Fellowlaborers – a tribute to a genuine Christian couple

Today, our church bid farewell to a dear family.  Darin and Charissa Kennelly have been exemplary Christian servants in the years that they have been here.  Darin has been a friend and Deacon, a teacher, and one of our financial officers.  Charissa has helped with nursery coordination, cleaning, and hospitality.  Their spiritual influence has gone even further.  Their five children have been a constant joy to young and old alike.

As I’ve thought of them over the last several weeks, the study that I did on Paul’s Helpers several years ago returned to my mind.  I went back through my notes on the husband and wife team, Aquila and Priscilla, and was moved by the comparisons.  The things written below are in regard to Aquila and Priscilla, but if you know the Kennellys, you will see the similarities; perhaps you know other couples who are like this.  Praise the Lord for people whose lives are devoted to being disciples of Christ.

******************************************************************************************************************

Fourteen people are called either a “fellowhelper” or “fellowlaborer” by the apostle Paul.  Both come from the same Greek word.  The word is “sunergon” which is a combination of the preposition “with” and the word “work” or “worker” – worker together.  This indicates companions in labor; it indicates camaraderie or union.  It is not just an encourager in labor, but one who participates in the labor.

In referencing all these individuals, Paul’s commendation is that they have participated in the work.  Basically, they have been in the trenches, or in the yoke with Paul – whatever the job may have been, these individuals have “worked” with Paul.

There is actually a husband and wife team which Paul called fellowlaborers, Aquila and Priscilla.

This couple is mentioned in several different places in the N.T.; three of those times are in Acts chapter 18, but each of those times represents a different time frame.

This couple labored with Paul over a period of more than 10 years.  Meeting probably in 55 A.D. and then mentioned just a few verses from the end of his last book around 66 A.D.

1.  Acts 18:1-6:

            – Their initial meeting.

            – They were Jews forced to leave Rome by Claudius.

            – They were tentmakers and so worked and lived together.

2.  Acts 18:7-18:

            – The uproar in Corinth.

         – Paul stayed a little while longer and then left Corinth with Priscilla and Aquila accompanying him.

3.  Acts 18:19-21: After arriving in Ephesus, Paul apparently decides to leave this couple in Ephesus.  His decision seems to have good results as verses 24-28 shows.

They wanted him to stay with them a while longer (not the Jews) for whatever reason, but he was determined to go on to Jerusalem.

4.  Acts 18:24-28: These verses show how they were fellowlaborers.  When they had been left in Ephesus by the Apostle Paul, and the man Apollos came to Ephesus, this couple had a great impact on not only the man Apollos, but by default the church in Ephesus.  Consider the problems that would have resulted in the church in Ephesus had Paul not left these two helpers there – Apollos would have continued teaching the baptism of John and the book of Ephesians may have been of a totally different nature.

5.  1st Corinthians 16:19: This is about 4 years after the initial meeting.  Remember that having met in Corinth and planted the church there together in Acts 18, when Paul left, he took Aquila and Priscilla with him and then left them in Ephesus when he went on to Jerusalem.

The church in Corinth would have remembered them as those who had helped Paul start this church several years before.  Paul, when writing the book of 1st Corinthians, sent the abundant greetings to the church in Corinth.  To them, the ministry in Corinth represented their introduction to Paul and possibly even to Christianity.  Acts 18:1-3 only states that they were Jews, so it is possible that it was during their early days in Corinth that Paul may have led them to Christ.  Their tie to Corinth would have been strong and so the words “salute you much in the Lord” is certainly understandable.

A further note is that the church is in their house.  Paul does not say exactly where they are, but we find them shortly back in Rome with the church in their house, but that was in Rome, which was not in Asia as 1st Corinthians 16:19 indicates.  The mention in 1st Corinthians 16:19 seems to show that they were somewhere in Asia and that the church in which they were ministering was meeting in their house – possibly Ephesus.

