# Is it lawful for Christians to have any part with state education?



## Hemustincrease (Oct 19, 2013)

Good evening.

In making a general google search under the terms ‘should church discipline be applied to parents who send their children to state/public schools?’ I was directed to a post on this forum. 

http://www.puritanboard.com/f32/education-church-discipline-23152/

The post was written some 6 years ago now and unfortunately it was closed without ever really tackling the meat of the subject. I am well aware that this subject creates a good bit of discomfort in Christian circles, nonetheless, I wonder if I might tentatively raise the matter again? I think the very fact there is disunity within the church, demands that it be properly debated, with the goal of deeper unity, always kept in the forefront. 

In considering this subject, perhaps we might keep in mind this well known command “And, ye fathers, provoke not your children to wrath: but bring them up in the nurture and admonition _of the Lord_.” Ephesians 6:4

There are of course dozens of other Scripture verses relating to this subject, but I think that one verse pretty much wraps it up. 



State schools are founded upon (and have as their philosophy) the things God hates. They teach lies without any fear of their Maker. They daily cause little ones to stumble (with their parents full permission) in word, thought and deed. Sins such as blasphemy, fornication, sodomy, lying, dishonoring parents and many more are taught as acceptable and this is all before the children reach the playground where all manner of evil communication (which corrupts good manners) abounds and children all become companions of fools (and Scripture says such a one will be destroyed). A girl can actually be assisted to commit murder and at the same time to lie to her parents, for her act of murder will be hidden from those whom God will one day hold to account for the instruction she received. I could go on, but you get the picture.  


My questions to the church, the people of God, are as follows:

Is it lawful for believing parents to send their children to state schools? 
If you believe it to be lawful to use state schools, what is your Biblical basis for this understanding? 
If you believe it is unlawful, how do you approach this subject within your own church? Is it a matter for reproof etc?


I’d be sincerely grateful for an edifying discussion regarding these questions.

On a personal note, I am (and have been for over 3 years since my youngest was a tiny baby) a single mother of three children (9,5 and 3) and whilst such circumstances have been suggested many times over as being prohibitive of providing a God fearing education/upbringing, I quite obviously disagree. I home educate.  If God commands a thing, He will also provide the means to obey such a command. It has never crossed my mind for so much as a millisecond, to place my children under the Godless/God hating instruction of the state, regardless of what my circumstances have been. This personal note might sift out some of the usual questions of ‘exceptional circumstances’ raised in such discussions and keep us focused on a Biblical discussion instead.

with love in our Savior
Jo


----------



## Jack K (Oct 19, 2013)

Hemustincrease said:


> State schools are founded upon (and have as their philosophy) the things God hates. They teach lies without any fear of their Maker. They daily cause little ones to stumble (with their parents full permission) in word, thought and deed. Sins such as blasphemy, fornication, sodomy, lying, dishonoring parents and many more are taught as acceptable and this is all before the children reach the playground where all manner of evil communication (which corrupts good manners) abounds and children all become companions of fools (and Scripture says such a one will be destroyed). A girl can actually be assisted to commit murder and at the same time to lie to her parents, for her act of murder will be hidden from those whom God will one day hold to account for the instruction she received.



I think you need to prove these points for your conclusion to be airtight. And while those things may be a fair description of some state schools and what happens to some kids, they don't sound like a fair assessment of ALL state schools I'm familiar with.

In any case, parents are duty-bound to oversee the proper education of their children. This may include letting other people do some of the direct teaching. If a parent has carefully considered schooling options—taking into account the needs of the particular child, the resources available, the particular skills and character of potential professional teachers, the amount of influence the parent retains in a particular school setting, and more—and then chooses to enroll a child in a state school, that parent should not be summarily subject to censure from the church. Not all state schools and not all family/child/teacher situations fit one mold.


----------



## THE W (Oct 19, 2013)

I lean towards the view of the OP.

It is true that not all these schools teach those things the OP described, maybe just 99.9% of them. maybe some one can list some state skools that teach and encourage biblical christian values. 

Prayer in school is practically outlawed. No more pledge of allegiance or they keep it and take the "under God" part out. no state skool teaches creationism, 100% evolution and big bang. sex education in state skools don't teach your child biblical principles about their sexuality and biblical manhood and womenhood and gender roles and some(if not all) even deem masturbation as acceptable. We don't even need to talk about the social climate in these state skoolatencharies.

It's not about whether or not a skool is gonna keep your kid off drugs and on the path to graduation and higher education and further success in life(matt 16:26 anyone?). its whether or not that school is going to actually consistently teach Christian values...REAL, BIBLICAL christian values! not the liberal, humanistic, 'Xtianity' that's popular in the US church today.

even the majority of these "christian" academies are a joke. many of them are roman.

I think the question within the question would be: is it sin to subject your child to an educational and social environment that will neglect and even appose christian values?

Just my bronze lincolns


----------



## JML (Oct 19, 2013)

I don't really think it proper to make a general statement that public education is wrong. Is it preferable? I would say not. But sometimes circumstances in life lead us to have to do things that are not preferable. In my situation, my wife and I believe that homeschooling is the best option as far as educating our children. However, my wife has debilitating migraines quite often and when my oldest reached school age we placed her in private school due to the strain it would have placed on my wife with her health issues. Not everyone can afford private school though, so another family facing the same situation may have had to place their children in public school. It is easy to have a strong opinion about this subject but sometimes life doesn't work out the way we planned. I am ashamed to say that we used think badly of parents who sent their children to school and did not homeschool. God has a way of teaching us the lesson of not judging an action until we know all the facts.


----------



## Scot (Oct 19, 2013)

For those in favor of state schools, I think they need to prove that God has given the state authority in the realm education. As far as I can see from scripture God has given the state the job of protecting the people. Welfare, education, healthcare, etc. is the job of the family and church.

I don't remember ever reading of the Israelites sending their children to the temple on the Sabbath and then giving them over to the Philistines for the rest of the week.

Or as Tertullian wrote ""What indeed has Athens to do with Jerusalem?"


----------



## Tim (Oct 19, 2013)

I think there are two questions here, that should be treated separately:

1. Is it proper for the state to provide any sort of education (lets limit it to K-12 for this discussion);
2. Is it proper for Christian parents to send their children to be educated in any sort of system that is not purposefully Christian.


----------



## Philip (Oct 19, 2013)

Scot said:


> For those in favor of state schools, I think they need to prove that God has given the state authority in the realm education.



This is a separate question as to whether the state should fund schools or whether schools ought to be private institutions. Incidentally, the first public education system was set up by the Scottish Parliament in 1616 (and then re-issued in 1633, 1646 and, 1696) under the direction of the Kirk.



Scot said:


> I don't remember ever reading of the Israelites sending their children to the temple on the Sabbath and then giving them over to the Philistines for the rest of the week.



