Category: Government Schools

Thou Shalt Have No Other God’s Before Me

— God

“Every child entering school at the age of five is insane because he comes to school with certain allegiances to our founding fathers, toward our elected officials, toward his parents, toward a belief in a supernatural being, and toward the sovereignty of this nation as a separate entity. It’s up to you as teachers to make all these sick children well–by creating the international child of the future.”

Psychiatrist Chester M. Pierce,
Addressing 1973 Childhood International Education Seminar

Similar quotes coming from sundry other people influential in the realm of government education, as that which is cited by Pierce, could be reproduced many times over, and yet despite this clearly stated intent to reprogram children, Christians continue to send their children to government schools. Some Christians tend to think that their local schools are different because the teachers there are “nice” and maybe even “smart.” What they fail to realize is that “nice” and “smart” is always used in service of the reprogramming of children — often times without the nice and smart teacher being themselves self-conscious of the malevolent design of government schooling. The most effective reprogramming is that reprogramming that is done with a smile on the teachers face. The Christian community has to realize that the Christian teachers in the school system where they are sending their children have yoked themselves to a system that is at war with Biblical Christianity, and that the Christianity of those teachers is either a Christianity that is in abeyance or is a Christianity that has been reinterpreted to fit the mold of the humanistic agenda of the government schools in which they are employed. A Biblical Christian teacher who taught their subject matter from a Biblical Christian worldview in a humanistic school system would be fired in weeks if not days. My friends the government schools are not populated by the kind of Christians that can help your children think God’s thoughts after him.

Government schools are committed to the religion of humanism where man, considered either in the individual or the collective is the god of the system. This is so true that government schools really ought to be considered churches. Just as Christian churches are charged with teaching children to think as Christians through catechisis so the government schools are charged with teaching children to think as humanists through their lessons. In the Church of humanism the teachers are the ministers. In the church of humanism the curriculum in the schools is the equivalent to the catechism in the church of Christianity. In the church of humanism there are high holy days that the adherents celebrate just as christian churches have their own high holy days that they celebrate. In the churches of humanism people can be expelled for sinning against humanistic rules of political correctness just as in Christian churches people can be excommunicated for sins against the Christian faith. All the dynamics that one finds in Christian churches and in the Christian faith are all present in government schools. Government schools are the temples of humanism where the initiates are indoctrinated in the ways of a false religion. Don’t let anyone tell you that Americans don’t have an established religion.

Now in light of all this and in light of the reality that the first commandment forbids us to serve other gods why do Christians send their children to government schools where their children are immersed in learning the covenant ways of a false religion? And having sent their children to government schools why do they become surprised when their children remain consistent with what they’ve learned of the faith of humanism and leave the Christian faith?

Some in would object to all of this by positing that education does not need to be specifically Christian since education is not spiritual but rather is only intellectual. The reasoning of these people is that education is not religious but rather is one discipline that falls within a common realm where both Christians and non-Christians can labor together despite significant differences in presuppositions. The reasoning of these folks insists that education is to be done not by the standards of God’s word but rather by the standard of natural law. They insist that God’s word doesn’t teach anything with regards to the disciplines one might expect to find in a liberal arts education. The truths of these disciplines are taught by natural law and are self evident.

The first problem we would note to this objection is that it seems to be an objection only raised by some Christians. Other adherents of other faith systems understand perfectly well the importance of an education in keeping with their faith. This is why we can find people of other non Christian faiths insisting on the importance of an education that is in keeping with their faith.

“He alone, who owns the youth, gains the future.”

Adolf Hitler

“Give me your 4 years olds, and in a generation I will build a socialist state.”

Vladimir Lenin

Listen to the diction from the teacher.

Note how she isolates and demeans the children not voting for Obama.

“He alone, who owns the youth, gains the future.”

Adolf Hitler

“Give me your 4 years olds, and in a generation I will build a socialist state.”

