Answering the "Salt & Light" Argument

 Brian Hazeltine

Principal Airdrie Koinonia Christian School

www.akcs.com and principal@akcs.com and 948-5100

 

The following argument was the basis for Mr. Hazeltine’s presentation on “Something to Talk About” with Kelly Turner on SHINE FM.

 

1)       So, what exactly is the Salt & Light Argument?

a)        Children should go to public schools where they can act as Salt & Light to have a positive affect on others and perhaps bring some to Christ.

b)       This is promoted more and more by Christians today as the reason for enrolling their children in public schools.

c)       I need to be clear that this stand violates logic, and it flies in the face of experience, history and the clear teaching of the Bible.

2)       Are you saying that everyone should send their children to a Christian school?

a)       No.

b)       First, it makes no sense for an atheist or agnostic, a Muslim, a Hindu or a Jew to send their children where their values are going to be systematically undermined. A Christian school is going to do everything in its power to change the thinking of these children, and believe me, we are very successful in influencing children.

c)       Second, there is a point in the training of young people as part of their “final exams” if you will that they need to be given more freedom and responsibility. Indeed, at some point they have been trained to be effective witnesses, and should be given the opportunity to do so. They are young adults; not completely free of their obligations to their parents, but getting ready to head out on their own. That would be somewhere in the middle to late teens. Many teens are ready to impact the world for Christ in high school. So, at the high school level it does make sense for some Christian kids to be in the public school.

d)       Third, there are some people who should provide Christian education by using the vehicle of home schooling. This is an excellent way to fulfill a parents’ obligation to train their children to think Biblically.

e)       Finally, I think it is vitally important that we have Christian teachers, teaching assistants, and principals in the public system. There is definitely a place for their witness there.

3)       What about the rest?

a)       For most of the rest, a Christian school should be the obvious choice, the default position, and one that would only be rejected on the basis of clear leading of God. This, however, should be the exception rather than the rule. This can happen when there is no Christian school available, and for whatever reason home schooling is not an option. Perhaps, the public school is filled with Christian teachers and children, and they all have freedom to pray and read the Bible together.

b)       In fact, this was the way that public schools use to be. Public schools used to be Christian schools. This is why I fully support public education, in principle, but when I think of public education, I mean that all children should have access to a free, comprehensive education program. I don’t think that this has to happen in a government school. Historically, the community through the church or government provided the funds, but the education was provided by the church or teachers hired by Christian parents. There was no question that it was to be a Christian education.

c)       To be honest, it is very strange that we are even discussing why a Christian should send his children to a Christian school. For all of history, this has been accepted as the norm; only recently have parents shifted to the opposite position. The question that needs to be defended is “Why you should provide your child with a secular education devoid of the teachings of the Bible?”

4)       Isn’t there a certain amount of logic in this position? Can’t a child influence his or her classmates?

a)       Well, I do believe that children influence one another. However, if one child among 30 is going to have a positive influence on the rest, isn’t it just as likely and even more likely that the majority will have a negative influence on the one?

b)       If children can influence each other, then surely a large number of students are going to have greater influence than just one.

c)       It is possible, if the majority of students are Christians, then perhaps they might have a greater positive affect than those who are not will have on them.

d)       However, it is also critical that the teacher also be a Christian, because there is no question that the greatest influence in the classroom is the adult teacher.

e)       Finally, one must ask oneself, “What is the primary reason that I send my child to school? Is it so that they can influence others for Christ or is it so that they can get an education?

i)         If the primary goal is evangelism, then logic compels us to ask, “How serious are you about training your child in evangelism?”

(1)     Do you as the parent get involved in the school on a regular basis to help out? Are you witnessing to the staff and children while you are there?

(2)     Do you get involved in Daily Vacation Bible School?

(3)     Do host a Backyard Bible Study to assist your child in bringing their neighbors to Christ?

(4)     Do you take your teen street witnessing or to the Mustard Seed to teach them about witnessing?

(5)     Is it logical to expect our children to be effective witnesses without any support or training? I don’t think so.

ii)       If the primary goal of school is education, then doesn’t it make sense to send them where they can get the best education possible? That includes educating the mind to think Christianly as well as academically. The most important book your children needs to know is the Bible, and the hours spent in a Christian school combined with the depth and intentionality of the program are far more powerful in equipping them than an hour on Sunday…. And of course Christian School children get that hour on top of everything else. There really is no comparison in the training that is going on.

iii)      So you see, when we really examine it, the logic behind this argument doesn’t stand up.

