# PCA resolution on public schools



## Scott

Article on PCA Resolution to Pull Kids from Public Schools.


----------



## RamistThomist

I hope they are more resolute than the SBC. Somebody pointed out to me that if all Southern Baptists in Texas pull their kids out of government schools on Friday, the whole system would collapse by next Wednesday.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

Scott, There is a thread on this subject here.


----------



## Poimen

> _Originally posted by Draught Horse_
> I hope they are more resolute than the SBC. Somebody pointed out to me that if all Southern Baptists in Texas pull their kids out of government schools on Friday, the whole system would collapse by next Wednesday.



Someone told me that if all Southern Baptists in Texas had their children baptized on Friday, the whole SBC would become Presbyterian by Sunday. Or at least congregationalist.



[Edited on 6-15-2005 by poimen]


----------



## Poimen

In all seriousness however, I hope it passes.


----------



## smallbeans

How about a resolution to promote the funding and establishment of PCA schools first? I feel bad for a lot of families who can't afford christian education. My own children attend a conservative Lutheran school because the school has been very generous with financial aid. I would love for them to be able to go to a PCA school.


----------



## LadyFlynt

ever consider, uh, homeschooling, Jonathan? I have a friend going to Covenant Seminary...he schools the kids while at home and his wife works. She's home while he attends school.

Before you throw the tomatoes....Twin Oaks PCA does have a school. They probably (hopefully) have financial aid as well (they are a big enough church that's for certain!) and I believe they use a classical curriculum.

[Edited on 6-15-2005 by LadyFlynt]


----------



## Plimoth Thom

> "Many Christian children in government schools are converted to an anti-Christian worldview rather than evangelizing their schoolmates."



And many home/christian schooled kids rebel against their christian upbringing, especially in college.

Why not trust in Providence, and accept that their children will not be "converted" without His will, instead of being afraid that the big bad government is going to "convert" their children if they let them go to the evil public school.


----------



## LadyFlynt

Thom, it's more a matter of it being a parental responsiblity given by God...than who would win the tug of war for the kids hearts. However, I've known relatively few "CHRISTIAN" homeschoolers that have rebelled. Try that in comparison to the "CHRISTIAN" kids in public schools (I was one, please keep in mind).


----------



## smallbeans

Twin Oaks is really far from where we live - it wouldn't be feasible given the varying ages - we already have to drive back and forth several times each day to pick up the kindegartner and the older ones who have different times they're at school. The little Lutheran school we found is very close. Our oldest son is autistic and so he needs to be in a school environment so we can force him to socialize with girls, other adults, kids his age, etc. - we found a school that was willing to work with us and allow him to be in a regular classroom. We have considered homeschooling some of the other boys (we have four boys) but prefer them to be in a church school. I'm not really super excited about homeschooling - I like the idea of church school best because I like the idea of looking to the church for education, and I guess homeschooling would be the next best thing. I'm also frankly scared. I like spreading out the risk - letting my children be around happy, Christ-loving teachers for a while every day is a good break from me and my wife - it brings some diversity to their day because those teachers have strengths that we lack and so my children benefit from seeing various kinds of Christians. I respect those of you who homeschool - it is hard work, and though we may have to do it someday, I view it as our plan B.

What I'd really like is an accelerated second grade for my second oldest boy. The school he is going to now isn't as challenging for him as it is for his younger brother. I wish there were a gifted Christian school...


----------



## RamistThomist

> _Originally posted by Plimoth Thom_
> 
> 
> 
> "Many Christian children in government schools are converted to an anti-Christian worldview rather than evangelizing their schoolmates."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And many home/christian schooled kids rebel against their christian upbringing, especially in college.
> 
> Why not trust in Providence, and accept that their children will not be "converted" without His will, instead of being afraid that the big bad government is going to "convert" their children if they let them go to the evil public school.
Click to expand...


The real argument goes something like this,
Many undiscipled "christian" children rebel against their upbringing. If kids rebel in college, there is more at issue than homeschooling.


----------



## LadyFlynt

> _Originally posted by smallbeans_
> ...those teachers have strengths that we lack and so my children benefit from seeing various kinds of Christians. I respect those of you who homeschool - it is hard work, and though we may have to do it someday, I view it as our plan B.
> 
> What I'd really like is an accelerated second grade for my second oldest boy. The school he is going to now isn't as challenging for him as it is for his younger brother. I wish there were a gifted Christian school...



I also respect ppl like you who have taken the time to view out your options, deal with different circumstances, and still try to find a Christ-centred resolution. We have several autism spectrum children within our extended family on both sides (seems to be a genetic trait from their non-related parents) and a close friend with an autistic son (due to a series of shots he received). I know some of the pros of being in a classroom setting for these children. I'm glad you and your wife found a christian school for them. Thanks for not throwing tomatoes at me! 

We need to have a St L. get-together this summer....I've noticed quite a few from the area on here and I'm sure hubby would enjoy (and I would enjoy meeting what wives there are  )


----------



## Plimoth Thom

My point is that if a child is "converted" in a public school its more an issue of the child's lack of proper christian education in the home and church, than the evil influences of a secular public school. I had nothing but secular public education from pre-school through university, and I was never converted nor ever thought about leaving my faith. It's hard at times for a christian child to go through a secular education with many non-christian peers, but it prepares you for real life in a fallen secular world. 

Perhaps the PCA should focus more on educating parents on their educational responsibilties in the home and church.


----------



## RamistThomist

> _Originally posted by Plimoth Thom_
> My point is that if a child is "converted" in a public school its more an issue of the child's lack of proper christian education in the home and church, than the evil influences of a secular public school. I had nothing but secular public education from pre-school through university, and I was never converted nor ever thought about leaving my faith. It's hard at times for a christian child to go through a secular education with many non-christian peers, but it prepares you for real life in a fallen secular world.
> 
> Perhaps the PCA should focus more on educating parents on their educational responsibilties in the home and church.



Does a state have a right to educate the child? 
Why is the State taking upon itself the role of education? it is trying to be messianic.


----------



## pastorway

the issue is that while parents may delegate teaching to someone else they are still responsible before God for what their children are taught.

I recommend reading David Limbaugh's book _Persecution_ on the matter of public schools. 



Phillip


----------



## Abd_Yesua_alMasih

I wounder if I would still be a Christian or at least Reformed if it wasnt for the fire breathing atheists at my secular High School. Through tribulations a person is refined. Some people are burnt away but those who survive are the better for it. I still remember that class where we had to read an article about how Christian "Fundamentalists" are killing good literature. The teacher ranted about it for ages on end. My history teacher was also always ready to pull out not-so-funny Puritan jokes that made no one laugh.

I would rather there were Christian Schools than Homeschools. That gives children a high level of education outside of secular schools. Not every perant has the ability to homeschool and very few can match the specialised education of a multi-million dollar school.


----------



## satz

> _Originally posted by LadyFlynt_
> Thom, it's more a matter of it being a parental responsiblity given by God...than who would win the tug of war for the kids hearts. However, I've known relatively few "CHRISTIAN" homeschoolers that have rebelled. Try that in comparison to the "CHRISTIAN" kids in public schools (I was one, please keep in mind).



hey Colleen, ( and everyone else ) 

do you think that parents' responsibility before God to bring up their kids is completely incompatible with sending children to public schools?


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

These websites which I cited in the other thread on this subject are helpful:

Alliance for the Separation of School and State

Home School Legal Defense Association

Get the Kids Out

Also this article is a good read. Sam Blumenfeld has written some good books about the history of statist public education and the agenda of the NEA too.


----------



## LadyFlynt

> _Originally posted by satz_
> 
> 
> 
> _Originally posted by LadyFlynt_
> Thom, it's more a matter of it being a parental responsiblity given by God...than who would win the tug of war for the kids hearts. However, I've known relatively few "CHRISTIAN" homeschoolers that have rebelled. Try that in comparison to the "CHRISTIAN" kids in public schools (I was one, please keep in mind).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> hey Colleen, ( and everyone else )
> 
> do you think that parents' responsibility before God to bring up their kids is completely incompatible with sending children to public schools?
Click to expand...


Yes, I do.


----------



## satz

> _Originally posted by LadyFlynt_
> 
> 
> 
> _Originally posted by satz_
> 
> 
> 
> _Originally posted by LadyFlynt_
> Thom, it's more a matter of it being a parental responsiblity given by God...than who would win the tug of war for the kids hearts. However, I've known relatively few "CHRISTIAN" homeschoolers that have rebelled. Try that in comparison to the "CHRISTIAN" kids in public schools (I was one, please keep in mind).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> hey Colleen, ( and everyone else )
> 
> do you think that parents' responsibility before God to bring up their kids is completely incompatible with sending children to public schools?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes, I do.
Click to expand...


that's fair enough...just a further question if you don't mind.

If the government were to legislate to make it complusory to send children to public schools do you see this as a legitimate area for civil disobedience? 

Do you think a christian should go to jail rather than submit to a government trying to force all children into public schools?

just curious about your thoughts...


mark


----------



## RamistThomist

> _Originally posted by satz_
> 
> 
> 
> _Originally posted by LadyFlynt_
> 
> 
> 
> _Originally posted by satz_
> 
> 
> 
> _Originally posted by LadyFlynt_
> Thom, it's more a matter of it being a parental responsiblity given by God...than who would win the tug of war for the kids hearts. However, I've known relatively few "CHRISTIAN" homeschoolers that have rebelled. Try that in comparison to the "CHRISTIAN" kids in public schools (I was one, please keep in mind).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> hey Colleen, ( and everyone else )
> 
> do you think that parents' responsibility before God to bring up their kids is completely incompatible with sending children to public schools?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes, I do.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> that's fair enough...just a further question if you don't mind.
> 
> If the government were to legislate to make it complusory to send children to public schools do you see this as a legitimate area for civil disobedience?
> 
> Do you think a christian should go to jail rather than submit to a government trying to force all children into public schools?
> 
> just curious about your thoughts...
> 
> 
> mark
Click to expand...


1. A thousand times NO!
2. Jail/going to government schools might not be the only two options.

Please call them "government schools" and not "public schools."


----------



## satz

> Please call them "government schools" and not "public schools.



soz...that's what i meant yes...

edit;

on second thoughts i realize i wasn't really thinking clear about this..isn't the distinction we are drawing between christian and non-chrisitan schools?

of course by chrisitan i don't mean any old school that calls them self by that name...

[Edited on 6-16-2005 by satz]


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

Many people today are unaware of how the government has persecuted parents who wanted to fulfill their God-given duty to educate their own children. The modern homeschooling movement came about in part because parents were willing to risk the consequences of civil disobedience in a state where homeschooling was illegal. 



> Perhaps a less well known struggle for freedom came in 1983 in Nebraska. Six homeschool families defied the compulsory attendance law and kept their children from public school. Nebraska authorities promptly threw the fathers in jail. The only "˜crime' was that these families dared to educate their own children outside the public school system. The fathers were eventually freed after a lengthy legal process and three months in jail. The same negative attitudes towards homeschool parents persisted across almost all 50 states in 1983. Due to the dedication of many homeschool pioneers, however, who demonstrated the academic success of homeschooling and argued that parents had a fundamental right to raise the children entrusted to them, the homeschool laws across the country slowly changed to recognize a parent's fundamental right to homeschool.



Source: HSLDA/Washington Times


----------



## LadyFlynt

> _Originally posted by Abd_Yesua_alMasih_
> I would rather there were Christian Schools than Homeschools. That gives children a high level of education outside of secular schools. Not every perant has the ability to homeschool and very few can match the specialised education of a multi-million dollar school.



I would rather children raised in their proper roles, raised by their loving parents, raised in Christ, and raised with character and integrity than a specialized education. There are so many ways to homeschool! A parent that says they aren't "capable" hasn't done their research. Video school, online school, co-ops that offer classes in areas that some parents find difficult (our co-op usually offers Latin, Sign Language, Drama, History classes (if using a particular curriculum), Dressmaking (moi), sometimes a type of science class, Intros to various art by a professional (and wonderful) artist, and this year I believe someone in our church will be holding advance math classes for jr through sr high. That helps ALOT with the middle and upper grades. The younger grades are fairly simple. You really need to only focus on the basics, get them reading, read alot, and if neccessary for you...follow the teacher's manual's just like any other teacher.

