October 18, 1992

The Christian's Warfare

which he is losing

1 Cor 10:4, 5

There is an unbelievable war going on today against Christianity. When I mention this war, the average person says, "Yes, and Bro Sileven is in prison because of that war," or "The Lord promised that all who lived Godly will suffer persecution." We connect the warfare against Christianity with some kind of physical abuse. These things are true, but there is so much more to this warfare than physical abuse.

We are living in what is called "Western Culture." This culture is actually a Christian Culture which, I suppose, started with the Reformation in the 1500s. We are living in the closing chapter of that Western Christian Culture. The first inclination would be to ask, "Why do you say that? Aren't there a great many Christians around us? Doesn't 80% of the population claim to be Christian? Aren't people like Gothard and Billy Graham having many many people follow after them? How can you say that we are in the end of Western Christian Civilization when there is such a revival of religious interest?" Let me mention some things, and then you make up your own mind.

Educate, education: According to Webster's 1828 dictionary...

Educate: (to lead), to bring up, as a child; to instruct; to inform and enlighten the understanding; to instill into the mind principles of arts, science, morals, religion and behavior. To educate children well is one of the most important duties of parents and guardians.

Education:

The bringing up, as of a child; instruction; formation of manners. Education comprehends all that series of instruction and discipline which is intended to enlighten the understanding, correct the temper, and form the manners and habits of youth, and fit them for usefulness in their future stations. To give children a good education is indispensable; and an immense responsibility rests on parents and guardians who neglect these duties.

Here we see that Webster makes some clear statements:

1) education comprehends all that series of instruction and discipline which is intended to enlighten the understanding, correct the temper, and form the manners and habits of youth.. Therefore, education encompasses everything: arts, science, morals, religion and behavior. None of these areas can be separated from the other; they all make up the education of a child.

In other words, art cannot be taught apart from science or morals; science cannot be taught apart from religion and behavior; behavior cannot be taught apart from morals and religion; religion cannot be taught apart from science and art. Everything that is taught in the education process of a child is connected with everything else. Education comprehends all that series of instruction and discipline which is intended to enlighten the understanding, correct the temper, and form the manners and habits of youth...

2) education is entirely future oriented; it prepares the child in all of these areas for its future station in life. The basic beliefs of a culture are passed to the future through educating the children.

3) education is the responsibility of the parent or guardian of the child. It is not the responsibility of society in general; when society claims that responsibility they are saying that they are the parent or guardian of that child; they possess that child.

4) education is future oriented. Education comprehends all instruction and discipline. Therefore, education must be religious in nature, because this is the Christian definition of religious instruction: Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it.Pro 22:6; All scripture is given by inspiration, of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works, 2 Tim 3:16, 17.

We cannot avoid the fact that a society's religious faith is passed on through the education process; society's belief about God is reflected in the education of the children in that society.

Next, let us look at the word curriculum: Referring again to the 1828 Webster's dictionary: Curricle (the old spelling), curriculum is straight from the latin and comes from curro, to run. The meaning is:

1. A chaise or carriage, with two wheels, drawn by two horses abreast. 2. A chariot. 3. A course.

Thus, the curriculum is the vehicle or the means of carrying forward society's view of art, science, morals, religion and behavior.

Consequently, society's belief about God will be revealed in the curriculum used to educate the next generation. The curriculum in every area will contain society's future desire for the morals, religion and behavior of its citizens. It will contain its views about God.

In a Christian Society the function of the curriculum is to honestly present God and His creation consistent with His revelation of Himself in His word, and to train the child to bring glory to God in all that he does; therefore, it will be God and Bible centered, 1 Cor 10:31. To be Bible and God centered does not necessarily mean that it will quote Scripture, but the basic premise of the curriculum will be consistent with God.

On the other hand, in a humanist or an anti-christ society which has departed from God, the function of the curriculum will be to destroy all true Scriptural revelation of God, bring glory to man and to bring glory to the ultimate man, the state. The curriculum will not necessarily openly attack God by saying there is no God or that the Bible is a lie; rather, it will undermine the basic premise of the Tri-Une God.

