My new GE range was delivered last night, and I inaugurated it by baking a walnut-pumpkin cake this morning. This is my first smooth top range, and I think I'm going to like it. (The photo isn't exactly like mine, but it's close enough.)
So what is the point of this post? Well, I am thankful that the Lord provided funds to replace the stove, but more importantly, I am thankful that our marriage has lasted longer than our appliances! A lot of marriages don't.
The Doctrine of the Lesser Magistrate. In the Bible, God gives government the responsibility to “bear the sword” (Romans 13:4). This means that government is to protect the persons and property of its citizens from evildoers. This is the responsibility of government regardless of whether it is a local government or a national government. Calvin reasoned that if a national government (the greater magistrate) fails to protect its citizens, the local government (the lesser magistrate) is still obligated to do its job. A lesser magistrate may even have to protect its citizens from the wrongful actions of the greater magistrate. This Doctrine of the Lesser Magistrate was the philosophy behind the American Revolution.
The American War for Independence was not, as many have been taught, a citizens’ tax rebellion. It was the collective effort of thirteen colonial governments (lesser magistrates) to protect their citizens from the wrongful actions of the king (the greater magistrate).[1] In 1772, when the crown-appointed governor of Massachusetts refused to allow the colony’s General Court to convene to hear the grievances of the citizens, Samuel Adams proposed that local town assemblies (as the lesser magistrates) should hear the grievances of the people. Later, the thirteen colonial governments joined forces in the Continental Congress to appeal to King George to redress his wrongs. When he refused, the colonial governments (as the lesser magistrates) declared their independence from England. In so doing, the thirteen colonial governments were fulfilling their obligations to protect their citizens from the tyranny of the English crown.
James Madison, one of the framers of the Constitution, called the Doctrine of the Lesser Magistrate the Doctrine of Interposition. A more recent example of the Doctrine of Interposition is the case of Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore refusing a federal court order to remove the Ten Commandments from the Alabama statehouse in 2005. Most Americans, even Christians, are ignorant of history (and the Bible) so that they do not understand what happened in Alabama in 2005. The state constitution of Alabama (rule of law) invokes “the favor and guidance of Almighty God” as the basis of its laws and justice system. As the highest court officer in Alabama, Chief Justice Moore was required to uphold the state constitution. When a federal court, acting unlawfully,[2] ordered Chief Justice Moore to remove God’s Law from the statehouse, he (as the lesser magistrate) refused in order to preserve for the citizens of Alabama their right to acknowledge God as the Supreme source of their state laws.
Some Concluding Thoughts
Rose Weiner of Maranatha Publications penned the following introduction to Charles Coffin’s The Story of Liberty, in which she eloquently connects the events of the Reformation with American history:
“Most Americans are ignorant of the fact that the fruits of civil liberty which they enjoy have their origin in Christianity."
What was at first only a little stone began to strike at the foundations of the religious and civil institutions of Medieval Europe. That which was destined to become a great mountain of refuge for the oppressed and afflicted of the earth, that civil and religious liberty which was destined to make its home in the wilderness of America, would not be established without cost. Over the ensuing centuries, liberty would be purchased by the blood of the martyrs and the testimony of the servants of Jesus. It would encompass over 500 years of struggle as the human race endeavored to climb from slavery to freedom.
The rebuilding of America’s Christian foundation and its superstructure of individual freedoms begins in the homes of American Christians, when the adults of this generation put a stop to the ignorance of American’s Christian history. The rich heritage of Christian self-sacrifice that was the foundation of America should be set as a “seal upon the heart” of every adult and every boy and girls who want to see their religious and civil liberties preserved.
America’s history and the events that preceded her founding pertain to Christ. It is His story of civil freedom and civil government. It is by diligently pondering the divine influence behind America’s history that we begin to understand the goodness of God in establishing the nation of America for His gospel purposes.
* * *
Today, most Americans have studied history rewrites, which have been designed to separate America from her spiritual roots and to debunk the true character of those who gave their lives to make America great. For too many, history is a boring incomprehensible enigma.
As the bible was preached to the masses and translated into the language of the people, the Reformation arose, awakening men’s consciences and intellects and stimulating science, literature, and invention. A free church, free education, free association, the right to speak and to write – these are the consequences of the liberty of conscience proclaimed by the Reformers.
The Bible in the hands of the individual became the root of America’s Christian form of civil government – a Christian Republic. The bible was first the means of transforming the life of the individual, and later the means of transforming not only church government but civil government as well.
* * *
We cannot neglect the present and hope to enjoy in the future blessings of the past. Liberty was purchased by Christian courage, self-sacrifice, and unceasing vigilance. Only by these virtues can we hope to keep it. We must, by God’s grace, be as determined to protect our liberties as our forefathers were to win them. “Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage (Galatians 5:1).
[1] You will recall that the King had tried to set an Anglican bishop over all of the colonies, denying them their religious freedom. He tried to retract (and in one case physically steal) the colonial charters. He deprived the colonists of the use of their property (Quartering Act) and of their prosperity (by forcing them to trade only with England). And he unlawfully allowed Parliament to tax the colonies. (The charters placed the colonies under Crown-appointed governors who reported directly to the King. Parliament had no jurisdiction over the colonies.)
[2] In its decision, the federal court cited the First Amendment’s “establishment of religion” clause, which says: “Congress shall make no law regarding the establishment of religion.” The First Amendment, however, does not prohibit government from acknowledging God. After all, our national motto is “In God we trust.” Furthermore, the First Amendment concerns what Congress (i.e. the federal branch of the government) can do. Ironically, the First Amendment actually disqualifies the federal court from intervening in matters of religion. Therefore, the federal court had no jurisdiction in the Alabama case.
The United States was actually born out of a violation of New Testament principles, and any blessings God has bestowed on America have come in spite of that disobedience by the Founding Fathers.