A FALSEHOOD about many teachers is that they "must be experts in what they teach"....HAH!!!! (no offense to teachers on the board...I have several close friends that are or have been teachers and considered it once myself) Teachers go to college to learn psychology, crowd control, politics, and paperwork. When they teach a class, they take whatever curriculum is given them (just as a homeschooler does), opens it up (just like a homeschooler), decides what to do (just like a homeschooler), and typically teaches from that (just like many typical homeschoolers). Only as a homeschooler, I'm not dealing with a million different problems coming from various homes and attitudes (Thank you to all the wonderful Christian teachers that find this to be your MISSION FIELD), instead I just have to focus on my few children, their specific needs, and we can spend more time on our studies. Most homeschoolers actually finish their school wordk around dinner (lunch) time. They aren't wasting their day in endless bells, walking, and etc. They have more oppurtunity to pursue their interest (my eldest son's is medical science...he's only 8 and determined to be a medical scientist or doctor!). Will I be able to teach him everything...probably not...if I hit a rough point I will find a class or tutor for him (many of these are free or cost a small fee under $50) or I can enroll him in a class at the local community college (you can take classes up there while still in highschool, I did when I was in public highschool and I know many homeschoolers that do). What will he learn that way...well, he will advance in those areas and already have a college credit....also by then he will be able to handle being in that type of class and since he focused on his studies at home rather than the peer pressures of school, he will have the focus colleges requires. Ppl who say they "can't teach" their child either haven't done their research or are coping out. (BTW, there are many parents that homeschool their handicapped children as well and there are special groups that support these parents...though I do understand the pressures of raising a child that is different...I partially raised two myself-a brother and a cousin-as well as dealing with a live-in 30yr old aunt with the mind of a 12yr).

Christian schools have their strengths and their vices...I think they have their place, especially as an outreach. But, yes, I do believe it to be the parents who hold the main responsibility...and when you compare the hours the schools have your kids to the one or two hours you have them before bed...who's REALLY training your kids?

I don't hold anything against those that haven't homeschooled their kids. Homeschooling wasn't the "norm" for a time so many either don't think of it, are scared of it, or just ignorant about it.

Please remember, I went through all the "toughening up" and "learning to deal with the world" in a public school. I nearly didn't survive. By all accounts I should have ended up a runaway and then in abusive relationships. Nothing like dealing with home issues, roughened up at school, and abusive treatment from teachers. Those with "good homes" got the best treatment at school as well...and many of those good "christian" kids fell for the garbage the teachers unloaded onto them and have since left the faith they were raised in--reformed, pentacostal, baptist. I think having it difficult at home and not trusting the teachers actually protected me and caused me to lean more onto my faith....and the fact that I met a young man stronger in his faith than I was in mine. So, YES, I also believe in Providence...but neither should you aim for the goal of being parents like mine or the others kids, throwing caution to the wind, and saying "well, it's all up to Providence". I hope you didn't leave it up to Providence that your kids would feed themselves, walk on their own, etc. I believe YOU put YOUR OWN initiative into it. Parents were purposed to TEACH THEIR CHILDREN.

(rant off)


----------



## LadyFlynt

> _Originally posted by satz_
> 
> 
> 
> _Originally posted by LadyFlynt_
> 
> 
> 
> _Originally posted by satz_
> 
> 
> 
> _Originally posted by LadyFlynt_
> Thom, it's more a matter of it being a parental responsiblity given by God...than who would win the tug of war for the kids hearts. However, I've known relatively few "CHRISTIAN" homeschoolers that have rebelled. Try that in comparison to the "CHRISTIAN" kids in public schools (I was one, please keep in mind).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> hey Colleen, ( and everyone else )
> 
> do you think that parents' responsibility before God to bring up their kids is completely incompatible with sending children to public schools?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes, I do.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> that's fair enough...just a further question if you don't mind.
> 
> If the government were to legislate to make it complusory to send children to public schools do you see this as a legitimate area for civil disobedience?
> 
> Do you think a christian should go to jail rather than submit to a government trying to force all children into public schools?
> 
> just curious about your thoughts...
> 
> 
> mark
Click to expand...


Yes! Please note the history of homeschooling in this past century that Andrew made note of.

Before the 1900's many children (and most of our presidents) homeschooled--and not with tutors either. As towns started schools (when the town was in control not the state) schooling out slowly became the norm...then the state stepped in with their money and rules of doing it their way....and on and on. It's a bankrupt, corrupted, socialistic/totalitarian, anti-Christ system.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

Colleen!

As a survivor of statist education myself who is now a home school teacher, I echo the lyrics below emphatically:

"When I think back on all the [stuff] I learned in high school/
It's a wonder I can think at all" -- Paul Simon

"We don't need no [statist] education/
We don't need no thought control" -- Pink Floyd

Here is an inspiring story about the superior education that comes from homeschooling.

[Edited on 6-16-2005 by VirginiaHuguenot]


----------



## BobVigneault

I have home schooled and I plan to home school again BUT, I wonder if we are doing right by exiting government schools and leaving such a great vacuum. It doesn't help our neighborhoods and communities to encourage a Christian ghetto.

Shouldn't we be infiltrating the schools and government and entertainment instead of running for the high grass. Someone tell me where I'm wrong here and thanks in advance.


----------



## Scott

> And many home/christian schooled kids rebel against their christian upbringing, especially in college.
> 
> Why not trust in Providence, and accept that their children will not be "converted" without His will, instead of being afraid that the big bad government is going to "convert" their children if they let them go to the evil public school.



God decrees not only the ends, but also the means. He does not only decree whether a child will remain a Christian but he also decrees the means by which that child will remain a Christian. The Bible suggests that parental instruction in biblical law all day long is the primary means of passing on the faith (Deut. 6). If you make a child spend a large portion of his waking hours in an enviornment where it is illegal to pass on the faith, then this is disobedience (he is not receiving instruction in the law all day long) and is undercutting one of the means God's uses to pass on the faith.

88 percent of evangelical children leave the church at age 18 and never return. This is morosely depressing. They are typically not converted to some world religion (eg. Islam), but converted to simple American relativisim, as taught in public schools, TV, and the like. 

BTW, I am glad you were in the 12 percent. But 12 percent does not make the rule. 

Scott


----------



## Scott

Bob: Those are very legitimate concerns. My response is that it just does not work. Our spiritual mortality rate is very high - with evangelicals losing 88 percent of their children to secularism. Our kids are not shaping the public schools. The public schools are shaping the kids.

It is also a challenge for kids. They are taught to respect and obey authorities. And these same authorities teach the kids to become cold to their parents' faith.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

> _Originally posted by maxdetail_
> I have home schooled and I plan to home school again BUT, I wonder if we are doing right by exiting government schools and leaving such a great vacuum. It doesn't help our neighborhoods and communities to encourage a Christian ghetto.
> 
> Shouldn't we be infiltrating the schools and government and entertainment instead of running for the high grass. Someone tell me where I'm wrong here and thanks in advance.



Bob, I am all for Christians getting out there in the world and being salt and light. I think the best way to redeem society according to Biblical principles, however, is to strengthen the family, which is the basic building block of church and state. Christian education by parents or those specifically delegated by parents in fulfillment of God's requirements in Deut. 6 and Proverbs along with family worship is the primary means of accomplishing this. When children leave the home fully equipped by their parents to face the spiritual battle that we all face then society will truly be the better. Homeschooling is strategically the best thing parents can do for their children and our society. The investment of protecting children from ungodly influences and training them in the nuture and admonition of the Lord -- contra statist education -- with God's blessing will reap untold benefits for society and generations to come. It is not a ghetto mentality; it is an investment in the future.


----------



## Scott

Some of this discussion in various fora tends to revolve around what is allowable, or what is the minimum standard . I think parents would do better if they framed the issue in terms of what is best for the children. In most circumstances (although there may be some), public school would not be the answer.


----------



## Arch2k

To Andrew's and Colleen's posts!

Don't forget the great teaching from Crosby, Stills, Nash & Young .........."Teach"¦.your children well."

It is the duty of the parents to raise their children, not the government, and not even the church. God gives children to parents, not churches or governments. I for one will raise my children from the home, and as for me and MY house...we will serve the Lord.


----------



## Arch2k

*This is from www.getthekidsout.org*

Principle #1: The education of children and youth is the primary responsibility of parents (Deuteronomy 6:4-9; 11:18-21; Psalm 78;1-7; Psalm 127:3; Proverbs 22:6; Malachi 2:13-16; Ephesians 6:4).

Principle #2: The education of children and youth is a 24-hour-a-day, 7-days-per-week process that continues from birth till maturity (Deuteronomy 6:7; 11:19; Proverbs 22:6).

Principle #3: The education of children and youth must have as its primary goals the salvation of and discipleship of the next generation (Psalm 78:6-7; Matthew 28:19-20).

Principle #4: The education of children and youth must be based on God´s Word as absolute truth (Matthew 24:35; Psalm 119).

Principle #5: The education of children and youth must hold Christ as preeminent in all of life (Colossians 2:3, 6-10).

Principle #6: The education of children and youth must not hinder the spiritual and moral development of the next generation (Matthew 18:6; 19:13-14; Mark 10:13-16; Luke 18:15-17).

Principle #7: The education of children and youth, if and when delegated to others by parents, must be done so with utmost care to ensure that all teachers follow these principles (Exodus 18:21; 1 Samuel 1:27-28; 3:1-10).

Principle #8: The education of children and youth results in the formation of a belief system or worldview that will be patterned after the belief systems or worldviews of the person´s teachers (Luke 6:40).

Principle #9: The education of children and youth must lead to true wisdom by connecting all knowledge to a biblical worldview frame of reference (Romans 1:20; Psalm 19:1; Proverbs 4:5,7; 3:19; 9:10, Psalm 104:24; 136:5; Jeremiah 10:12; Romans 11:33; Luke 11:52; Colossians 2:3; 1 Corinthians 8:1, 13:8; Romans 1:28.

Principle #10: The education of children and youth must have a view of the future that includes the eternal perspective (Colossians 3:1-2; Matthew 6:19-20; 2 Timothy 4:6-8; Acts 20:24; Hebrews 11:13; Colossians 3:23-24).


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

> _Originally posted by Jeff_Bartel_
> Don't forget the great teaching from Crosby, Stills, Nash & Young .........."Teach"¦.your children well."


----------



## LadyFlynt

> _Originally posted by maxdetail_
> I have home schooled and I plan to home school again BUT, I wonder if we are doing right by exiting government schools and leaving such a great vacuum. It doesn't help our neighborhoods and communities to encourage a Christian ghetto.
> 
> Shouldn't we be infiltrating the schools and government and entertainment instead of running for the high grass. Someone tell me where I'm wrong here and thanks in advance.



I don't see how we are creating a "Christian ghetto"...my children and I still interacting with those within our society, including other children, and perhaps moreso than if they were in a school setting. My children participate throughout the day with all various ages.

Yes, I'm gonna train my kids to infiltrate the government. When they are grown, they will be well prepared to do so  Patrick Henry College, YOU are in our sights!


----------



## Arch2k

This topic has much to do with a study of the roles of the three institutions established (and given roles) by God.

Government: Minimal role in human affairs as possible. Protection of human rights (life, liberty, and processions). 

Church: The administration of the Word and Sacraments. Oversight of the Law of God in the private sector (i.e. church discipline etc.)

Family: The mutual help of one another (husband and wife). The prevention of sexual immorality. The producing, raising and teaching of children (a godly seed).

This is not an exhaustive list, but most duties can be derived from the ones listed. When people begin blurring the lines, trouble happens. God has his formula of roles, and we must be careful to obey them clearly.

The family is the import of this subject. We must understand God's intent and role of parents in a Godly family. Does the establishment of the family as God has set forth include "farming out" education? By no means. We might as well farm out our kids. But then one might ask "Why even HAVE kids then?" Good question. God calls us to raise up children in the way of the Lord. This does not include sending them off to a secular humanist school. Childhood is a time for learning, and growing up, not a time for teaching others (i.e. the world) how to live. 

When this happens, we can expect reformation in this country, even if it is just reformation in our own family.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

This is the product of government education.


----------



## BobVigneault

I agree with what's being said but I am thinking about the history of education. Like hopitals and social welfare, education was propagated by the church. At somepoint, probably because of the pre-tribbers, we pulled back and left a vacuum and now we complain because there is no Christian element in the schools.

I am a confirmed home schooler, but I wonder if we havent shrugged our responsibilities as salt and light. Is there a way to turn things around or do we give up on reforming the 'statist' schools?


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

I am aware of the Puritan heritage that public schools have in this country under the Olde Deluder Satan Act. But the Puritan public schools which taught the _New England Primer_ under theocratic government and the statist Prussian model schools which began under Horace Mann's influence are vastly different. I am of the opinion that the Puritan model was well-intentioned and beneficial in many ways but off the mark principially. The Horace Mann model is just pernicious. Either way, I believe in separation of school and state because I don't see that government statist education can be reformed.