The basic function of humanist education will be to glorify man, to break down any dividing line between people (the word "sin" will be anathema because it separates people) and to unite people into a society which will get along with each other. In fact, a anti-christ curriculum can be reconized by its efforts to merge all men into a world-wide community where all individuals are on the same level, and where all people must do the state's desire at all times. (This is the basic premise of Gothard's material: obey the state at all times.)

With the goal of merging all people into a passive one world order, functional education in the basic 3Rs is unimportant. In fact, in order to have a docile society, the ability to "think" for one's self (as required in mastering the 3Rs) must be subverted or overthrown. All that is necessary is for the individual to do what the system tells him to do; he does not need to think, he must not think and reason for himself because the state will do that for him. The goal of education for a one-world social order is socializing, how to get along in a group and the necessity of giving up individuality.

Every aspect of education is religious; every subject is intertwined to where art cannot be taught apart from a religious view; science cannot be taught apart from a religious view; morals cannot be taught apart from a religious view. Every aspect of education must reflect a world-view, either Christian or anti-christ.

Education in America was basically Christian until John Dewey came upon the scene.

According to Dewey, in Experience and Education (1938), the pupil must learn to set his own ideals in terms of himself as the criterion. For education, this means that the pupil's role is not one of acceptance in terms of a basic authority, and an intelligent development in terms of that authority, of the Christian faith and Christian scholarship. Rather, the pupil is an explorer, a discoverer, whose one authority is himself. (RJ Rushdoony, The Philosophy of the Christian Curriculum, p. 17. Ross House Books, PO Box 67, Vallecito, Ca 95251.)

In other words, in Dewey's education system, there can be no absolutes; facts can only be what the child decides they are: the pupil is an explorer, a discoverer, whose one authority is himself.

This brings me to the subject at hand. The warfare against Christianity is indeed going on in a physical way of persecution, but this is not what is destroying Western Christian Culture. Persecution has never destroyed Christianity.

Not counting the obvious areas of religion, morals and behavior, there are three areas of education under very serious attack by the anti-christ crowd; they are: reading, writing and arithmetic (we dealt with science, magic & witchcraft some time ago in The Examiner). The question might be asked, "How in the world can the anti-christ crowd attack areas such as the 3Rs? These are natural subjects, aren't they?" The answer is a resounding NO!, they are not, and because Christians regard them as such, they are losing the battle for the future to those who are bent on destroying Christianity.

First, we must combine the two, reading and writing. John 1:1, 2, In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. V. 14, And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

God has revealed Himself to mankind through His Word: spoken and written down for our admonition in the Holy Scriptures, and in the Living Word, Jesus Christ. Therefore, the written word is absolutely necessary for man to know and please God; the spoken word is absolutely necessary for man to pass on that knowledge of God. God is a God Who changes not; therefore, His word changes not. In order to understand this God Who changes not, we must have a word or language which changes not; we must have a fixed language.

When we believe that there is a fixity of language, we assume some things:

1) that there is a prearranged meaning for all words.

2) that God gave to those words their meaning in relationship to Himself.

3) to know God we must find and learn those meanings.

4) if man gives his own meanings to words, he then can give to God's Word his own meaning. Thus, the Bible will mean what man wants it to mean.

So how can the anti-christ crowd deal with this fixed meaning in language? The destruction of language is coming through the educational system in the form of what is called, "Deconstruction." Deconstruction is defined by Webster's New World Dictionary as, "a method of literary analysis originated in France in the mid-20th century and based on a theory that, by the very nature of language and usage, no text can have a fixed, coherent meaning."

