God Wants PARENTS to Educate Their Own Children

Posted on by

God Wants PARENTS to Educate Their Own Children

Posted in In line with Scripture

“Hear 0 Israel : The LORD our God, the LORD is one! YOU shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your might. And these words which I command YOU today shall be in your heart; you shall teach them diligently to your children, and shall talk of them when you sit in your house, when you walk by the way, when you lie down, and when you rise up.” –Deuteronomy 6:4-7

The teacher must have the Word of God in his heart. As a matter of fact, the teacher qualifications in the Bible, and those to which we Christian Home Schoolers should automatically subscribe, are far tougher than any College of Education has ever dared to propose. The teacher must first have the Lord as his God. Do the teachers at the public schools who teach your child have the Lord as their God?

Second , the teacher must love the Lord his God with everything he’s got. Do even the Christian teachers at the public schools who teach your children love Him like that? Are they even legally allowed to acknowledge or demonstrate such love for God within the state classroom? Do you love the Lord your God like that? Well, really none of us does. That is why we must continually confess our sins and receive again His assurance of forgiveness. But we should all be working toward loving Him more consistently and completely and with everything we’ve got.

Next this Scripture says that the teacher is to teach the children God’s Word diligently at all times and in every situation. This eliminates the classroom as a proper teaching environment. Teaching is to be done in the context of everyday life. Only parents can do that. They can work as a team, and the children can see the proper way for a man and his wife to behave toward one another, demonstrate affection toward one another, support one another in the running of the house, the earning of the income, the education and training and discipline of the children. It is a 24-hour-a-day process and it takes place in the reality of the home, the community and the marketplace as they go about their day-to-day routines together. It is an education in the real world and will obviously prepare children for the real world. And those silly home schooling critics say WE are the ones sheltering children from the real world!!

It is the responsibility, then, of parents to educate their own children. To delegate the teaching task to another is not forbiden. But neither is it commended. The problem with delegation of this particular task is that it removes from the parents some of their responsibility. As this responsibility passes to another, the school teacher for example, some of the parents’ authority over their children automatically passes over as well. This is a fact of life. If you carry ALL responsibility in an area, you also carry ALL authority in that area. If you share the responsibility, you also share the authority.

The children in a school are now expected to obey not only Mum and Dad but also every teacher at school, even those who hold views and values at variance with the parents. Parents also take pot-luck with whatever peer group socialisation agenda that happens to operate within the classroom and on the playground of that particular school.

To put it in terms of stark reality, sending five and six year olds away from home for six hours a day may cause them:

a) to feel rejected by their parents;

b) to look to the peer group (class mates) for security and acceptance;

c) to become confused as to who is the role model he should be following;

d) to divide their loyalties among competing authorities;

e) to develop self-defensive coping strategies based on the “survival of the fittest” philosophy that may operate on the playgroud;

f) to develop a split personality, adopting one set of behavioural parametres at home and a different set at school;

g) to develop tension and stress-related illnesses and hyperactivity because of the constant noise levels, interruptions, confusions, and competitions within the classroom.

These problems are virtually unknown within the home schooling situation. Mum and Dad are constantly on hand to demonstrate their love and assure the child of their commitment to him. They can train the siblings to likewise love and support other members of the family. The one set of role models, the one authority is constantly before them reinforcing their own standards and values. The environment of the Christian home is at the opposite end of the philosophical spectrum from the evolutionist “survival of the fittest” idea. Behavioural standards of the home, the home school and the church all reinforce rather than contradict one another. (“The LORD is One…”) And the tensions and logistics problems of a classroom of 25-30 mixed ability children from just as many backgrounds just do not exist in the home.

In may ways, home schooling will help us all bring our lives more in line with Scripture.