[Edited on 6-16-2005 by VirginiaHuguenot]


----------



## LadyFlynt

The problem was (I just saw a LHOTP episode last night that showed this!) the church stepped back and handed the schools over to the state in exchange for the money the schools would receive. We have no way of aquiring those back. Now if a church wishes to start a school of their own, fine. I personally find it to be second best to what God has established...but a fine mission for those around them. I would like to see a Christian school set up for ministering without the overtly high cost to the parents of these kids though...where the church, through various means, supports the school rather than FULL dependance upon tuition.


----------



## Puritan Sailor

> _Originally posted by Jeff_Bartel_
> Don't forget the great teaching from Crosby, Stills, Nash & Young .........."Teach"¦.your children well."



At least the hippies got one thing right 

Unfortunately, they mess it up with verse 2, "Teach... your parents well..."


----------



## Augusta

I heartily agree with Colleen, Andrew, Jeff, et al!!


----------



## Puritan Sailor

I think if the public schools would be committed to teaching rather than brainwashing, then they could be redeemable. But that is not the case anymore. They simply don't teach anymore. I can teach my children at a much higher level than any public school can. I can bypass the sex ed nonsense, the cultural diversity (every one is good except Christians) nonsense, the ethical nonsense (Neitzche), and actually teach him the fundamentals; English, Math, History, Philosophy, Greek (or any foreign language), Writing, Critical thinking, whatever, all within a Christian worldview. I can pick the best books, and train them properly. And if he's interested in a particular feild, I can integrate the rest with it to help him learn. A public school has no such flexibility at all, where all must move at the pace of the slowest kid, with the most watered down curriculim. This is just common sense. I was a product of the public school system, and though it wasn't as bad then as now, I still was never pushed to my potential. That made it more difficult as I entered adulthood. I had alot of catching up to do in college.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

> Education is inescapably a religious concept...
> 
> The goal of "public education" has never been the education of children in the classical sense of mastering academics; the goal of public education is - as it has always been - the "engineering" of a new kind of citizen.



See this article for more insights into the philosophy of education.


----------



## Augusta

> _Originally posted by puritansailor_
> I think if the public schools would be committed to teaching rather than brainwashing, then they could be redeemable. But that is not the case anymore. They simply don't teach anymore. I can teach my children at a much higher level than any public school can. I can bypass the sex ed nonsense, the cultural diversity (every one is good except Christians) nonsense, the ethical nonsense (Neitzche), and actually teach him the fundamentals; English, Math, History, Philosophy, Greek (or any foreign language), Writing, Critical thinking, whatever, all within a Christian worldview. I can pick the best books, and train them properly. And if he's interested in a particular feild, I can integrate the rest with it to help him learn. A public school has no such flexibility at all, where all must move at the pace of the slowest kid, with the most watered down curriculim. This is just common sense. I was a product of the public school system, and though it wasn't as bad then as now, I still was never pushed to my potential. That made it more difficult as I entered adulthood. I had alot of catching up to do in college.



Patrick just summed up exactly why I homeschool.


----------



## Arch2k

Why transform public schools? Why not just reform them?


----------



## pastorway

here is a thought about sending kids to influence schools.....

would you attend a cult, a Mormon "church", a Catholic "church", a Jehovah's Witness "church" - or send your kids there to participate in the daily activities in order to be a witness, salt and light?

NO.

Why? Because you would be subjecting yourself and your children to false religion.

But is that not exactly what the government schools are doing? They are teaching and practicing the religion of secular humanism. And they are intolerant of any other religion that is exclusivistic, ie. Christianity.

So would you send your kids off to be unnattended and fully participating in the services at the neighborhood Mosque in order for them to be a missionary? Then why send them to government schools?

Phillip


----------



## Arch2k




----------



## BobVigneault

Great point Pastor Way, I'm convinced.


----------



## rmwilliamsjr

> PCA Assembly Rejects Resolution about Removing Christian Children from Public Schools
> 
> Chattanooga, Tenn. "“ The General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in America voted on Thursday, June 16, to reject a resolution to encourage Christian parents to remove their children from public schools. The resolution was offered by the Rev. Steven Warhurst of Kingsport, Tenn.
> 
> 
> 
> The resolution asked the General Assembly to "encourage all her officers and members to remove their children from the public schools and see to it that they receive a thoroughly Christian education, for the glory of God and the good of Christ´s church."
> 
> 
> 
> The Bills and Overture Committee recommended that the Assembly reject the resolution and approved the following reason, "We strongly affirm that it is the responsibility of Christian parents to raise their children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord, it is not appropriate for the General Assembly to make such a recommendation as contained in [the] Personal Resolution to all the members of the PCA. Rather, the education of covenant children is best left to the wisdom of Christian parents under the pastoral guidance of local church Sessions."



from: emailed "by faith"


----------



## LadyFlynt




----------



## Augusta




----------



## pastorway




----------



## Puritan Sailor

Though I agree with the sentiments of teh proposal, I also agree with the GA's action to reject it. It would be impossible to enforce. Unless every church in the PCA is willing to fund the education of their children, either homeschooling or private, then they can't condemn parents, especially poor parents, for using the public schools. It's a sad dilemma, but a reality still.


----------



## WrittenFromUtopia

Postmillennialism is delayed another year ...


----------



## BlackCalvinist

> _Originally posted by puritansailor_
> Though I agree with the sentiments of the proposal, I also agree with the GA's action to reject it. It would be impossible to enforce. Unless every church in the PCA is willing to fund the education of their children, either homeschooling or private, then they can't condemn parents, especially poor parents, for using the public schools. It's a sad dilemma, but a reality still.



I've been having this discussion with several folk over the past few days and on a secular board I now frequent. I think I'm in agreement with where you stand on this. My thought on it is still developing, though. The viewpoints tossed out in this thread have helped a lot. 

Andrew - thanks for the links!

[Edited on 6-17-2005 by OS_X]


----------



## LadyFlynt

> _Originally posted by puritansailor_
> Though I agree with the sentiments of the proposal, I also agree with the GA's action to reject it. It would be impossible to enforce. Unless every church in the PCA is willing to fund the education of their children, either homeschooling or private, then they can't condemn parents, especially poor parents, for using the public schools. It's a sad dilemma, but a reality still.



Sorry, but the "poor people" excuse doesn't work for me. And BTW, I AM one of those "poor" (you should see our finances, most don't know how we're doing it). Anyhow, here is why it doesn't work for me.....

I believe the church is responsible for making decrees like they tried to make in the PCA. They are also responsible for assisting those that it would be considered a "hardship" on. We used to go to a church where you were required to send your child to their school or homeschool (though homeschooling was looked down on a few families still did it). The parents only paid for the books. If a family couldn't afford the books, arrangements were made to assist in that area. The church provided the schooling and the teachers. Really a church only needed 2-3 teachers (for a smaller congregation) as each teacher taught about three grades within the same classroom.

The problem I see with why ppl like the PCA DON"T want to do this is they don't want the true biblical responsiblity (and haven't been taught that this is included in helping the poor and widows amoung them) in this aspect. They don't want the downfall and loss of membership that will come with such a decree (so let's exchange purity if we can just keep our numbers, right?).

Sorry, I'm with HSLDA and Doug Philips on this one. HSLDA pays for members curriculums if the father passes away...until all children are through with school. And Doug Philips has a CD out on assisting single parents homeschool their children (this can be applied to church schools as well, I'm sure)...BTW, I know single, poor (even on welfare) parents that both work and homeschool their kids. It is possible.


----------



## BlackCalvinist

> _Originally posted by LadyFlynt_
> 
> 
> 
> _Originally posted by puritansailor_
> Though I agree with the sentiments of the proposal, I also agree with the GA's action to reject it. It would be impossible to enforce. Unless every church in the PCA is willing to fund the education of their children, either homeschooling or private, then they can't condemn parents, especially poor parents, for using the public schools. It's a sad dilemma, but a reality still.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry, but the "poor people" excuse doesn't work for me. And BTW, I AM one of those "poor" (you should see our finances, most don't know how we're doing it). Anyhow, here is why it doesn't work for me.....
Click to expand...


Try telling that to the mother and father who both have minimum wage paying jobs and have to work upwards of 12 hours a day and are living paycheck to paycheck because the cost of living in their area is so high.

Some things aren't as cut and dry as you try to make them seem on here, Colleen. No disrespect to what you're doing, but realistically - you haven't experienced poverty.

You have internet access. You're not poor.

I, on the other hand, teach kids who wear the same clothes to school multiple days, sleep out in the streets and such because their parents are either strung out, no father in the home or the kids are wayward. Among my kids that are at least nominally Christian, the bulk come from single family homes. Homeschooling is OUT as an option. The price of living in PG County is so high that most of the parents can't afford to move anywhere else (the only nearby option is DC....which is where most of them moved FROM to get away from the city....) and can't afford private schools (the only three in the area are Seton, Bishop MacNamara and there's one more, but the name escapes me right now) and transportation costs for their kids would be too expensive to send them even to the local charter school in DC. So the school they're in, is the school they're in. Most of these parents have jobs that don't offer benefits - don't work, don't get paid. And some of them are already losing money because they have to take days off to come up to the school to take care of business regarding their child.

So it's not an 'excuse' that some aren't able to afford to homeschool - it's reality.


----------



## Augusta

Kerry, I believe Colleen is speaking of Christian parents in particular with the financial and congregational support would have no excuse. That is the situation she would like to see.

Me personally, over my dead body my kids would go to public school. If I was dirt poor then I would teach them as much as I could off the top of my head or from thrift store books and let them be sub par in schooling before sending them to government schools. I think even this would be superior to the sub par schooling they would get at a government run school. This is as a Christian mind you, who wants her children brought up, by me, in the fear and admonition of the Lord.

Obviously this is not the conviction of some bible believing Christians so I don't expect non-christians to hold to it.

I also want to add: Didn't the resolution just ask the church to "encourage" homeschooling? I didn't think it was anything like forcing all PCA members to homeschool or be excommunicated. Encouraging people to homeschool is too much of a strain on the Christian conscience?? 

[Edited on 6-17-2005 by Augusta]


----------



## Arch2k

I don't understand how homeschooling costs so much money!?? There is still such a thing as a library...no? As far as both parents working, and using schools as a baby-sitting service is dangerous (if not outright sinful) on so many levels. The woman was meant to stay at home.

Titus 2:4-5
That they admonish the young women to love their husbands, to love their children, to be discreet, chaste, homemakers, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God may not be blasphemed. 

It is the husband's duty and responsibility to provide for his family. It is his God-given role. This does not mean riches, but enough to allow for godly instruction, for wife to stay at home (at least when there are kids in the house) etc.

1 Timothy 5:8
But if anyone does not provide for his own, and especially for those of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.


----------



## govols

> _Originally posted by OS_X_
> Try telling that to the mother and father who both have minimum wage paying jobs and have to work upwards of 12 hours a day and are living paycheck to paycheck *because the cost of living in their area is so high.*



Maybe that is the problem. If you are making minimum wage then they have minimum wage jobs in areas that the cost of living is not so high.


----------



## Augusta

> I don't understand how homeschooling costs so much money!?? There is still such a thing as a library...no? As far as both parents working, and using schools as a baby-sitting service is dangerous (if not outright sinful) on so many levels. The woman was meant to stay at home.






About not being poor if you have internet access. Most people on welfare in this country not only have internet access (dial-up is free if you have phone line) they have cable tv, a tv, a dvd player etc.

[Edited on 6-17-2005 by Augusta]


----------



## Larry Hughes

Thom,



> Why not trust in Providence



Be careful because this could sound more like trusting in "œchance" and calling it providence. Or as I´ve heard some Christian parents abrogating their duty, "œI just turned him/her over to the Lord". A.k.a spiritual abandonment. There is a difference in trusting in providence and doing my duty, and throwing up my hands.



> My point is that if a child is "converted" in a public school its more an issue of the child's lack of proper christian education in the home and church, than the evil influences of a secular public school. I had nothing but secular public education from pre-school through university, and I was never converted nor ever thought about leaving my faith. It's hard at times for a christian child to go through a secular education with many non-christian peers, but it prepares you for real life in a fallen secular world.
> 
> Perhaps the PCA should focus more on educating parents on their educational responsibilties in the home and church.



I can´t disagree here at all, but I don´t have the PCA background to speak about it, I can speak a bit from the SB direction.

From the Article: "œWhereas, Sending thousands of PCA children as "missionaries" to their unbelieving teachers and classmates has failed to contribute to increasing holiness in the public schools. On the contrary, the Nehemiah Institute documents growing evidence that the public schools are successfully converting covenant children to secular humanism, and Whereas, We are squandering a great opportunity to instruct these children in the truth of God's word and its application to all of life;"œ

They are correct. I found it increasingly fascinating that non-covenantal churches are internally inconsistent here. For on the one hand they classify their children as being outside of the Covenant, yet send them out as "œmissionaries" to the schools and mission trips - if not explicitly then implicitly. This contradiction is as obvious as the noon day sun. 