"Whole-language," is a primary vehicle the ungodly is using to destory language in the Christian Western English Speaking world. "The authors ofWhole Language What's the difference? (Heinemann, 1991) write:

From a whole language perspective, reading ( and language used in general) is a process of generation hypotheses in a meaning-making transaction in a sociohistorical context. As a transactional process (Rosenblatt 1978;Goodman 1984), reading is not a matter of "getting the meaning" from text, as if that meaning were in the text waiting to be decoded by the reader. Rather, reading is a matter of readers using the cues print provides and knowledge they bring with them (of language subsystems, of the world) to construct a unique interpretation. Moreover, that interpretation is situated: readers'creations (not re-travails) of meaning with he text vary, depending on their purposes for reading and the expectations of others in the reading event. This view of reading implies that there is no single "correct" meaning for a given text, only plausible meanings. (p. 19)..

Whole language represents a major shift in thinking about the reading process. Rather than viewing reading as "getting the words," whole language educators view reading as essentially a process of creating meanings. (See the development of this view in the writings of Kenneth Goodman [Gollasch 1982] and Frank Smith [1971, 1986].) Meaning is created through a transaction with whole, meaningful text (i.e., texts of any length that were written with the intent of communicate meaning). It is a transaction, not an extraction of the meaning from print, in the sense that the reader-created meanings are a fusion of what the reader brings and what the text offers. ... In a transactional mode, words do not have static meanings. Rather, they have meaning potentials and the capacity to communicate multiple meanings. (p.32) (Chalcedon Report, Oct 92, Whole Language: Deconstruction in the Primary School, by Samuel L. Blumenfeld.)"

The above description of "whole-language" can be simply summed up in a couple of points:

1) a text has only the meaning that the reader gives it, and that meaning is not picked up by "decoding" words but by hints in the text.

2) no word has a single meaning; words have multiple meanings and the reader makes a multiple choice as pleases him.

Consider this: What will happen when a person applies the above premise to the reading of the Scripture?

U.S.News & W.R. (6/14/92) gives a very watered down explanation of "whole-language:"

Until recently, most educators have stressed the teaching of phonics, the relationships of letters and syllables to sounds, in their beginning reading instruction... Though the roots of whole-language teaching can be found in the hands-on progressivism of turn-of-the-century educator John Dewey, the movement first came to U.S. schools in the late 1770s.... Now it is spreading rapidly.. The key to teaching reading, whole-language advocates argue, is emphasizing what words say rather than how they are put together. Reading is a process of "unlocking meaning," not one of "decoding symbols into sounds," writes Frank Smith, a founder of the movement. Phonics teaching amounts to "memorization of non-sense," Smith says, breaking naturally spoken language into abstract bits confusing to new readers.

... Whole-language students don't always measure up to their phonics peers on traditional reading-achievement yardsticks-standardized multiple-choice exams. Whole-language advocates contend that this is because the tests favor the basic skills taught in phonics classrooms.

The article goes on to say that whole-language encourages students to start writing at a very early age (for them anyway, but not for home or Christian School kids) using "intended spelling." A 5 year old's sentence is used as an example of whole-language in action: "i wt to the ntrl hstre muzem." Whole-language advocates like the idea that there is less "slotting of students" into ability-based reading groups.

What do we have here?

In whole language, the child is not only encouraged to give his own meaning to words, but he is applauded. In "whole-language," the pupil is an explorer, a discoverer; he has the authority over the word and is applauded when he exercises that authority. In "whole-language," any system of reading (phonics particularly) which attempts to give predefined meanings to words is condemned. Thus, the "whole-language" movement is a dirrect attack against the Western Christian Culture; it denies any authority over the words except the individual reader's. Education is inescapably religious; it either reflects a Christian Culture or it wars against that Christian Culture. It cannot be neutral.

It is obvious that within a few generations of "whole-language" instruction, all ability to read and understand the world of God will be gone.



The next area of warfare is in the area of Math, which would include the sciences. Again, the question arises, "How can a natural subject like math be Christian or non-Christian?" The same thing applies here as applies with reading and writing. Christian math recognizes a pre-existant God Who can be better known by His pre-established system of numbers to which He gave meaning.