6.  Romans 16:3-5a: Another year further into their relationship.  As Paul is writing to the Roman believers, having never been there but preparing them for his coming, we find that Aquila and Priscilla have preceded him there.

They have somehow returned to Rome after having been forced to leave 5 years earlier.  Not only are they back in Rome, but the house in which some of the Roman believers meet is the home of this beloved couple.

It is in this passage that we see them called “helpers.”  Even though the English word is only helpers, the Greek word has the preposition on the front which makes it “fellow helpers.”  Following the history this far, we can see that appellation is well deserved by them:

They housed Paul and labored with him to help start the church in Corinth.

They traveled with him when he left Corinth and then at stayed in Ephesus when he traveled on back to Jerusalem.  After Paul left Ephesus, they were able to disciple Apollos when he came there.

When Paul wrote to the Corinthians, he sent greetings from this couple which we find was hosting a church in their house.

As Paul continued on with his journeys, Aquila and Priscilla preceded him back to Rome where they had some roots – once there, their home was again the meeting place of the church in Rome.

However, in this letter to the Romans, Paul expresses to these people how much Aquila and Priscilla mean to him and all the churches.

They have “for my life laid down their own necks.”

They have also sacrificed on behalf of all the churches of the Gentiles.  Tracing the history of this couple through the N.T. shows that their influence has been broad.  At a minimum, we see their affect on the Corinthian church and the Ephesian church, and now the Roman church.

7.  2nd Timothy 4:19 is the final mention of this couple.  It seems that Aquila and Priscilla are back in Ephesus.  Timothy was in Ephesus when he received this final letter from the Apostle Paul and Aquila and Priscilla are back there.

We can’t discern how or why they were so ubiquitous – but somehow they were driven to just be workers in the ministry.   They are ministering in Corinth, then in Ephesus, then in Rome, then back in Ephesus . . . and evidently in all of the churches of the Gentiles and in Asia in between all the dots.

Conclusion:  There are many things that we can learn about Aquila and Priscilla based on the things that we find in these different references.  There are many things we don’t know about them – there is no mention of any family, or the point of their salvation, they seem to have had wealth . . .  However, here are a few things that are hard facts:

1.  They used their resources for the LORD.

            – They housed Paul in Corinth

            – They housed one of the churches of Asia

            – They housed a church in Rome

            – They labored with the Apostle in the gospel

2.  They hazarded their lives for the LORD.

            – They laid down their own necks . . . we don’t know how or when, but Paul was clear that their lives were in danger on his behalf.

3.  They were tremendously influential.

            – Apollos was an orator and debater, yet they were able to direct and disciple him in the truth.  A little bit of assumption here, but this speaks of their knowledge of the Scriptures and it is a testament to their demeanor and influence.  It doesn’t seem likely that Apollos was an easy man to influence – Paul was not able to get him to return to Corinth later, yet this couple was able to help correct his doctrine.

It is no wonder that Paul held them in such high regard!

*******************************************************************************************************************

Darin and Charissa, we love you and we hold you and your family in high regard!  May the Lord bless your continued service to Him in your new locations.  We look forward to our paths crossing in this life and in eternity!

The Hand of the LORD (Proverbs 21:1)

Proverbs 21:1 in light of proper hermeneutical principles.

For starters, it is an interesting study to look at the things in the book of Proverbs that belong to the LORD: the eyes of the LORD, the chastening of the LORD, the curse of the LORD, the blessing of the LORD, the way of the LORD, the name of the LORD, the counsel of the LORD, the candle of the LORD, and the hand of the LORD.

The Hand of the LORD

Proverbs 21:1-2 “The king’s heart is in the hand of the LORD, as the rivers of water: he turneth it whithersoever he will.  Every way of a man is right in his own eyes: but the LORD pondereth the hearts.”

Phrases:

As the rivers of water

I have often thought of the Mississippi when I’ve read this verse.  The reality is that it is more related to a canal that a farmer would dig to send water to his crops; or perhaps a brook that a husbandman would dam up so that he could direct waters to his fields.  The idea hints strongly at nourishment; the LORD desires to use the king to supply needed nourishment to people.