Nothing could be further from the truth. From Jamestown to Yorktown, the American colonies were greatly influenced by the writings of the Reformers. At the time of the American Revolution, fully two-thirds of the colonists belonged to Christian denominations that ascribed to Reformed confessions of faith, leading German historian Leopold von Ranke to observe, “John Calvin is the virtual founder of America.” Calvin derived principles of government from the Bible, including: human government is necessary because of sin; the powers of government must be several and separated because of man’s sinful tendency to abuse power; and all power ultimately originates with God who is the True Sovereign.
It is beyond the scope of this lesson to study the full extent of Calvin’s influence, but I do want to mention two specific areas where the Reformation shaped American thought.
The Rule of Law. The Reformers firmly believed in Sola Scriptura - “the Bible alone is the Word of God.”[1] Therefore, the Bible is man’s final authority. This belief was in great contrast to Catholic Church’s teaching that the Pope and church traditions were the final authority. Calvin saw in the Bible that government is ordained by God and endowed by Him with certain, limited powers. Calvin reasoned that government then, has no inherent powers, but only those powers delegated to it by God. Therefore, government must conform to God’s Word. Calvin further realized that the highest authority in government must not be men, but a written “rule of law” based on the Word of God. Everyone (even the King) must be subject to the written “rule of law.”
The earliest legal documents in America recognized God as the Source of Authority. The Mayflower Compact (1620) said that the Pilgrims’ settlement was undertaken “for the Glory of God, and the advancement of the Christian Faith.” The Fundamental Orders of Connecticut (1639) acknowledged that “there should be an orderly and decent Government established according to God.” Two centuries after Calvin, the American Founding Fathers created a constitutional republic based on the written rule of law. The highest authority in America is the U.S. Constitution, which, in turn, is founded on Christian principles.
Because the U.S. Constitution does not specifically quote from the Bible or reference God, many people assert that the Founding Fathers intended to create a secular state and that there are no Christian principles to be found in the Constitution. Certainly, the Founding Fathers could have created a more specifically Christian document, but we need to remember two factors that influenced their thinking. Firstly, while it is true that the Founding Fathers were influenced by Enlightenment thought[2] (the “leaven in the lump”), they were still very much the products of a Christian society. When they spoke of “religion,” they had nothing but the Christian religion in mind. They never envisioned a Muslim America or an atheist America. So the Founding Fathers simply assumed that the Constitution would be interpreted in light of a Christian worldview.
We need only to read the writings of the Founding Fathers to observe that they were the products of a Christian society. John Adams wrote in 1798, “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” Shortly after the Constitutional Convention in 1787, Alexander Hamilton said, “"For my own part, I sincerely esteem it [the Constitution] a system which without the finger of God, never could have been suggested and agreed upon by such a diversity of interests." In a speech to the Virginia House of Burgesses in 1765, Patrick Henry stated:
“It cannot be emphasized too clearly and too often that this nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religion, but on the gospel of Jesus Christ. For this very reason, peoples of other faiths have been afforded asylum, prosperity, and freedom of worship here.”
Even Benjamin Franklin, who was not known to be a believer, said in a speech to the Constitutional Convention:
“God governs in the affairs of man. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without his notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without His aid? We have been assured in the Sacred Writings that except the Lord build the house, they labor in vain that build it. I firmly believe this. I also believe that, without His concurring aid, we shall succeed in this political building no better than the builders of Babel.”
The second concern of the Founding Fathers was that of limiting the powers of the federal government because of man’s sinful tendency to abuse power. They knew well the lessons of the previous two centuries when kings and queens had tried to force a particular form of religion on their citizens. Consequently, the U.S. Constitution forbids the federal government from making laws regarding the establishment of religion. The framers of the Constitution believed strongly that matters concerning religion properly belonged to local government. Many of the early state constitutions were explicitly Christian (see below), and some of the state constitutions even included the Ten Commandments.[3]
[1] The beliefs of the Reformers can be summarized with five Latin phrases: Sola Scriptura (the Bible alone), Solus Christus (Christ alone), Sola Gratia (Grace alone), Sola Fide (Faith alone), and Soli Deo Gloria (the Glory of God alone).
[2] Philosophers of the Enlightenment period emphasized human reason.
[3] Unfortunately, most of the original state constitutions have been rewritten, removing explict references to God and the Bible.
Since I don't know how to embed a video in this blog, I'll just have to supply a link: All Things Were Made By Him
A Brief Overview Of the Reformation
The Protestant Reformation is an important part of church history that, unfortunately, has been largely ignored by the modern church. Many Christians today are unaware that our spiritual and civil liberties are the result of the sacrifices of the sixteenth century Reformers. Someone has said that if we want to regain the liberties that we have lost in this country we need to understand how those liberties were first won in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries.
Throughout the Middle Ages, common men were kept in spiritual bondage by the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church and in physical bondage by the whims of kings and emperors. The Church was able to keep men in subjection because access to the Bible was very limited. Before the invention of the printing press in 1454, Bibles had to be laboriously hand copied. Gutenberg’s press increased the number of Bibles in circulation, but they remained expensive, and they were written exclusively in Latin. Since only the most educated class could read in Latin, the Bible remained a mystery to most people.
In the place of the Bible, the Catholic Church taught traditions and the doctrines of men. Salvation was something to be earned by good works. The Church also taught that men could receive pardon for their sins by purchasing indulgences, and men were taught to pray to “saints” and to worship relics rather than God.
Additionally, the leadership of the Catholic Church was corrupt. Church offices were frequently sold to the highest bidder. Pope Leo X (1475-1521), the Pope who excommunicated Martin Luther, was an immoral man, who surrounded himself with vulgar companions. He used church offerings to support his own sinful lifestyle, and he tortured and killed everyone who opposed him.