Furthermore, it teaches children that they can "œwork their way to heaven", rather than "well the Lord can use it." (That's what the Gospel's for). If you don´t believe it (this is what kids glean from this type of approach) ask your youth group a test question just to pick their brains as to what they are really thinking (let them answer it on paper/cards anonymously so as to get an accurate unpressured answer). Use something simple like the old: "œWhen you die and stand before God and are asked, "œWhy should I let you into My heaven", what will be your answer/reason"? You are very likely to be shocked what these young "œmissionaries" being sent out will answer. I did it once and was very unsettled as to what we were doing with the youth, and it was very alarming to me! How are they "missioniers" when they have not the Gospel???

Also, Pastorway's point is straight to the chase:



> here is a thought about sending kids to influence schools.....



An excellent point!

The sad thing is - is that many parents, Christian, find themselves unable to afford good Christian school educations, nothing is near them and/or they are immediately incapable of a full tilt home school. To them I would be gracious and encourage them to do what they can to go in that direction. We have to be careful not to impose a standard upon Christians that simply do not have the tools/means immediately available. The church, as man runs it, is at fault here with its years and decades of neglect to the flock in hand.

Larry


----------



## BlackCalvinist

> _Originally posted by govols_
> 
> 
> 
> _Originally posted by OS_X_
> Try telling that to the mother and father who both have minimum wage paying jobs and have to work upwards of 12 hours a day and are living paycheck to paycheck *because the cost of living in their area is so high.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe that is the problem. If you are making minimum wage then they have minimum wage jobs in areas that the cost of living is not so high.
Click to expand...


Okay, add in moving costs, time off from work to go shopping for apartments, time off from work to pack and such. 

You also neglect that the 'trade off' for living in a lower-cost-of-living area in many cases is also an increased crime rate. DC is cheaper than PG County, but the crime rate and lack of safety overrules the cheaper cost of living.

Most of you live in relatively 'safe' areas. I'd love to see you move to somewhere like Baltimore City or South East DC, get a 'local' job (i.e.- a job which doesn't make you a huge amount of money, but just enough to pay bills, get to work, buy a few groceries and exist).


----------



## BlackCalvinist

> _Originally posted by Augusta_
> 
> 
> 
> I don't understand how homeschooling costs so much money!?? There is still such a thing as a library...no? As far as both parents working, and using schools as a baby-sitting service is dangerous (if not outright sinful) on so many levels. The woman was meant to stay at home.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> About not being poor if you have internet access. Most people on welfare in this country not only have internet access (dial-up is free if you have phone line) they have cable tv, a tv, a dvd player etc.
> 
> [Edited on 6-17-2005 by Augusta]
Click to expand...


Where do you get that statistic from ? Most of my kids on the lower end of the socioeconomic scale DON'T have cable (especially since Comcast is ridiculously priced in this area), a TV is a one-time cost and nowadays, folks pick things up from crack addicts and pawn shops for reduced prices, DVD players are $25 bucks nowadays (or see option #1 for getting a TV). I know of a few families that have actually forgone getting a DVD player. And I'm not talking about 'welfare' folks, either. Welfare is a trap where folks get paid not to work. I'm talking about folks who work, but make barely enough to get by. 

And dialup is NOT FREE in this or any major city with a 'lower income class' that I know of.

Like I said.... some of you commenting on 'poor people'.... ain't neva been poor.


----------



## rmwilliamsjr

> About not being poor if you have internet access. Most people on welfare in this country not only have internet access (dial-up is free if you have phone line) they have cable tv, a tv, a dvd player etc.



i have no interest in turning this into a "i've been poorer than you thread" but when we lived on the streets for more than a decade we homeschooled by necessity. we didn't have a house, nor a phone, nor jobs, nor money, nor electricity, nor running water etc etc.

when we found a place to park for a year, my kids voted to go to public schools. they wanted to be like other kids and be in school. now 15 years later 1/2 have graduated from university and 2 are still in school. so i'll bet the issue is parents, not homeschooling, not church related schools, not independent Christian schools, not government funded public schools. not poverty, not food stamps, not much else but parents. As far as I know my kids were the first ones in many years to graduate from high school in our neighborhood. There are 5 generations next door with generation times of 15 years, and not a single adult who finished 10th grade. culture is important but the determining factor is parental responsibility.

...


----------



## Puritan Sailor

I have to agree with Kery on this one. I know a man who has a low paying job here in Jackson, and he can't even afford to live in the cheap districts here. He has to live in the homeless shelter. I can't imagine how he could handle it if he had a family to feed and educate. Things just aren't as simple as we would like them to be. Poor communities have poor churches too. A church may not be able to support the education of their children. These are realities that you have to deal with. 

Plus, if you are going to call it sin for parents to let there kids go to public school, the you must excommunicate them for disobeying. Otherwise you are allowing people in unrepentent sin to remain in good standing in the congregation. Even if you just "encourage" parents to pull them out, you are creating a two tiered church membership, those more holy for pulling their kids out, and those less holy for leaving them in. The issues here aren't as clear cut as we would like.


----------



## Augusta

My husbands family lived in poverty with 9 siblings. One has a masters degree, 4 have bachelors degrees, one on the way to a bachelors degree in one more quarter of school. Of the other 3 two have great jobs and one is on welfare, won't marry, has 4 kids out of wedlock and is in and out of jail but the nicest guy in the world. It has almost everything to do with parenting and alot to do with work ethic and just personal responsibility.

My ditto was late and was to rmwilliamsjr.  Just for clarification.

[Edited on 6-17-2005 by Augusta]


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

"Where there is a will there is a way." God through parents or the church makes possible the education of his covenant children, regardless of their financial condition. The internet is not necessary for Biblical education. Parental oversight and involvement is. Most of us here have not experienced the utter poverty of the Sudan or the like, and frankly the Christian community could do much more to provide the network that homeschool families benefit from so much. But the onus is on parents to provide an education for the children to the best of their ability whether they well off or not. It would certainly help if homeschool parents weren't required to pay the taxes that uphold government schools, but regardless, as I say, where parents have the will to educate their children Biblically, they will find a way. God has ordained education to be in the hands of parents, and he gives means to supply according to the need. We ought to help our brethren who are in greater need than we, but as hard as it is to fulfill this responsibility, it is a holy calling and it can and must be answered.

[Edited on 6-17-2005 by VirginiaHuguenot]


----------



## LadyFlynt

Deleted.

[Edited on 6-18-2005 by LadyFlynt]


----------



## LadyFlynt

Deleted.

[Edited on 6-18-2005 by LadyFlynt]


----------



## Myshkin

Thank you Patrick and Kerry for your realistic honesty. I agree with everything you say, and was beginning to think I was alone in the real world. I grew up very poor, and in general, my experience is that those who have much, or at least relatively more and are able, use it as a sign of their "faithfulness" to God. I have even heard that reasons why people are poor is because of sin in their lives. ("God will provide! and if he is not providing, maybe you are not a christian, cuz he provides for all our needs"; I can't tell you the amount of trouble this has caused me to this day with assurance issues.) I don't believe this "where there is the will there is a way" stuff. In fact, thats a phrase I heard often in public school but never in church. If you will it strong enough, God will provide. Yeah, tell that to those stuck in poverty who want to be out of it, but the church nearby does nothing about and lets the welfare agencies take over. I guess only those who are weak willed are on welfare and aren't helped by the church. I don't think we want to equate our will with God's providence. Sounds like my Word of Faith experience. I have the desire (a strong one), that my dad comes to Christ, does this mean that God will provide? Isn't it possible to desire something that God does not grant, even a good thing?

The dogmatism of homeschoolers, in general, scares me. I agree that public schools are not the best option, _at this time_. But to legislate this I think is not only binding consciences where they shouldn't be, but it will cause many who don't have the means, or education, or awareness, or who are new converts with kids, etc. to be seen as less sanctified, less blessed by the Lord, and maybe even seen as unbelievers. God's truth is black and white, but this world isn't. I agree with the general desire and thrust of the homeschool movement, but to make it an explicit command from God so as to make it denominationally legislated I think is feeble man shouting where our perfect God whispers.

Every believer's situation does not come from a cookie-cutter. And sometimes we as christians don't have all the answers or resources, despite our thinking to the contrary. I think too many people hide behind their theology to avoid dealing with real life problems that we don't have all the answers to. So they make something implicit or unclear into a dogma so as to relieve themselves of any duties they may have that God has explictly commanded. Is this not what the pharisees did even to Christ when he healed on the sabbath? Didn't they even use scripture for their case? 

I don't think the public schools are our problem (oh that dirty world out there!). I think the problem is we have too many nominal christian parents who think public school is where education starts and ends. Too many christian parents who are chasing the money dream and not spending time with their kids. I fear we are falling into the pharisee trap of condemning those not like us, instead of looking at our own heart's sins. While were so focused on what the world is doing wrong, we're neglecting what christians are failing in. And in this regard choice of schooling is at the bottom of the list for our worries, I think. I realize I am in the shrinking minority on this, I just hope that someday my profession of faith and membership in the church isn't determined by whether I homeschool or not.

Until homeschoolers start speaking out for those who are less able than they are, are giving all they can to assist those who can't homeschool for providential reasons, then I will continue to look at the homeschool movement as an ironic elitism. 

I hope we don't get to the point where God's unique providence in each christian's life is defined in a black and white mannner to determine who is and is not a true faithful christian. I guess all the new believers in third world countries with their missionary built public schools and such aren't as faithful as us American homeschooling christians, . 

Is homeschooling good? Yes. Are christian schools good? Yes. Are public schools bad? In themselves no, but today yes. Should we legislate denominationally on this issue and risk losing actual believers to the scruples of the "faithful"? No. I don't see this as any different in principle than any other moral issue, say alcohol. Is getting drunk a sin? Yes. Is it it okay for me to avoid it so I am not tempted to this sin? Yes. Is it okay for me to demand this same boundary for other believers? No. I appreciate what homsechoolers do, and personally would prefer it myself. But I am getting tired of some if not many on the homeschool side saying it is the only christian option regardless of circumstances. 

I think the PCA did the right thing.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

Allan, I think you have completely misunderstood what I said. I did not refer to the quote "where there is a will there is a way" in order to promote "Word of Faith" theology. I made reference to that quote in response to the idea that poor people have no choice but to resort to government education for their children. I simply do not believe that poor Christians have no alternative but to dump their children in government schools. Public education is evil and godless, and parents who put their children in such schools will reap what they sow. Parents have a God-given responsibility to educate their children. That does not rule out delegating the responsibility but it does rule out delegating it to the heathen public school system. If Christian parents sincerely desire to educate their children, there are ways that can be found to do that Biblically no matter how poor they are. I think the poverty excuse for public education is a cop-out of parental duty. But I have previously said that the Church has a duty to help the poor. Any parent that cannot afford to educate their child has the reasonable expectation of diaconal assistance from the Church to make that possible.

[Edited on 6-17-2005 by VirginiaHuguenot]


----------



## Arch2k




----------



## AdamM

I think we need to be careful speculating about the motivations of the elders at the general assembly that voted against the resolution. I heard the debate and I doubt there was anyone in the assembly who would not strongly support both home schooling and private Christian schools for children. The question comes down to whom has God given the authority to make these types of decisions? 

The B&O Committee and the assembly I think wisely stated that "the education of covenant children is best left to the wisdom of Christian parents under the pastoral guidance of local church Sessions." It may rub folks wrong, but that is the Presbyterian system of church government. I think when the issue is right, we sort of turn into crypto Episcopalians.

[Edited on 6-17-2005 by AdamM]


----------



## Plimoth Thom

> _Originally posted by Larry Hughes_
> Thom,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why not trust in Providence
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Be careful because this could sound more like trusting in "œchance" and calling it providence. Or as I´ve heard some Christian parents abrogating their duty, "œI just turned him/her over to the Lord". A.k.a spiritual abandonment. There is a difference in trusting in providence and doing my duty, and throwing up my hands.
Click to expand...


I know what you're saying, and I agree. My point was that if the parents are doing their best to raise up christian children, and sending them to public schools, they don't need to be afraid that their children are going to fall away just because they're in a public school. If a child puts more stock in what their teachers say, or trusts their teachers more than their parents, then there's something wrong with the parents.