I don't remember the Israelites being particularly good examples of raising the next generation, either.


----------



## THE W (Oct 19, 2013)

John Lanier said:


> However, my wife has debilitating migraines quite often and when my oldest reached school age we placed her in private school due to the strain it would have placed on my wife with her health issues. Not everyone can afford private school though, so another family facing the same situation may have had to place their children in public school.



Families in this extreme situation should talk to the session of their church on what can be done for them(james 1:27; matt 25:34-40). their children can be sent to the homes of other able homeschooling mothers. The Body of Christ should step up and help out.


----------



## VictorBravo (Oct 19, 2013)

Scot said:


> For those in favor of state schools, I think they need to prove that God has given the state authority in the realm education.



I don’t follow why they would “need” to prove this. Isn’t the question here about the parents’ use of their own authority over their children in choosing to send them to a public school?


----------



## Scot (Oct 20, 2013)

VictorBravo said:


> I don’t follow why they would “need” to prove this. Isn’t the question here about the parents’ use of their own authority over their children in choosing to send them to a public school?



Because if God has not given the government jurisdiction over this area why would Christians willfully give their children over to it?

http://theantithesis.weebly.com/education.html


----------



## kvanlaan (Oct 20, 2013)

> I don't remember the Israelites being particularly good examples of raising the next generation, either.



Immaterial and irrelevant. God gave that responsibility to the father/parents. That they were not good at it is besides the point.

Also, does Romans 12 not speak to this directly? When we send our children to public schools, we ARE conforming them to this world, 6-8 hours a day. My opinion on the issue of whether or not I think the local public school is OK in my authority as a parent does not matter if Scripture tells me otherwise.


----------



## JoannaV (Oct 20, 2013)

Right now I can't think of any argument that all Christians everywhere should never send their children to any kind of public education. It would seem you would have to argue that all children up to the age of X can only ever be within physical sight of their parents and only ever taught anything by their parents and can never talk to any non-Christian. So I can only think of reasons why homeschooling may be the best choice a lot of the time, but not anything to prove it is the only choice ever.
There are small village primary schools where the few teachers are fellow Christians. Would that still be evil? I've heard some bad things about the US curriculum (don't know to what extent all I've heard is true) but in the UK I never encountered teaching of evolution or sex outside marriage or suchlike in my primary school. And I heard worse swear words walking down the street than I did from my classmates.

It is good for parents to receive guidance from their fellow brothers and sisters in Christ when making these decisions. But I don't see how we could prove that the decision must be the same for all parents everywhere.

(I intend to homeschool.)


----------



## Philip (Oct 20, 2013)

A couple of things on this subject:

There seem to be three questions at play here. First, may the magistrate set up a system of public schooling? Certainly the framers of the WCF believed so, given their support for the existing university system and (as I stated above) the support, in Scotland at least, for public education at the parish level. So at the very least we need to recognize that the issue is incredibly complex.

Secondly, the question is whether a Christian may send their children to public school. Here too we have a complex issue, but I don't know that we can bind people's consciences across the board here. I think those who have talked about individual children's needs and individual school systems are most certainly speaking wisdom here. Can one raise one's children faithfully and still let the public education system teach them reading, writing, and arithmetic? Sure---and I've known plenty who have.

Finally, should I send my kids (ok, I don't have kids) to public school? That's another question entirely.


----------



## irresistible_grace (Oct 20, 2013)

Indoctrination takes place regardless of whether a child is educated by the "state" or at home. Personally, I would rather have complete control over the "Christian" education of my covenant children and what they are being taught rather than having extremely limited control over what they are being taught while they are being indoctrinated by "the world" (at least 7 hours a day, 5 days a week) in a "state" school. This is why I educate my children via the Department of nonPublic Education, at home! 

That said, I do not believe a large portion of the generalizations made in this thread concerning "public education" are charitable or accurate. Some of the statements above boarder on hyperbole.

Regardless of where you choose to send your children [the other] 6 days per week, may you keep the LORD's Day holy! Enjoy the Sabbath & call it a delight. This is the day the LORD has made!

In Christian love,


----------



## jwithnell (Oct 20, 2013)

The state mandate actually has two questions embedded: is it within the state's authority to _tell_ a parent how to educate his children? No, both in view of the US Constitution and Biblical guidelines. Is it _permissible_ for a state to provide education? That's another question. Previous generations have answered this question "yes," then insisted that the education be within a Christian worldview.

Again, from an historical point of view, I think it would be hard to argue that homeschooling is normative within the Christian community. In puritan New England, parents taught their very young children and their girls to a certain point before sending the boys, and sometimes the girls, on to school. I've pondered why they didn't teach further and reached this conclusion: the amount of work an average woman had to do was too much to take most of the day teaching their children. They had to grow the wool or flax, spin the thread then weave it into cloth,_ before_ they could make their clothes, and that was just one area of responsibility! Our ability to educate our children is, to some extent, a precious luxury.


----------



## Hemustincrease (Oct 20, 2013)

Scot said:


> For those in favor of state schools, I think they need to prove that God has given the state authority in the realm education. As far as I can see from scripture God has given the state the job of protecting the people. Welfare, education, healthcare, etc. is the job of the family and church.



This is a valid point in my opinion. God nowhere gives the state the jurisdiction to educate the nations children. They step outside of their boundaries when they do so and we are then forced to support this activity (whether we use it or not) by way of taxes. I’m not sure one could build a solid Biblical argument against the use of public schools based on this question alone though. 




kvanlaan said:


> Also, does Romans 12 not speak to this directly? When we send our children to public schools, we ARE conforming them to this world, 6-8 hours a day. My opinion on the issue of whether or not I think the local public school is OK in my authority as a parent does not matter if Scripture tells me otherwise.



Amen. Our decision must be made on the basis of Scripture, not the individual merits or otherwise of each and every state school. Nor can we base our decision on circumstances, pragmatism or any other non Biblical position. We must begin with the Word of God. 


JoannaV said:


> There are small village primary schools where the few teachers are fellow Christians. Would that still be evil? I've heard some bad things about the US curriculum (don't know to what extent all I've heard is true) but in the UK I never encountered teaching of evolution or sex outside marriage or suchlike in my primary school. And I heard worse swear words walking down the street than I did from my classmates.



If the small village school is a state school then it is founded upon a philosophy which is contrary to the Gospel and to the Truth found in Scripture. That Christians are the ones imparting that anti Christ philosophy should be something that greatly concerns us rather than encourages us to support it. Evolution has been taught in UK schools for decades now. (I was raised in the UK and live here again now.) Sex education has been on the curriculum for decades too, with ever increasing perversions added as society has become more and more degraded by the humanism the schools have so successfully spread. So far as swearing is concerned. The issue is not whether or not our children ‘hear’ swearing or blasphemy as to how those who have authority over them at that time respond to that behavior. 


