Smile... The Future's On Its Way
by C.J. Horn
Education - Not Information: A Perspective on Education
The "information highway" was a phrase popularized in the 1990's because of the advent of computerized access to all unclassified media information. Children and adults alike spend their work and leisure hours at a computer terminal. On the side of productive learning is the fact that thorough research on any subject that has been put on this "highway" can be accomplished quickly with a minimum of cost. On the down side, however, is the fact that the learner can only accumulate what has been placed in circulation on this technological superhighway.
If there is a failing of a computerized method of education, it is the same failing that has faced public education. The information available is necessarily subjective, as is any information found in a textbook, in the school library, or classroom. Subjective means the information presented as reality is that which is perceived as such after it has filtered through the mindset of the writer. History, science, math, social studies, and, in fact, all educational material is written by a person with a worldview. The worldview of that writer will show forth in what has been written. If the writer views history, geography, geology, biology, sociology or any learning discipline through an evolutionary framework, then the writing will reflect this view. If an evolutionary framework architects the structure on which all learning proceeds, that framework will be that the world and all that is in it (people, plants, animals, rocks, continents, sea life, etc.) are the accidental product of random chance.
It is difficult to illustrate random chance. That is why the evolutionary foundation and outgrowths of much of the learning of today are difficult to pinpoint. However, no one would expect an engineer to build a bridge without planning and design. To say that everything that is to be studied proceeded from nothing plus random chance is to ask a physicist to make conclusions based on a blackboard empty of calculations. Random chance as the basis for studying all that man sees around him crushes the foundation of any concrete conclusion.
A science education does not begin in a physics laboratory, however. It begins at the simplest level, perhaps with a child looking at a flower and making observations.
Alexander Bell said, "The period of childhood is the great observing period in human life. The child is an explorer in a new land in which marvelous discoveries may be made each day."
The child has no thorough knowledge of the intricate workings of photosynthesis, pollination, etc. but he does share an instinct that is common to all humankind. Most children around the age of three begin to ask the question "Why?" They have found this word to be an instant conversation promoter and enjoy the attention the word provokes. It is interesting that children from all cultures ask this question in their own language. It may be more than just a silly question asked by children. One educator has said, "'Why?' gets back to a purpose, and purpose gets back to a person." If a child asks why, and the answer is, "Because of nothing, and from nothing," the educational process has begun in a vacuum. Many fine scientists may be lost in our generation because they are not equipped with the most fundamental of truths. The Bible teaches, "The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom" (Proverbs 9:10). One can fill the mind of a child full of information, but if that information is incorrect, then it is not education. Education is, first of all, a body of truth and the wise exercise of it. The core of that truth is the knowledge of the Creator who gives meaning to all other facts in the universe. And education's goal is the exercise of that truth in the execution of the God-given role mankind has as the supreme caretaker of all creation.
A Personal Word
My high school children and I were invited to be one of the "visual aids" in a class of fifteen PhD candidates (mainly secondary school principals and administrators). These "students" were conducting panel discussions and giving presentations about things that were impacting the modern public school system. Because I was a homeschooling parent, I and my children were invited. After an hour of discussing the strengths and weaknesses of public education versus home schooling, I was asked THE QUESTION by one of the PhD candidates (a high school chemistry teacher). It was, "Why are you home schooling?"
A home schooling family makes a definite statement about the present state of much of education. Many public school science teachers and, in fact, most teachers in the public sector have received their credentials in universities that teach man is a product of billions of years of an upward spiral of random chance and mutations. This theory of origins envelopes a child's educational process from the biology textbook to the literature class. My answer was not popular that day, but at least it was truthful.
Evolution is Destructive
Dr. George Lindsey is an educator who has done over two decades of research in the field of evolution's "contribution" to the advancement of learning. He maintains that evolution not only makes no contribution to learning, it can actually be harmful to that learning process. I recently interviewed Dr. Linsdey on this subject. He made some telling points about how evolution is going to affect education and research for years to come.
Dr. Lindsey talked about the contributions of creation scientists in the past: "Louis Pasteur, a creation scientist, did more than anyone had done in the field of inoculations and immunology, and his work was based upon the biblical perspective that only life can beget life. He reasoned that if humans have a pathogen (disease causing organism) in their bodies, that it should be possible to find its origin by tracking it back generation to generation. Once the source is discovered, a method to block the pathway can be developed preventing the infection. If medical science had assumed the evolutionary perspective, that pathogens could spontaneously generate, then Pasteur's solution would not have been discovered, perpetuating devastating worldwide suffering."
What many researchers in scientific laboratories fail to understand is they have brought a faulty premise into the laboratory with them. Many scientists in these research facilities have been taught from their earliest education that ultimate truth cannot be discovered and the wonders they see in the microscope are all a product of random chance. Truth is approached as a moving target and all that is in the world has no ultimate purpose beyond what the person at the microscope can muster.