The Catholic Church did not suddenly become corrupt in the sixteenth century, however. Two centuries earlier, good men had questioned its teachings and leadership. John Wycliffe of England was one of those men. Wycliffe realized that the only way to combat spiritual darkness was to get the light of God’s word into the hands of the people. He translated the Bible out of Latin into Old English. But Wycliffe was continually opposed by the Church. He was posthumously (after death) found guilty of heresy, and his bones were exhumed (dug up) and burned by the Church. Another early critic of the Church, Jan Hus, was burned at the stake in Bohemia in 1415.
On October 31, 1517, a German monk named Martin Luther, wrote out 95 statements (or theses) against the Catholic Church and nailed them to the door of Castle Church in Wittenberg, Germany. (The church door was like a public bulletin board.) Luther hoped to start a public discussion about the errors of the Church. Instead, his 95 Theses were copied and distributed all over Europe, eventually finding their way to Pope Leo X. Leo X pretty much ignored Luther for three years, during which Luther continued to write both against the corrupt practices of the Church and about correct Bible doctrines. Luther had become convinced that justification was by faith alone, and not by a combination of faith and works as the Church taught. Finally, in 1520, the Pope warned Luther that he risked excommunication if he did not retract 41 statements from his writings. The Pope sent his written warning, called a papal bull, to Luther on June 15, 1520. Upon receiving the papal bull, Luther built a bonfire and publicly burned it. For this shocking action, Luther was excommunicated from the Catholic Church in January of 1521.
In April of the same year, Luther was ordered to appear before the Diet of Worms, which was the general assembly of the estates of the Holy Roman Empire (basically, the civil government). Luther was ordered to recant (take back) his writings against the Church and its teachings or be punished as a heretic (which at that time meant being burned at the stake). The following day, Luther gave his now famous reply:
Unless I am convinced by proofs from Scriptures or by plain and clear reasons and arguments, I can and will not retract, for it is neither safe nor wise to do anything against conscience. Here I stand. I can do no other. God help me. Amen.
Luther escaped death by burning because his friends “kidnapped” him and kept him safely hidden in Wartburg Castle for more than a year. While he was in hiding, Luther translated the Bible into the German language. Luther also continued to write, and his writings influenced many other men. One of those men was William Tyndale.
William Tyndale was an English scholar with a passion for getting God’s Word into the hands of the common Englishman. Tyndale, the master of several languages, was particularly suited to Bible translation. He translated the New Testament into English while hiding in various places on the European continent from agents of King Henry VIII and the Pope. Tyndale was working on a translation of the Old Testament when he was betrayed by a “friend.” After spending a year as a prisoner in Vilvoorde Castle in Belgium, Tyndale was strangled and burned at the stake on October 6, 1536. Tyndale’s dying prayer was “Lord, Open the King of England’s eyes.” Within two years, God answered Tyndale’s prayer when Henry VIII authorized the Great Bible to be placed in every church in England.
“Thy word is a lamp unto my feet and a light unto my path” (Psalm 119:105). For the first time,[1] English-speaking people could read the Bible in their own language. Its impact was tremendous. More and more men began to speak out against the corrupt doctrines of the Catholic Church. Many of them, like Hugh Latimer and Nicholas Ridley, were martyred.[2] The English Bible instructed John Knox, the Scottish Reformer, as well as the Puritans and Separatists who followed the Reformation.
Knox was a student of one of the greatest of the Reformers, John Calvin.[3] Calvin was a French-born lawyer turned theologian, who had fled to Geneva, Switzerland, to escape persecution in France. Calvin became pastor of a church in Geneva in 1536, but he is best remembered for his writings. Access to the Scriptures led the Reformers to discover many Bible truths that had been “lost” during the dark years of Medieval Catholicism, and John Calvin brilliantly articulated those principles in his writings. His commentaries on the Bible and his Institutes of the Christian Religion are still read today. Calvin also helped exiles from England to prepare the study notes for the Geneva Bible. The Geneva Bible became the Bible of three generations of English-speaking Christians, including the Scottish Reformers, the Puritans and Separatists of England, the great English writers, Milton, Shakespeare, and Bunyan, and the Pilgrims and Puritans of New England.
[1] Wycliffe’s Bible was hand-written, and, therefore, not widely distributed.
[2] October 16, 1555. Latimer and Ridley were martyred for denying the Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation. According to this doctrine, the bread and wine of communion actually become the body of Christ when eaten. Thus, Christ is crucified every time communion is taken. Latimer, Ridley, and other English Reformers understood that this teaching undermined the entire Gospel message of the finished work of Christ, and they were willing to die for their beliefs.
[3] Just for the record, Calvin was not the author of the so-called Five Points of Calvinism. These five points came out of the Synod of Dort in 1618, about 54 years after Calvin’s death. Calvin’s name was not attached to the Five Points in 1618 either. It was only later that they became known as the Five Points of Calvinism. The Five Points do, however, represent the beliefs of almost all of the Reformers, as well as the majority of pastors, theologians, evangelists, and missionaries of the next two centuries.
Lesson 4 - The Antediluvians
History texts often describe ancient man as primitive [simple, unsophisticated], and in our minds we visualize him as an illiterate, hairy, club-toting oaf with a small brain and big feet. But is this really an accurate picture of early man? Taking the Bible as our authority, we must answer with a resounding “No!”
Genesis 1 tells us that Adam, the first man, was created in the image of God. This means, among other things, that he was created as an intelligent being. From the very beginning, Adam could communicate through a spoken language. Adam understood the job God gave to him, and he named all of the animals (Genesis 2:19). In Chapter 3, we find Adam and Eve talking with one another, with the Serpent, and with God. No caveman “ughs” here.