From Keystone Magazine
July 1995 , Vol. 1 No. 3
P O Box 9064
Palmerston North
Phone: (06) 357-4399
Fax: (06) 357-4389
email: craig@hef.org.nz

Teaching Other Peoples’ Children

Posted on by

Teaching Other Peoples’ Children: Part 1

Posted in Over a Cuppa

Ian & Wendy Wilson and their only son Samuel, 9, (Names have been changed to protect privacy) home school in the Auckland area. Ian is a tradesman and Wendy is a trained teacher. She saw what could be done with children when you had time for individual attention in a country school where she had only 12 children and taught those same 12 for four years. Then she taught in a city school class room with 35 children. She saw the bright children stunted in their potential. She saw the average and slower children wilt for lack of individual attention because you can only do so much and sometimes even less when there is a disruptive child or two in the class. It was at this point that Wendy decided she would never want to put her own child into such a system.

So when she began home schooling Samuel, they were the only ones doing so in their part of town. Then Freddie, two years younger than Samuel, was brought around. Could Wendy help him out? He had been at school a whole year and he still could not even form the letters of the alphabet, and now his behaviour was deteriorating. OK, she agreed, but for only four mornings a week.

Later on another parent came along, whose marriage had broken up. She brought Conner who was exceptionally bright, and the same age as Freddie. During his second year at school Conner seemed only to be going backwards, and his behaviour was getting really bad. Wendy directed them elsewhere. But they came back, with tears in their eyes, please teach my son! Righty-o, we’ll give it a try.

It was on a Sunday night, three weeks before the Christmas holidays when their guard was down, when another set of parents, the husband being a workmate of Ian’s, rang up about their 13-year-old daughter! She was becoming unruly and rebellious. And she wasn’t learning anything. Both parents worked full time. Surely a girl of this age would not want to be in the same class as three tearaway boys half her age? Nevertheless, Kathy joined the Wilson home school for the three weeks to the end of the year.

Fortunately Samuel was able to work fairly independently. Freddie required independent attention. Conner went from being incompetent in most subjects to being a full year ahead in maths after only 6 months. The challenge was to keep enough work in front of him, he chewed through it at such a pace. Kathy had developed the habit of just stumbling along when she didn’t understand anything and would never ask for help. It turned out that she was well behind Samuel. Conner soon passed her. She was probably only behind Freddie in reading except that he was more aware of when he needed help. After eight years in school, she was six years behind! She had epilepsy which meant she wasn’t with it some times, but would tune in later on. Even so, after two weeks in the Wilson’s home school she herself declared she had learned more in those eight days than during a whole year at school. Her parents couldn’t believe the 180 degree turn-around in her attitude since she was now even cooking meals at home for when her parents returned from work. And she liked the home school situation, even though she was being taught, for the most part, the same things as the boys. At this stage the parents asked if Kathy could join the Wilson home school again next year. “OK, we’ll see what we can do.”

It was only meant to be four mornings a week. Wendy made it clear that the children’s education was ultimately the parents’ responsibility, not hers. She also explained her philosophy that education is life and that she was only helping out in the formal academic area. However, Wendy was taking Samuel to Music sessions and to the library on Mondays, Art on Tuesdays and Gymnastics on Thursdays, so the others came along as well. Wendy and Samuel really tried to keep Wednesday afternoons and Fridays just for themselves.

The competition, especially from Conner, was pushing the others along. They would all sit for the same reading/ discussion sessions in Bible, history, science or whatever and then turn around to their desks for individual work. But Conner turned out to be a hyperactive smart alec. He would taunt and tease the others because they weren’t as smart as he. Now if  Samuel cut up, Wendy could deal with him fairly smartly and effectively, being her own son. However, with other peoples’ children you have to take a different tack, especially when these other people do not share the same faith or value system as was the case here. Wendy finally mentioned it to Conner’s mum. . .in fact, she put the ball into her court . It appeared that Samuel had been complaining that if he behaved like Conner did, he’d get the strap. Conner’s mum subsequently announced, without explanation, that she had come for Conner’s books. She thanked Wendy for all she had done and then left. They haven’t been back.