5)       But doesn’t experience actually go against the logic? We all know of people who went through public schools and turned out OK, or perhaps led others to Christ while there.

a)       Several things may be said here. First, did they turn out fine? The evidence in the Christian church today is that there are very few visible distinctions between the behaviors, life styles, and standards of Christians and non-Christians. It’s really quite disturbing. I wonder if we are turning out kids who are strong in their faith and witnessing to many of their classmates and living differently. Let me illustrate from my own life why I raise this question: I remember teaching my first Christian school students about the two main kingdoms in biology: plants and animals. When I tried to explain to them that man belonged to the animal kingdom they argued with me. After my third attempt, I realized that I was wrong, and that I had been thinking from a secular perspective. If man is an animal, then abortion is as acceptable as killing cattle, isn’t it? No, man is part of an entirely different biological kingdom, but despite my Bible college training, I didn’t get that. My mind had already been formed by my childhood in public schools.

b)       Let us assume, however, that you are correct and that many people go through the public school and turn out OK. If we accept this argument, then would you agree that there are many committed Christians who did not attend church when they were growing up? Are we to say that it doesn’t matter whether we attend church or not as we are growing up? I know many who didn’t grow up in Christian homes. Should Christian parents not teach their children about the Lord as they grow up? You see, just because we can point to an example of where, despite not receiving the best education or having the best home life, a person turned out OK, we cannot use that to defend poor education or a poor home life.

c)       While we are on this point, let me raise the flipside to this argument. Many people will point to a graduate of a Christian school and point out how poorly they are doing. And, of course, we cannot deny that this happens. However, the same argument stands. I know of many children who grew up attending church and later turned away from God. Does that make church bad? I know the children of pastors who are no longer living for the Lord. Does that mean that teaching our children to love God is wrong? No! It simply means that there are no guarantees when it comes to raising our kids.

d)      What about the verse that says “Train up a child in the way he should go and when he is old he will not depart from it?”

i)         Again, it doesn’t matter what your position is on schooling; we all know of children from seemingly very good homes that later went astray.

ii)       This verse is not a promise, it is a proverb. A statement of what is generally true and therefore a clear obligation of parents to do the training, but it is not a guarantee of the results.

iii)      I can give you a great example: I know of a wonderful father with an absolutely wonderful, positive home environment, who had two children, a boy and a girl. Both of them turned away from their Dad. In fact, they openly embraced a contrary lifestyle, and when confronted about the matter blamed others and even blamed him. I am talking about Adam & Eve. You see God Himself will not overrule the right of His children to exercise their free will.

e)      But you said yourself, that you attended a public school?

i)         Yes, and it had some very negative effects on my thinking, But remember, the argument is not that a child can survive a public school. The argument is that they can actually influence others for Christ there. Does experience (and remember we are talking about K-8 in particular) bear this out?

ii)       One can ask some fairly simple questions to see if this is indeed working. “How many children did your son or daughter lead to Christ in grade one? Grade two? Grade three? And so on. If they have led one child to Christ every year for eight years, then that is fantastic, and it would be hard to discount this. I dare say that this is the exception rather than the rule; and that is my point.

iii)      But I still want to ask one more question. Are we really serious about evangelism? If parents are really serious about this, then I certainly hope that they are witnessing at their places of work, and that they are bringing many to Christ. Moreover, if they want to help their children to be evangelists, then I would challenge them to start a Backyard Bible study for the children in their neighborhoods and teach and model how to lead a child to Christ.

iv)      Beyond that, they should volunteer to help out in their church’s Daily Vacation Bible School and bring their own children along to help. Let’s be honest; far more decisions are made for Christ at a DVBS than are made during the school year. Get involved with a summer camp program. Christian camping is hugely successful. In fact, as far as first-time decisions being made, these two efforts are among the very best. Why is that? It is the result of very intentional teaching and preaching from adults and teens seeking to win these children to Christ. Because of this, at AKCS we routinely have our students get involved in DVBS or summer camp as counselors. They are well trained and effective witnesses for the Lord. What better place to evangelize?

f)        But isn’t public school where these kids meet other kids to invite to DVBS?

i)         Of course, but they can just as easily invite the members of their soccer teams and dance classes, and their friends in their neighborhoods, etc.

ii)       The reality is that over the past 50 years, we have been losing our children to secularism. The church and Christian parents have not been very successful in training up the next generation to stand in the midst of a secular culture. A very high percentage of our children are turning from their faith in high school and university because they lack adequate preparation. Experience tells us that this has not been a very effective tool for evangelism.