Many history texts speak of a pre-agricultural era, as though early man did not know how to tend animals and grow crops. But Genesis 4:2 tells us that Adam's son, Abel, was a “keeper of sheep” and his other son, Cain, was a “tiller of the ground.” History texts also speak of a “Stone Age,” supposedly lasting for tens of thousands of years, during which man did not know how to make tools from metal. But the Bible says that Adam's 7th great-grandson, Tubal-cain, was “an instructor of every artificer in brass and iron” (Genesis 4:22) In other words, he was a metal worker.
Let's look at what else the Bible says about these early men. Enoch, Adam's great-grandson, built a city (Genesis 4:17). Jabal, the half-brother of Tubal-cain, raised cattle (Genesis 4:20), and his brother Jubal was a musician and maker of harps and organs (Genesis 4:21). During the life of Enos, another of Adam's grandsons, men began to “call upon the name of the Lord” (Genesis 4:26), dispelling the myth that early man knew nothing about religion. And then there was Noah, who built a sea-worthy ship that was 510 feet long, 85 feet wide, and 51 feet high. We call these pre-flood people, Antediluvians [from “ante” meaning “before” and “deluge” meaning “flood”], and the Bible describes them as “mighty men which were of old, men of renown” (Genesis 6:4). The word renown means famous or of a wide-spread reputation. They were hardly primitive men! It is also worth noting that the Antediluvians lived very long lives. Think of all you could accomplish if you lived 900 years!
If the Bible teaches us that the earliest men were intelligent and creative, where does the idea of primitive man come from? It comes from the imaginations of evolutionists. In order to support their theory that man evolved slowly over millions of years, they must also theorize that man's intelligence and abilities also slowly evolved. Therefore, early men must have been less intelligent than we are. Sadly, even many Christian books have adopted the primitive man idea. Consider this quote from Streams of Civilization, a Christian history text:
Ancient history may be divided into two parts: (1) preliterate, or prerecords, the time before there were any written records; and (2) literate, the period after about 3000 B.C. When written records were kept.1
Given all we know about the Antediluvians, why should we assume that they were unable to read and keep records? This is simply evolutionary bias on the part of the authors of Streams of Civilization.
Another example of evolutionary bias can be found in The Golden Bible Atlas. In a chapter entitled “The Beginnings,” the book shows early settlers in Mesopotamia plowing the ground with hand-held tools. The caption reads:
The invention of the plow marked the beginning of settled civilization; it allowed man to till the soil and grow his food instead of wandering in search of it.2
Hmm . . . I thought Cain was tilling the soil way back in Genesis 2? One of the problems here is that the antediluvian civilization was destroyed by the Flood. Only Noah, his three sons, and their wives, survived the Flood. It is likely that some of the skills acquired by the Antediluvians perished with them and had to be rediscovered by post-Flood generations. Likewise, the dispersion of the population at the Tower of Babel probably resulted in some loss of knowledge for each people group. It is clear from the text, that after God confused their languages, the builders were unable to finish the tower, meaning that no single-language group had all of the skills necessary to complete the work. So if the iron-workers migrated off in one direction, and the stone-masons in another, neither group had as many skills as they had when they were all together at Babel. In spite of these set backs, however, it is important to remember that none of these early people groups could accurately be described as primitive.
Rather than witnessing the evolution of man from primitive beings into complex societies, we have seen just the opposite. The Antediluvians were more knowledgeable than their immediate successors after the Flood. Throughout the ages, however, there have been truly primitive societies – groups of naked savages who lived in huts or caves, hunted with spears, and had only stone implements. How do we explain these people groups? Romans 1:18-32 gives us the answer. Men were created intelligent and with a knowledge of God, but as they rejected God, God darkened their understandings and gave them up to their own foolishness. So the “primitive” peoples we meet throughout history are not undeveloped societies, but societies that have deteriorated because of their own wickedness.
Notebooking:
-
Make your own chart of Adam's line from Adam to Noah. Leave some extra room because we will be adding to this chart later. Make your beginning date 3975 B.C. and your ending date 1969 B.C. Mark off 100 year segments at the top of the page.
-
Adam 3975 to 3045
-
Seth 3845 to 2933
-
Enos 3740 to 2835
-
Cainan 3650 to 2740
-
Mahalaleel 3580 to 2685
-
Jared 3515 to 2553
-
Enoch 3353 to 2988 (went to heaven; did not die)
-
Methuselah 3268 2319
-
Lamech 3101 to 2324
-
Noah 2919 to 1969
-
Read Romans 1:18-32.
Jr. and Sr. High Supplemental: As we study history, we will find that even pagan societies had elements of truth in their beliefs and legends. For example, the Chinese believed that a man named Fuhi and his wife, three sons, and three daughters escaped a great flood and were the only people left on earth. The Egyptians worshiped many gods, but they believed that Ptah was the most-important, all-knowing god, and the only god who could appear in human form. They also believed in eternal life. How do you explain these pagan cultures having elements of truth in their belief systems? Does Romans 1 help? Write out your explanation, and put it in your notebook.
1Streams of Civilization. Albert Hyma and Mary Stanton. Christian Liberty Press, Arlington Heights, Illinois, 1976. Page 6.
2The Golden Bible Atlas. Samuel Terrien. Golden Press, New York, 1957. Page 10.
A few years ago, researchers at the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill under the direction of Christian Smith conducted a survey of teenagers and their religious beliefs. When the data was analyzed, Smith and his researchers concluded that a new religion had emerged among America's youth. The basic tenets of this religion were that God exists, He wants us to be fair and nice to each other, and He wants us to be happy. The UNC Chapel Hill researchers named this new religion “Moralistic Therapeutic Deism” (MTD).
The first time I read about MTD, I thought there was something vaguely familiar about it. “Be fair. Be nice. Be happy.” And then it struck me. MTD has become the religion of most American teens because that is the central message of most Sunday school curricula. As a former Sunday school teacher, I was well familiar with the message: “Be fair. Be nice. Be happy.”