Wendy does charge a daily rate, but it is less than the rate she has to pay the housekeeper to come in to do the chores she cannot get around to herself. Being a trained teacher has not been an advantage as far as she can tell. She does not want to change her home into a school, although they did have to build the desks, get a white board and make sure they started at the same time each morning. She of course doesn’t have the same amount of time to give exclusively to Samuel. He liked it when she did, especially because he could get his Mum to read to him, rather than him reading. He could get her to help him compose sentences rather than him working them out on his own. He has been forced to become more independent in his studies, which up to a point has been good for him.

Discipline is a bit of a problem, since all the children come from such different backgrounds, none of which match the Wilson’s. But they reckon they are sowing the seeds of faith in their visitors since their attitude toward “religion” is not the negative one it used to be.

All in all Wendy says there are definite positives and definite negatives to home schooling other peoples’ children. The issue which looms largest in her mind is to do the best she can for all the children. Anyone else thinking about teaching other peoples’ children at home should weigh up the pros and cons as they see them for their own situation.

Says Wendy, “Believing that discretion is the better part of valour, I don’t say ‘Yes’ initially, but, ‘We’ll give it a try for a few weeks.’ The fact that Samuel is an only child made us more open to the idea, and there have been definite advantages for him. However, the more children I take on needing a great deal of individual attention, the less effectively I do what I originally set out to do–educate my own child. At what stage does he become disadvantaged? It would be very comfortable to be brought well adjusted, capable children from good Christian homes, but that’s not how it is. So it becomes a question of how much service we can be of to others while still fulfilling our primary aim and responsibility.

“If we feel there is room for one or two more, should we only consider taking children from families who share our world view, or do we give others the opportunity to hear the gospel and fit in? We ourselves feel there is a place for the latter provided that such children are prepared to conform. Who can tell what God may do for our visitors? Our prayer as we begin our studies each day is that God would bless each of us in our learning so that we would live lives that honour and glorify Him. “

From Keystone Magazine
May 1995 , Vol. 1 No. 2
P O Box 9064
Palmerston North
Phone: (06) 357-4399
Fax: (06) 357-4389
email: craig@hef.org.nz

Home Schooling and the Millennium

Posted on by

Home Schooling and the Millennium

Posted in Theologically Speaking

What we believe about the future, about the meaning of the word, “millennium”, will affect how we organise and direct our home schooling time and how we perceive what we are trying to accomplish.

The term “millennium” comes from one place in the Scriptures, Revelation 20:2-7. Among evangelical or born again Christians, it is probably safe to say that the most popular belief is that there will be a literal 1,000-year reign of Christ which He will institute upon His physical return to earth. He needs to return because the Gospel message will ultimately face defeat, save only a few and the world will continue its downward spiral without supernatural intervention. This view is known as Premillennialism, because Jesus comes before (or pre) His millennial reign.

There are actually two other views of the millennium. Amillennialism does not go along with the idea of a future literal 1,000-year reign of Christ on the throne. These “a-mils” (or no-1,000) see the 1,000 as a symbolic figure meaning a long time, that Christ reigns and has reigned and will always reign. His reign has become progressively stronger since the resurrection, but will only reach its zenith once Christ returns to judge the world and create the new heavens and the new earth.

Postmillennialists may believe that we are in the millennium now, again an indefinite long period of time which can be said to have begun in power with the outpouring of God’s Holy Spirit at Pentecost, or that the Gospel rnessage will ultimately usher in a 1,000 year period of peace and prosperity, after which (post) Christ will return.

Premillennialists are eagerly awaiting the Lord’s return which most of the popularists tell us could happen at any moment, maybe this afternoon. Therefore we must be focusing our attention on evangelising the unreached millions and not get too involved in the more mundane chores and responsibilities of everyday life. With this time constraint, some Christian groups have been tempted to take short cuts with the Gospel and do all they can to attract people in while downplaying the sin bit which tends to put people off. We’ve all seen those churches which seem to be into the entertainment business these days. It comes fsom this desire to get people in at all costs, because the time is short. With the year 2,000 right around the corner, it is almost irresistable not to lean heavily toward the idea that a week of 1,000’s, from 4,000 BC when many believe God created the world, to AD 2,000 (6,000 years) is to be capped by the final Sabbath 1,000 years, or the Millennium of Christ’ s reign on earth.