The heart of the king

The heart is the seat of emotions.  It encompasses the idea of the mind and will, the affections and emotions, and really, even the soul and spirit.  This speaks of the motivations, meditations, and curriculum of life.

This seat of emotions is the possession of the king.  It references the leader of people; the ruler of the nation.

(Is) In the hand of the LORD

I love this phrase.  Think of the times when this concept is used in the Scripture.

Jesus stated on the cross that He commended His Spirit into the hand of the Father.  (Luke 23:46)

Think also of John 10:22-30 – the Good Shepherd!

The hand of the LORD is an entity over which no one else has control.  Solomon’s statement indicates that the inner most part of the king’s affections, motives, and will are in the hand of the LORD.

He turneth it withersoever He will

This final part of the verse indicates God’s absolute control.

This phrase is worded like this: “upon all His delight, He turns it.”  The words indicate that the heart of the king is totally controlled by the LORD and that the movement of it is completely controlled by the LORD according to what delights Him.

Essentially, the king serves completely at the delight of God; his heart is in the hand of God to use it however He sees fit.

Interpretation:

This verse has been quoted by many people over the years when a ruler does not measure up to an ideal.  We pray for him . . . as we should, and then we recite this verse and hope that God will “change his heart.”  I’m guilty of this thinking myself.

I’m going to give an analysis which is more in keeping with the rules of the interpretation of Scripture.  Howbeit, I do want to say that I do believe that God is capable of turning the heart of a king or leader, even if he is not a God-fearing man.  Even though, I think this verse should be considered as something other than a statement on God’s sovereignty, I do not doubt – and Biblical history proves that God can and does direct the hearts of men.  Pharaoh, Cyrus, and Artexerxes are all examples.

A couple of rules of interpretation should be noted here.  These are questions that an individual should ask himself when studying any passage of Scripture:

1.  Who wrote the passage?

2.  To whom was it written?

3.  What was the purpose of the writing?

4.  What, if any, are the problems addressed in the writing?

5.  What, if any, are the solutions offered?

Sometimes, these questions are easily answered, sometimes they are not, but the answers almost always point one to the Holy Spirit’s intent in inspiring a passage of Scripture.

Here are the answers:

1.  Who wrote the passage? Solomon.

2.  To whom was it written?  Primarily, his son (s); secondarily, his subjects.

3.  What was the purpose of the writing?  Proverbs 1:1-9

4.  What, if any, are the problems addressed in the writing?  None that we know of.

5.  What, if any, are the solutions offered?  None, if there are no problems evidenced in the passage.

There are also a couple of questions that relate uniquely to this passage:

1.  When was it written?  In the dispensation of the law (not the church), by a king who was himself to be living under the law of God and intended to be the executive in the closest thing to a Theocratic form of government that will be seen until the Millennial reign of Christ on the earth.

2.  Which king was in view?  Solomon.

Basically, this passage does not indicate that Solomon is concerned that a bad king is in control and that his encouragement is to remind the people that God guides the king.  Why should he, when he was the king at the time he wrote the book, be encouraging the people to “take heart” when you have a bad king?  He was the king whose wisdom, power, wealth, and influence had no equal on the known earth at the time.

In the mind of Solomon, he was the king; in the mind of his son, Solomon was the king; in the mind of his subjects, Solomon was the king.  The king in this verse, to his son and his subjects would have been Solomon – that is the context.

For your own study sometime, in the book of Proverbs, Solomon writes of “a king,” “the king”, and “kings.”  It appears that when Solomon is writing, a reference in the singular is either a reference to himself, or a challenge to his offspring regarding their family dynasty; when he writes plurally of “kings” he seems to be indicating “kings” or “leaders” in general.  The statement “the king” is almost certainly Solomon writing of himself in the 3rd person.