My Sunday school class used curriculum from Regular Baptist Press. Here is how Regular Baptist Press presents the accounts of Abraham and Lot, David and Mephibosheth, and Jeremiah and Ebed-Melech.
- Abraham and Lot – The central theme is “God is pleased when we are kind to people.”
- David and Mephibosheth - The central theme is “God is pleased when we show kindness to people.”
- Jeremiah and Ebed-melech - The central theme is “God is pleased when we do the right thing and are kind to people.”
In each of these lessons, the student's response is supposed to be “to desire to please God by being kind.”
Now certainly, we should be kind, and kindness is a theme that could be drawn from each of these Bible stories. But is this the way we are supposed to teach the Bible, as an anthology of moral stories? Do students taught by this method understand the central theme of the Bible is the redeeming work of Jesus Christ? I am not suggesting that Regular Baptist Press does not teach the Gospel in its curriculum. It does. Usually, however, the Gospel message is awkwardly tacked onto the end of each lesson.
But the Gospel is an integral part of every Biblical story. Consider the account of David and Mephibosheth. David, the great king, sought out Mephibosheth, a poor cripple, and gave him a place at the king's table. Mephibosheth did not deserve David's kindness; he describes himself as “a dead dog.” But David showed mercy to Mephibosheth for Jonathan's sake. What a picture this is of the Christian's relationship to God the Father! God sought us while we were dead in our sins and exalted us to a place at His table, not because of our own merit, but for the sake of Jesus. When this account is reduced to “David was kind to Mephibosheth. So you be kind, too,” its meaning is lost.
In his new book, Already Gone, Ken Ham contends that America's youth begin their departure from the orthodox Christian faith while still in middle school, and he argues that Sunday school is hastening their departure. Based on my experiences as a former Sunday school teacher, I must concur. If we are to produce another generation of faithful Christians, we must teach the Bible as the real historical account of God's calling a people to Himself through the redeeming work of His Son. “Be fair. Be nice. Be happy” won't cut it.
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. Psalm 127:3-5
The Bible clearly teaches that children are a blessing, especially the children of one's youth. They are as arrows in the hands of a mighty warrior - powerful weapons against the enemy. The man whose quiver is full of such arrows will not be put to shame when he contends with the enemy. If these words from the Bible are true, why do so many Christian couples go into the battle with an empty quiver?1
The answer is simply that they do not believe the Bible. No matter how much they may protest otherwise, they do not believe that children are a heritage from the Lord. Instead of arming for battle, many young Christian couples are pursuing careers, acquiring assets (and debt), and indulging in an extended, responsibility-free adolescence. They do not want to be saddled with parenthood yet. Maybe later, when they are well into their thirties, they will have a child or two, but for now they will satisfy that paternal urge by playing "mommy" and "daddy" to a poodle or a great dane.
In the meantime, the enemy continues to make advances. Government schools churn out tens of thousands of humanist converts every year. The Muslims have an annual growth rate of 2.13 percent compared to only a 1.36 growth rate for Christians. The enemy is increasing in strength, and the church is almost out of ammunition.
Not only are the church's quivers empty, many of her soldiers are AWOL. In 2006, George Barna of the Barna Research Group reported that six out of ten twentysomethings "disengage from active participation in the Christian faith during their young adult years - and often beyond that."2 In his new book, Already Gone, Ken Ham uncovers an even more startling statistic. While they were physically present in Sunday school and youth group during their teen years, spiritually speaking, these twentysomethings were "already gone," having lost faith in the veracity of the Scriptures while in middle school and high school.3 Ham's research puts the loss rate at nearly 80 percent. Most congregations cannot survive such attrition rates. Unless something drastically changes, we will witness the death of the Christian church in America in less than a generation.
1I am not referring to couples whose womb the Lord has sovereignly closed, but only to those couples who choose not to have children or who choose to delay having children until later in life.
2See "Most Twentysomethings Put Christianity on the Shelf Following Spiritually Active Teen Years," The Barna Group, September 11, 2006, www:barna.org.
3See Already Gone: Why your kids will quit church and what you can do to stop it, Ken Ham and Brit Beemer, Master Books, May 28, 2009, www.answersingenesis.org.
Historically, homeschooling parents have been pretty good marksmen. Their children, more often than not, have matured into faithful adults. But recent data collected by Answers in Genesis for Ken Ham's book Already Gone suggests that being homeschooled is no longer an indicator of whether or not a young person will remain in the faith. In fact, earlier data compiled by the Nehemiah Institute showed a similar trend. While some homeschooled students scored very well on the Nehemiah Institute's worldview test, at least twenty-five percent of the homeschooled students tested could be described as having a humanistic worldview. How can this be? Have parents become complacent? Are we not aiming our arrows anymore?
I would suggest that homeschooling parents are still diligently honing and aiming their arrows, but that over the past decade, someone has subtly moved the target. The goal is no longer to rear children who will live for Christ. The new goal is to rear children who will succeed in the world.
Just this week, two articles have crossed my desk illustrating this point. In "What is wrong with American education?" from The Classical Teacher, Martin Cothran argues that education has become disconnected from Western culture, "that amalgum of beliefs and affections that informs our thoughts and actions." Cothran argues that this "amlgum of beliefs," having its roots in Athens, Rome, and Jerusalem, was what enabled the West to reach great achievements in arts, literature, and science, and he believes that classical education is the vehicle to pass on these beliefs. He concludes that nothing is wrong with American education that "a good dose of classical education wouldn't cure."
I beg to differ. The problem with American education is that it has lost its Christian foundation. The Pilgrims and Puritans understood that "the fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge" (Proverbs 1:7). Saving Western culture through classical education will not produce a generation of young people who are faithful to Christ. While there are aspects of the classical education movement that I can appreciate, taken as a whole, I believe it represents a shifting of the target.