6)       Let’s move on to something else you mentioned, History: You have said that the modern trend of Christian parents to send their young children to a secular school flies in the face of church history. How is that?

a)       I will suggest to you that for two thousand years the church has maintained the absolute necessity for children to be taught Christian values by Christian instructors and that this was considered the very core of what education was all about. It is only in the last 50 to 100 years that the church has departed from its historical stance.

b)       The Jews were the first to establish a religiously based compulsory school system. These schools were established in the local synagogue about 75 years before the birth of Christ. It is likely that is where Jesus got his education.

c)       Early Christian parents living in Rome were bitterly opposed to the pagan schools because their literature, art, and philosophy were opposed to Christianity. Not much has changed in two thousand years.

d)       Tertullian, one of the early church fathers said, “What has Athens to do with Jerusalem? What concord is there between the Academy and the church? What between heretics and Christians?”

e)       Once the Roman empire had finally embraced Christianity, the Roman public schools began to be replaced by Christian schools throughout the empire. Gregory, for example, established a system of compulsory Christian schools around the fourth century.

f)         With the eventual collapse of the Roman Empire, there was no longer education made available to the general public. But most education that was available took place in the monasteries. Though there was limited access, it was certainly Christian.

g)       With the Reformation in the 1500’s we again see an emphasis on the importance of education of the young. Martin Luther felt very keenly the need for Christian schools. He said, “When schools prosper, the Church remains righteous and her doctrine pure. Young pupils and students are the seed and source of the Church. For the sake of the Church we must have and maintain Christian schools.”

i)         It is ironic that so many pastors fail to see the need for Christian schools while Luther felt that they were crucial.

ii)       Luther based many of his appeals solidly in Scripture: He quoted from Psalm 78 and Deut. 32 where he found Moses clearly commanding parents to train up their children in right living.

iii)      He viewed the Bible to be the central part of any proper education and said that “where the Holy Scriptures are not the rule, I advise no one to send his child. Everything must perish where God’s work is not studied unceasingly.”

iv)      He said that if he had to give up preaching, there was nothing he would prefer to be than a school teacher. He said, “Let it be considered one of the highest virtues on earth faithfully to train the children of others.”

h)       John Calvin started a city-wide system of Christian schools in Geneva. Like Lutheran schools, they studied languages, science, art, etc., but the Bible was always central. Teachers were considered officers of the church. Every detail of the school was based on Biblical principles. Calvin viewed the church and school as inextricably connected. You could not have one without the other. Calvin did not accept the modern idea that there is a division between the sacred and the secular. All of life is sacred and should reflect our relationship with God.

i)         John Knox set up a country wide system throughout Scotland. The schools were similar to those set up by Calvin and were under joint control of the state and church.

j)         This pattern of the state requiring attendance of all citizens and church run schools continued up until the last 100 years. All of the Protestant Reformers believed passionately in the need for compulsory education of all citizens and that this should be enforced and paid for by the state. However, they also clearly understood that the role of the state was to support the work of the church. The church was the institution that was responsible to actually provide the education.

k)       In more recent times, J. Gresham Machen one of the 20th century’s leading theologians put it this way, “The Christian life cannot be lived on the basis of anti-Christian thought. Hence the necessity of Christian schools.”

l)         One final historical reference would be to note that right here in Alberta all of the early schools were set up by missionaries. They were thoroughly Christian in the beginning. In Airdrie, one of our high schools, George McDougall is named after an early Christian missionary to this area.

7)       So, we’ve looked at the logic of the argument, some practical experience with schools in our culture, and what church leaders have said about Christian schools. But what does the Bible say about it?

a)       The Bible says nothing about Christian schools, but it does say a lot about children and Christian education.

b)       There are two main points that the Bible makes about children, and it makes them again and again.

i)         The role of children is to listen, learn, respect, honor, and obey their parents.

ii)       And parents are to teach, train, nurture, admonish and provide for their children. That’s it. Nowhere are children instructed to evangelize.

c)       Well, what about the Salt & Light argument?

i)         First, when Jesus was referring to Salt & Light, some would say that He is probably not referring to primarily to individuals but rather the church as a whole. For example, He specifically refers to a city set on a hill that is visible to all. Salt is only effective when many grains work together, but be that as it may He was not speaking to children, but adults. Nowhere in Scripture are children sent out to evangelize or urged to evangelize. This is a parental obligation.

ii)       More importantly in this passage, Jesus is not referring to where one goes, but who one is. He is talking about the kind of people Christians should be, not where they live and work or go to school. He is saying that salt is no good without its flavor, and a light is no good if it isn’t visible, but He is specifically talking about good deeds. This is why the church has always taken the lead in establishing schools and hospitals throughout history.

iii)      Furthermore, in Matthew 18 He specifically reminds His listeners that children are vulnerable and innocent; willing to accept what they are taught in simple faith. He encourages us not to hinder them from coming to Him. He then warns everyone about the penalties for causing one of these little ones to stumble in their faith. When we put all of these passages together, it is clear that using the Salt & Light argument to justify sending children to a secular school simply is not tenable.