----------



## Augusta

> _Originally posted by AdamM_
> I think we need to be careful speculating about the motivations of the elders at the general assembly that voted against the resolution. I heard the debate and I doubt there was anyone in the assembly who would not strongly support both home schooling and private Christian schools for children. The question comes down to whom has God given the authority to make these types of decisions?
> 
> The B&O Committee and the assembly I think wisely stated that "the education of covenant children is best left to the wisdom of Christian parents under the pastoral guidance of local church Sessions." It may rub folks wrong, but that is the Presbyterian system of church government. I think when the issue is right, we sort of turn into crypto Episcopalians.
> 
> [Edited on 6-17-2005 by AdamM]



Adam was the resolution such that the church was to "encourage" homeschooling or was it a blanket command to homeschool or else? Maybe something in between?


----------



## Myshkin

Andrew, my friend, I think you jumped the gun. I was not referring to you. It was just a coincidence. I was apparently writing while you had posted.


But then I read this, so I guess it applies...



> _Originally posted by VirginiaHuguenot_
> I simply do not believe that poor Christians have no alternative but to dump their children in government schools. Public education is evil and godless, and parents who put their children in such schools will reap what they sow.



I went to public school my whole life. My family up till junior high was dirt poor. Homeschooling was unheard of at the time to my parents. What are my parents going to reap exactly? I'd sincerely like to know. 

Your quote confirms my point. Apparently the God who determines the times and seasons in which we live was unfaithful to my christian mother because He put her in this situation. And now she will reap what she sowed, despite the fact that God put her there and that my whole family professes to belive in Christ. I think you're missing my point that I am not against homeschooling, I am against the church legislating an absolute on this issue. Not everyone has had the providence that you or others have had.

My whole point was in reference to the PCA resoulution, not to you or those on this board.


----------



## Augusta

> _Originally posted by Scott_
> 
> 
> 
> And many home/christian schooled kids rebel against their christian upbringing, especially in college.
> 
> Why not trust in Providence, and accept that their children will not be "converted" without His will, instead of being afraid that the big bad government is going to "convert" their children if they let them go to the evil public school.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> God decrees not only the ends, but also the means. He does not only decree whether a child will remain a Christian but he also decrees the means by which that child will remain a Christian. The Bible suggests that parental instruction in biblical law all day long is the primary means of passing on the faith (Deut. 6). If you make a child spend a large portion of his waking hours in an enviornment where it is illegal to pass on the faith, then this is disobedience (he is not receiving instruction in the law all day long) and is undercutting one of the means God's uses to pass on the faith.
> 
> 88 percent of evangelical children leave the church at age 18 and never return. This is morosely depressing. They are typically not converted to some world religion (eg. Islam), but converted to simple American relativisim, as taught in public schools, TV, and the like.
> 
> BTW, I am glad you were in the 12 percent. But 12 percent does not make the rule.
> 
> Scott
Click to expand...


Wanted to bump Scott's quote.


----------



## AdamM

> Adam was the resolution such that the church was to "encourage" home-schooling or was it a blanket command to home-school or else? Maybe something in between?



I think it encouraged people to remove their children from the public schools, leaving home schooling and private schools as options. 

The main issue as far as the assembly is concerned is to whom has God given the authority to make these decisions? I know there is a lot in the background too and I am not naive about it, but in our system of church government, the local Session is invested with the primary spiritual authority to oversee the flock. The general assembly has no such authority except as a court of appeal. The wisdom in that is great, because who other then the local elders has the insight to evaluate each individual situation?


----------



## Augusta

Just encouraging parents to homeschool just doesn't seem that harsh to me. The church is the guardian of our faith. It's their job to encourage us in the right direction. With the current state of government run schools I believe in my opinion that encouragement to be warranted.


----------



## crhoades

Not hopping into the fray per se but...

If we were not taxed via property taxes etc. and if the government wasn't so bloated to take as much money from all of us there would be more money to go around for whatever non-government school choice one would have. 

Even use vouchers as a half-way step although I do not favor them in principle.


----------



## Arch2k

Again, this is not to say that in theory, good education could not come from a government run school (although it is NEAR impossible  ) but the question rather is to what authority has God given the right to education children. Let's play multiple guess...is it...

1) The government

2) The church

3) The family (i.e. parents)

If you guessed 1 or 2, that is not the biblical view. 

Just because a woman would make a good preacher, doesn't mean she should become one. God has not given her that role or the authority to do so.


----------



## BlackCalvinist

Colleen, go ahead and delete. I will respond later, I've read all the way through.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

> _Originally posted by RAS_
> Andrew, my friend, I think you jumped the gun. I was not referring to you. It was just a coincidence. I was apparently writing while you had posted.
> 
> 
> But then I read this, so I guess it applies...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Originally posted by VirginiaHuguenot_
> I simply do not believe that poor Christians have no alternative but to dump their children in government schools. Public education is evil and godless, and parents who put their children in such schools will reap what they sow.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I went to public school my whole life. My family up till junior high was dirt poor. Homeschooling was unheard of at the time to my parents. What are my parents going to reap exactly? I'd sincerely like to know.
> 
> Your quote confirms my point. Apparently the God who determines the times and seasons in which we live was unfaithful to my christian mother because He put her in this situation. And now she will reap what she sowed, despite the fact that God put her there and that my whole family professes to belive in Christ. I think you're missing my point that I am not against homeschooling, I am against the church legislating an absolute on this issue. Not everyone has had the providence that you or others have had.
> 
> My whole point was in reference to the PCA resoulution, not to you or those on this board.
Click to expand...


Allan,

Thanks for your clarification, brother. I too went to public school for my whole life. Despite considering myself a "survivor" of public education, I am not basing my objection in principle to public education on my own experience. Nor do I wish to single out your mother for any decisions she made about sending you to public school. I agree with you that everyone's situation is different. Cookie-cutter views of education -- such as what one finds in government schools -- are simplistic and dangerous. 

The fact is, though, God has commanded parents to teach their children in the Lord. Christian education is a duty of every parent. Christian schools, tutors and the like are all consistent with this principle. To send one's child to government school for indoctrination in secular humanism, though, is an abdication of parental responsibility. Pastor Way has made the point that secular humanism is the official religion of government schools. Does that mean that every Christian child sent to government schools will punt the faith? No. Statistics have been given to show that the influence of government schools is catastrophic in general to the faith of Christian children. 

If you survived government education without ill effects, I rejoice in God's mercies to you. The pernicious thing about secular humanist education is that its effects can be subtle. As I have pointed out before, all education is religious. There is no neutrality in education, just as there is no neutrality in anything else that is religious. 

The point has also been made that God has not given the responsibility of education to government but to parents. Compulsory public education laws are violation of the spheres of authority and responsibility that God has ordained. 

I have also made the point that parental duty to provide Christian education is not contingent upon being rich or poor. Lots of poor people -- including, if I may say so, poorer than you or I have ever been -- have successfully educated their children at home. So I just don't buy poverty as an excuse to send one's children to public school. 

I realize that homeschooling was not well known a couple of decades ago. I also realize that many Christians have never even thought about their duty to educate their children in the Lord. Ignorance of their Biblical duty, however, does not negate the duty. 

God is faithful even when parents are poor to provide the means to fulfill the duty he requires of them. He is faithful even when parents are faithless in their duty.

Christian education and government education are not compatible. That is not to say that one can't learn their ABC's in a government school or even learn about the Bible (in rare cases). The good that comes from government education, however, is _despite_ the principle of government education not _because_ of it.

The church ought not to tolerate anti-Christian education of its covenant children. It is contrary to the vows that parents take to raise their children in the nuture and admonition of the Lord when they are baptized. The church ought also to make every provision to help the parents fulfill their duty. No covenant child should be forced to receive a heathen education because a parent is unwilling or "unable" to honor their vows. 

Again, poverty is no excuse for disobedience to God's requirement that children be educated according to Christian principles, and not in secular humanist indoctrination camps. The same principle involved in the abortion debate applies here: pro-lifers are often accused of insensitivity to poor single mothers when they claim that children must be carried to term. Well, the church is right to make that claim, but there is an accompanying diaconal duty to help parents care for their children after they are born no matter how poor they are. That principle applies to the education of children as well as merely putting clothes on their backs and food at their table. Education is a duty of parents and it must be in the Lord not in the State. 

I hope these comments make sense and I don't mean to offend you, brother, by speaking plainly. Incidentally, I don't have a personal stake in the PCA resolution one way or the other. I can see arguments against the resolution based on principles of church authority, while supporting the general desire to see church members raise their children in the Lord. That is my desire as well.

[Edited on 6-18-2005 by VirginiaHuguenot]


----------



## LadyFlynt

> _Originally posted by OS_X_
> 
> I, on the other hand, teach kids who wear the same clothes to school multiple days, sleep out in the streets and such because their parents are either strung out, no father in the home or the kids are wayward. Among my kids that are at least nominally Christian, the bulk come from single family homes. Homeschooling is OUT as an option. The price of living in PG County is so high that most of the parents can't afford to move anywhere else (the only nearby option is DC....which is where most of them moved FROM to get away from the city....) and can't afford private schools (the only three in the area are Seton, Bishop MacNamara and there's one more, but the name escapes me right now) and transportation costs for their kids would be too expensive to send them even to the local charter school in DC. So the school they're in, is the school they're in. Most of these parents have jobs that don't offer benefits - don't work, don't get paid. And some of them are already losing money because they have to take days off to come up to the school to take care of business regarding their child.
> 
> So it's not an 'excuse' that some aren't able to afford to homeschool - it's reality.



Most of these parents aren't the ones that are in discussion. Christian parents aren't strung out. These children are understandably in the government schools. I truely feel for these kids. And I highly respect you for working in them. If you know anything of North St Louis and East St Louis...you know St Louis chalks right up there for drugs, crime, and high rate of living expense along with DC. My husband's best friend was a Math/Science teacher in the Washington Park area (one of the worst parts of East St Louis). My husband and this friend used to meet his students on the streets at night when they would go do street ministry. My best friend's husband was raised in East St Louis...his parents were strung out...I won't tell you the stories he's told my husband. While doing crack house ministry in North St Louis, kids will play in the yards till 2am under the street lights because of their strung out parents...government schools are an escape to them...teachers like you are a blessing to them.

So I do understand. My husband works with some of these strung out ppl. Unfortunately this is not the topic of this thread...and like Traci/Augusta stated...I was trying to show that it IS POSSIBLE for churches to have schools for at least their members without the tuition costs....even better would be to have church schools for these poor (not talking just financial) kids who want a good education and could be reached with the gospel through a church school.

My other point was, any parent who really wanted to homeschool, can find a way to do so. It is possible...even when it "seems" impossible.

Please forgive my temper earlier...we've done without...we've sacrificed...we still could end up with no place to live after our landlady dies (she's 90 and not doing well) due to not being able to aford the cost of living and rent around here...but here is where the jobs are...my husband has worked eighty hours a week before just to keep a roof over our heads and still not make all the bills.

Please don't make a snap judgment about somebody just because they appear in a room full of ppl with college degrees (neither my husband nor I have a degree...we're just well read). Also, for all you knew, I could have access to this forum from the library (I actually did use the library computers to communicate with a couple of forums this past autumn as we didn't have a phoneline...we actually went without a phone for several years before).