Vladimir Lenin

“Education is intellectual and not affective. Sending children to government schools is completely neutral since education is completely neutral. Hitler and Lenin were wrong on their estimations of the importance of education and children.”

D. H. Heart
R2Kt Theologian

A parent complained on an Internet blog about a school textbook that includes a chapter on Obama called ‘‘Dreams from My Father.’’

The school district said in a statement that it has received no complaints about the book, which it first used last school year. Even so, the 21,000-student district said it was reviewing its policies regarding the book’s use in a literature class.

B. K. Eakman in her book “The Cloning Of The American Mind” insists that the part I put in bold is the response that government school teachers are explicitly taught to give to parents who complain about something going on in their child’s class, even when (especially when) they aren’t the only complainers isn’t true. That’s right … the government school teachers are taught to tell bald faced lies.

Eakman insists that the reason for such counsel is that,

1.) It makes the parent complaining feel isolated as if out of a class, which has the children of multiple parents in it, they are the only ones who have a problem. It makes the complaining parents think they are being unduly and unreasonably critical.

2.) It serves to keep parents with the same shared concern from knowing of one anothers existence thus making it easier for the teacher (or in this case the school) to dismiss the complaining parents. If parents knew that there were other parents with their concern it would make the issue and the parents more difficult to control for the teacher.

Several years ago when contending with the local school over their sex education curriculum I had this exact same line — “that you are the first one to complain about this” — pulled on me.

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

The philosophy in the classroom in one generation, will be the philosophy of the government in the next generation.

I teach at a Christian school, and I have contact with others at both Christian and public schools. When parents ask me, “What do you recommend — public, private, or homeschool?”, I respond, “It depends on the kid.”

I am sincerely sorry that you give such bad counsel. May I advise you in the future to say …. “Why, naturally you should be homeschooling your children.” What a wonderful opportunity you will have to really keep your Baptismal vows when your children were baptized.”

Bret, let’s grant everything that you’ve been saying about the public schools.

If everything I’ve said about government schools is granted, no argument remains.

For the sake of argument, we can accept the metaphor that public schools are temples of humanism with festivals and priests.

Ok, that means those who advocate children attending government schools have accepted the idea that God desired the children of Israel to send their children to the schools of Canaan. It means that they accept the idea that God approves of the children Israel taking classes in Canaan on “The social theory behind sacrificing children to Molech,” and “How luck guided Israel to this land,” and “Economics that don’t take account of God.” Among other classes.

Does it follow that attending a public school *is*, by definition, participating in humanistic religion?

Yes. Schools teach what to think. Scripture teaches as a man thinketh in his heart so he is. Sending children to a school that teaches humanistic religion produces humanistic children. Now, surely we all agree that God is gracious and that God can providentially pluck children from such saturation but we should not put the Lord thy God to the test.

To borrow from 1 Cor, are the children in public schools drinking the cups of idols, OR, are they eating the meat sacrificed to idols? The former, as you recall, is incompatible with being a Christian. The latter is permissible as long as the conscience is undefiled.

Interesting framing of the issue Jeff. I would instead say that putting the covenant seed in government school is to cause a little one to stumble. Now, again, I want to make it clear that I fully recognize that not all covenant children who attend government schools end up apostate just as all children who are aborted don’t end up being born dead.

I would argue that the latter is a more apt analogy. Teachers in public schools may advocate humanistic ideas, but that doesn’t require students to accept them.

Sure, you can soak a million rags in oil 40 hours a week for 13 years and it is possible that some of those rags won’t become oily rags.

It’s entirely possible for a well-trained child pick up skills like mathematics and writing from entirely secular teachers — to “plunder the Egyptians” — and engage in the spiritual battle in the situation he finds himself.

And it is possible that a children’s crusade to the Middle East would result in a few children actually attacking the citadel of Islam.

Still, I quite agree, that in what are styled the “hard sciences” a student could learn in government schools. Of course this does not take into consideration the destructive peer dynamics that occur in government schools. Considerations quite apart from the humanism in the classrooms.