Dr. Lindsey went on to state,
"For many years, doctors took the evolutionary perspective on tonsils, believing they were a useless leftover organ from our distant past. As a result they would remove them at the slightest provocation (which in many cases resulted in causing other problems)."
Now science has discovered that the tonsils are a part of the immune system--we don't understand fully how they work, but they have a role in the body's disease prevention. As a result, now doctors are much more "pro-tonsil" and will not remove them unless there are very significant reasons. If we want the best results we should tint our research with the creation perspective. Even if we don't understand entirely the function of an organ, the fact that God put it in the human body means that it must have value and we can continue to search for that value as opposed to labeling it worthless. This has certainly proved true in the case of the tonsils.
"Science" always meant "knowledge" until its 19th century relegation to that which can occur only naturally without outside influence. This was done to exclude creationism from science classrooms. At any rate, the "scientific method" means to observe, to test, to repeat, etc. Knowledge which can be obtained in this manner is said to be "scientific."
A creation scientist does not have to apologize because he believes the Bible. Evolutionists believe in things they cannot prove by the scientific method. It is logical to make the assumption that the God who created the universe would be able to state facts about that world in His Word to man. A proof of this is as man's knowledge (those things he can observe and test) expands, he finds more and more scientific truths abound in Scripture.
Dr. Lindsey continued:
Scientific research has documented that the chemicals responsible for blood clotting in a new born baby reach a peak on the eighth day after birth--and it is interesting and more than coincidental that the mandate in the Bible was to circumcise a male on the eighth day. Here we see what I call scientific biblical information lining up with modern day scientific discovery. When God wrote the Bible, even if He did not go into total detail regarding science, what He did say on the subject is absolutely accurate and true and truth has practical value and application. On the other hand, if something is not true, as in the case of evolution, then its application is not only going to be impractical, but harmful.
Dr. Lindsey's comments sound like a modern day version of Psalm 36. We see this in a study of Psalm 36 which contrasts the differences between the evolutionist with "no fear of God before his eyes" (Psalm 36:1) and the creationist. Remember, the "fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom, and the knowledge of the holy is understanding" (Proverbs 9:10).
It could be said the creationist believes, "In Thy light shall we see light" (Psalm 36:9).
The End Result of "Nothingness"
The person in Psalm 36 who does not fear God ascribes to the first tenet of the Humanist Manifest II, which is the hallmark of evolution: "No God will save us, we must save ourselves." The Psalmist gives insight into the heart and mind and actions of a person who does not fear God: "The words of his mouth are iniquity and deceit: he hath left off to be wise, and to do good" (Psalm 36:3). Iniquity is an interesting Biblical concept, broad in its meaning and destructive in its consequences. Dr. James Strong, in his Concordance of the Bible, describes the "iniquity" of Psalm 36 thus: "from a word meaning to 'pant,' hence to exert oneself, USUALLY IN VAIN, TO COME TO NAUGHT, nothingness"
This word is translated as several other words in the Old Testament that give insight into the character of a person who has no fear of God: "False, unjust, unrighteous, vanity, evil or wicked."
The difficult thing for most Christians to realize is that vanity (iniquity) is not neutral in its Biblical sense. It is DESTRUCTIVE. One may think of a vain idea as being empty or perhaps without effect. But one must look at the effects of emptiness in order to gain an understanding of the destructiveness of what the Psalmist calls vanity. If a person chooses to reject God and embrace untruth, then he, by Biblical definition is called "vain" or "evil" or "wicked." The Bible speaks of this type of person: "Behold, they are all vanity; their works are nothing: their molten images are wind and confusion" (Isaiah 41:29). "When a wicked man dieth, his expectation shall perish: and the hope of unjust men perisheth" (Proverbs 11:7). "The hope of the righteous shall be gladness: but the expectation of the wicked shall perish" (Proverbs 10:28). No matter what the expectation of a person who begins with untruth, the end of unbelief is not productiveness, rather it is to perish.
Evolution is the Counsel of the Wicked
When Solomon spoke of vanity, he coupled the meaning with "leading astray." Jeremiah also speaks of this: "Thus saith the Lord of hosts, Hearken not unto the words of the prophets that prophesy unto you: they make you vain (lead you astray): they speak a vision of their own heart, and not out of the mouth of the Lord" (Jeremiah 23:16). This "vision of their own heart" was not some ancient idea dead and buried in the time of Jeremiah. These false prophets were in the business of keeping people from knowing the one true God. Evolution's primary foundation stone is just that; there is not one true God. Proverbs 12:5 says "the thoughts of the righteous are right: but the counsels of the wicked are deceit." Evolution is deceitful because it is not true and can be defined as the "counsel of the wicked."