Whilst I certainly have great sympathy with the many and various difficulties and trials which so many (if not all at some point or another) families face, we bear a poor witness to our faith if we permit them (the difficulties) to tempt us or even drive us onto a path of disobedience, simply because to obey appears in our human minds to be an impossible feat. (If we are faithful to live in obedience, we can be absolutely certain that the Lord will provide the means, no matter what the particulars of our difficulties might be. With Christ, all things are possible.) LIkewise, the fact that the church as a body so often fails to assist single parents or struggling families and instead points them to the welfare state, either for food or for education does not reduce the command of the Lord in anyway. Those families must still choose obedience, no matter the lack of earthly support for that choice. 

We are commanded to bring up our children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. Thus, the question is not ‘what is best’ (from some kind of circumstantial or pragmatic basis) so much as what is commanded. 

In considering a school or a tutor or whatever other outside (of the family) educational provision, this question surely must be asked? Will this educational provision work towards assisting me in bringing up my child in the nurture and admonition of the Lord? Or will it work against that? 

No education is neutral. The state most certainly does not believe that the education they provide is anything close to neutral. 

How far from God’s truth must a curriculum/institution/educational provision fall before believers stand united in opposition to it? How far must an educational provision go in despising Christ and the Gospel before we reject it outright? The Lord never left any room for neutrality in His teachings. 

For those who consider state schooling to be a lawful option, are you willing to share your Biblical basis for that belief? 

It might sound melodramatic, especially to those who use the public schools, but we might do well to remember what is at the core of humanism (which is the root of communism). Humanism seeks to destroy the family and erode all morality. If the movers and shakers behind humanism cannot do those two things, they will never succeed in any other goals. State schooling has been the primary means of success for them. Children are taught to honor and depend upon the state above God and above parents. We don’t need to look far to see the results of their overwhelming success. How then can we preach against humanism from the pulpit, yet support it Monday through Friday?


----------



## a mere housewife (Oct 20, 2013)

Jessica and Jean, thank you. I think there was also more humility in the past in this area. Parents did not seem to have this idea that by controlling their childrens' environments they could spare them from evil: as if parents -- though sinners in a still sinfully permeated environment (Christian homes are still part of a fallen world) -- necessarily have a charmed influence where their own sins have no lasting impact on their children. Cain only had Adam and Eve's influence, and he still grew up to be a murderer. 

Also, mothers and fathers did not seem to feel that they were all specially qualified as educators.

I am not against homeschooling -- nor am I advocating that people send their children to public schools. Having been homeschooled myself (and I love my dear parents deeply and honor the efforts they made in this area), I am not an unmitigated fan of any method. 

Since this question of church discipline has been brought up so plainly, not wishing to be ungracious to anyone here, I think it right to say that I believe (and have some reason for believing) that creating and taking up reproaches against our brethren, an eagerness to find one another in the wrong or to discipline one another from communion over our own understandings, is one of those parental sins that impact little ones.


----------



## Philip (Oct 20, 2013)

Hemustincrease said:


> This is a valid point in my opinion. God nowhere gives the state the jurisdiction to educate the nations children.



He also doesn't say it mustn't, either. The question of the makeup of civil society is not one which the Scriptures directly address and Christians have had differing opinions on this over the centuries (cf. my historical notes above).



Hemustincrease said:


> Amen. Our decision must be made on the basis of Scripture, not the individual merits or otherwise of each and every state school. Nor can we base our decision on circumstances, pragmatism or any other non Biblical position. We must begin with the Word of God.



Ok, so make the decision for your own household, but don't presume to bind the conscience of another believer without warrant from Scripture. The fact is that many Christians do raise their children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord while still sending them to and supporting public education.

Here's a question: is it lawful for a Christian to be an instructor in a state school?


----------



## ZackF (Oct 20, 2013)

No. Church discipline should not be applied to parents who send their children state schools. The state has and continues to usurp citizens and the private sector in a number of spheres including education. It does not follow that such resources can not be used by Christian children or adults. Libraries and healthcare are obvious examples. The fact that adult Christians can use public education resources for many reasons but are necessarily sinning and should be under discipline for supervising children using public education resources is a false conclusion. Public (for that matter home/Christian school) run the spectrum in quality and faithfulness to the truth. I am fortunate to be in a congregation with leadership tolerant and wise enough to understand that faithful Christian parents have reached different conclusions. I would say our church is about a one-third near equal split between private, public and home schooling with little to no resentment of those in other situations. 

In the Christian world there is rising desire to toss out members of a congregation for matters of conscience that would be unthinkable fifteen years ago from children's education to where women work. For some it seems leaving public schools are not enough because no private schools are faithful enough either. It must be homeschooling or bust. That is not even enough for some. No consortia are to be employed nor any unbelievers for anything in a child's education. At the core of the issue is contact with unbelievers in society whether these people be peers or those in positions of authority. One wonders if one of the parents is an unbeliever but is willing to homeschool with his wife!! Does he have the authority to do so? Mrs F. and I are strongly considering home schooling, especially in the early years, but increasingly I find ourselves more disturbed by the increasing disdain Christians have for unbelievers. If we find ourselves, especially our child(ren) going down that path, I'm afraid we will have to rethink our decision. It's the world's job to mock, ridicule and shame Christians and not the other way around. I think some parents think their children should go through an entire childhood without having anything to do with unbelievers as long as possible even into adulthood. In the end it could be best and the Lord's will that certain Christians have no contact with unbelievers though it won't be because we intended it for good.


----------



## calgal (Oct 20, 2013)

THE W said:


> John Lanier said:
> 
> 
> > However, my wife has debilitating migraines quite often and when my oldest reached school age we placed her in private school due to the strain it would have placed on my wife with her health issues. Not everyone can afford private school though, so another family facing the same situation may have had to place their children in public school.
> ...



Wade: the law in the state of Michigan regarding Homeschooling mandates (as in must do) 70% of core classes must be taught in the home. That means mama teaches (in most cases) in the home for most classes. Sending a child outside the home to another homeschool family as you are suggesting means two families are violating the law.


----------



## kvanlaan (Oct 20, 2013)

> Secondly, the question is whether a Christian may send their children to public school. Here too we have a complex issue, but I don't know that we can bind people's consciences across the board here. I think those who have talked about individual children's needs and individual school systems are most certainly speaking wisdom here. Can one raise one's children faithfully and still let the public education system teach them reading, writing, and arithmetic? Sure---and I've known plenty who have.



Sure, and I've known people saved at a Billy Graham crusade. Who here will vouch for the theology or wisdom of such a situation? It is simply unwise to put one's children into the arms of Rome when there is ANY other option. If there simply is not, well, then that is something else. But that is very rarely the case. Israel was unable to perform the sacrifices in the Temple when they were in exile. Unable. Thus there were other methodologies instituted. But when they were able to sacrifice in the Temple and follow God's law, the faithful did so, did they not? 