The second article was a blog post by Gary DeMar at American Vision entitled "Homeschoolers Are Only Good for Cleaning Toilets." In this post, Mr. DeMar defends Christian homeschoolers against a charge made by an atheist that they are only capable of cleaning toilets. In his defense, Mr. DeMar points to graduation rates, test scores, and the fact that many top colleges actively recruit homeschoolers as evidences that homeschooling is superior to public education. He also invites homeschooled graduates to post comments and share their career achievements with "Mr. Atheist." While I appreciate Mr. DeMar taking up for homeschoolers, his defense underscores the target shift that has occurred. Success as a homeschooler is now measured by academic and career highlights and not by obedience to Christ.
Can homeschoolers be obedient to Christ and be academically and professionally successful? Absolutely! But we can never achieve both if we do not aim our arrows at the first target. "Seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you" (Matthew 6:33).
life." This means that the Bible provides us with instruction and guidance
for every area of our lives, whether it be finances, marriage,
child-rearing, or education, etc. Of course, the Bible does not always
provide this guidance through verses that say explicitly "Thou shalt" or
Thou shalt not." Often, we must study the whole counsel of God to derive the
principles by which we are to govern our lives. A principle rightly derived
from Scripture, however, is just as authoritative as a "Thou shalt" or "Thou
shalt not" commandment. And, a principle rightly derived from Scripture
cannot be overthrown by anecdotal evidence to the contrary. In other words,
I cannot make void a Scriptural principle just because I did it differently,
and everything turned out okay for me.
When someone presents me with a principle that she believes is from
Scripture, my first response should be to search the Bible to see if this is
indeed a biblical principle. If I am convinced from the Bible that this is
indeed a principle, then I should follow it. If I remain unconvinced - if I
believe my sister has misinterpreted the Bible - then I should present her
with my understanding of the Scriptures. My argument may not convince her,
and we may have to "agree to disagree." But if we "agree to disagree," we
should not pretend that both of us are correct. One of us is wrong. One of
us has misinterpreted the Bible, and the knowledge that I might be the one
who is wrong should keep me humble.
While I should be willing to acknowledge that I may have misinterpreted the
Scriptures, I should never affirm that there are many "truths." The Bible
does not allow for pluralism. I don't have my set of biblical principles and
you have your set of biblical principles. If our principles disagree, then
one of us has adopted some unscriptural principles. This is easy to do given
that we live in a culture that is the antithesis of Christianity.
One way to root out these unbiblical assumptions is to keep our discussions
focused on what the Bible says rather than on what grandma or Aunt Sue or
Cousin Ralph did. We all know people who have violated scriptural principles
in one area or another and who did so without any apparent repercussions.
But we should not use these stories to argue against the principle. They are
not proofs that there are many principles by which one may live; they are
instead examples of God's mercy.
Modern culture has made Christians vulnerable to a creeping pluralism. We
are conditioned to accept everyone's ideas as equally valid and to embrace
our differences. Our differences notwithstanding, however, a principle is a
principle. If it can be demonstrated from the Scriptures that the principle
is true, then none of our objections matter. Our varied backgrounds and
circumstances do not equate to various principles. If the Bible is indeed
the rule for all of faith and life - if it does speak to every area of life
- then when it speaks, it speaks authoritatively.
We ought then to examine our beliefs in light of the Scriptures, and to hold
fast to those truths contained therein.
A cousin's wedding
Thanksgiving at Great-Grandma's house
Whose birthday?
Doolittle RaidersAndrew (2nd grade) began his study of WWII aircraft by copying II Corinthians 3:17, "Where the spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty." And he defined terms such as fighter, bomber, and aircraft carrier. He learned that each type of aircraft was designed to fulfill a specific need. He drew pictures of the P-51 Mustang and the Douglas SBD. He learned that no B-17 bomber ever turned back from a mission, a testimony to the courage and character of her crews. His study of the B-25 Mitchell bomber led us to investigate the Doolittle Raid on Tokyo in 1942, and Doolittle's escape from China led us to further study of American missionary John Birch.
Sarah's (7th grade) project had a similar theme, as she explored the home front during WWII. She learned that the Christian idea of government is that citizens are first governed by the law of Christ and that they voluntarily unite with the civil government, whose purpose is limited to protecting the righteous, punishing evil doers, and administering God's justice. In WWII, the United States went to war to defend and protect its citizens, and each American contributed to the war effort by sacrificing some of their accustomed comforts. She learned about rationing, scrap drives, victory gardens, war production, air raid drills, and V-mail. She also collected a few war-time recipes like "Eggless Sponge." She also wrote about the activities at a local military camp during the war. She printed out and colored fashions from WWII and added a collection of WWII propaganda posters to her notebook.
Lauren and DozerLauren (9th grade) used her project days to learn more about dogs, which only furthered her desire to own a dog.
The obvious principle concerning dogs is that they were created on the sixth day and that they did not evolve from some other kind of animal. She researched common diseases in domestic dogs, the ins and outs of caring for a pet dog, dog shows, and the various uses for dogs. She then concentrated on three of her favorite breeds: the German Shepherd, the Beagle, and the Golden Retriever. Ironically, just a few weeks after Lauren completed her project, a neighbor employed her to exercise their Golden Retriever mix puppy.
The kids' great-grandpa and his team
Washington urged unity upon the nation. He wrote, "The name of American, which belongs to you in your national capacity, must always exalt the just pride of patriotism more than any appellation derived from local discriminations." He warned that special interest groups ("small but artful and enterprising" minorities) will attempt "to make the public administration the mirror of the ill-concerted and incongruous projects of faction rather than the organ of consistent and wholesome plans, digested by common councils and modified by mutual interests." He noted that no matter how attractive these associations may appear initially, "they are likely in the course of time and things to become potent engines by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people, and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion."