Back to the context however, with Solomon as the king in 21:1, this verse should be viewed as a testimony of Solomon’s character more than a statement of God’s sovereignty.

Application:

It is inward, not outward!  It is personal, not political.

There would be a relative application to either the son or the subject.  To his son, this is a testimony of Solomon’s relationship with God with a hope that his son would follow in his steps.  To his subjects, it would have been an assurance that their leader was under the control of Jehovah and that he was a channel through which God intended to nourish them.  With that view in mind, consider a few things that Solomon must have understood about himself.  Principles can be developed from Solomon’s example:

1.  “God intends to use me to nourish others” (as the rivers of water)

2.  “God directs me according to His pleasure” (He turneth it withersoever He will)

3.  “I am in the hand of the LORD”  (There is no better place to be).

Verse 2 is connected.  “Every way of a man is right in his own eyes: but the LORD pondereth the hearts.”

Solomon recognized that every man – himself included – considered his chosen courses to be right, but that God is the one who measures, ponders, and weighs what is in man.  So, in verse 2, Solomon understood more about himself.

4.  “I must be cautious of my own ways.”  This is the reason to give my heart into the hand of the LORD.  He can weigh it accurately.

Looking at the example of Solomon, a few things are learned about him, and by application about ourselves.  Though not kings like Solomon, we are believers who can have the same relationship with the Father – we are also leaders of others, whether children, churches, or communities.  We should live as nourishers of others.

Why I love America . . . and what I love more.

Even though our country is not all I want it to be, and doesn’t seem to be what it used to be, I still love the United States of America!  I have many reasons for which I have an appreciation for this great country.  However, the reasons that are the most important to me may be a little bit of surprise to some people.  Here they are (if you are in a hurry, you can scroll down and view the main points) :

1.  Because of the price paid for our liberty.  This principle can be found in the story of King David and his mighty men (1st Chronicles 11:15-19).  David’s mighty men broke through the Philistine garrison to get some water from the well of Bethlehem for David.  When they returned with the water, David would not drink it, but poured it out on the ground as a sacrifice to the LORD.  He recognized the sacrifice of the men and compared the gift of water to their blood because they were in jeopardy of their lives.  His assessment was that it would be wrong to devalue the sacrifice of these men by simply drinking down their gift to him.

Countless individuals have given their lives in the pursuit of freedom which they have then passed on to us – the people of the United States.  I, like David, recognize those sacrifices; I will not devalue them by using them selfishly.

An incalculable cost has gone into the purchase of our freedom and I love America because of the price paid for our liberty.

2.  Because of the partnership with Israel.  When God initiated His covenant with Abraham in Genesis 12:1-3, He concluded by stating that, “I will bless them that bless thee and curse him that curseth thee.”  There is no middle of the road that says, “I will be neutral to those that are neutral towards you.”

The U.S. is viewed globally as the staunchest friend of Israel.  The question is, should we be?  The passage of Scripture in Genesis could not be any clearer.  If we abandon Israel, we are abandoning the blessing of God; if we make Israel the enemy of the United States, we have made the United States the enemy of God.  I understand that Israel has been set aside in this theological dispensation, but the fact of Biblical history is that even when Israel has been exiled, God has blessed those that bless them and judged them that were against Israel.

As long as the U.S. is a friend of Israel, we will experience at least a measure of God’s blessing; it is an indisputable fact of Scripture.

3.  Because of the piety of some of her people.  1st Kings 19:1-18 records a very interesting story.  Elijah had just shamed and then had killed the 450 prophets of Baal.  Jezebel was ready to kill him and he fled into the wilderness.   There, in an encounter with God, he declared, “I’m the only one left!”  God disagreed and told him that there were still seven thousand who had not bowed their knee to Baal!

There are still some righteous people in the U.S.  You and I could travel the country and find a decent church not too far from our destination.  I know many pastors who stand in their pulpits and speak the truths of God’s Word just like I do.  Furthermore, I’ve come to know many people, who may not attend the same church that I do, but they love the same Lord that I do – they may be in the schools, in the businesses, or in the government of our community – but they still live a life that is built primarily on the principles found in the Scriptures.