> Jessica and Jean, thank you. I think there was also more humility in the past in this area. Parents did not seem to have this idea that by controlling their childrens' environments they could spare them from evil: as if parents -- though sinners in a still sinfully permeated environment (Christian homes are still part of a fallen world) -- necessarily have a charmed influence where their own sins have no lasting impact on their children. Cain only had Adam and Eve's influence, and he still grew up to be a murderer.
> 
> Also, mothers and fathers did not seem to feel that they were all specially qualified as educators.



Heidi, it is not the idea that controlling the environment of the child that we could spare our children the slings and arrows of this sinful world, though I do think that we are called to do that anyway. The argument is more hinged upon God giving the command and us following it. My failings as a father due to my sin is no excuse for me to shirk my duties as a father. I see my sin in my children every day, but there is no way I will call in a social worker to 'fix' my failings within my family. I am not saying that those families that do not homeschool are shirking their duties, but must, must, must insist that public school should be an option to a Christian family only in the most dire of circumstances.


----------



## Tim (Oct 20, 2013)

Zach, there are several places where your reasoning does not seem to follow. Do you mind if I point them out? Not trying to pick on you, brother.



KS_Presby said:


> It does not follow that such resources can not be used by Christian children or adults. Libraries and healthcare are obvious examples.



I don't think the use of libraries and healthcare has any bearing on the lawfulness of educating children in state schools that do not have a Christian curriculum.



KS_Presby said:


> I am fortunate to be in a congregation with leadership tolerant and wise enough to understand that faithful Christian parents have reached different conclusions.



Isn't this begging the question at this point? The OP is essentially asking whether it is faithful to participate in state education.



> In the Christian world there is rising desire to toss out members of a congregation for matters of conscience that would be unthinkable fifteen years ago from children's education to where women work.



It is important to remember that excommunication is the last resort of church discipline. Discipline begins with gentle instruction. But aren't you again begging the question by concluding as a matter of conscience what is being asked in the OP?



> For some it seems leaving public schools are not enough because no private schools are faithful enough either. It must be homeschooling or bust. That is not even enough for some. No consortia are to be employed nor any unbelievers for anything in a child's education.



Didn't you just finish saying this is a matter of conscience? Why would you then have a problem with such conclusions?



> I find ourselves more disturbed by the increasing disdain Christians have for unbelievers. If we find ourselves, especially our child(ren) going down that path, I'm afraid we will have to rethink our decision. It's the world's job to mock, ridicule and shame Christians and not the other way around.



A big jump here. Why should non-participation in state, non-Christian education connect with disdain, mocking, ridicule, and shame? 



> I think some parents think their children should go through an entire childhood without having anything to do with unbelievers as long as possible even into adulthood. In the end it could be best and the Lord's will that certain Christians have no contact with unbelievers though it won't be because we intended it for good.



How in the world do you make the jump from opting out of state education to "having nothing to do with unbelievers"? This attitude may exist somewhere, but it is by no means a necessary part of homeschooling or other Christian education. In fact, I suspect that homeschooling affords a far greater flexibility to interact with members of the general public, whether it be in commerce, politics, agriculture, special interest groups, etc.


----------



## calgal (Oct 20, 2013)

Corrolary question: What about the congregants who work in the schools, provide goods and services to the schools and support said schools: are they also under church discipline? If not then why?


----------



## Tim (Oct 20, 2013)

Philip said:


> Ok, so make the decision for your own household, but don't presume to bind the conscience of another believer without warrant from Scripture. The fact is that many Christians do raise their children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord while still sending them to and supporting public education.



Philip, do children receive a Christian education at public school? I am having trouble understanding how that can be considered "Christian education", which is commanded in scripture.


----------



## kvanlaan (Oct 20, 2013)

And thus the "warrant from Scripture" objection is satisfied.


----------



## Scot (Oct 20, 2013)

Dr. Morecraft does an excellent job addressing the issue(s) in this sermon. I've posted this before on a different thread but here it is again.

The Crisis of Education CRI001 - SermonAudio.com


----------



## THE W (Oct 20, 2013)

calgal said:


> THE W said:
> 
> 
> > John Lanier said:
> ...



Which is what the able homeschooling mother will be doing. teaching her own children in her own home along with other children.

do you have a link to where this law is stated where i could look at it?



calgal said:


> Corrolary question: What about the congregants who work in the schools, provide goods and services to the schools and support said schools: are they also under church discipline? If not then why?



Why would a christian work, provide for, and support an organization that neglects and even opposes biblical christian values?


----------



## Mushroom (Oct 20, 2013)

The extrapolations in this thread are indeed underwhelming. But all else aside, it seems needful that some proper consensus be established. What of the family that is convinced they should homeschool, but can't pay their obligations on a single income? Should the Church, including members who have no such conviction, or even those who might consider homeschooling inappropriate, help that family accomplish its goal? With the 'big tent' approach, these conundrums do arise. Should a Session tell that family that since this is a matter of conscience, and therefore indifferent, that their inability to afford it is not the Church's problem?

We've had the question raised in the thread whether parents that send their kids to public schools should be disciplined, but here's another - what of the family that gets behind in their financial obligations while homeschooling? Is their unwillingness to send the kids to public school to permit the wife to work for money cause for discipline? Their indebtedness and delinquency in paying their bills is a spot on the purity of the Church. Should they be helped or disciplined?


----------



## JoannaV (Oct 20, 2013)

I know a _lot_ of Christian teachers. Some homeschool their own children, some do not. But they enjoy teaching children (who would otherwise not be taught by their own parents) to read and write and also be witnesses to Christ. To what extent they can teach Christianity will vary, but generally some personal testimony at least is allowed. Some may find they need to leave a particular school or school system or subject or even teaching entirely at some point, but for many teaching remains a profession consistent with their faith.
What my non-believing classmates knew of God, they knew because they had been to state school. They learnt many Bible passages and sang hymns several times a week and prayers were offered. Years later they still remembered these things. (Of course there are various reasons various Christians would not want this, and may have issues with certain aspects of worship and religious teaching in schools.) At my primary school (in the UK) the headteacher was a Christian and so were several of the other teachers. I assume many were not Christians, but at the time I probably thought most were. The school's references to the Bible and Christ added to the witness from my parents and my church. It was _not _a CofE school, but in retrospect there may have been more Christian influence in my school than in many church schools.

As I plan on homeschooling, most of the time I think about all the ways in which homeschooling will be better for my children than schools would. This thread is reminding me of the good bits sometimes found in schools though. 

*Is it lawful to attend university?*


----------



## ZackF (Oct 20, 2013)

Tim said:


> Zach, there are several places where your reasoning does not seem to follow. Do you mind if I point them out? Not trying to pick on you, brother.
> 
> *
> My, Zack's, response in bold italics.
> ...