----------



## Arch2k

Check out the RPCGA website! They list among their distinctives:

1. embrace the doctrine of Biblical Inerrancy 
2. maintain a literal twenty-four hour, six consecutive day creationist view of Genesis; 
3. reject the modern day Erastian teaching of Church Incorporation; 
4. practice male head-of-household voting; 
5. encourage family-integrated church practices; 
6. require an educated eldership; 
7. adhere to a two office view of the church (Southern Presbyterian) 8. while maintaining a three fold function of the eldership (preaching, teaching and governing); 
*9. promote and support the training of our children in Christian educational institutions, especially in the home schooling method. *


----------



## Myshkin

> _Originally posted by VirginiaHuguenot_
> 
> 
> 
> _Originally posted by RAS_
> Andrew, my friend, I think you jumped the gun. I was not referring to you. It was just a coincidence. I was apparently writing while you had posted.
> 
> 
> But then I read this, so I guess it applies...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Originally posted by VirginiaHuguenot_
> I simply do not believe that poor Christians have no alternative but to dump their children in government schools. Public education is evil and godless, and parents who put their children in such schools will reap what they sow.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I went to public school my whole life. My family up till junior high was dirt poor. Homeschooling was unheard of at the time to my parents. What are my parents going to reap exactly? I'd sincerely like to know.
> 
> Your quote confirms my point. Apparently the God who determines the times and seasons in which we live was unfaithful to my christian mother because He put her in this situation. And now she will reap what she sowed, despite the fact that God put her there and that my whole family professes to belive in Christ. I think you're missing my point that I am not against homeschooling, I am against the church legislating an absolute on this issue. Not everyone has had the providence that you or others have had.
> 
> My whole point was in reference to the PCA resoulution, not to you or those on this board.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Allan,
> 
> Thanks for your clarification, brother. I too went to public school for my whole life. Despite considering myself a "survivor" of public education, I am not basing my objection in principle to public education on my own experience. Nor do I wish to single out your mother for any decisions she made about sending you to public school. I agree with you that everyone's situation is different. Cookie-cutter views of education -- such as what one finds in government schools -- are simplistic and dangerous.
> 
> The fact is, though, God has commanded parents to teach their children in the Lord. Christian education is a duty of every parent. Christian schools, tutors and the like are all consistent with this principle. To send one's child to government school for indoctrination in secular humanism, though, is an abdication of parental responsibility. Pastor Way has made the point that secular humanism is the official religion of government schools. Does that mean that every Christian child sent to government schools will punt the faith? No. Statistics have been given to show that the influence of government schools is catastrophic in general to the faith of Christian children.
> 
> If you survived government education without ill effects, I rejoice in God's mercies to you. The pernicious thing about secular humanist education is that its effects can be subtle. As I have pointed out before, all education is religious. There is no neutrality in education, just as there is no neutrality in anything else that is religious.
> 
> The point has also been made that God has not given the responsibility of education to government but to parents. Compulsory public education laws are violation of the spheres of authority and responsibility that God has ordained.
> 
> I have also made the point that parental duty to provide Christian education is not contingent upon being rich or poor. Lots of poor people -- including, if I may say so, poorer than you or I have ever been -- have successfully educated their children at home. So I just don't buy poverty as an excuse to send one's children to public school.
> 
> I realize that homeschooling was not well known a couple of decades ago. I also realize that many Christians have never even thought about their duty to educate their children in the Lord. Ignorance of their Biblical duty, however, does not negate the duty.
> 
> God is faithful even when parents are poor to provide the means to fulfill the duty he requires of them. He is faithful even when parents are faithless in their duty.
> 
> Christian education and government education are not compatible. That is not to say that one can't learn their ABC's in a government school or even learn about the Bible (in rare cases). The good that comes from government education, however, is _despite_ the principle of government education not _because_ of it.
> 
> The church ought not to tolerate anti-Christian education of its covenant children. It is contrary to the vows that parents take to raise their children in the nuture and admonition of the Lord when they are baptized. The church ought also to make every provision to help the parents fulfill their duty. No covenant child should be forced to receive a heathen education because a parent is unwilling or "unable" to honor their vows.
> 
> Again, poverty is no excuse for disobedience to God's requirement that children be educated according to Christian principles, and not in secular humanist indoctrination camps. The same principle involved in the abortion debate applies here: pro-lifers are often accused of insensitivity to poor single mothers when they claim that children must be carried to term. Well, the church is right to make that claim, but there is an accompanying diaconal duty to help parents care for their children after they are born no matter how poor they are. That principle applies to the education of children as well as merely putting clothes on their backs and food at their table. Education is a duty of parents and it must be in the Lord not in the State.
> 
> I hope these comments make sense and I don't mean to offend you, brother, by speaking plainly. Incidentally, I don't have a personal stake in the PCA resolution one way or the other. I can see arguments against the resolution based on principles of church authority, while supporting the general desire to see church members raise their children in the Lord. That is my desire as well.
> 
> [Edited on 6-18-2005 by VirginiaHuguenot]
Click to expand...


Andrew-

I have to speak plainly also, and likewise mean no offense.... I clarified my post to you, yet no apology, and you proceed to write to me as if I am disputing you. I repeat, I was not talking to you. I was making general comments about the topic of the thread.

Your post comes across as a lecture, and I am not sure why you are singling me out for an education. Like I said before I was not referring to you in my post. Our use of the same phrase was just a coincidence. You are speaking to a ghost, because I am not sure where I ever disagreed with you. Again, the point of my post was not against homeschooling(I am for it all the way), nor pro-public school (I am against it at this time in history), but that while agreeing with their desire, I was glad that homeschooling was not legislated denominationally. I am only echoing the comments of Patrick and Adam here. You are writing to me as if I support public schooling and am ignorant of the situation, which I never said. All I am supporting is parents who aren't, for whatever reason, in the ideal situation. To think that every situation in this life can be fixed, solved, or explained is to have a simplistic view of life, is a subtley self-righteous way of viewing ourselves and our fellow believers, and mimics the mentality I was fed in the Word of Faith movement. I appreciate your desire to help, but please don't talk down to me. I am not offended nor do I now take it personally, brother. I sent you a u2u.

God bless,
Allan


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

> _Originally posted by RAS_
> Andrew-
> 
> I have to speak plainly also, and likewise mean no offense.... I clarified my post to you, yet no apology, and you proceed to write to me as if I am disputing you. I repeat, I was not talking to you. I was making general comments about the topic of the thread.
> 
> Your post comes across as a lecture, and I am not sure why you are singling me out for an education. Like I said before I was not referring to you in my post. Our use of the same phrase was just a coincidence. You are speaking to a ghost, because I am not sure where I ever disagreed with you. Again, the point of my post was not against homeschooling(I am for it all the way), nor pro-public school (I am against it at this time in history), but that while agreeing with their desire, I was glad that homeschooling was not legislated denominationally. I am only echoing the comments of Patrick and Adam here. You are writing to me as if I support public schooling and am ignorant of the situation, which I never said. All I am supporting is parents who aren't, for whatever reason, in the ideal situation. To think that every situation in this life can be fixed, solved, or explained is to have a simplistic view of life, is a subtley self-righteous way of viewing ourselves and our fellow believers, and mimics the mentality I was fed in the Word of Faith movement. I appreciate your desire to help, but please don't talk down to me. I am not offended nor do I now take it personally, brother. I sent you a u2u.
> 
> God bless,
> Allan



Allan,

I think our mutual attempts at clarification have gone awry and for that I am sorry. I have great respect for you and I think we are simply misunderstanding each other. I will respond to your u2u. 

God bless, brother.


----------



## LadyFlynt

> _Originally posted by Jeff_Bartel_
> Check out the RPCGA website! They list among their distinctives:
> 
> 1. embrace the doctrine of Biblical Inerrancy
> 2. maintain a literal twenty-four hour, six consecutive day creationist view of Genesis;
> 3. reject the modern day Erastian teaching of Church Incorporation;
> 4. practice male head-of-household voting;
> 5. encourage family-integrated church practices;
> 6. require an educated eldership;
> 7. adhere to a two office view of the church (Southern Presbyterian) 8. while maintaining a three fold function of the eldership (preaching, teaching and governing);
> *9. promote and support the training of our children in Christian educational institutions, especially in the home schooling method. *



Praise be to the Lord! SOMEBODY has the guts!


----------



## Scott

"So it's not an 'excuse' that some aren't able to afford to homeschool - it's reality."

Kerry: I think you are right. Some options just do not work for some people, as good as they might otherwise be.


----------



## Myshkin

Andrew-

Everything is okay. Misunderstandings are easy on this format of communication. I likewise apologize for any lack of clarity on my part. Feelings of respect are mutual, brother. (Sent you a u2u)

-Allan


----------



## LadyFlynt

> _Originally posted by Scott_
> "So it's not an 'excuse' that some aren't able to afford to homeschool - it's reality."
> 
> Kerry: I think you are right. Some options just do not work for some people, as good as they might otherwise be.



Give me a true life example, using someone who REALLY DESIRES to homeschool...(betcha I could find a way for that person...or at least possiblities for them to check out)


----------



## BlackCalvinist

I'm here, but really not here - thought i'd share this-

From a blog entry from a Pastor who made his way to my blog via Phil Johnson's:



> Brother, thank you for addressing this matter. Having had two children in public, private and home school, I must admit there are no guarantees in any of these situations. My kids have suffered in each circumstance and continue to feel the effects of associations with "less than desirable" friends in all three scenarios. (You say, how can they have less than desirable friends in home school? In a home school association that meets regularly to teach subjects to many homeschoolers in the area.)
> 
> Regardless of which school situation works best for any individual family, our lives are never exempt from the snares of a fallen world. But some choices are obviously better than others. Generally speaking, government controlled, atheistic, evolutionary, anti-intelligent design public schools are at least a waste of time, and at worst a breeding ground for insolence and stupidity among young children who are depraved and drawn toward such rebellion anyway. Almost any alternative is a move in the right direction, in the vast majority of cases.
> 
> But you also mention the spiritual education of our children. You are absolutely correct that a church cannot be held responsible for this by parents who think it is not primarily their own responsibility to educate their children in spiritual matters. Parents need to see the church SS and youth programs as supplemental at best. The real education must be (and by default, is) done in the home.


----------



## Authorised

The resolution was thought to be too vague, so it was voted down. I think this issue pales in comparison with the recent attacks (through the years) on the Westminster confession from within the PCA; at GA a resolution got voted down (not by a large margin) which would have allowed an elder not only to hold an exception, but also to teach it in conjunction with the confession. To me, this relegates the confession to a place that is for all intents and purposes, worthless.

What bothers me is that there are growing numbers of Elders in the PCA willing to compromise the confession, which is the bond that holds our denomination together.

[Edited on 6-20-2005 by Authorised]


----------



## LadyFlynt

Kerry, that pastor is correct in that children can turn out whatever way, for whatever reason, whatever the schooling option chosen. We never negated that probability. We have stated that, with active and strongly convicted parents, it may be less likely with homeschooling...but not that homeschoolers are immune.

The issue at hand is "is it the parents responsibility to make sure children have a specifically Christian education?".

The issue of the thread is "is it the church's responsibility to hold the parents accountable for doing so?"

Personally...yes to both of those.


----------



## Theological Books

Nobody is saying sending children to public school is a sin, or that sending your children to a public school is disobedience to raising your children in the fear and admonition of the Lord is equal to, are they?

[Edited on 6-21-2005 by Theological Books]


----------



## WrittenFromUtopia

It's not sin to support atheism being taught to children of the covenant?


----------



## Scott

"Give me a true life example, using someone who REALLY DESIRES to homeschool...(betcha I could find a way for that person...or at least possiblities for them to check out)."

Colleen: Well, one example is the child whose parents don't want to homeschool and, not only that, are abusive. In some circumstances, as bad as public schools can be (and they vary in quality), sometimes it is a better environment than with abusive (drunk, etc.) parents. I think Kerry had mentioned something like this.


----------



## LadyFlynt

> _Originally posted by Scott_
> "Give me a true life example, using someone who REALLY DESIRES to homeschool...(betcha I could find a way for that person...or at least possiblities for them to check out)."
> 
> Colleen: Well, one example is the child whose parents don't want to homeschool and, not only that, are abusive. In some circumstances, as bad as public schools can be (and they vary in quality), sometimes it is a better environment than with abusive (drunk, etc.) parents. I think Kerry had mentioned something like this.



Then you didn't read my post to Kerry where I stated almost the exact same thing you just did. I understand (more than you know, in fact first hand) that going to school can be an escape for these kids. Due to that I would like to see affordable (or free) options for these kids. If we can set up cheap, but quality schools for kids overseas...I know we can do it here. In fact I believe one woman in North St Louis has done so for some kids there. But again...this is NOT the point of the thread...we are talking about the responsibilities of a CHRISTIAN PARENT. You all are trying to split the issue...and I've already offered suggestions for the church to address this issue and yet ppl keep making excuses even there rather than taking up the challenge...I dare any teachers amoung you to get with your church and start a mission school.

And, no, that is NOT an example...I'm looking for an example of a PARENT who desires to homeschool their children but think they can't. A real life one, not one created out of your imagination or a possibility.


----------



## LadyFlynt

> _Originally posted by Theological Books_
> Nobody is saying sending children to public school is a sin, or that sending your children to a public school is disobedience to raising your children in the fear and admonition of the Lord is equal to, are they?
> 
> [Edited on 6-21-2005 by Theological Books]



Yes, I am...and no, that is not an attack towards anyone who ps's their kids. I am accountable for my actions, they are accountable for their. And we are supposed to be held accountable by the church.

here's some quotes I found:

1) One on one education by someone who deeply cares for your child.

4) Avoidance of state-sponsored evolutionary teaching, which does not come from God, but the devil.

5) Avoidance of poor peer influences which can lead to rebelliousness in your child. The Bible says that bad company corrupts good character.

8) Opportunity to forge lasting deep relationships with your children beyond what you have now!

9) Avoidance of state socialistic pressures, like mandatory vaccinations. (the reason I left this one in here is because we are supposed to protect our children...some of these vacs harm children...others are cultured in aborted fetal tissue, I'm not injecting someone's idolotrous sacrifice into the body of my child).