4.  Because of the philosophy of government.  The design of our government mimics the kind of government that God considered to be ideal.  As Isaiah was describing the perfect government of Christ in the Millennial Kingdom, he described the LORD in three specific ways.  Isaiah 33:22, “the LORD is our Judge, the LORD is our Lawgiver, the LORD is our King, He will save us.”  Notice three particular words: “judge, lawgiver, king” . . .   Three different aspects of government are noticed in those three words – legislative, executive, and judicial!  The branches of government in our country reflect the aspects of Christ’s rule in his perfect kingdom.

As frustrated as we may get at times with the overreach of the executive(s) or legislating by the bench, the fact is that there is a balance of power that is so deeply ingrained in our Constitution that it would take far more than a generation to entirely upset that scale.  If you are inclined to be a little pessimistic – I encourage you to read U.S. history (especially 1861-1865) – our country has been through these cycles before and we have withstood far greater challenges.

5.  Because of the prosperity which fuels missions.  Paul challenged Timothy to encourage the believers in Ephesus who had earthly means to use that wealth in a specific way.  1st Timothy 6:17-19, ” Charge them that are rich in this world, that they be not highminded, nor trust in uncertain riches, but in the living God, who giveth us richly all things to enjoy; that they do good, that they be rich in good works, ready to distribute, willing to communicate; laying up in store for themselves a good foundation against the time to come, that they may lay hold on eternal life.”

I don’t think that any country has been more philanthropic than the United States.  Even more importantly, I believe that the wealth of Christians in America has been used to fulfill the Great Commission around the world.

BUT . . . . as much as I love America, and as good as these reasons are, the reasons could change.

Furthermore, there is another perspective that supersedes what I’ve just explained.

Hebrews chapter 12 challenges believers (in context, Jewish ones) to look at others who have been people of faith (from chapter 11) as an example of how they should be running their race.  In the first 11 verses of chapter 11, Abel, Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Sarah are all mentioned as people of faith.   The author of Hebrews makes a couple of specific points about them.

1.  They lived by faith.  11:13  “These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth.”

When the author writes that they “died in faith,” he means that they came to the end of their natural life while living in faith.  The five modifying phrases describe their coming to the point of physical death while living by faith.

2.  They learned to forsake.  11:14-15  “For they that say such things declare plainly that they seek a country.  And truly, if they had been mindful of that country from whence they came out, they might have had opportunity to have returned.”

Forsake what?  Their previous country!  They considered their earthly country to be inferior to their heavenly country and they were willing to forsake their earthly country in favor of the pursuit of the heavenly!

3.  They longed for their Father.  11:16  “But now they desire a better country, that is, an heavenly: wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God: for he hath prepared for them a city.”

The word “country” is referring back to the same word in verse 14.  The word is referring to the “Father Land” or the “Land of the Father.”  The rest of verse 16 makes it clear that there is an established relationship with God.

Simply put, the people of faith who were our examples, lived by faith on this earth, they learned to forsake the things of this earth, and they longed for their heavenly Father.  How different our lives would be if we refused to be distracted by the things of this earth and instead kept our focus on the things of eternity!  Our country is the greatest on earth and because of her qualities can be a tremendous tool for accomplishing the will of God, but it must be kept secondary in our affections and energies!

Being a calibrated Christian . . . in politically warped society.

I’ve been a pretty avid follower of politics since before I was old enough to vote.  Every election cycle draws my interest and I usually have an intense personal struggle battling the urge to get too emotionally ratcheted.  I must admit that the election this past year has caused me more turmoil than any previous one.  Fortunately, I’ve discovered that I’m not the only disciple of Christ that has wrestled through political disappointment.  In fact, after His resurrection, it was one of the first problems that the Lord Jesus helped a couple of his disciples navigate.