[*I]It's not a jump when churches are willing to toss members out for sending them to state schools. This I say as an advocate of homeschooling and a likely participant. I do agree about the flexibilities you mention. [/I]*


----------



## JoannaV (Oct 20, 2013)

And I do really think that a better focus would be on encouraging the church to support its families in educating their own children! Brad you are correct! It's all very well for a church to decide to discipline members who send their children to school....but so many churches look on whilst families struggle as they do their best to live according to their faith!


----------



## irresistible_grace (Oct 20, 2013)

Mushroom said:


> The extrapolations in this thread are indeed underwhelming. But all else aside, it seems needful that some proper consensus be established. What of the family that is convinced they should homeschool, but can't pay their obligations on a single income? Should the Church, including members who have no such conviction, or even those who might consider homeschooling inappropriate, help that family accomplish its goal? With the 'big tent' approach, these conundrums do arise. Should a Session tell that family that since this is a matter of conscience, and therefore indifferent, that their inability to afford it is not the Church's problem?
> 
> We've had the question raised in the thread whether parents that send their kids to public schools should be disciplined, but here's another - what of the family that gets behind in their financial obligations while homeschooling? Is their unwillingness to send the kids to public school to permit the wife to work for money cause for discipline? Their indebtedness and delinquency in paying their bills is a spot on the purity of the Church. Should they be helped or disciplined?


If the church disciplines those who don't homeschool then they should help those who are financially unable to do so. If the church refuses to help "the poor" who are financially unable to do provide their children with a"CHRISTIAN" education they shouldn't discipline those who feel obligated to send their children to public school. in order to provide for their family.


----------



## Philip (Oct 20, 2013)

Tim said:


> Philip, do children receive a Christian education at public school? I am having trouble understanding how that can be considered "Christian education", which is commanded in scripture.



How do we define a "Christian Education", though? The education commanded in Scripture seems to relate to training in righteous living. Delegating, for example, the teaching of reading, maths, and sciences would not be a failure in such so long as adequate explanation was provided. Discussion of the relevant issues would be necessary, but it would be necessary anyway.



THE W said:


> Why would a christian work, provide for, and support an organization that neglects and even opposes biblical christian values?



So much for the high school biology teacher who fights to be able to discuss creation and evolution in the classroom. So much for the university professor who counsels students from a Christian perspective. So much for the Christians in the early church who worked in Caesar's household.


----------



## Tim (Oct 20, 2013)

irresistible_grace said:


> If the church disciplines those who don't homeschool then they should help those who are financially unable to do so.



An excellent exhortation. Yes, they should go hand-in-hand.


----------



## Tim (Oct 20, 2013)

Philip said:


> How do we define a "Christian Education", though?



A fair question. It is instruction that says, "The God of the Bible is the God of these subjects". To neglect to mention the divine source of order and beauty in all academic subjects is, in a sense, a lie. 



> So much for the high school biology teacher who fights to be able to discuss creation and evolution in the classroom.



With all sensitivity and respect to those who are still fighting, isn't this battle already lost? I mean, you really do have to admit this, don't you?



Philip said:


> So much for the university professor who counsels students from a Christian perspective.



Professors have much more freedom to set their own curriculum, and university students are adults. This is a _completely_ separate issue.


----------



## THE W (Oct 20, 2013)

Philip said:


> Tim said:
> 
> 
> > Philip, do children receive a Christian education at public school? I am having trouble understanding how that can be considered "Christian education", which is commanded in scripture.
> ...



The organization I'm referring to is a public school not teaching christian values. Clearly i needed to be more specific.


----------



## Philip (Oct 20, 2013)

Tim said:


> A fair question. It is instruction that says, "The God of the Bible is the God of these subjects". To neglect to mention the divine source of order and beauty in all academic subjects is, in a sense, a lie.



Ok, so can a Christian parent send their child to a public educational system (thinking particularly of high school here) and provide explanation and clarification in the home?



Tim said:


> With all sensitivity and respect to those who are still fighting, isn't this battle already lost? I mean, you really do have to admit this, don't you?



The gentleman in question (who's a homeschooling dad) would beg to differ. I've known any number of faithful Christians who have worked in the public education system, being salt and light in what is, frankly, a broken system. But then again, so is every system.


----------



## irresistible_grace (Oct 20, 2013)

The New England Primer contained the WESTMINSTER SHORTER CATECHISM, the Apostles Creed, The Lord's Prayer, lots of poems to teach Biblical truths, prayers etc.
The purpose of "state" education was first and foremost to teach children to read. The first book published in New England was the Bay Psalter & most of the words in the primer are found in the Psalter.

The "state" is no longer concerned with providing a "CHRISTIAN" education & I am not a huge fan of what passes for "CHRISTIANITY" in America today ... even if the "state" were to provide a so-called "CHRISTAN" education I would still feel the need to educate my own covenant children in a distinctly "Reformed" way!


----------



## Mushroom (Oct 20, 2013)

Philip said:


> How do we define a "Christian Education", though? The education commanded in Scripture seems to relate to training in righteous living. Delegating, for example, the teaching of reading, maths, and sciences would not be a failure in such so long as adequate explanation was provided. Discussion of the relevant issues would be necessary, but it would be necessary anyway.


I suppose I'd define a Christian education as one that recognizes Christ as King in all its assertions. You certainly won't find that in public school 'reading, maths, and sciences'. In fact, you find quite the opposite. 'Discussion' seems inadequate to deprogram the garbage public schools espouse, because the humanist religion it does espouse is emnity to the true faith..

The problem seems to be that entirely - that the state itself does not recognize Christ as King, and thus its apparatuses do the same. 


Philip said:


> So much for the high school biology teacher who fights to be able to discuss creation and evolution in the classroom. So much for the university professor who counsels students from a Christian perspective. So much for the Christians in the early church who worked in Caesar's household.


Well, therein lies the rub - Caesar's servants were slaves, brother. Are we? The scriptures state that if a Christian can obtain his freedom he should. We have a freedom that was purchased with the price of the blood of our forefathers. Should we surrender it so as to be 'secret agent' Christians in a humanist culture? Because unless we are _disobedient_ servant/slaves, that is what being an employee of the state school system entails. It is contrary to Federal law for a servant of state schools to openly espouse and proclaim the gospel. That was not so in the past, but it definitely is now, so it seems a corner has been turned. But God gives more grace. Can we not trust Him that our talents can be employed in teaching, carpentry, or candle-stick making to His glory and provision for our families without selling ourselves into slavery? How glorifying to God can it be to _disobey_ our employers/masters to _sneak_ in an occasional allusion to the gospel?


----------



## Tim (Oct 20, 2013)

KS_Presby said:


> I believe you can learn solid, truthful stuff from unbelievers at whatever education level as well as get treated effectively for cancer and have your house fire put out.



