Off to Beirut Lebanon!

In the Lord's providence, I am leaving for Beirut Lebanon on December 5, returning on December 15.  I will be meeting with the leadership of perhaps as many as 32 Christian schools to discuss how we might work together to strengthen our respective schools and enrich the professional development of our faculties and the learning experiences of our students.

I will periodically post updates on my trip to this blog (including pictures), my Facebook account, and via Twitter.  I am returning to the U.S. with a stop over in Paris so I will post some nice pictures from Paris as well. 

If you would like to receive the updates to this blog as they are posted, be sure to subscribe for updates by email--see the right side of this blog for the place to subscribe.

Finally, feel free to comment on the posts as I post them. 

Technorati Tags: Beirut,Lebanon,Paris

Click to read full article>>>

Discover Christian Schools

By Harold Naylor, Jr., Director of Institutional Advancement The Christian Academy

Critical thinking, character education, safety and security, uncovering God-given talents and passions, and developing a Christian view of the world.  These are some of the reasons Christian parents invest large sums of money for tuition in a local Christian school.

However, most (90% by some estimates) evangelical parents put their children in the local public school.  They (fondly) remember their own school days and declare, "I went to public school and I turned OK."  These parents, and the ones that desire for their children to be "salt and light" in the local school are the reason for the launching of www.DiscoverChristianSchools.com , a communications initiative to speak directly to parents about the total education of their children.

The initiative produces weekly radio spots, Christian Education Commentary, that are carried on 117 stations across the US.  The web site has had over 300,000 unique visitors and still gets 4,000 hits per day.  A Google search on "Christian schools" puts the site in the #2 position.

WORLD magazine's founder, Joel Belz, recently described www.DiscoverChristianSchools.com

...a notable effort to help parents discover the good things happening on the school front.

Schools need to band together to get the word out that the local Christian school is the best partner a parent can find for the training of their child.  This communications effort also helps schools crystallize and amplify their message as they seek to put critical information on their on web site and into the hands of prospective parents.

Schools can join the effort at no cost, but the campaign is maintained by gifts.  If you would like more information on how to bless children, parents, and schools, please call National Director John Fedele (toll free) 866-576-4546 or email at jfedele@DiscoverChristianSchools.com.

Technorati Tags: Christian schools,Christian education

Click to read full article>>>

A Great Reason for Christian Education

By By Steve Cornell, Senior pastor, Millersville Bible Church, Millersville PA

In the very near future, America will cease to be the primary sending nation for Christian missionaries. Already large numbers of missionaries are being sent from places like Latin America, India and South Korea (to name a few). They are even being sent to reach Americans. Why is it that evangelical Churches in America are full (especially in their Mega forms) and yet a steadily decreasing number of Christians answer the call to take the gospel to the ends of the earth? The answer might surprise you. Let me explain.

A major ideological shift: The tyranny of tolerance

In the last twenty to thirty years, we (in the West) have experienced a major ideological shift with regard to religious truth. America, as a free nation, has supported the existence of a diversity of religions. But, with the recent shift, we have moved to a required acknowledgment of the validity of each religion as a truth option. Tolerance, we are told, mandates this outlook on religious beliefs. And, in the new system, no exceptions to tolerance will be tolerated.
Tolerance is considered the peacekeeping virtue of a pluralistic society. It is the primary quality for maintaining pluralistic civility. Yet while peace and respect for diversity are important, gaining them through socially imposed tolerance is misguided and dangerous. It is also a departure from the proper understanding of tolerance itself.

The true virtue of tolerance is unnecessary when people surrender or silence commitments to real differences. Tolerance only becomes a functional virtue when two people or groups of people strongly disagree and yet treat each other with respect. Where disagreements either do not exist or do not matter, there is no need for tolerance.

Ironically, the tolerance being required today is a form of intolerance. It requires people to keep their differences to themselves. It promotes a monolithic culture—where everyone is increasingly forced to conceal the multi-cultural dimensions of society. What we end up with is diversity we can’t talk about lest we offend those who disagree. An entire generation of Americans have been socially conditioned under the tyranny of tolerance.

Pressure on religious communities:

In the cause of promoting and protecting pluralistic civility, social pressure is particularly placed on religious communities to de-emphasize all positions that could be perceived as claims to superiority among the religions of the world. Under the tyrannical rule of the twisted version of tolerance, people have been conditioned to be deeply suspicious of attempts to privilege one religious tradition or teaching as normative for all. If a religious tradition claims to have special access to truth about God, it is considered intolerant no matter how respectfully it relates to others. Absolute religious and moral opinions are considered potential threats to pluralistic civility.