But if this is the case, many of us will be right in the middle of our home schooling years when the year 2,000 arrives, with our children still living in our homes. So why are we slogging our guts out to give them the best academic, social, spiritual and character training we can if they will hardly ever get to use any of it if at all? We should get them saved and then pack up and get ourselves off to the mission field to save a few more souls from the coming fire.

Both the Amillennialist and the Postmillennialist see a lot of work to be done to bring the Gospel to bear on this sin-cursed world, not only to bring sinners into the Kingdom, but also to bring every thought and authority and power captive to obey tbe Lordship of Christ on the earth now before His physical return. They are not under the same time constraint as are most Premills. They see more to a life of service to Christ than just evangelism.

Now I would love to go into a deep comparison of Biblical passages and theological histories concerning the millennia1 views. I would love to show how our sinful natures exploit each of the views to our own selfish ends, bringing disrepute to Christ’s Name . Maybe another time. But let us look at how this affects our home schooling. Or perhaps it would be more accurate to say, let us look at our home schooling and see what is revealed about what we really truly believe regarding the millennium.

Most of us believe there is quite a future before us. We are training our children up to be men and women of God, who know the Scriptures and are not afraid to wield the sword of the Spirit, when faced with the enemy’s lies. In fact, we get quite excited when we think about the careers they are likely to have, the pioneering Christian work they are likely to do in so many areas of endeavour since they have been reared with a more consistent Biblical worldview than we have ourselves, the spouses they are likely to marry, the even more Godly and Christlike grandchildren they are likely to rear for us since their home schooling programme will be so much more advanced than ours. We are training them up to not just cope with this evil world, but to take a hold of it with both hands and with God’s help to change it round the way it should be, to turn the world upside down as did the early apostles. Isn’t this what the early church fathers did? The Reformers? The Puritans? The many revivalists of the 1700’s and 1800’s?

Hasn’t revival been our prayer for NZ and the world for many seasons now? Don’t we in fact see home schooling and Christian schools as a foundational step in this direction ? Don’t we envision our children being able to articulate the Faith and demonstrating to a crooked and perverse generation how the Word of God has the only right principles for individual, family, church, community, and civil behaviour? Maybe the home schooling movement is the revival we have been praying for.

We are actually people of victory, not defeat, are we not? We filled in the Certificate of Exemption form confident that we would win the Exemption. We took on home schooling confident that we could overcome all the hurdles and do a really good job. We stick at home schooling confident that it will provide spiritual and academic and social and character building benefits far superior to those represented by a School Certificate or Bursury. We write to MP’s confident that we will not allow them to intimidate us nor force unwanted restrictions upon us. We are willing, for the sake of our children’s futures, to do things we never would have dreamed ourselves doing a few years ago. We forget what lies behind and we strain forward to what lies ahead. In short, we too are concerned about serving God in more ways than just evangelism.

Brothers and Sisters, people of God: I get the sneaking suspicion that if an outsider were to study our lifestyles and then to categorize our views on the millennium according to what has been observed, none of us would qualify as Premillennialists!! Well, as for me, if the Lord comes this afternoon, I want to be found doing His will. If He doesn’t come for another 700 years, I want to do all I can to ensure my descendants then are found doing His will and living in a world that reflects His standards more than does the present one.

From Keystone Magazine
May 1995 , Vol. 1 No. 2
P O Box 9064
Palmerston North
Phone: (06) 357-4399
Fax: (06) 357-4389
email: craig@hef.org.nz

KEYSTONE Vol.I No.II May/June 1995

Posted on by

To read the Keystone magazine click this link:

keystone-vol-1-no-2-may-june-1995websiteready.pdf

Contents:
(Regular Columns)
Editorial
Home Schoolers Did It (Features on Horne Schooled Kiwis) Dr. L. Cockayne
Subscription Information
Puzzle
Over a Cuppa Teaching Other Peoples’ Children
Tough Questions People Throw Your Way
Q.  No. 1: Should We Police/Review Ourselves?
Q.  No. 2: Should We Accept the Supervisory Allowance?