Thanks for your responses, brother. I acknowledge that you are supportive of homeschooling, but I think that you are minimizing the seriousness of neglecting to provide an explicit Christian education. I'll respond to just one of your points, okay?

I think that there is a difference between education on one hand and medicine/firefighting on the other. While medicine does have some ethical implications, I believe that education, being part of the larger umbrella of Christian discipleship, is in a different sphere from other endeavors. With education, we are concerned with developing a worldview in children who have not yet formed a worldview. This is not the case for the treatment of disease or emergency response. 

So, while one can indeed learn solid material from unbelievers, the education of children who are, by definition, young, naive, and immature must be a special case. Education must be explicitly Christian. Consider this verse from Deuteronomy 6:



> 6 And these words, which I command thee this day, shall be in thine heart: 7 and thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children, and shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up. 8 And thou shalt bind them for a sign upon thine hand, and they shall be as frontlets between thine eyes. 9 And thou shalt write them upon the posts of thy house, and on thy gates.



Notice how extensive this discourse is, and how it is evangelically grounded. I really do think that a humanistic education does much to undermine what is to be the ever-present consideration of the believer and the children he disciples. It is difficult enough for us adults, with a recognized profession of faith, to employ our Christian worldview in all we do. How much more difficult is it for children, many of whom have not yet made a credible profession (i.e., are not yet communicant members) to identify and reject the humanistic and evolutionary philosophy that is presented in the state schools?

For parents to subject their children to such, is this not a worthy matter of concern for the elders of the congregation?


----------



## Philip (Oct 20, 2013)

Mushroom said:


> Caesar's servants were slaves, brother.



Not all of them were. Many would have been Roman citizens and aristocrats.



Mushroom said:


> Should we surrender it so as to be 'secret agent' Christians in a humanist culture?



False dichotomy. We are Christians in a humanist culture and many of us have callings which will limit our speech. None of the folks I know of in these fields are "secret agents" in any sense. Those who know them are aware of their convictions, and most of the time they are respected for them. 



Mushroom said:


> Can we not trust Him that our talents can be employed in teaching, carpentry, or candle-stick making to His glory and provision for our families without selling ourselves into slavery?



Here you seem to have a bit of confusion. You seem to think that no Christian could have public education as a _vocation_ where God was calling them to minister in that context. I know a number of wonderful Godly Christian men and women who have been called to just that and who glorify God in that vocation.



Mushroom said:


> The problem seems to be that entirely - that the state itself does not recognize Christ as King, and thus its apparatuses do the same.



Well, quite. But we have to work for the Kingdom within the system we have.


----------



## Tim (Oct 20, 2013)

Philip said:


> Ok, so can a Christian parent send their child to a public educational system (thinking particularly of high school here) and provide explanation and clarification in the home?



Isn't this a rather schizophrenic approach to education - where a child, whose worldview is still being formed, is presented with material that he must learn, but then must reject some, but not all of it. This sounds good, but does it really work to have a constant conflict in education - a constant sequence of learning, unlearning, and correction?

I say no - it is confusing and double minded. How can the child trust his teachers?



Philip said:


> The gentleman in question (who's a homeschooling dad) would beg to differ. I've known any number of faithful Christians who have worked in the public education system, being salt and light in what is, frankly, a broken system. But then again, so is every system.



Salt and light, I acknowledge. One can be kind and loving. But, in the end, there is a set curriculum, right? And it isn't Christian. How does one work with that?


----------



## Tim (Oct 20, 2013)

Philip said:


> But we have to work for the Kingdom within the system we have.



No, you don't!

In God's providence and mercy, there are viable alternatives to state education for K-12. There are private Christian schools. Homeschooling is legal and well supported with various groups in each state. Homeschooling continues to grow in the year 2013 and all indicators are that homeschoolers outperform most public schoolers. 

Now, if you want to talk about higher education, this is not necessarily the case. However, as I said, universities are for adults and it is a different case.


----------



## Mushroom (Oct 20, 2013)

Philip said:


> Not all of them were. Many would have been Roman citizens and aristocrats.


As Christianity was an unlawful faith under Roman law, that seems a rather spurious assertion.


Philip said:


> False dichotomy. We are Christians in a humanist culture and many of us have callings which will limit our speech. None of the folks I know of in these fields are "secret agents" in any sense. Those who know them are aware of their convictions, and most of the time they are respected for them.


A philosophy major refutes a 'false dichotomy' with anecdotal evidence? Please, Philip.


Philip said:


> Here you seem to have a bit of confusion. You seem to think that no Christian could have public education as a vocation where God was calling them to minister in that context. I know a number of wonderful Godly Christian men and women who have been called to just that and who glorify God in that vocation.


So you assert that God would call FREE Christians to willingly serve an unrighteous magistrate in the inculcation of children in Christ-denying concepts (which they MUST do unless disobedient to said master)? That's astounding, brother! But really not surprising. I see a lot of free Christians submit themselves to unrighteous masters in the pursuit of property or security who then speciously excuse their treason with some form of 'secret agent Christian' defense. Their master would certainly disapprove, but hey, at least they can make the SUV payment. Is it any wonder that Christ's Bride is held in such derision by her enemies when her men will not stand for truth to their hurt in their pursuits of paychecks?

The Lord said through Paul:


> 1Co 7:21 Were you a slave when called? Do not be concerned about it. (*But if you can gain your freedom, avail yourself of the opportunity.*)


 Obtaining freedom would likely entail some frightening things for a slave; insecurity and loss of a home he was familiar with, but he is commanded to pursue it if possible. In this country, at this time, the only chains that bind a man to a particular master are his attachment to the worldly benefits that master affords him. We are commanded to quit ourselves like men, not willingly and unnecessarily submit ourselves to wicked masters before whom we must hide our faith to remain in his good graces.


----------



## Andres (Oct 21, 2013)

THE W said:


> Why would a christian work, provide for, and support an organization that neglects and even opposes biblical christian values?



Do you think it's wrong for a Christian to work at any business (excepting works of mercy/necessity) that is open on the Lord's Day? Even if the Christian doesn't work on the Lord's Day, the business "neglects and even opposes biblical christian values" by being open on the Lord's Day, right?

To answer the OP's question, as an elder, no, I would not discipline a church member for choosing to send their child to public school. I have a soon to be 2 year old son. My wife and I would like to have more children, Lord willing. We have decided to home school all of our kids. I am pretty strongly opposed to public school for many of the reasons mentioned in this thread, but again I would not discipline a church member for choosing to send their child to public school. The reason is becasue I do not believe that family decisions fall under the authority of the local church. God has ordained the father/husband as the head of the household and I believe he holds the authority in these familial decisions. Again, I may encourage, counsel, and help him as much as possible to choose a homeschooling/Christian school path, but I could not discipline him.