Division of truth: Personal and public
Social conditioning based on radical tolerance is strengthened by the division of truth into personal and public categories. Moral and religious opinions are widely viewed as matters of personal taste like preferences for chocolate over vanilla. Media and academic elite (the primary means for social conditioning) have tried to persuade the public that moral and religious opinions (unlike scientific facts) are merely personal matters we should keep to ourselves. An unsuspecting public has been taught to marginalize and trivialize religion and morality into a private sphere irrelevant to life in the real world.

Public education: learning environments for the tyranny of tolerance

Participants in public learning institutions face an imposed rule of tolerance that requires acceptance and celebration of each person’s moral and religious beliefs and practices. In his extensive research concerning the thinking and beliefs of American teenagers, Professor Christian Smith suggested that among today’s young students, “The strategy for dealing with religious and moral disagreement is: ‘You don’t go there’” (Soul Searching). To avoid hurt feelings or unnecessary conflict, young people have learned to avoid particulars and absolutes and talk about everything in strictly non-offensive ways. This is the safer option if they wish to be accepted rather than ostracized.

This social conditioning has produced in our young people (and in many adults) in our churches an in-articulacy with regard to the faith. A learned capacity to talk about differences becomes unnecessary in a society that asks us to avoid speaking in particular or absolute categories. As a result, large numbers of people are not only unable to articulate what they believe and why they believe it, they are guarded against beliefs that are too particular or in any way exclude or offend the beliefs of others.

Even if they actually hold to particular moral or religious beliefs, they have learned to suspend their commitment to them in most social circumstances. And, since they have been taught that moral and religious opinions are merely matters of personal taste, why stir things up over such matters? You don’t go there.

Exceptions to the rule of tolerance:

Exceptions to this rule of tolerance are found in areas where society decides acceptable views for everyone. The primary tools of influence on these matters come through the media and academia. Elitists in these fields pressure others to see things their way or face ridicule and condescension. Uniformity of opinion is required for all who wish to be considered open-minded and progressive. Those who see things differently will be labeled (among other things) narrow, backwards and right-wing conservatives.

For examples, homosexual lifestyles and gay marriage must be considered acceptable. Abortion is a fundamental right and not the taking of innocent life. All religions lead to God in their own way and the value of religion is found not in its truthfulness but in the benefit it brings to adherents. As long as you are sincere in your efforts to serve God, it doesn’t matter what religion you follow. Conversely, one must never publically refer to what the bible teaches—outside of Church at least. Those who are brave enough to do this should expect to hear collective groans and sighs about the presence of “one of those radical Christians.”

No need for evangelism or apologetics classes:

Under this kind of social conditioning, it becomes unnecessary to be trained in moral argument or to learn how to constructively engage someone in a discussion about different beliefs. Young people in particular might question the value of such training. Why talk about things that could be perceived exclusive or violations of pluralistic civility. Some might even suspect hidden imperialistic agendas designed to oppress a minority group or to impose your politics on others. Let’s not go there.

A growing number of people actually feel that there is something morally repugnant about followers of one religion maintaining that they are correct in their beliefs and that sincere adherents of other religions are mistaken in what they believe. Most college students, for example, accept the idea of some creative force behind the existence of the universe. “What is a debated topic is how you move from this rather impersonal force to the beliefs of a particular religious tradition, and especially whether in affirming the truth-reliability of one path, you must stand against the truth-reliability of all other paths.” (Professor Daniel Liechty, Illinois State University).
The new tension is not about belief in God but whether or not it is “safe” to believe in one absolute deity. The tyranny of tolerance has scared people into postures of neutrality. It feels safer to choose not to believe anything too conclusively but to hold all beliefs in their broadest terms. The by-product is a culture that has lost its ability to think, discuss and debate. “Whatever” has become the common response to differences on morality and religion. In this environment, it becomes increasingly hard to train people to share and defend their faith.

A new social etiquette

Social etiquette requires acknowledgement of the independent validity of every faith. Those who attempt to convert people to their religious beliefs are viewed as religious chauvinists. It’s not enough to maintain (as we should) that each person is free to follow and express his or her own religion. Now we must treat each religious belief as equally valid and abandon, as unacceptably arrogant, any attempt to convert others to a different religious opinion. Strangely, this approach “… forecloses on open-mindedness in the same breath by which it extols the virtues of open-mindedness. Both the irony and tragedy of this fierce intolerance stem from the fact that it is done in the name of tolerance” (D. A. Carson, God and Culture). The new mantra is: “No exceptions to tolerance will be tolerated”.

Effect on Christian witness and missions

Should we be surprised that Christians with a missionary faith feel intimidated by this attitude? How can they obey Jesus’ call to, “go and make disciples of all nations” (Matthew 28:19), without being considered rude and intrusive? Under the tyranny of tolerance, how should we think about Jesus statement, “I am the way, the truth and the life. No man comes to the father but through me” (John 14:6)? Should we change Jesus’ words and make him say, “I am a way, a truth, and a life. People can come to the father through me or any other means they desire.”