Theologically Speaking Definitions & History of Theological and Ecclesiatical Terms and their Relevance to Home Schoolers) The Millennium
Statist & Professional Trends (Christian Cornmmt on Current Issues)
Excerpt from Select Committee Report on Children at Risk
A Review of the Committee’s Recommendations
Action Station
CHomeS Roundup
Home Schooling T-shirts
Discounted Books
Trading Post

Fundamentalism

Posted on by

Fundamentalism

Posted in Theologically Speaking

Here is a word that has taken a beating over the years, so much so that serious Christians are not sure they want to be tagged with this label. It began as a conservative theological movement among American Protestants early this century in opposition to “modernism” and other schools of thought, such as evolutionism, higher Biblical criticism and studies in comparative religions.The original idea was to protect the essential doctrines (the fundamentals) of the Christian faith from the eroding effects of modern thought. Such doctrines include the Virgin Birth, the Resurrection and deity of Christ, His substitutionary atonement, the Second Coming, and the authority and inerrancy of the Bible. The Fundamentals , a series of 12 small books published from 1910 to 1915, and financed by Lyman Stewart, a wealthy oilman of Southern California, were sent to some three million theological students and Christian workers. In 1920 Curtis Lee Laws and associates within the Northern (USA) Baptist Convention called themselves “The Fundamentalist Fellowship” partly in response to the rnessage of the books, and partly because they, as moderates, also felt the modernists were surrendering the “fundamentals” of the Gospel, namely, the sinful nature of man, his inability to be saved apart from God’s grace, etc.

A more militant conservative voice was raised in 1923 with the formation of the Baptist Bible Union. They broadened their cause to fight against evolutionary teaching.

Among Presbyterians, the conservative position was championed by J. Gresham Machen of Princeton Theological Seminary. But the mainstream Presbyterian Church tried him for rebellion against superiors, and thus evolved the Orthodox Presbyterian and Bible Presbyterian denominations. At this time fundamentalism was known as a conservative theological movement made up of militants, moderates such as Laws and scholarly types such as Machen. Unfortunately, due to the tactics of certain leaders, the fundamentalist image eventually became stereotyped as closeminded, belligerent and separatistic.

In the 1950’s a growing number of conservatives moved to dump the fundamentalist label for “new evangelical”. Their hope was to preserve and defend the Biblical Gospel while maintaining intellectual respectability, social concern and a cooperative spirit. This movement, evangelicalism, has been largely successful and is considered the heir of the spirit and purpose of the original fundamentalists.

Today the media enjoy branding anyone who sticks to their convictions and refuses to indulge in the modern politically correct art of compromise as a “right-wing, militant, free market, fundamentalist, ignorant, religious bigot”. So although our Christian roots may go deep into fundamentalism and our religious convictions closely parallel those of the original fundamentalists, we may choose to shun that label because of the way some unwise Christians, the media and the secular population at large have hijacked the term and twisted its original meaning. Since fundamentalism has also been attached to muslim and other religious terrorists, most of us are quite happy to be known as evangelicals.

As always, we need to be constantly endeavouring to conform ourselves and our children to the expectations of God’s Word (which never changes) rather than to the expectations of men or of some man-made label (which does change). The term”fundamentalist” today tends to evoke a picture of someone ready to smash opposition and unilaterally set up his idea of the way things should be in order to save what is left of our society and culture. This is the same as a revolutionary. We will want our children to clearly know and understand that salvation is not by the revolution of men, but by the regeneration of God’s Holy Spirit. Just like the leaders of the Reformation, we must be reformers rather than revolutionaries. We should reform ourselves first and then our families and then others as we have opportunity until we all conform to Christ.

Sadly, for all its history, the term “fundamentalist” today seems to convey more of the idea of a revolutionary than that of a reformer.

From Keystone Magazine
March 1995 , Vol. 1 No. 1
P O Box 9064
Palmerston North
Phone: (06) 357-4399
Fax: (06) 357-4389
email: craig@hef.org.nz