----------



## Mushroom (Oct 21, 2013)

Andres said:


> THE W said:
> 
> 
> > Why would a christian work, provide for, and support an organization that neglects and even opposes biblical christian values?
> ...


I'd say one committed to the serving of pizza falls into a different category from one committed to the eternal destruction of the souls of children, but being stubbornly self-employed since 1997 I may be somewhat unsympathetic to the argument.


----------



## Mushroom (Oct 21, 2013)

Philip said:


> We are Christians in a humanist culture and many of us have callings which will limit our speech.


How is that possible, Philip? Are we enslaved eunuchs such as was Daniel? The only limitations on our speech as free American Christians is that which we willingly submit to in the pursuit of godliness or prosperity. Only one of those is appropriate for God's people.


----------



## Andres (Oct 21, 2013)

Mushroom said:


> Andres said:
> 
> 
> > THE W said:
> ...



I agree with you, but based on the person I was quoting, they seem to be saying that the individual doesn't matter as much as what the organization stands for. The W said that public school oppose biblical values so it's wrong for a Christian to work there. I'm saying if this is one's logic, then Pizza Hut is opposing biblical values by being open on the Lord's Day.


----------



## Philip (Oct 21, 2013)

Tim said:


> Isn't this a rather schizophrenic approach to education - where a child, whose worldview is still being formed, is presented with material that he must learn, but then must reject some, but not all of it. This sounds good, but does it really work to have a constant conflict in education - a constant sequence of learning, unlearning, and correction?



I suppose I am thinking here of higher grade-levels where the kind of crutical thinking this would entail is actually supposed to be part of the dialectic of education.



Tim said:


> One can be kind and loving. But, in the end, there is a set curriculum, right? And it isn't Christian. How does one work with that?



And the set curriculum is set by a local school board. As I said, the people who I know are shining the light of Christ in this place and it is a disservice to those on the front line to kibitz (pardon a Yiddish-ism) about where God has placed them. 

As as side note, I actually do support private and homeschooling (for entirely different reasons) and am a product of said systems. But I had Godly Christians friends who didn't.



Mushroom said:


> So you assert that God would call FREE Christians to willingly serve an unrighteous magistrate in the inculcation of children in Christ-denying concepts



God calls Christians to subvert all kinds of Christ-denying structures.



Mushroom said:


> But really not surprising. I see a lot of free Christians submit themselves to unrighteous masters in the pursuit of property or security who then speciously excuse their treason with some form of 'secret agent Christian' defense.



So last year I worked for a coffee company (that shall remain nameless) which, in its charitable works, promotes all kinds of sin. In the process I ended up witnessing to a number of people. I was not, as you claim, a "secret agent" because all my coworkers (and many of my customers) knew exactly where I stood. I made no secret of it. Was I somehow "selling out" here, brother?

Again, kibitzing from the rear is easy.


----------



## Herald (Oct 21, 2013)

This thread is lacking any ironclad argument that prohibits parents from sending their children to state schools. However, parents are responsible for the raising of their children. This includes education. Voddie Bauchman said, "If you send your children to Rome, don't be surprised if they come back Romans." In other words, if you send your children to be taught by a godless system, don't be outraged if some of those godless values become theirs. 

Others have mentioned that the church should help in the area of education for those who are hindered by finances or in hard situations such as a single parent. In our zeal for truth we must display grace and love. 

Sent from my iPhone killing Galaxy S-4


----------



## Mushroom (Oct 21, 2013)

Philip said:


> God calls Christians to subvert all kinds of Christ-denying structures.


Please point me in the direction of the scripture that calls Christian to 'subvert' anything. Perhaps my understanding of the word subvert is different from yours, but it sounds dishonest and secretive to me. We are called to 'pull down' strongholds, not infiltrate them through guile.


Philip said:


> So last year I worked for a coffee company (that shall remain nameless) which, in its charitable works, promotes all kinds of sin. In the process I ended up witnessing to a number of people. I was not, as you claim, a "secret agent" because all my coworkers (and many of my customers) knew exactly where I stood. I made no secret of it. Was I somehow "selling out" here, brother?


Doesn't sound like you were hiding your faith to earn a paycheck, Philip. In a Federally-funded public school, however, one MUST hide their faith for that paycheck, by law, or they are both disobedient to their employer and violating said law.


----------



## Mushroom (Oct 21, 2013)

Andres said:


> I agree with you, but based on the person I was quoting, they seem to be saying that the individual doesn't matter as much as what the organization stands for. The W said that public school oppose biblical values so it's wrong for a Christian to work there. I'm saying if this is one's logic, then Pizza Hut is opposing biblical values by being open on the Lord's Day.


Andrew, a person may work for an organization that violates the Sabbath such as Pizza Hut and openly refuse to participate in that violation. My daughter has had 2 jobs where the Sabbath is disregarded, yet stood her ground, with no little difficulty, and both accommodated her convictions. That is impossible in a public school setting. It is illegal for a Christian to teach the gospel as exclusively true there. Many folks might do it and get away with it, but that would be in disobedience to their employer and done surreptitiously.


----------



## calgal (Oct 21, 2013)

THE W said:


> calgal said:
> 
> 
> > THE W said:
> ...



1. MDE Homeschool Redirect. Or here: http://www.hslda.org/docs/nche/Issues/E/Equal_Access.pdf 
2. To feed, clothe and shelter their family and bring salt and light to an unbelieving world.


----------



## Scot (Oct 21, 2013)

calgal said:


> 2. To feed, clothe and shelter their family and bring salt and light to an unbelieving world.



Children in Public Schools: Light to the World or Human Sacrifice? - Steve C. Halbrook

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.

Remember, Ephesians 6:4 reads, “Fathers, do not provoke your children to anger, but bring them up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord” (Ephesians 6:4). All education that runs counter to this requirement to be raised in the discipline and instruction of the Lord--such as public schools--must be rejected. 

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.” 
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?

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)

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)


----------



## Prufrock (Oct 21, 2013)

I thank God for my parents who carefully sought out an area with a good public school - a school where there were teachers who were passionate about their subjects and could teach literature and calculus and physics in ways that my parents knew they couldn't. I'm grateful that they worked on our homework every night with us, and helped us relate what we learned to the instruction in the faith which they gave us at home, seeing our school day as only a part of our education. I'm grateful there were teachers who let the students meet in the classrooms before and after school for prayer if they so desired, and that no teacher ever made a student feel anything less than normal and sane for their faith and values, nor ever sought to subvert and contradict them - especially since a substantial amount of teachers and administrators were members at local churches; and I'm grateful for a public school where administrators would work with parents if those parents had any concerns about a teacher to whom their child was assigned; but most of all, I'm grateful that, if anyone in my parents' life shamed them or made them feel unrighteous, imprudent or in need of discipline for their choice, based only upon generalities with no specific knowledge of the local school system, community or family dynamics - I'm grateful that my parents did not give into that shame, and, with their quiet and simple faith, continued to do what they knew was best for their son and daughter, peaceably bearing whatever condemnation was passed upon them.