d)      What else does the Bible say along this line?

i)         Well, as I have said, anyone who studies the Bible will come away with two very strong messages: children learn from your parents; parents train your children.

ii)       One obvious verse that relates to this discussion is 1Cor. 15:33 which says, “Do not be misled, bad company corrupts good character.” You see, sin is like the law of gravity. Everyone has a sin nature, so it’s much easier for someone to drag a righteous person down into sin than it is to drag an unbeliever out of it. Paul specifically warns us not to be misled. He is saying, “You will think that you will be unaffected by the attitudes and behavior of others, but you are deceived.” Jesus affirmed the same point when He said, “A little yeast will affect the entire loaf.”

iii)      There are others in Ephesians that speak of raising children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord, but there are two really important scriptures that people often don’t even think of in this context. I want to conclude with them:

(1)     First, there is the Great Commandment from Deuteronomy 6. It says that we are to love God with all our heart, soul, and strength. But if you look at the context, it immediately goes on to say that we are to impress God’s commandments upon our children and talk about them morning, noon, and night. This is really clear in a literal translation like the New American Standard where they put in all the “Ands” at the beginning of each verse. There is one continuous thought through the next twelve or so verses. When we look at the context it is clear that the Greatest of all Commandments is to Love God and Teach Your Children to do the same. It’s all one thought.

(2)     Finally there is the Great Commission. Often, this is used to bolster the Salt & Light Argument. Most people think that the Great Commission commands us to Go into all the world. Actually, this is not so. This is a poor translation. It really says that as we are going, and as we are preaching, and as we are teaching, we are to make disciples. The first three words are participles. Only one is an imperative: and that is “Make Disciples.” Making disciples is actually what a Christian school does; that is our whole reason for existence. Our entire focus is on fulfilling the Great Commission. It is ironic but sad that some of those who are most concerned with fulfilling the Great Commission, don’t actually ensure that they are doing it with their own children. As an aside, we are sending 45 students and staff down to Mexico this Friday to preach the gospel. They are well-trained and well-led; and because of this, they will be effective witnesses.

8)       Why is it then that so many pastors do not support Christian schools?

a)       Well, historically of course the overwhelming majority have been deeply supportive of Christian schools. And today, virtually every denomination has churches that sponsor specific schools. It’s interesting to note, ironically, that the Christian school movement is so big in the States where they get such little support from the government. Here in Canada it is smaller.

b)       However, as to why some don’t support Christian schooling, I would say that most have not had any training in this area. Most pastors have not studied Christian education outside of the context of Sunday School and camping. Our theological schools are behind the times in this regard. Many of course draw conclusions from their own personal experience, having gone to a public school and survived, but very few have actually studied the issue from a biblical perspective.

c)       Remember, up until the last 50 years or so, the public schools were thoroughly Christian, so it wasn’t an issue. That has changed, and it is time that the church took another look at the schools and the Scriptures. When pastors and lay people alike go to the Scriptures and ask, “What do they say about educating children?” they find the overwhelming evidence supports training them morning, noon, and night to think Christianly. That is very hard to do in a secular school. Certainly, all of the great Christian theologians held to this position.

9)       So you really take issue with the position a lot of Christians hold to, don’t you?

a)       Yes. It appears that I am currently in a minority, but historically my position was unquestioned. I am certainly in good company theologically on this.

b)       I think parents and pastors need to take the time to re-examine their views on this. If I am wrong, then make your case. I would love to dialog with people about this to see where I have missed something. But after years of studying it, I felt I needed to bring this forward to get the issue debated more thoroughly. Examine the logic, study the experience of the church in the last 50 years, examine the teaching of the great theologians, and examine my interpretation of the Bible. If you do this, I suspect that you will come to the same conclusions, but if not, then at least you will have a firmer foundation for the choices you make.

c)       What I hope will happen as a result of this study is that Christians will begin to make Christian schools their first choice again, as they did in the past. I would hope that 90% of Christian children will receive the training that parents, I believe, are obligated to provide, especially at the K-8 level. Obviously, many people will not be persuaded by what we have said today, but some will. I believe that an honest study of these issues will lead many people to re-evaluate how they have been raising their children. If I can help just a few parents to be more effective in raising their children to love the Lord then it is worth it.

d)       Remember, we said that there are no guarantees when it comes to raising our children, but I want to be able to stand before the Lord and know that I did absolutely everything I could to ensure that I had raised them in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.

e)       For anyone who is interested, we will be posting the transcripts of this show on our website. They can read over it, develop their counter arguments and email me. I look forward to hearing from them.