
I believe a girl becomes a woman when she is prepared to be given in marriage, raise a family and support the vision of her husband.
Of course, in the rare cases of a call to singleness, it would be when the children would be mature enough to have fulfilled the marital roles had they been called to them.
Just a direction of thought, not conclusive.
Joseph,
Thanks for your thoughtful reply. I will reply to your comments as best I can, but am open to correction on any given point.
This is the first of two comment postings.
As you commented:
"When does a child become an adult? Only when this question is answered can the issue of public school vs. private/home schooling be completely answered. My understanding is this: When a child becomes an adult (referring to Christian maturity, not age of majority), he/she takes his faith into his/her hands, and chooses to believe the Truth, or to reject the love of God. Obviously this age is variable--which leads me to my last statement: This article CANNOT apply to all "children" of the covenant. After all, some "children" may be more spiritually mature (and, in this case, spiritually able to defend themselves and become a positive influence, instead of being influenced by evils) than adults."
Neither the act of becoming a Christian, nor becoming a more mature Christian than average, necessarily means one is no longer a child as it applies to Ephesians 6:4, which reads:
“Fathers, do not provoke your children to anger, but bring them up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord.”
This text forbids sending one’s child to public schools. It requires fathers to raise children in the discipline and instruction of the Lord, which our humanistic public schools undermine.
Since Ephesians 6:4 specifically pertains to “children,” then, if you are correct, it wouldn’t apply to supposedly mature Christian teenagers, if their maturity means they are "spiritual adults" and thus no longer children in the Ephesians 6:4 sense of the term.
However, if this is so, then logical consistency demands that Ephesians 6:1 no longer applies to such teenagers as well, since this text is likewise addressed to children.
Ephesians 6:1 reads, “Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right.”
Surely we don’t want to say that these mature Christian teenagers no longer need to obey their parents.
We must keep in mind that in texts that refer to “child,” we cannot necessarily divorce the physical from the spiritual--nor assume that the spiritual is even what the text has in mind. Perhaps any given text may refer solely to child in the physical sense.
Taking one’s faith into one’s own hands (if by this you mean coming to saving faith) is not the same as taking one’s life into one’s own hands. Christian children still must submit to their parents.
Again, whether one who is physically a child comes to saving faith in the womb (as John the Baptist did), or during his teenage years, he still is under parental authority.
comment post 2
A problem with the argument that a teenage Christian is no longer a child (according to Eph. 6:4) because of his spiritual maturity is that, on the flip side, unbelievers would always be considered children. That is, if spiritual maturity is linked to conversion and sanctification, then unbelievers are always spiritually immature. (This is of course true, but we are speaking in terms of the ramifications of Eph. 6:4.)
They would thus be perpetually under the authority of their parents. And they would be nowhere closer to adulthood at 80 than at 15.
Thus there must be a more objective basis for measuring whether one is a child or an adult.
I think the age is most likely twenty. Consider the following passages:
"Take a census of all the congregation of the people of Israel, from twenty years old and upward, by their fathers’ houses, all in Israel who are able to go to war." (Numbers 26:2)
“Surely none of the men who came up out of Egypt, from twenty years old and upward, shall see the land that I swore to give to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, because they have not wholly followed me,” (Numbers 32:11)
The first passage gives the legal age for one to go to war. It seems most likely this is the age given because this is the age the Bible considers physical adulthood.
I can only imagine two possibilities for the second passage:
1) In saying the following, “Surely none of the men who came up out of Egypt, from twenty years old and upward," it is saying that 20 years old is the age one reaches manhood.
2) It is saying that all men 20 years and up will not see the land, without specifying whether there are men less than 20 years old.
I think the first case is correct, especially when coupled with 20 being the warrior's age. If I'm wrong, we still can say this: we still know for sure that one is a man at 20, but we don't what age prior to 20 one becomes a man. (Unless Scripture teaches the age of manhood elsewhere.) Therefore, since one doesn't know that exact age, one is safest in keeping his children from public schools completely until they are 20 (and of course by this time, they are too old to attend).
Also to note about the two passages about age 20 is that neither makes exceptions for higher or lower ages based on spiritual maturity. And if these don’t, why should we regarding Ephesians 6:4?
Beyond all this, I would caution against assuming a Christian who is physically a child is somehow spiritually mature. It’s too subjective, and one must also keep in mind the doctrine of total depravity: “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately sick; who can understand it?” (Jeremiah 17:9).
Thus I’d neither trust my son nor myself to decide if he’s spiritually mature enough for public schools. Why play Russian roulette with his soul? Instead, I’d prefer he refrains from public schools and abides by this counsel:
“Blessed is the man who walks not in the counsel of the wicked, nor stands in the way of sinners, nor sits in the seat of scoffers; but his delight is in the law of the LORD, and on his law he meditates day and night.” (Psalm 1:1-2)
Finally, why should doubt on whether it’s wrong in every case to send children to public schools be cause to assume by default that it is okay for some children to attend public schools?
Such uncertainty works both ways, so that there would be just as much doubt as to whether it’s right in those cases to send children to public schools. And this should be enough to make us want to err on the side of caution. Especially in light of Mark 9:42:
“Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him if a great millstone were hung around his neck and he were thrown into the sea.”