It’s tempting to feel marginalized by the selective tolerance of our culture. The primary object of intolerance is Christianity. Islam doesn’t receive the same level of ridicule and hostility. Professors who openly mock Christianity wouldn’t dare attack the Islamic faith in university classrooms. But like the first followers of Christ, we must not compromise the message of salvation. In a fiercely pluralistic and polytheistic Roman society, the early apostles testified of Jesus that, “Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved” (Acts 4:12). They did not offer this as a personal opinion among many equally valid options. This was proclaimed as a fact of prophecy and history.

When Jesus described his true disciples in the beatitudes (see Matthew 5:10-16), he included persecution as distinguishing mark (cf. John 15:20). Persecuted people live provokingly different lifestyles in the world. They are true difference-makers and Jesus picks up on this when he reminds his disciples that they are the salt of the earth and the light of the world. He also cautioned them not to follow the temptation to dilute the salt or hide the light. The followers of Jesus must be like well-lit cities on a hill that cannot be hidden. We must capture strategic places of influence for Jesus and not allow ourselves to be marginalized by the pressures of selective intolerance.

Witness with wisdom and grace:

Considering the atmosphere I have described, Christian witness should be offered with wisdom and grace. Scripture that is particularly applicable exhorts us to, “Be wise in the way you act toward outsiders; make the most of every opportunity. Let your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer everyone” (Colossians 4:5-6). Given the prevailing distortions of tolerance and the misdirected attitude toward religious beliefs, it is also wise to emphasize the inclusive parts of our message. The good news of salvation is meant for all people.

At least seven truths related to the gospel apply to all people - without exception.
1. God has demonstrated his love for all people (John 3:16).
2. God desires the salvation of all people (I Timothy 2:3-4).
3. God has made provision for the salvation of all people (I John 2:2).
4. God commands all people to repent (Acts 17:30).
5. God will hold all people accountable for their response (Acts 17:31).
6. God takes no pleasure in anyone’s rejection of his provision (Ezekiel 18:23,32).
7. God will save all people who place faith in the Lord Jesus Christ (John 3:16).

Final note:
A Good reason for Christian Education Christian Schools and colleges provide learning contexts for our children and youth to talk freely and openly about absolute moral and religious beliefs. They do not have to suspend their commitments to these beliefs or feel unsafe to discuss them. They are able to learn how to articulate why they believe what they believe. Many who work in these environments are discouraged due to decreasing enrollments and funding. Yet the work being done in Christian education is vital to the advancement of the gospel and the preservation of liberty and justice for all. Keep on providing the context for faith to flourish!

Questions for discussion:
1. What are the long-term affects for those who spend large amounts of time in environments where they learn to avoid talking about particulars and absolutes?
2. Would a learned ability to suspend commitment to one’s belief lead to moral compromise in similar circumstances?
3. How can churches address these matters and the issue of inarticulacy regarding the faith?
4. How does Christian teaching that all people are created equal in the image of God serve as the only reliable basis for true tolerance?
5. Does tolerance ask too little of people?
6. Would it be better to use the word respect instead of the term tolerance? If so, Why?
7. How would a call to radical neighbor love over tolerance be more socially transformative from a Christian perspective?
8. How do the salt and light metaphors relate to the roles of Jesus’ followers in the world?

Technorati Tags: Christian schools,Christian education

Click to read full article>>>

What Do Good Coffee and Good Teaching Have in Common?

By Jason A. Van Bemmel (Headmaster, New Covenant Christian School)

In our School Business class this summer, Dr. Mosbacker had us read “The Peanut Butter Manifesto” by a VP from Yahoo! I was inspired by the title to do some reflection on the connection between good coffee and good teaching. My reflections then became “The Coffee Manifesto.” I shared this with our teaching staff at an in-service a few weeks ago, and they loved it. It humorously serious, and I thought you might find this enjoyable.

The Coffee Manifesto: Will it Be Starbucks or Sanka?

I love watching old Andy Griffith shows on DVD from the library. They are a perfect way to unwind after a long day. The DVDs from the library have the original sponsor spots which closed the shows when they aired. These old commercial spots are fun to watch, but one thing really bothers me: Andy Griffith pitched Sanka.

I love Andy Griffith.

I hate Sanka.

Sanka is an example of what should never be done to coffee. Sanka has two nasty qualities, which make it barely qualify as coffee:

1. Sanka is chemically decaffeinated.
2. Sanka is instant coffee.

Coffee should never be robbed of its stimulating effect. This is why most sensible people drink coffee. Rob coffee of its caffeine and you have lost the essence of what coffee is. The only worse thing you can do is to then freeze-dry the coffee so people can make it in an instant.

Coffee is meant to have caffeine. Coffee is meant to be brewed right before you drink it. Sanka is an attack on the essence of coffee. As much as I love Andy Griffith, it pains me to see him hawking this rubbish that no human being should be forced to drink.

