Tuesday, October 4, 2011

Tenet 16, and a thoroughly Christian education

16. Education is not a neutral enterprise. Christian parents must provide their children with a thoroughly Christian education, one that teaches the Bible and a biblical view of God and the world. Christians should not send their children to public schools since education is not a God-ordained function of civil government and since these schools are sub-Christian at best and anti-Christian at worst. (Deut. 4:9; 6:6-9; Rom. 13:3-5; Eph. 6:4; 2 Tim. 3:15)
Deut. 4:9 – Only take heed to yourself, and diligently keep yourself, lest you forget the things your eyes have seen, and lest they depart from your heart all the days of your life. And teach them to your children and your grandchildren,
This is a command to the Israelites to teach their children what they saw. This is no command to teach children reading, counting, or even of the meaning of the death of Christ. Those are not among the things we saw. It could either mean: “Israel, teach the children and grandchildren of your nation” or “each Israelite parent, teach your own children and grandchildren.”
Deut. 6:6-9 – And these words which I command you today shall be in your heart. You shall teach them diligently to your children, and shall talk of them when you sit in your house, when you walk by the way, when you lie down, and when you rise up. You shall bind them as a sign on your hand, and they shall be as frontlets between your eyes. You shall write them on the doorposts of your house and on your gates.
This is a command to diligently teach the laws of Deuteronomy. How do you pick and choose what you take from there? Do you still bind a frontlet between their eyes? Do you do a genealogy check on people before they become part of your group, to insist that no bastard (someone born from illicit intercourse) may become part of the group, even if the illicit act was by the grandmother’s grandfather’s great-grandparents?(Deut. 23:2)
Rom. 13:3-5 – For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same. For he is God’s minister to you for good. But if you do evil, be afraid; for he does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God’s minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil. Therefore you must be subject, not only because of wrath but also for conscience’ sake.
We must do good, so we do not have to fear the government. How does this relate to educating our children? Could “he (the authority) is God’s minister to you for good” be used to mean that the authority ministers for good by providing public schools? Or does this relate to being willing to let authorities test your home-schooled children, as you have nothing to fear?
Eph. 6:4 – And you, fathers, do not provoke your children to wrath, but bring them up in the training and admonition of the Lord.
Notice that fathers are not asked to potty-train their children, or teach them chemical science or bicycle riding or self-defense or how to make a living. These things could be taught by other people, and the father who trains his children about Christian living and understanding the things of God would still obey Eph. 6:4.
TBP use this verse to refer to fathers, and not mothers, in tenets on authority. (See tenet 5 and 12) Now that it comes to the actual work of educating children (closer than authority to the real meaning of this verse) they say fathers should do it with mothers!
Why do they use this for a father’s authority to train children without using Deut 4:9, Deut 6:6-9 and 2 Tim 3:15 for a mother’s authority to train them? The question here is about consistency: If they use verses on teaching children to prove male parental authority, they should also use them for female parental authority. If they believe that verses on teaching children prove no authority, they should scrap Eph. 6:4 from tenets 5 and 12.
2 Tim 3:15 – and that from childhood you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
Timothy knew the Scriptures from childhood. His mother and grandmother taught him. It shows mothers could teach their children about God. The Scriptures he knew would have been only the Old Testament and perhaps a few of the first apostolic letters. It would not be the whole New Testament as little of it was written by the time Paul wrote to Timothy.

16a) Education is not a neutral enterprise.
It makes sense, but it was not defended from the Bible.
b) Christian parents must provide their children with a thoroughly Christian education,
It depends. Education has a very wide meaning range. It includes everything that the child learn, from chewing solids through potty training, counting to ten, manners, swimming, algebra, the Bible, using a weapon, healthy eating habits or how to relate to the opposite sex.
Educating babies on how to chew solids pretty much entail the same things whether you are a devout believer, an atheist or a Hindu. The same with bicycle balance, mathematics, preparing a meal, entrepreneurial skills, or a myriad of other things. And the Lord never commands it should be parents who teach children these things.
Bringing children up in the training and admonition of the Lord certainly mean they should be taught to do what they do as if for him. (Col 3:23) In that sense, they do need Christianity to permeate everything in their education. For that reason, and because Eph. 6:4 could refer to both parents (Heb 11:23 use the same Greek word to refer to both), this point gets a pass.  
But patriarchists use Eph. 6:4, about the training and admonition of the Lord, to refer only to fathers and not both parents. (See tenets 5 and 7) As such, they have no scriptural command here to let mothers partake in Christian teaching, or home schooling. (2 Tim. 3:15 is no command, and Deuteronomy don’t speak of Christianity.)
Nothing in scripture say parents should be a child’s sole teachers. Or that they should be the ones to teach much beyond religious belief itself.
That said, a child who is taught by wise Christian parents in many ways, will most likely be better brought up in the training and admonition of the Lord than children who spend most of their time away from parents, or children with unwise parents. For example, the Tenets of Biblical patriarchy provably contain much unbiblical material. (The evidence is all over this blog.) Any parents who believe these tenets prove that they are not wise enough to be solely responsible for teaching their children in the ways of the Lord.
c) one that teaches the Bible and a biblical view of God and the world.
As far as “training and admonition of the Lord” overlaps with Bible teaching, this is biblical. However, to believe this refers to both parents, you must reject the way Eph. 6:4 is used in tenet 5 and 12.
d) Christians should not send their children to public schools
There is no Biblical defense for this view in TBP.
d) since education is not a God-ordained function of civil government and
Nor is education – except for training children about God – a God-ordained function of parents. (Not by the literal words of the Bible, anyway.) If you demand a Bible verse that tell government to teach young ones reading and writing and ‘rithmetic before condoning public school, you should also demand one that tells parents to do so, before condoning home schooling.
e) since these schools are sub-Christian at best and anti-Christian at worst.
The Bible says nothing of government schools. As such, this point cannot be Biblical. However, American teachers are not allowed to talk of God to children in school hours. Therefore, I would concede these schools are sub-Christian at best.
Other ways Christians understand this:
Christians believe that children should be brought up in the training and admonition of the Lord. Most Christians, however, have no problem with teaching children whose parents are not Christians, because Christ tells us to go into all the world and make disciples of all nations. In several spots, the New Testament talks to children. As such, it seems that children were taught not just by their parents, but by the church as well.
Many Christians emphasize that bringing up children in the training and admonition of the Lord does not mean teaching them the right outward attitudes. A parent should help them find Christ, and testify Christ to them in word and deed. To have Christian attitudes outside while not having Christ inside (right behaviour can be beaten into a child, but Christ cannot), is futile. In fact, it could just bring the child under a false impression of having salvation when he/ she does not.

Summing it up
How reliable is this tenet? I will use a color code:
      The color code:
      This is adequately Biblically defended
      This is a partial truth. (The other part of the truth, that together make it Biblical, will be added in brackets.)
      This is not Biblically defended
      This was not defended from the Bible, but I’ll concede it for rational reasons.
16. Education is not a neutral enterprise. Christian parents must provide their children with a thoroughly Christian education, one that teaches the Bible and a biblical view of God and the world. Christians should not send their children to public schools since education is not a God-ordained function of civil government (nor of parents, beyond the training and admonition of the Lord) and since these schools are sub-Christian at best and anti-Christian at worst.

No comments:

Post a Comment