----------



## Scot (Oct 21, 2013)

Herald said:


> Voddie Bauchman said, "If you send your children to Rome, don't be surprised if they come back Romans."



[video=youtube;Lq_tcyPV7Vg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lq_tcyPV7Vg[/video]


----------



## Tim (Oct 21, 2013)

Prufrock said:


> I'm grateful that, if anyone in my parents' life shamed them or made them feel unrighteous, imprudent or in need of discipline for their choice, based only upon generalities with no specific knowledge of the local school system, community or family dynamics - I'm grateful that my parents did not give into that shame, and, with their quiet and simple faith, continued to do what they knew was best for their son and daughter, peaceably bearing whatever condemnation was passed upon them.



Paul, I am glad you had a generally good experience in your schooling.

But, I am not quite comfortable with your bringing in words such as shame and condemnation. There have been a few posts above that have attempted to paint a picture of parents who choose public school as _victims_ - those who have been persecuted for their choices within the visible church. 

I do not wish to attribute to you any ill intent, but can you see the potential for this to appear manipulative? For, according to what you describe, it would seem that a principled opposition to state-schooling is cruel.

May we not in this discussion understand that such opposition can and may consist of loving instruction and correction from the elders? May a church body not, on the basis of conviction, adopt a statement of faith that includes the mandate to provide children with a Christian education?


----------



## Philip (Oct 21, 2013)

Mushroom said:


> We are called to 'pull down' strongholds, not infiltrate them through guile.



We are to conform them to Christ's image. Pulling them down can be done as easily from within as from without.



Mushroom said:


> In a Federally-funded public school, however, one MUST hide their faith for that paycheck, by law, or they are both disobedient to their employer and violating said law.



Guess that just never occured to the school systems I'm familiar with, then. Because all of them are honeycombed with Christians who are open about where they stand.


----------



## Tim (Oct 21, 2013)

It also seems to me that some argue as if education choices of parents is the one area of life that is free from elder oversight.


----------



## VictorBravo (Oct 21, 2013)

Tim said:


> But, I am not quite comfortable with your bringing in words such as shame and condemnation. There have been a few posts above that have attempted to paint a picture of parents who choose public school as victims - those who have been persecuted for their choices within the visible church.
> 
> I do not wish to attribute to you any ill intent, but can you see the potential for this to appear manipulative?



Tim, this cuts both ways. If parents are confronted with statements comparing them to those who sacrificed their children to pagan gods, doesn't that also have the potential to seem "manipulative?" It certainly is emotionally charged.

No way am I a public school advocate. But on the other hand, I have seen plenty of examples of public schools being sensitive to parents' religious concerns to think that, at least on many occasions, a parent can be found to have exercised authority with proper discretion in sending a child to a state school.


----------



## a mere housewife (Oct 21, 2013)

I just wanted to add some quotes to this discussion from Rosaria Butterfield's book, The Secret Thoughts of an Unlikely Convert:



> One time, on a Saturday, a young college woman, S, was baking cookies with me. A neighbor came by at the same time to return a book and mentioned something to me about her daughter trying out for something at the local public high school. The neighbor was sharing a concern that she had about something going on in the high school, something that her special needs daughter would not understand. S shook her head and muttered audibly, "Sending a child to the public schools is like giving pearls to swine." This student was not known to be combative or rude. She was so accustomed to be around likeminded people that she slipped. I know she did not intend to do harm. But her heart was revealed in this slip (as our hearts always are). My neighbor was, understandably, offended, and privately, the following week, said to me that she knew the student was hurling the Bible at her, but she had no idea what it meant: was she the pearl or the pig? Why did this pert and disrespectful girl think that public schools were for pigs. These sorts of encounters happened too frequently. . . . My unsaved neighbor needed Jesus more that this college student needed to hurl a few well-rehearsed epithets about the evils of public schools.





> What does it mean to "lack fellowship?" . . . It means that a family needs to be in a church made up of people who are just like they, who raise their children using the same childrearing methods, who take the same stance on birth control, schooling, voting, breastfeeding, dress codes, white flour, white sugar, gluten, childhood immunizations, the observance of secular and religious holidays. We encountered families who feared diversity with a primal fear. They often told us that they didn't want to "confuse" their children by exposing them to differences in parenting standards among Christians. I suspect they feared that deviation from their rules might provide a window for children to see how truly divers the world is and that temptation might lead them astray. Over and over again I have heard this line of thinking from the fearful and the faith-struggling. We in the church tend to be more fearful of the (perceived) sin in the world than of the sin in our own heart. Why is that?



Perhaps regardless of convictedly chosen path in this area all parents could seek to model the study of being quiet and doing one's own business in 1 Thessalonians 4 (linked in context with both brotherly love, and striving to provide for our own) as Paul speaks of his parents doing above -- that would be a great thing for children to learn at home.


----------



## Prufrock (Oct 21, 2013)

Tim said:


> Prufrock said:
> 
> 
> > I'm grateful that, if anyone in my parents' life shamed them or made them feel unrighteous, imprudent or in need of discipline for their choice, based only upon generalities with no specific knowledge of the local school system, community or family dynamics - I'm grateful that my parents did not give into that shame, and, with their quiet and simple faith, continued to do what they knew was best for their son and daughter, peaceably bearing whatever condemnation was passed upon them.
> ...



First of all, we've all seen enough of this conversation on the PB to know where it inevitably terminates; and even if it never reaches that explicit point this time, well, you're right - no one has used the words "shame" and "condemnation;" no one has yet accused anyone of "sacrificing their children to pagan gods," and indoctrinating their children into hating God; so far the only charges have been that parents aren't doing their duty, that they're sending their children off to learn garbage, that they're conforming to the world, that they hate their children, etc, etc, etc. Look, I'm an advocate of homeschooling; in the great majority of cases, I think it is probably preferential to the other schooling options available. But _far_ more important than the discussion of the prudence and wisdom of _that_ choice, is the discussion of the prudence of publicly troubling sensitive consciences over an action which is admitted to be evil only in its circumstances when the accuser has no knowledge whatsoever of those circumstances. People need to be aware of what their words do to others. To needlessly vex another's conscience and bind it, even unwittingly (_especially_ unwittingly), is a dangerous thing. _That_ is where cruelty comes in. If you don't see that such is done in threads like this, then I suppose we're at an impasse. Principled objections are good; but principled objections must be to specific objects. There is no such thing as "the state school." That is a nebulous concept, a mere mental construct. There are only individual schools and school systems. Let's leave the discussion of whether church members need "discipline" for sending their children to those individual schools to the ministers who have authority over them and actually know something about those schools and communities.


----------



## py3ak (Oct 21, 2013)

Thank you Paul, for some wise words. On that note, thread closed.


----------