When the Psalmist asked in Psalm 14:4 "Have all the workers of iniquity no knowledge?" the word he employed for "iniquity" is the same as the "words of iniquity and deceit" mentioned in Psalm 36. "Knowledge" in Psalm 14:4 is knowledge of the Lord and the Psalmist is saying that the choice is between a knowledge of the Lord or iniquity. The Psalmist then says these people "eat up my people (God's people) as they eat bread" (Psalm 14:4). Turning one's back on the knowledge of God destroys not only learning, it destroys people.
How Does This Relate to Educating Children?
Further light is shed on the devastation of iniquity elsewhere in the Psalms: "He that soweth iniquity shall reap vanity: and the rod of his anger shall fail" (Proverbs 22:8). This verse is speaking of the education of children. When one "sows iniquity" or in essence pulls God out of the picture, then he can reap only vanity--or destructiveness. Under these circumstances the "rod" of correction will not be applied for godly training, but in anger, and it is doomed to "fail."
It can be concluded that iniquity and untruth are an exertion for nothingness or toward failure. It's the "no win scenario." It is like a self-collapsing hole that is not only worthless in itself, but becomes destructive and self-perpetuating in its influence. Note, for instance, Proverbs 17:4, "A wicked doer giveth heed to false lips; and a liar giveth ear to a naughty tongue." An evil person will listen to lies. Not only does a lie corrupt the thinking to begin with, (as in the evolutionary lie), but after the person believes the lie, it snares him into believing other lies.
Although the above commentary may sound pretty bleak, it does give some insight into why the children of our society seem to have no hope. They have been fed the lie of evolution and its destructive influence is filtering through to every area of their life.
Psalm 36 also gives the other side of the issue. It speaks of one who believes God as Creator:
"O LORD, thou preservest man and beast. How excellent is thy lovingkindness, O God! therefore the children of men put their trust under the shadow of thy wings. They shall be abundantly satisfied with the fatness of thy house; and thou shalt make them drink of the river of thy pleasures. For with thee is the fountain of life" (Psalm 36:6-8).
The Bible: More Than Just Another Book
The Bible says "the path of the just is as the shining light, that shineth more and more unto the perfect day" By contrast, the wicked don't even know what they stumble at. (Proverbs 4:18). In order to recognize error, one must have a strong working knowledge of truth.
Experts decry the present state of our educational system and develop and redevelop methods of education. People wonder why children of past generations were better educated, better thinkers, inventors and responsible citizens. It certainly isn't because those generations had the wealth of technology we have today, or better or bigger libraries. It isn't because their facilities were large or because their teachers were specialists in their respective fields.
The reason the children of past generations had a brighter future is because Psalm 36 is true. "In Thy light (the Lord's light), we shall see light." It has only been in recent generations that the Bible has been banned from the educational process. When truth is pulled from the foundation of education, then there can be no true illumination, only destruction. Lindsey sounds a warning about what will happen if the evolutionists continue to have control of our educational system:
I have read articles by evolutionists who have taken their theory to the logical scientific conclusion as a scientific tool. They believe if evolution could turn molecules into man, there should be no problem so difficult it cannot correct. If evolution, by accident, can do what all the scientists in the world with their laboratories and modern technology cannot do (create life in all its forms) then evolution should certainly be able to solve all the much simpler problems in the world around us.
These evolutionary authors have recommended that we stop doing some of the things we are doing and wait on evolution. Why preserve the environment or some particular ecological niche when we are just preserving the inferior? The logic of an evolutionist would conclude that since evolution has done a better job than man ever could, we should stand back and let nature take its course. Basically stated, they believe the world will accidentally get better and better.
The Truth is Useful, Error is Useless
The problem with this random chance approach to improving the real world is that scientifically it does not work. In the history of science, there has never been documented a single problem which has been solved by evolution. Real scientific observations tell us that accidents always result in chaos and cause problems. If you want things to improve, it takes deliberately imposing plan and purpose on the circumstances. As a problem solving tool, time and chance are useless. Let me emphasize again--if something is true it will be useful, and if it is not true, it will be useless.
No one will argue that the goal of education is to produce useful, productive, fulfilled human beings. If that goal is to be accomplished, then one must look to the foundation upon which that education is built.
If religious books are not widely circulated among the masses in this country, I do not know what is going to become of us as a nation. If truth be not diffused, error will be; If God and His Word are not known and received, the devil and his works will gain the ascendancy; If the evangelical volume does not reach every hamlet, the pages of a corrupt and licentious literature will; If the power of the Gospel is not felt throughout the length and breadth of the land, anarchy and misrule, degradation and misery, corruption and darkness will reign without mitigation or end. -- Daniel Webster.