I’m a lot like the disciples on the road to Emmaus, and I’m sure many believers are.  If you aren’t familiar with the story, it is found in Luke 24:13-35.  The time is shortly after the crucifixion of Christ.

We find these two men on the road to Emmaus probably asking themselves the question “what now?”  The Jews were eagerly anticipating deliverance from the control of the Romans.  I draw some similarities to our culture:  the Romans had no morals and they had little regard for life; they taxed heavily and corruptly; their thinking was philosophical, not Biblical; they thought they could produce world peace; they were materialists.  These things were nearly all at opposition with the Jewish Religion.  The Greek wording in verse 21 makes it clear that these two men were “hoping for liberation from an oppressive situation.”  They were thinking that Jesus was a poltical deliverer.  Sadly, that is not much different than the way many Christians think of some candidates during an election cycle.

So, what happens when we, likewise, are left or put under the control of those whose morals are ambiguous, who have little regard for life, who are materialistic, hedonistic and have confused good and evil?

The desire of these two disciples was not wrong – just like it is not wrong for us to love our country and want to see it delivered from these same things.  Every Jew then and probably now, was very nationalistic – that is one of the reasons that many people are so anti-semitic; no matter where a Jew lives, his primary loyalty is always to Israel.  The Jews believe that they will be delivered from oppression and restored to absolute world sovereignty under the King Who is of the seed of David.  These two men on the road to Emmaus where simply on the wrong time chart and therefore had the wrong priorities.

Twenty-First Century believers are not much different than those disciples.  We want to be delivered from heavy taxation that is used to fund philosophies and principles that we find repulsive; we want our nation free from those things which we find to be morally objectionable – based on our Biblical beliefs.  We want to be delivered from the ubiquitous but impossible assertion that every man can do that which is right in his own eyes and yet everyone else must tolerate what everyone else is doing (how will that ever work?).  Our frustration and disappointments can rise almost to the level of these two men on the road to Emmaus – perhaps even more intense . . .

Jesus walked these two disciples down a path on which any Christian can go; He was unwilling for them to continue with this misdirected hope.  Believe me, this is one of the most liberating lessons that I’ve learned from the Lord!

I’ll have THE historian, Luke, show how Jesus calibrated these men.  (I will insert an alliterated outline)

  I.  He Revealed Their Dismay

24:17 And he said unto them, What manner of communications are these that ye have one to another, as ye walk, and are sad? 24:18 And the one of them, whose name was Cleopas, answering said unto him, Art thou only a stranger in Jerusalem, and hast not known the things which are come to pass there in these days? 24:19 And he said unto them, What things? And they said unto him, Concerning Jesus of Nazareth, which was a prophet mighty in deed and word before God and all the people: 24:20 And how the chief priests and our rulers delivered him to be condemned to death, and have crucified him. 24:21 But we trusted that it had been he which should have redeemed Israel: and beside all this, to day is the third day since these things were done. 24:22 Yea, and certain women also of our company made us astonished, which were early at the sepulchre; 24:23 And when they found not his body, they came, saying, that they had also seen a vision of angels, which said that he was alive. 24:24 And certain of them which were with us went to the sepulchre, and found it even so as the women had said: but him they saw not.

My Comments: These two disciples were upset that their Jewish leaders had rejected Jesus, and delivered Him to the Romans to be killed.  They were hoping that Jesus would be their political deliverer.  Instead – He was killed.  Now, they were hearing that He is alive?  What should they think and what should they do now?  In this conversation, Jesus brought to the surface the emotional disappointment that these two men were harboring.

 II.  He Rebuked Their Disbelief

24:25 Then he said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken:

My Comments: Jesus announced that there was an answer to their concerns, they just hadn’t put “two and two together.”  The answer was in the Scripture!  God had revealed His plan, but they were focused on what was happening with their nation politically.  Sounds familiar . . .

III.  He Redirected Their Discussion

24:26 Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory? 24:27 And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.