10) Your child will learn to grow into a Godly adult by exposure to Godly adults like you and those in your homeschool co-op group.

11) Freedom to teach the Bible, biblical principles, and to pray in school.

14) Avoidance of school violence, temptation to engage in sexual activity, temptation to use drugs, and peer influences to disrespect authority figures.

here's another:

Biblical Reasons to Homeschool

Offered here are just a handful of verses from God's word which apply to raising, training, and educating children. There are hundreds of reasons to reject the usage of the government education system, including social, moral, academic, ethical, political, and "religious" reasons. For a Christian, especially a Christian who values the authority of Scripture, God's own words on the matter should settle the issue. So here we attempt to explain a conviction we have through the only objective way possible: Holy Scripture.

-Brandon and Rebekah Staggs

God gave you children as a steward and gave you the authority over them:

Psalms 127:3-5 Lo, children are an heritage of the LORD: and the fruit of the womb is his reward. As arrows are in the hand of a mighty man; so are children of the youth. Happy is the man that hath his quiver full of them: they shall not be ashamed, but they shall speak with the enemies in the gate.

Genesis 33:5 And he lifted up his eyes, and saw the women and the children; and said, Who are those with thee? And he said, The children which God hath graciously given thy servant.

Genesis 48:8-9 And Israel beheld Joseph's sons, and said, Who are these? And Joseph said unto his father, They are my sons, whom God hath given me in this place. And he said, Bring them, I pray thee, unto me, and I will bless them.

Isaiah 8:18 Behold, I and the children whom the LORD hath given me are for signs and for wonders in Israel from the LORD of hosts, which dwelleth in mount Zion.

Hebrews 2:13 And again, I will put my trust in him. And again, Behold I and the children which God hath given me.

On rendering to GOD'S what is GOD'S:

Matthew 22:21 They say unto him, Caesar's. Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's.

(People tend to ignore the latter portion of the verse. Our kids are not Caesar's!) Children belong to God:

Ezekiel 16:20-21 Moreover thou hast taken thy sons and thy daughters, whom thou hast borne unto me, and these hast thou sacrificed unto them to be devoured. Is this of thy whoredoms a small matter, That thou hast slain my children, and delivered them to cause them to pass through the fire for them?

God's commandments to us regarding our stewardship of the children He has given us include:

Ephesians 6:4 And, ye fathers, provoke not your children to wrath: but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.

Does sending your child to a secular school fulfill your obligation to bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord, or does it work against doing so?

Deuteronomy 6:6-9 And these words, which I command thee this day, shall be in thine heart: 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. And thou shalt bind them for a sign upon thine hand, and they shall be as frontlets between thine eyes. And thou shalt write them upon the posts of thy house, and on thy gates.

Above is a Mosaic example of a general precept: that we must always be teaching our kids God's word. Can sending children to public school somehow qualify as teaching them when they sit, walk, lie down, rise up, etc -- how does doing so qualify as diligence? God clearly wants us to make our children THINK like followers of Him -- how can sending your kid to a place that they learn, among other things, how to think in a secular manner not be disobedient to this? At the very least, it would qualify as shooting yourself in the foot, would it not? See also Psalm 78, Exodus 13:8,14, etc)

Proverbs 23:7 For as he thinketh in his heart, so is he: Eat and drink, saith he to thee; but his heart is not with thee.

How someone thinks in their heart is what makes them. How do kids learn to think of the world, of God and His creation, in school?

More regarding thoughts:

2 Corinthians 10:5 Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ;

Does this happen in school? Does the school teach your child to take EVERYTHING in consideration with God's precepts? If you send your kid to school for 30 hours a week before they are even fully aware of a Christian worldview and spiritual warfare, how can they possibly be taking every thought into captivity? Does sending your kid to school work for or against this goal?

Isaiah 54:13 And all thy children shall be taught of the LORD; and great shall be the peace of thy children.

Jeremiah 10:2 Thus saith the LORD, Learn not the way of the heathen, and be not dismayed at the signs of heaven; for the heathen are dismayed at them.

Let's see -- does sending your kid to a heathen school go for or against the precept of "learn not the way of the heathen?" When your kid goes to school -- any school! -- do they not learn heathen ways? I know I did!

Matthew 22:37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.

A kid's mind is trained in school. Can school help or hinder your child from loving God with all of their MIND when they teach their MIND to ignore God? Does this help or hinder your goal?

Romans 12:2 And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.

Is sending your child to a heathen school helpful or damaging to making them NOT conform to this world? And is having a "normal" kid who acts like other "normal" heathen kids really a Biblical goal?

Here is a no-brainer:

Proverbs 22:6 Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it.

Does a heathen school offer this kind of training? If you are trying to train your child in "the way he should go," does sending him to heathens and putting your child under heathen educational authority help or hinder your efforts to train him in the way he should go?

On "missionary schooling:"

1 Samuel 15:22 And Samuel said, Hath the LORD as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the LORD? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams.

Would God rather you sacrifice your child to a heathen system in the hopes of converting lost schoolchildren, or would He rather you obey His commands concerning the training of your child?

Proverbs 13:20 He that walketh with wise men shall be wise: but a companion of fools shall be destroyed.

I'll give you two guesses: is a heathen school filled with heathen children acting like heathen animals a place where your child will walk with wise men or find companionship with fools?

And if you do manage to impart good morals to your child before you send them off to school in the morning, what will happen when they get there?

1 Corinthians 15:33 Be not deceived: evil communications corrupt good manners.

That's communications as in "community." Is it a good idea to put your child in that situation?

James 3:13-18 Who is a wise man and endued with knowledge among you? let him shew out of a good conversation his works with meekness of wisdom. But if ye have bitter envying and strife in your hearts, glory not, and lie not against the truth. This wisdom descendeth not from above, but is earthly, sensual, devilish. For where envying and strife is, there is confusion and every evil work. But the wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, and easy to be intreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, and without hypocrisy. And the fruit of righteousness is sown in peace of them that make peace.

This [contrary to truth] wisdom is from.... where? Is it in keeping with your stewardship of the child God gave you to put them in training where they get only earthly wisdom?

So what does the Lord think of those who give harm to (offend) children?

Matthew 18:6 But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.

Does sending your child to a heathen educational system harm or help your child -- in the things that matter to God?

Psalms 119:97-104 MEM. O how love I thy law! it is my meditation all the day. Thou through thy commandments hast made me wiser than mine enemies: for they are ever with me. I have more understanding than all my teachers: for thy testimonies are my meditation. I understand more than the ancients, because I keep thy precepts. I have refrained my feet from every evil way, that I might keep thy word. I have not departed from thy judgments: for thou hast taught me. How sweet are thy words unto my taste! yea, sweeter than honey to my mouth! Through thy precepts I get understanding: therefore I hate every false way.


----------



## rmwilliamsjr

i've read the previous message a dozen times, and started and discarded replies an equal number of times. i am not really interested in arguing the issues here, but i would like to point out a logical fallacy that is so commonly made that it now seems true.

Avoidance of state-sponsored evolutionary teaching, which does not come from God, but the devil.
Avoidance of state socialistic pressures, like mandatory vaccinations.

This is the logical error of composition. (http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/composition.html for example)
what is happening is that conservative Christians, who are orthodox because of their stance on the authority, inspiration, and unity of the Scriptures also tend to be conservative political, culturally, socially, economically etc etc.

The problem is that the conservative program/package/worldview is not itself Scriptural. There may be pieces that are, but on the whole it is not. Nor should we expect it to be, it is not a theology, but a social viewpoint. But since we tend to filter things we heard through our interpretative grid, of which this viewpoint is a crucial part, we let in things that are consistent with the grid but are not part of our basic theology.

The sad part to me, is that issues like the two i quoted above are never looked at carefully but are just added to the pile and believed since they seem so consistent with the worldview. We need better theological filters and better logical reasoning abilities, hooking these elements without examination into our Christian worldviews will not help the discussion at all.

for they both are simply not true.
evolution =/=atheism
vaccinations have nothing to do with socialism
both statements are fundamentally guilt by association and name calling fallacies.

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/guilt-by-association.html

....

[Edited on 6-21-2005 by rmwilliamsjr]


----------



## lwadkins

A simple way to see which system is prefered:
Let parents keep their tax monies and use it to educate their children as they would (Christian School, Homeschool, Public, Private) and see where the majority of people place their children. Of course the government will never allow this as it detracts from their abiblity to teach children not to think, but to blindly follow government dictates. This is not freedom but tyrany. Also the Public School system has become a political institution used to garner power for a specific political ideology. In public schools indoctrination not education is the order of the day. And yes this is generalization and not universaly true, but it is by far generally truy.


----------



## LadyFlynt

"Avoidance of state-sponsored evolutionary teaching"

This is a theological view...not a social one.

"Avoidance of state socialistic pressures, like mandatory vaccinations"

This is due to religious conviction...not social preference.


"evolution =/=atheism"

no, but it is still wrong and affects other areas of ones beliefs.

"vaccinations have nothing to do with socialism"

This "socialistic" could be read more than one way. Socialistic, basically meaning, one size fits all and EVERYONE HAS to do it regardless of religious, moral, or medical reasoning...hey are requiring something that we aren't willing to participate in therefore automatically negating their system as an educational option.



[Edited on 6-21-2005 by LadyFlynt]


----------



## LadyFlynt

> _Originally posted by lwadkins_
> A simple way to see which system is prefered:
> Let parents keep their tax monies and use it to educate their children as they would (Christian School, Homeschool, Public, Private) and see where the majority of people place their children. Of course the government will never allow this as it detracts from their abiblity to teach children not to think, but to blindly follow government dictates. This is not freedom but tyrany. Also the Public School system has become a political institution used to garner power for a specific political ideology. In public schools indoctrination not education is the order of the day. And yes this is generalization and not universaly true, but it is by far generally truy.


----------



## Myshkin

I think the dividing line between homeschoolers and non-homeschoolers goes deeper than a pious and simplistic "they are God's children" catchphrase. I think it comes down to Kuyper/presuppositionalism/worldview thinking over and against Augustinian/classical/Two-Kingdoms thinking. (This is a thesis of mine I do not wish to take the time and flesh out here, it is just something I think about from time to time.) But, the point is that I think going to one verse here and there is simplistic and does not advance the discussion anymore than a Dispensational would quote 1 Thess. 1:10 for support of a 7 year earthly tribulation, and then say "see, that settles it!". There are more things involved than just going to scripture. Before being dogmatic and using prooftexts to persuade one another, we should tackle the issue in light of historical practice in the church, what is confessional, and what fits the analogy of faith principle in interpreting scripture.

1)Could we start defining what "christian "education actually is?
2) When God commands parents to raise their kids in the fear and admonition of the Lord does this included 2+2=4, or is it referring to spiritual matters (i.e. prayer, theology, bible knowledge, churchmanship, character in all spheres of life, etc.).
3) hypothetically, if public schools did not indoctrinate a philosophy, a psychology, a worldview, etc., but only taught the facts of each discipline (i.e. 2+2=4, 2 hydrogen molecules + 1 oxygen molecule = water, etc.) would public schools still be "of the devil"? Can a heathen still teach facts about God's creation? Can we learn the alphabet from a non-christian, or does the alphabet have christian only undertones to it?
4)Is it right for christians, in reaction to the secularist agenda of separating the disciplines into contradictory spheres, to overreact and tie up all disciplines into a "christian" education? Shouldn't we distinguish without confusing or separating?
5)If public schools are sinful simply because they are state sponsored, then to be consistent shouldn't we abandon all organizations or groups that are related to the state? (military, police, road construction etc.) Public schools might be wrong for other reasons, but the argument that they are wrong because they are state sponsored seems like we would have to tear Romans 13 out of our bibles.
6)even if we all came to a consensus that public school is wrong, does this mean it should be denominationally legislated or confessionaly mandated?
7)is public school inherently wrong or is it just wrong today seeing what it has become?
8)is the problem really the public schools, or is it the parents neglecting their responsibility before and after school? Are we pointing fingers at the world's sin when we should be pointing fingers at christian parents who neglect their kids before and after school, who reinforce the secualrism of the public schools in their daily lives, who let secularism into church theology and form, and who do not help their fellow church members when providence is "frowning" on them? Is the problem the state schools or is it the Church?

I think answering questions like these will help the discussion, because too often the discussion is held to a superficial level of name-calling, proof-texting, and emotional rhetoric for effect. If we are certain of our views we should not be afraid of allowing them scrutiny. Again, I think this issue is bigger than just homeschool vs. public school. It touches on the areas of monasticism, God's sovereignty, academics vs. spiritual education, vocation, providence, church and state, Romans 13, historical practice, confessional precedent, ethics, Kuyperian neo-calvinism vs. classical calvinism. The homeschool side needs to integrate these issues and more into their argument, instead of just using the pious phrase of "it's a parents responsibility" as if the public school side disagreed with that statement. Much more is involved than parental responsibility. No one is disagreeing with the "that it is", the dispute is over the "how it is to be done". Maybe my diagnostic questions for all of us to answer would shed some light on deeper issues and would cause some more charity in the discussion.