Unconstitutional Encroachment of Powers
Washington warned that the encroachment of one branch of government upon the powers of another "is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed." He wrote:
"It is important, likewise, that the habits of thinking in a free country should inspire caution in those entrusted with its administration to confine themselves within their respective constitutional spheres, avoiding in the exercise of the powers of one department to encroach upon another. The spirit of encroachment tends to consolidate the powers of all the departments in one, and thus to create, whatever the form of government, a real despotism."
The Absence of Religion and Morality
Washington wrote that religion and morality are "indispensable supports" to political prosperity, and he warned against subverting "these great pillars of human happiness." He added:
"And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle."
Foreign Policy and Global Economy
Washington urged the nation to "steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world." He encouraged the United States to "observe good faith and justice towards all nations," to "cultivate peace and harmony with all," and he added that "religion and morality enjoin this conduct." He also favored free trade, writing that "our commercial policy should hold an equal and impartial hand, neither seeking nor granting exclusive favors or preferences."
National Debt
Washington encouraged the nation to avoid incurring debt. He wrote, "As a very important source of strength and security, cherish public credit. One method of preserving it is to use it as sparingly as possible." While acknowledging that "unavoidable wars" may occasion the accumulation of debt, Washington cautioned his generation against "throwing upon posterity the burden which we ourselves ought to bear."
Conclusion
George Washington's prescience was remarkable, yet a great number of Americans living today have never read these words of wisdom from the father of our country. The most influential man in the founding of our nation barely rates a mention in history textbooks today. In 2002, the Mt. Vernon Ladies' Society, which maintains Washington's residence as a national historic site, commissioned a study of U.S. history textbooks. They found that compared with textbooks from the 1960's, today's texts have devoted 90% less space to George Washington.
In one generation, all knowledge about our nation's first President has nearly been eradicated. The American Council of Trustees and Alumni surveyed students at the nations top 55 universities. They discovered that 99 percent of the students could identify the cartoon characters Beavis and Butt-Head, but only 42 percent could identify George Washington as the man who was called "first in war, first in peace and first in the hearts of his countrymen." Just as Washington's place in our national memory has been subverted by popular culture, his space in history textbooks has been supplanted by multiculturalism. David W. Saxe, a professor of education at Pennsylvania State University says, "In the interest of being inclusive, material about women and minorities is taking the place of material about the founders of our country."
There is more at stake here than George Washington getting his due. The issue is whether the ideas undergirding our constitutional republic and safeguarding our liberties are being communicated to succeeding generations. Judging from the headlines coming out of the capital, the answer is "no."
Source: "George Washington: Mr. Excitement?; Mt. Vernon, Alarmed by Fading Knowledge, Seeks to Pep Up His Image" by Stephen Kinzer, July 29, 2002, New York Times.
The “God of our Many Inaugural Addresses” was not a generic deity, a "god of our many understandings," but rather an “Almighty Being,” “Omnipotent,” the “Ruler of the Universe,” the “overruling Providence,” the “Divine Hand by which the destinies of nations and individuals are shaped,” whose judgments are “true and righteous altogether.”
“[I]t would be peculiarly improper to omit in this first official act my fervent supplications to that Almighty Being who rules over the universe, who presides in the councils of nations, and whose providential aids can supply every human defect, that His benediction may consecrate to the liberties and happiness of the people of the United States a Government instituted by themselves for these essential purposes, and may enable every instrument employed in its administration to execute with success the functions allotted to his charge. In tendering this homage to the Great Author of every public and private good, I assure myself that it expresses your sentiments not less than my own, nor those of my fellow-citizens at large less than either. No people can be bound to acknowledge and adore the Invisible Hand which conducts the affairs of men more than those of the United States. Every step by which they have advanced to the character of an independent nation seems to have been distinguished by some token of providential agency;” - George Washington, 1st Inaugural address
“and knowing that "except the Lord keep the city the watchman waketh but in vain," with fervent supplications for His favor, to His overruling providence I commit with humble but fearless confidence my own fate and the future destinies of my country.” - John Quincy Adams
“In assuming responsibilities so vast I fervently invoke the aid of that Almighty Ruler of the Universe in whose hands are the destinies of nations and of men to guard this Heaven-favored land against the mischiefs which without His guidance might arise from an unwise public policy. With a firm reliance upon the wisdom of Omnipotence to sustain and direct me in the path of duty which I am appointed to pursue, I stand in the presence of this assembled multitude of my countrymen to take upon myself the solemn obligation "to the best of my ability to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States." - James K. Polk
“But let not the foundation of our hope rest upon man's wisdom. It will not be sufficient that sectional prejudices find no place in the public deliberations. It will not be sufficient that the rash counsels of human passion are rejected. It must be felt that there is no national security but in the nation's humble, acknowledged dependence upon God and His overruling providence.” - Franklin Pierce
“Looking for the guidance of that Divine Hand by which the destinies of nations and individuals are shaped, I call upon you, Senators, Representatives, judges, fellow-citizens, here and everywhere, to unite with me in an earnest effort to secure to our country the blessings, not only of material prosperity, but of justice, peace, and union—a union depending not upon the constraint of force, but upon the loving devotion of a free people; "and that all things may be so ordered and settled upon the best and surest foundations that peace and happiness, truth and justice, religion and piety, may be established among us for all generations." - James Buchanan
"The Almighty has His own purposes. "Woe unto the world because of offenses; for it must needs be that offenses come, but woe to that man by whom the offense cometh." If we shall suppose that American slavery is one of those offenses which, in the providence of God, must needs come, but which, having continued through His appointed time, He now wills to remove, and that He gives to both North and South this terrible war as the woe due to those by whom the offense came, shall we discern therein any departure from those divine attributes which the believers in a living God always ascribe to Him? Fondly do we hope, fervently do we pray, that this mighty scourge of war may speedily pass away. Yet, if God wills that it continue until all the wealth piled by the bondsman's two hundred and fifty years of unrequited toil shall be sunk, and until every drop of blood drawn with the lash shall be paid by another drawn with the sword, as was said three thousand years ago, so still it must be said "the judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether."