I think you recognize this fact, Bret, which is why you allow for “adults” ages 18-22 to attend secular colleges, despite the fact that the atmosphere on college campuses is far more perniciously anti-Christian than in public secondary schools. In your view, an 18-year-old can attend a college without participating in its worship.

No, Jeff, this is a mis-characterization of what I said.

First, there is no such thing as secular.

Second, I do not accept the premise that Colleges are any more humanistic then secondary schools.

Third, I made it clear that the reason I find it acceptable for a 18 – 22 year old to attend college is that I believe by that age they should be trained to be a burr in the saddle of humanistic college professors. They may be in the temple of Molech, but while there they are giving Molech an enema.

Well, if an 18-year-old can do that, what about a 16-year-old? Or 14-year-old? *It depends on the kid.*

See first response to Darryl today. I already answered that.

In other words, what we’re talking about here is matter of wisdom rather than an iron-clad rule, “Thou shalt not participate in public secondary education.”

I think it is, “Thou shalt have no other gods before me.”

That’s one of the ironclad ones isn’t it?

Yes, secular schools are intent on inculcating their value system. We would be fools not to recognize this. For many, the better part of wisdom might be to stay away.

Well, I suppose if your children are child savants and are courageous as lions and are not intimidated by adult blowhards foisting humanism, that in such a case we certainly might have an exception. Do you know any children like that?

But many may not be able to. You spoke earlier of those who drive $20k cars, but there are millions of Christians in America who can’t afford those kinds of cars to begin with.

Must have me mixed up w/ someone else. I never said that.

And still others may have students who are spiritually trained and able to be in the school without being of the school.

Just as there may be children who could join the Marines and make the cut.

We need wisdom to determine which ideas from secular education are truly compatible “all the way down” with Biblical theology, and the wisdom to know whether our children are vulnerable to being corrupted by the false ideas. We can’t just throw down a blanket rule, any more than we can create a blanket rule like “Thou shalt not watch R-rated movies.”

You watch R rated movies?

Just kidding.

Look, Jeff, children are children. They are to be protected. I fully grant that rare exceptions might occur. But the idea that we can make policy on those rare exceptions is unwise.

The same wisdom is likewise needed to determine whether a given *Christian* school is a good fit for our children. Christian schools aren’t given a magic talisman that keeps them from error. On the contrary, Christian schools are often the promoters of errors at least as pernicious as those in public schools — legalism being the most common.

I quite agree and would say that potential dangers exist for homeschooling. Still, a child would be better off growing up without education at all then to attend government schools.

In fact, I often steer students *away* from Christian colleges with Bible departments that are known to have a low view of Scripture. For many Christian young adults, it’s better to attend a secular university where the enemy is obvious, than to attend a “Christian” university where the enemy is trusted because of his Christian label.

I agree again.

The same wisdom is required of parents who wish to home-school. In some cases, the kid needs to be home. But in some cases, being at home with mom and dad will simply exacerbate sin tendencies already present in the family.

Well, in an ideal world, the Church would involve itself with those familial sin tendencies.

Or perhaps Mom and Dad weren’t the sharpest students in the class; is it loving to the child for them to pass on their substandard knowledge to their children when better teachers are available?

Teachers that are humanistic in their worldview are by definition not better teachers.

Training? Yeah, absolutely. All parents need to be training their children on a regular basis. Mandated private- or home-schooling? That’s turning what may be wise for some (or even many) into a rule for all. I don’t think that works.

Well, Jeff, you’re entitled to be wrong.

I suspect, Bret, that you might agree with me. After all, if you really believed that sending kids to public schools was idolatry, wouldn’t you be pressing charges against those parents, just as if they had taken them to a Buddhist temple for services?

Not having any parents whose children attend government schools I couldn’t speak to that.

Second, even if I did, I’m wise enough to know that some things need to be done incrementally, even if that means that some covenant children will suffer as a result.