(Moved to Crhoades thread listed below)

[Edited on 6-21-2005 by RAS]


----------



## crhoades

RAS- we're on the same wavelength as to the complexity of the issue. I started a thread over here: http://www.puritanboard.com/forum/viewthread.php?tid=11626
to try and differentiate some of the matters you brought up (but not all of them - you added some excellent discussion points for sure!). The reason I started another thread on the normativity of education was this one in theory was about the PCA resolution and was dovetailing. (Not to mention, this thread is in the family forum as opposed to the education forum - trying to put it on level turf:bigsmile


----------



## LadyFlynt

1)Could we start defining what "christian "education actually is?
The raising and training of our children to become active, useful members of society with a scriptural worldview.

2) When God commands parents to raise their kids in the fear and admonition of the Lord does this included 2+2=4, or is it referring to spiritual matters (i.e. prayer, theology, bible knowledge, churchmanship, character in all spheres of life, etc.).
Mainly the latter part, added in the former...the former however can be many time affected by the latter.

3) hypothetically, if public schools did not indoctrinate a philosophy, a psychology, a worldview, etc., but only taught the facts of each discipline (i.e. 2+2=4, 2 hydrogen molecules + 1 oxygen molecule = water, etc.) would public schools still be "of the devil"? Can a heathen still teach facts about God's creation? Can we learn the alphabet from a non-christian, or does the alphabet have christian only undertones to it?
This can't be done. A teacher will ALWAYS instill some of his belief system into his student. Where do you place science? Psychology? History? Are there not worldviews played out when presenting such subjects? Aren't some subjects (like Psychology) based upon a worldview apart from Christ? Can you truely present these in an unbiased manner?

4)Is it right for christians, in reaction to the secularist agenda of separating the disciplines into contradictory spheres, to overreact and tie up all disciplines into a "christian" education? Shouldn't we distinguish without confusing or separating?
I think you state your own worldview when you refer to it as overreacting. It is NOT overreacting to tie up all disciplines and teach them within a scriptural/christian context. How are we "confusing"? How is it wrong to teach about cultures (understanding their worldview) and compare it to our worldview? How is it wrong to teach history and show God's hand in it all? How is is wrong to teach science and show God's wonders?

5)If public schools are sinful simply because they are state sponsored, then to be consistent shouldn't we abandon all organizations or groups that are related to the state? (military, police, road construction etc.) Public schools might be wrong for other reasons, but the argument that they are wrong because they are state sponsored seems like we would have to tear Romans 13 out of our bibles.
Due to the responsibility of teaching and training children is specifically given by God to the parents not the government. The military is ceasar's, not God's. The road construction is ceasar's, not God's. The children are covenanted and are God's.

6)even if we all came to a consensus that public school is wrong, does this mean it should be denominationally legislated or confessionaly mandated?
Do not the ppl on this board believe in ecclesiastical authority? Aren't we to be held accountable to (and justly disciplined if neccessary by) the authorities within our churches?

7)is public school inherently wrong or is it just wrong today seeing what it has become?
Depends...if you are refering to "government" schools...then for a christian, yes. However, public schools started as church schools within the communities. If everyone within the community attended the same church, so did the children attend the same school. If there were two different denominations within the same community and the community was big enough, they had two different schools (ie catholic school and baptist school). However, the schools were offered money by the state...but in exchange that they make changes...until they became state schools.


----------



## crhoades

> _Originally posted by RAS_
> Thanks Chris. Just noticed that. Could we move mine to your thread?



Knock yourself out. I'm not a mod of any sort so you can always do the copy paste and then edit delete...


----------



## Augusta

> _Originally posted by LadyFlynt_
> 1)Could we start defining what "christian "education actually is?
> The raising and training of our children to become active, useful members of society with a scriptural worldview.
> 
> 2) When God commands parents to raise their kids in the fear and admonition of the Lord does this included 2+2=4, or is it referring to spiritual matters (i.e. prayer, theology, bible knowledge, churchmanship, character in all spheres of life, etc.).
> Mainly the latter part, added in the former...the former however can be many time affected by the latter.
> 
> 3) hypothetically, if public schools did not indoctrinate a philosophy, a psychology, a worldview, etc., but only taught the facts of each discipline (i.e. 2+2=4, 2 hydrogen molecules + 1 oxygen molecule = water, etc.) would public schools still be "of the devil"? Can a heathen still teach facts about God's creation? Can we learn the alphabet from a non-christian, or does the alphabet have christian only undertones to it?
> This can't be done. A teacher will ALWAYS instill some of his belief system into his student. Where do you place science? Psychology? History? Are there not worldviews played out when presenting such subjects? Aren't some subjects (like Psychology) based upon a worldview apart from Christ? Can you truely present these in an unbiased manner?
> 
> 4)Is it right for christians, in reaction to the secularist agenda of separating the disciplines into contradictory spheres, to overreact and tie up all disciplines into a "christian" education? Shouldn't we distinguish without confusing or separating?
> I think you state your own worldview when you refer to it as overreacting. It is NOT overreacting to tie up all disciplines and teach them within a scriptural/christian context. How are we "confusing"? How is it wrong to teach about cultures (understanding their worldview) and compare it to our worldview? How is it wrong to teach history and show God's hand in it all? How is is wrong to teach science and show God's wonders?
> 
> 5)If public schools are sinful simply because they are state sponsored, then to be consistent shouldn't we abandon all organizations or groups that are related to the state? (military, police, road construction etc.) Public schools might be wrong for other reasons, but the argument that they are wrong because they are state sponsored seems like we would have to tear Romans 13 out of our bibles.
> Due to the responsibility of teaching and training children is specifically given by God to the parents not the government. The military is ceasar's, not God's. The road construction is ceasar's, not God's. The children are covenanted and are God's.
> 
> 6)even if we all came to a consensus that public school is wrong, does this mean it should be denominationally legislated or confessionaly mandated?
> Do not the ppl on this board believe in ecclesiastical authority? Aren't we to be held accountable to (and justly disciplined if neccessary by) the authorities within our churches?
> 
> 7)is public school inherently wrong or is it just wrong today seeing what it has become?
> Depends...if you are refering to "government" schools...then for a christian, yes. However, public schools started as church schools within the communities. If everyone within the community attended the same church, so did the children attend the same school. If there were two different denominations within the same community and the community was big enough, they had two different schools (ie catholic school and baptist school). However, the schools were offered money by the state...but in exchange that they make changes...until they became state schools.





The earth is the Lord's and everything in it. So everything pertains to the Lord and He pertains to everything. I can't tell you how many times, in teaching my children ALL subjects, that God ends up the topic or how He relates to that topic.


----------



## Scott

"And, no, that is NOT an example...I'm looking for an example of a PARENT who desires to homeschool their children but think they can't. A real life one, not one created out of your imagination or a possibility."

Colleen: Ok, a poor single mother with young children (6 and under) would be an example. Say also that she does not have a church that will provide free education for her child (which would be nearly all churches in the country, conservative or otherwise).


----------



## LadyFlynt

To start with (I have a feeling that you made this woman up...therefore refusing to deal with a real situation), there are generally church schools around...has she really checked with them about financial assistance or scholarships? Is she a member of a church? Also, where does the church stand on education? If they aren't pro christian education, then she might be in the wrong church for her and her children.

Only one of her children would need to be educated...in some states, her 6yr is still below mandatory age limits and wouldn't need to worry about schooling them for the next year...she could start teaching her child the basics in the evening....phonics, writing, arithmetic. $30 for the entire year would be the approximate that she would need.


----------



## LadyFlynt

BTW, one single mom I know that homeschools her young son, and works full time...has her son schooling with another couple's daughters. The situation recently has fizzled, I believe. I think she and another single mom will be taking turns on teaching and taking care of the kids (ie, splitting shifts due to their jobs).


----------



## Theological Books

> _Originally posted by WrittenFromUtopia_
> It's not sin to support atheism being taught to children of the covenant?



Okay, so you are saying sending covenant children to a public school *IS* a sin?


----------



## pastorway

The SBC passed their resolution this year!



> Resolution No. 1 on Educating Children.
> 
> WHEREAS, Children have been entrusted to parents by the Lord and represent our nation's future and our spiritual legacy; and
> 
> WHEREAS, God has given parents the responsibility for the upbringing and
> education of our children (Proverbs 22:6; Deuteronomy 6:6-7); and
> 
> WHEREAS, Many negative influences are attempting to transform the moral
> foundation of the culture by reshaping the core values of our children,
> undermining historical truth, and promoting promiscuity, violence, and other
> immoral behaviors; and
> 
> WHEREAS, Children are vulnerable to marketing and entertainment campaigns that redefine truth, morality , and family relationships; and
> 
> WHEREAS, Homosexual activists and their allies are devoting substantial
> resources and using political power to promote the acceptance among
> schoolchildren of homosexuality as a morally legitimate lifestyle; and
> 
> WHEREAS, Educational institutions are often an effective gateway to
> children's hearts and minds; and
> 
> WHEREAS, Parents have access to textbooks, curricula, special programs,
> teachers, and other school personnel, giving them tremendous power to effect change in schools; and
> 
> WHEREAS, All citizens have the right and responsibility to participate in
> local, state, and national elections and to use their influence to effect
> change; and
> 
> WHEREAS, Involved parents are the ultimate influence in the lives of their
> children; now, therefore, be it
> 
> RESOLVED, That the messengers to the Southern Baptist Convention meeting in Nashville, Tennessee, June 21-22, 2005, urge parents and churches to research and monitor the entertainment and educational influences on children; and be it further
> 
> RESOLVED, That we urge parents and churches to exercise their rights to
> investigate diligently the curricula, textbooks, and programs in our
> community schools and to demand discontinuation of offensive material and
> programs; and be it further
> 
> RESOLVED, That we urge our churches to assist and support parents as they investigate community schools and as they train and disciple their own
> children; and be it further
> 
> RESOLVED, That as citizen Christians we commit to hold accountable schools, institutions, and industries for their moral influence on our children; and be it finally
> 
> RESOLVED, That we urge Christian parents to fully embrace their
> responsibility to make prayerful and informed decisions regarding where and how they educate their children, whether they choose public, private, or home schooling, to ensure their physical, moral, emotional, and spiritual
> well-being, with a goal of raising godly men and women who are thoroughly
> equipped to live as fully devoted followers of Christ.



A definite step in the right direction!!

Also read Al Mohler's comments here:
An Exit Strategy

Phillip


----------



## LadyFlynt

> _Originally posted by pastorway_
> 
> A definite step in the right direction!!
> 
> Phillip



I "guess". Parents have already been doing this since I was in school and it has never changed anything around here. Sorry, but this "resolution" has really "resolved" anything...and really doesn't take a true stand on anything. Pretty much "business as usual".


----------



## SolaScriptura

What became of the PCA's resolution?


----------



## LadyFlynt

It was thrown out.


----------



## LadyFlynt

Yes, I'm dragging this sorry old thread up again...wanted to clarify something.



> _Originally posted by RAS_
> Until homeschoolers start speaking out for those who are less able than they are, are giving all they can to assist those who can't homeschool for providential reasons, then I will continue to look at the homeschool movement as an ironic elitism.



I'm all for this, Allan...and there ARE homeschoolers out there that are attempting to do what they can and are encouraging others to do the same. There are curriculum companies that are willing to give curriculum away at discount or even for NO COST to those that are truely in need. Doug Phillips has a CD out on where he speaks of assisting single mothers to be able to homeschool their children. There are homeschoolers that help other families be able to homeschool their children (either by babysitting while single mom or dad in the evening or by homeschooling the other person's children themselves by agreement between all parents involved). Some homeschoolers even pass on curriculum that they aren't using to other homeschoolers to help defray costs. Homeschoolers do what they can to help others who wish to homeschool. However, you're right, we can't provide for EVERYBODY. (this doesn't make it elitist however). I know ALOT of homeschoolers who tell of the sacrifices they make in order to homeschool...we make sacrifices ourselves (I could have gone to nursing school and be making more than hubby---I actually had started to take my pre-reqs at one time)...but we chose to sacrifice having the financial extras in order for me to be home with our kids. We make our bills and we cut corners (I love yard sales, thrift stores, and used books).

Please don't refer to us as an elitist club...we come in all sizes and are doing our best to inform others.


----------