With malice toward none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in, to bind up the nation's wounds, to care for him who shall have borne the battle and for his widow and his orphan, to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations." - Abraham Lincoln, 2nd Inaugural Address
“[A]bove all, upon our efforts to promote the welfare of this great people and their Government I reverently invoke the support and blessings of Almighty God.” - James A. Garfield
“And let us not trust to human effort alone, but humbly acknowledging the power and goodness of Almighty God, who presides over the destiny of nations, and who has at all times been revealed in our country's history, let us invoke His aid and His blessings upon our labors.” - Grover Cleveland, 1st Inaugural Address
I find it interesting that God warned the Israelites that they would forget him during times of plenty. He said, "And it shall be, when the Lord thy God shall have brought thee into the land which he sware unto thy fathers, to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, to give thee great and goodly cities, which though buildest not, And houses full of all good things, which thou filledst not, and wells digged, which thou diggest not, vineyards and olive trees, which thou plantest not; when thou shalt have eaten and be full, then beware lest thou forget the Lord." (Deuteronomy 6:10-12a)
Surely, this is the place we have come to in 2008. We recovered from the Great Depression, and God once again blessed us with plenty. But few families will actually give thanks to God this Thanksgiving. For most of them, Thanksgiving will just be a day for overeating and watching football. They will enjoy the abundance of American prosperity without a thought for the merciful God who made it all possible. May it not be so among God's people. Let us remember to praise God for His goodness every day of the year. It shouldn't be hard; we have plenty to be thankful for.
Lauren wants to research dog breeds. Sarah will be researching the homefront during WWII. Kathryn wants to learn more about horses, and Andrew says he wants to study the sea.
I am thankful that we have the liberty to pursue individual interests.
I cannot help but think that education would look differently if we could somehow divorce ourselves from society's expectations. If we had only the Bible to guide us, I believe our homeschools would teach only one subject: God. We would teach our children about who God is (theology) and about the universe He created (science and mathmatics). We would teach them about God's dealings with mankind (history) and how to effectively communicate God's Truth to others (grammar, literature, speech, music, art, drama). Finally, we would teach them how to live out God's Truth in their daily lives (doctrine).
If we were to home educate our children in this manner, we might still use textbooks and other resources, but the emphasis would be on God rather than on subjects. Our resources would be tools rather than the end products, and we would never again feel pressured to "finish the book" just because all fifth-graders have to study U.S. History, or all eighth-graders have to take pre-algebra.
If we were to home educate with the Bible as our sole guide, I believe we would view each child as an individual with unique gifts from God that need to be developed. In other words, we would not direct each of our children down the same educational path. Our children would have the liberty to cultivate the talents and pursue the interests that God has given them.
While we may never have the liberty to homeschool exactly as we would like, many of us remain in greater bondage than we need be. Most of us have no compelling reason to divide our studies into eight subjects, to give examinations and grades, or to keep transcripts. In some cases we may be accommodating government regulations, but in most cases, we do these things because we are afraid to buck the status quo. We fear the disapprobation of others if we fail to march in lock-step with government schools. We are afraid our children will not succeed in life if we approach education differently.
Confession: I have had these very fears. I remember being mortified when my twelve-year-old informed a group of her peers that she did not know how to write in cursive. I suddenly felt like a complete failure as a home educator. Everyone knows that you learn cursive handwriting in second or third grade. Never mind that my daughter is a mature young woman who loves the Lord. Never mind that she can play the piano and flute and that she can sketch life-like portraits. Never mind that she is a good student and a diligent worker. She can't write in cursive! How could I have overlooked such an important detail?
How worked up we can get over insignificant matters when our focus is in the wrong place! I believe the greatest challenge facing home educators today is the challenge of liberating ourselves from unbiblical expectations so that we can pour our energies into teaching our children the only subject that matters: God.
The Liberal Party candidate was radically pro-euthanasia. He believed that every family had the right to determine when grandma and grandpa should go. As a Senator, he even voted against legislation that would have mandated medical care for the elderly who miraculously survived their lethal injections.
The Conservative Party candidate believed in the sanctity of life, but even he supported killing grandmas who suffered from irreversible medical conditions like Alzheimer's Disease. In those instances, he believed that euthanasia became a private family matter. The Conservative Party candidate also supported funding euthanasia programs through Medicare for those families who otherwise could not afford to do away with grandma. Furthermore, as a Senator, he had voted to affirm judges who were open supporters of killing the elderly.
There was a Third Party candidate running who consistently affirmed the sanctity of life, who believed that it was always wrong to kill grandma. But Joe would not vote for him because he did not believe the Third Party candidate could win. It would be like throwing away my vote, reasoned Joe. "It would be the same as voting for evil," Joe told his friends.
As Joe was leaving the polls on Election Day, he was run over by a satellite truck rushing to cover the Liberal Party candidate's victory celebration. Joe Christian found himself before the Judge of the Universe answering the question "Why did you vote for a candidate who supported killing grandmas instead of a candidate who would uphold My Standard?"
Joe pondered how he should answer. I wasn't voting for a pastor? I believed that voting for a biblically qualified candidate was the same as voting for evil? I thought that if I voted for the candidate who upheld biblical standards I would be helping to elect a wicked ruler? I voted based on pragmatism, the philosophy that determines the truth of a matter by its probable success? I was afraid of what would happen if the Liberal Party candidate won?
A voice broke into Joe's thoughts . . . .
"The most High ruleth in the kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever he will. . . Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man."
Andrew's timeline:
Pages from the Geneva Bible and the King James Bible:
We also celebrated the day by playing some medieval games. Here the kids are playing bocce.
Mary stole the target ball from the bocce set.