Teaching is like coffee, and the same kinds of critical elements that make for good coffee also make for good teaching. The essence of coffee is to stimulate. The essence of teaching is the same.

John Milton Gregory says that the essence of teaching is to stimulate the mind of the student for self-activity. “The true stimulant of the human mind is a question, and the object that does not raise any questions will stir no thought.”

Compare for a moment the stimulating effect of Sanka with a more excellent coffee – Starbucks. Drink Sanka and you are ready to fall asleep. Drink Starbucks and you’re ready to take on the world.

What is the effect of your teaching on your students? Does it call for action, stimulate thought, excite the mind, get the life ready for response?

Good coffee takes time to roast and brew properly. Starbucks roasts their beans until the bitterness is gone and the complexity of flavors can be fully tasted. If the beans are not roasted as long, the bitterness of the raw bean remains and the complex and more subtle flavors of the bean cannot emerge. Yet even properly roasted coffee beans must be ground and brewed properly, too. BUNN coffee makers can brew a pot of coffee in just 2-3 minutes, but coffee grounds need to be exposed to hot water dripping through them for 6-6.5 minutes for ideal results.

Like good coffee, good teaching cannot be rushed. It takes time to stimulate the minds of our students to inquire, discover, know, understand, appreciate and apply the complex truths we have to teach them. The bitter flavors of a rush to judgment, a quick and dirty answer, will dominate teaching that is rushed. The more subtle and complex flavors of contemplation, genuine understanding, appreciation, delight, discrimination, and transformation take much longer to emerge and can be overwhelmed by cheaper and easier and much less transformative elements if teachers do not have patience with the teaching process.

Good coffee is roasted and brewed carefully, with attention to detail and discrimination. Roasted coffee has over 1,000 flavor and aroma compounds. Only 30 of these make the best-tasting coffee.

Likewise, good teaching must be careful and discriminatory. The world is full of thousands of ideas. Most of them will not make our students think God’s thoughts after Him. They will poison, rather than enhance, their ability to live a life that pleases God. The teacher must be careful and pay attention to detail so as not to confuse, overwhelm or dishearten students.

Good coffee can stand on its own or can be enhanced and enjoyed with a variety of flavors added to it. Starbucks comes in different roasts and brews and adding flavored syrups and creamers makes it taste even better without obscuring the essence of what makes the coffee excellent. Cheap coffee, on the other hand, needs flavor enhancers to try to mask the cheap and bitter quality of the coffee.

Quality teaching also speaks for itself. It can come in a variety of subject areas (or “roasts”) – history, English, math, languages, etc. Each of them, while varying from each other, can still be recognized as excellent teaching with the same core essence – stimulating the mind of the student to self-action, discovery and understanding with patience and discrimination. Teaching can be flavored with field trips, feasts, celebrations, videos, games, etc. These additions make excellent teaching even more enjoyable. Poor teachers try to mask poor teaching with videos, games, and field trips (often meaningless ones), trying to compensate for poor teaching by adding lots of flavorful fun. This may amuse some students, but it cannot really make up for the fact that the teaching itself in its essence is poor and does not stimulate the minds of students to quality thinking and acting.

Good coffee must be properly strong, as even quality coffee is not very good when it is too weak. The more coffee grinds you use, the more complex and robust the flavors you can produce. Of course, you can also make coffee that is too strong.

Good teaching must also be delivered at the appropriate strength. Teachers need to be assertive, bold, joyful and confident. They should lead and guide their class from a position of strength, not weakness. Of course, a teacher can be overbearing – too strong – and overwhelm their students and keep them from being able to properly express themselves, ask questions, discover the truth for themselves and exercise dominion over their piece of God’s creation. So teaching, like coffee, must be properly strong but not overly assertive.

Finally, when good coffee is brewing, it is enticing. The aroma of good coffee draws people to it – even people who don’t drink coffee. In fact, I have heard many people smell good coffee brewing and say, “I wish I drank coffee.”

So also, good teaching should be enticing. It should attract students to the truth. It should make them want to have a drink from the fountain of knowledge. As our teaching entices students, we can then equip them to be life-long learners because they will want to learn and to love to learn.

God has given us the highest privilege – to stimulate the minds of our students to know God’s truth, to embrace His goodness, to love His beauty. We have been called by God to entice our students to the highest truths, the greatest goods. We have the opportunity to make an eternal difference in the life of a child made in the image of God. Our students are looking for something to believe, for someone to follow. They want to be stimulated. The real question for us, as educators, is simple: What will we offer them – Starbucks or Sanka?

Technorati Tags: Teaching,Coffee,Starbucks,Sanka,Andy Griffith,Engaged,Effective Teaching,Education,Reform

Click to read full article>>>