Beginning with Home Schooling (4)

This book of the law shall not depart from your mouth, but you shall meditate on it day and night, so that you may be careful to do all that is written in it; for then you will make your way prosperous, and then you shall have success (Joshua 1:8).

If Christians want to succeed in any activity, including the education of their children, they should meditate in God’s law. In fact, the law of God is an educational tool, more important than Science and History. It helps to give context to the world we inhabit, and the nation we are part of.

The law of God is His tool of dominion.[1] His law lays out the ethical base for all we do. The Psalmist lays out the centrality of the law of God to the believer, instructing us that

His delight is in the law of the Lord, and in His law he meditates day and night. He will be like a tree firmly planted by streams of water, which yields its fruit in its season and its leaf does not wither; and in whatever he does, he prospers (Ps.1:2-3).

Both of these passages teach us that the day and night meditation in the law of God, are the keys to success and prosperity for the believer.

But I’ve discovered this frightening fact: when people discover the golden honey-jar called “tax-payers’ money,” everything else becomes irrelevant. This is the fatal error so many “Christian” educational institutions make. It may destroy them. Why?

Pagan kingdoms implicitly want unconditional surrender from their enemies.[2]                    

The institution that blindly follows the money trail is about to learn a hard lesson (if it wants to learn anything, that is).

There was a young lady from Niger,                                                                        Who smiled as she rode on a tiger.                                                                   They returned from the ride with the lady inside,                                                And the smile on the face of the tiger.

Our Experience:                                                                                                           In 1990, Sue and I decided to commence homeschooling our children. I had become convinced that this was a legitimate option in 1984, after I attended an Abundant Living seminar in the US.

Why did we do this? We believed that homeschooling was a legitimate option, and the best one in our circumstances.

Did we get permission from a bureaucracy to homeschool? No.

Were there some potential problems and risks? Yes.

Did we consider them? Yes.

Did we really think we were being responsible? Yes.

Do we now regret that choice? No.

Cautious, careful people, always casting about to preserve their reputation and social standing, never can bring about a reform. Those who are really in earnest must be willing to be anything or nothing in the world’s estimation, and publicly and privately, in season and out, avow their sympathy with despised and persecuted ideas and their advocates, and bear the consequences (Susan B. Anthony).

As a believer in Jesus Christ, I would rather mix with and identify with a godly bunch of dissidents as Moses did (Heb.11:23-29), as Gideon did (Judges 6-8), as David did in the cave of Adullam (I Sam.22:1-2), and as Jesus did, than be well-fed, but silenced and intimidated in King Saul’s court.

Why? Because separation is crucial in serving God.

Morecraft has pointed out,                                                                         

God identifies Himself as the God who separates His people from other peoples. Therefore, separation (including Christian intolerance of other religions and gods) is a basic principle of Biblical law, with respect to religion and morality.[3]

This has been God’s way, from the beginning:

God separated His people from the surrounding cultures in the Old Testament era. He separated Noah from the pre-flood world. He separated Abram from both Ur of the Chaldees and Haran. He separated Israel from Canaan during Israel’s sojourn in Egypt. He separated Israel from Egypt’s masses by putting them in Goshen. He separated Israel from Egypt completely at the time of the Exodus.

All of these separations were essentially separations from pagan gods and pagan cultures. But separations from did not imply retreat and impotence. These separations were established by God in Israel’s history in order to give God’s people confidence concerning Israel’s future. The covenantal separation from other nations established the possibility and the requirement of Israel’s dominion over those nations.[4]

Education is a deeply religious issue, for all of life is deeply religious. If Christians think they can make God honouring choices, and somehow easily placate educational bureaucracies, they may have some hard lessons to learn about those bureaucracies.

God requires unconditional surrender from mankind. He does not offer terms of permanent peace on anything other than full, unconditional surrender. God’s dealings with the Egyptians and the Canaanites were about to demonstrate, for all the world to see, just how unconditional His terms of surrender are… The Canaanites understood this when Israel crossed the Red Sea, as Rahab told the spies (Josh.2:9-11).[5]

Conclusion:                                                                                                                          

The law of God provides both freedom and limits for the believer. God promised His people liberty, but the price of liberty is always obedience to Him. For those who refused to leave Egypt at His command, there was only slavery.

Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty (II Cor.3:17).

What is it that you want your children to learn, most of all? The true liberty of Jesus Christ, or slavery?


[1] See Gary North’s series, “Tools of Dominion: the Case Laws of Exodus.”

[2] Gary North, “Moses and Pharoah,” 1986, p.185.

                                                                              31

[3] Joseph Morecraft, “A Christian Manual of Law: An Application of Deuteronomy,” p.75.

[4] North, p.135.

[5] North, p.181.

                                                                               32