What is at issue in math is this: "is their a pre-established world, or does the mind of man create a world out of chaos?" (The Philosophy of the Christian Curriculum, p. 56). Hence, humanism demands that man create his own system of math. Culture will develop its own system of math; Christian culture will develop fixed numbers under the fixed authority (of God). God's numbers and their functions (how they work together in formulas) must be memorized and then used according to their fixity to discover more about God and His creation and thus how to glorify Him. Through the proper use of numbers, we think God's thoughts and confirm that He indeed pre-established the world and ALL its contents.

On the other hand, paganism will develop random numbers which are under the authority of man the pupil and thus deny God and His authority over all creation. (The so-called "New Math" was a futile effort in man being his own god over numbers: "2+2=4 because I say that it does and that is the answer that works best for me," not because it is pre-established by God.)

When we believe that there is a fixity of numbers and their functions, we assume some things:

1) that there is a prearranged meaning for all numbers.

2) that God gave to those numbers their meaning in relationship to Himself.

3) to know God we must find and learn those meanings.

4) if man gives his own meanings to numbers, he can become his own god and establish his own dominion.

Thus, math and science is as religious as reading the word of God.

How is the anti-Christ crowd currently attacking the Western Christian Culture in the area of math? The following article in the Indianapolis Star (10/16/92, Math, science tests don't measure right skills, study says) brought on this message:

The National Science Foundation issued a scathing indictment Thursday of the mathematics and science test used to evaluate most U.S. students... Among the key findings: Tests often neglect key subject areas. In math, number systems and number theory were overemphasized, while probability, measurement, algebraic thinking and geometry were underemphasized. In science, physics was "serious(ly) neglected." Tests stress the wrong kind of thinking. In mathematics, only 3 percent of the items on both standardized and textbook-based tests sampled what the researchers called "high-level conceptual knowledge." The rest, they said, emphasize rote [memorized achieved by repetition without understanding the meaning] recall of information, basic computation and use of formulas in routine problems. "These tests are stressing adding, subtracting, dividing and multiplying or using data from simple word problems," said Boston College researcher Maryellen Harmon. "None of that calls for high-order thinking that requires that they go in-depth into concept, that they use math skills in non-conventional contexts." [ED. Strange! Our present crop of students cannot use simple math in conventional contexts and she is worried about non-conventional? Obviously, she has much more in mind.)

The article concludes with a lament that

Tests have a significant negative impact on the way math and science are taught... In high-minority classrooms, about 60 percent of teachers reported teaching text-taking skills, teaching topics known to be on the text, increasing emphasis on tested topics, beginning preparation more than a month before the test, and including topics not otherwise taught." the authors wrote.

Notice the insinuations of this report on the report:

1) it is harmful to emphasize number systems and number theory.

2) it is the wrong kind of thinking to stress memorized repetition, recall of memorized number information and memorized formulas in solving routine problems. The researcher condemned the present stress on addition, subtraction, division and multiplication to solve simple word problems. (ED. Present test scores of high schoolers already show that there is really not much to worry about in this area. Why do they need to dumb down the population even more? Try to get a government high school graduate to make change for you with a cash register lacking pictures on the keys, eg. Mc Donalds.)

3) it is disadvantageous for minority students to have to memorize numbers and their functions in formulas; they should be using that time to teach other more important items.

The problem in modern education, according to these researchers, is that the standardized tests emphasize numbers with pre-determined meaning which have to be memorized and used according to that meaning (formulas).

Actually the problem that the anti-christ crowd has is that God gave to those numbers their meanings and the current tests emphasize those meanings. Therefore, to overthrow God and Western Christian Culture, they must do away with meaning in numbers; they must do away with formulas which work every time they are worked properly in "conventional contexts"; they must do away with all fixity in words, science and mathematics.

Basic functional literacy in the 3Rs must go if the English speaking, Western Christian Culture is going to be rendered docile and unable to think for itself under the new-world order.

There is a war going on, and most Christians do not even realize what is taking place. It is a high-stake war; it is a life and death struggle between Western Christian Culture and paganism. The most effective weapon we have on our side is seeing that our children get firmly grounded with the 3Rs in a Bible based context.

Which side are we on? Which side, Christian reconstruction or Anti-christian deconstruction, will win?