Thanks again for your thoughts, Joseph.
Just to be brief, I don't believe that I (or any other person, Christian or not) should ever come to an age where I consider it right to disrespect my parents. Even when they're both long gone, it's my duty to honor them, in my keeping of their name and reputation. That being said, I should also say that I believe the home is the center of learning, and I'd use those same passages from Psalms, Proverbs, and Ephesians to back my case. I don't think I'll ever stop learning things from my parents. That doesn't mean I'll be dependent on them(in a legal, physical, and spiritual) sense indefinitely.
I was very blessed, in hindsight, to have gone to Christian private schools my entire life, and it was a mild shock dorming at UC Irvine. So I'm very biased towards the private/home schooling regime, don't get me wrong! But I don't think those passages (Eph. 6:1,4) necessarily say: "Send your kids to private school. Or home-school them if you can. Then your kids will honor you." I read it more as "Fathers, you are responsible for your childrens' education, because they are His treasure. Love them, and they will love you."
Public schools are bad, I agree. But the world is bad. We are bad. Should we form an inclusive community to guard our children? I think some people did that already...
Ephesians 6:4 by implication forbids fathers from allowing anyone to disciple his children who undermines being raised in "the discipline and instruction of the Lord."
To deny this is like arguing that although fathers must protect their children physically, it's okay to allow the children into environments where their lives are at risk.
Regarding your comment:
"Public schools are bad, I agree. But the world is bad. We are bad. Should we form an inclusive community to guard our children? I think some people did that already..."
Do you really believe this statement? C'mon! That's like me saying, it's okay to send your child to worship at a Mosque, or to let them hang out in a whore house-- and when you (I would hope) object to this, I say, "Should we form an inclusive community to guard our children?"
Since when does keeping children from physically and spiritually dangerous environments translate into "inclusive communities"--if by that you mean have *nothing* to do with the world?
Does the Great Commission require the assistance of federal government to disciple the nations, or to be a good Samaritan?
Is a father who homeschools incapable of leaving the house, and even taking his children with him? Or is this only physically possible once the state whisks his child away on a school bus?
I don't deny that Ephesians 6:4 commands fathers to raise their children in the law of God.
For the record, the allusion to the hermit life of seclusion was used in irony. Obviously that's not the correct path. I think you're taking the analogy a little far, using a mosque. The church doesn't really come in to this argument, unless the private school is run by the church (where I spent my first eight years of schooling. It was good, godly, and edifying.) I think better analogies would be: Should we let our kids get a driving license? Should we permit them to have unbelieving friends? Should we let them go to parties?
To answer your statements: No, neither is acceptable. No, we shouldn't seek to isolate ourselves from the evils that threaten us and our children.
Ok, I really need to stop using the plural--I'm not a father.
"keeping children from physically and spiritually dangerous environments" does not translate to running away from the world. No, that doesn't fulfill the Great Commission. No, the government doesn't really have a place in the Great Commission. In fact, it should be one of them many facets of life that Christians influence.
I'm not sure what you mean by that last paragraph. Again, sorry. I often forget that sarcasm doesn't work well with letters. :)
Joseph,
you said,
"I think you're taking the analogy a little far, using a mosque."
Not really--mosques teach children to worship "Allah" and Muhammad, and temples of humanism (public schools) teach children to worship themselves.
Although if you like, I could compare sending children to Islamic schools with sending them to humanistic temples. Both are false religions. Thus both are forbidden to send children to.
A man asked the great ArmEnian Calvinist, "What discipline can a church bring upon members who send their children to public school?"
"NONE," R J Rushdoony replied. "GOD will judge them." He went on to explain that presumptuous actions on our part might drive the erring parents away from the ministry of the Word and Sacrament.
Oh, yes, and concerning Muslims: God has brought thousands of them to our universities. Befriend 'em, invite them into your homes, and let your children help you to honor and serve your guests. Knowing that a charming, intelligent, and kind surrogate big sister is NOT on the road to heaven opens the doors for conversations about electing grace -- and the need to pray for those God brings into our lives.
THIS is legitimate "youth ministry." Engaging our own children in the work of ministering to those who need the Lord.
Let's face it -- Hollywood has taught the world that Americans have zero respect for faith or family. It is a real relief for our Muslim sojourner neighbors to see this message disproved.
There is no guarantee either way how a child will turn out after schooling. The absolute most important thing a Christian parent can do to influence their children is to live out God's commands setting examples the way they have been set for us through the Bible. Doing this on a daily basis teaching Grace and obedience and allowing your children to see evidence (fruits of faith) that you have a relationship with Jesus will be the foundation on which a child will grow from.
I am a single mom struggling to keep my son in a Christian school because I know how important it is to provide a Godly influence for him outside of the home when I cannot provide this for him through a God honoring marriage.
In this school I have seen teenagers that are on a sinful path because they are not getting fed at home. Their parents want a good Christian education for them but do not provide proper biblical training at home.
I am not trying to step on anyone's toes here, just my thought on the subject.
Thank you.
Post a Comment