My Comments: These verses thrill me!  Rhetorically speaking, this was God’s design!  Jesus used the Scriptures to prove that He was supposed to die (and much more of course).  Why were they so surprised when He suffered?  As a side note, should we be surprised when the world is in the condition that it is?  Doesn’t the Scripture tell us that things will get worse? (Jude 1:18; 2nd Timothy 3:1-4:5)  Why are we so surprised when things are actually just like Paul and Jude told us they would be?  Could it be that we are “fools and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken” . . . ?

I wonder how things would be different for us if we spent more time talking about Scripture and its relativity to life than politics and how its ruining our way of life.

IV.  He Raised Their Desire

24:28 And they drew nigh unto the village, whither they went: and he made as though he would have gone further. 24:29 But they constrained him, saying, Abide with us: for it is toward evening, and the day is far spent. And he went in to tarry with them. 24:30 And it came to pass, as he sat at meat with them, he took bread, and blessed it, and brake, and gave to them. 24:31 And their eyes were opened, and they knew him; and he vanished out of their sight.

My Comments: His words created in them a desire to spend more time with Him.  When they thought He was going to go on further, they begged Him to stay! When our hearts are recalibrated, we will be more interested in the Words of Jesus than of Limbaugh, O’Reilly, and Hannity – or Matthews, Maher, and Maddow, for that matter.

V.  He Revived Their Devotion

24:32 And they said one to another, Did not our heart burn within us, while he talked with us by the way, and while he opened to us the scriptures? 24:33 And they rose up the same hour, and returned to Jerusalem, and found the eleven gathered together, and them that were with them, 24:34 Saying, The Lord is risen indeed, and hath appeared to Simon. 24:35 And they told what things were done in the way, and how he was known of them in breaking of bread.

My Comments: the testimony of these two men as recorded by Luke describes a devoted heart, “did not our heart burn within us . . . while He talked with us . . . while He opened unto us the Scripture!”  When I imagine myself walking on the road to Emmaus with these disciples, the work that the Lord did for them is transferred into my own heart and mind.  I need it – pretty often actually!

Jesus took these men who were politically disappointed and confused and turned their minds and hearts to the proper focus – Him!

It is unfortunate that many Christians have equated patriotism and political activism with religion.  There is obviously an overlap because your curicculum vitae affects your entire being, but politics is a secondary focus.  When secondary becomes primary, then what happens to the original primary?

I contend that we are waging a secondary war with political activism.  We won’t win the abortion battle at the polls (or any other battle for that matter).  Spiritual regeneration must precede societal reformation.

We put our children in the public school

A little history:

I grew up in a pastor’s home in Missouri.  I was in a Christian school through 6th grade, and then was home educated through the completion of high school.  I went to a Christian college for a bachelor’s degree, then taught in a Christian school for 2 years, then went back to the Christian college for a master’s degree; my doctorate is also from a Christian university.  My wife spent 12 years in a Christian school and then went to two different Christian colleges.  When we had children, we began home educating them.  All we have known is Christian education.

The home education philosophy worked well for us in the early stages of our family’s educational journey, but several ago, Carol and I started thinking, talking and praying about making some changes in the education process of our children.  Eventually, we came to the conclusion that God would be pleased for us to put our children into the local public schools.  I suppose the following post will turn out to be more of a thesis, but if it is important enough to you, then I suppose you’ll take the time to read it (I will put headers over the different reasons so that you can scroll to that which interests you).

Every family is different:

This has been a decision based on our family DNA.  Not every family is the same; I have 6 boys and 2 girls – if the genders were reversed and I had 6 girls and 2 boys I might not have made the same decision.  If we had fewer children (hypothetical obviously – I want all of the children that I have and chose to have each one) we may have selected a different course.  Or, if the personalities of the children were different, I might have chosen something differently.  I live in a small, conservative mid-western town, if I lived in Chicago, I might have chosen to find a Christian school or continued homeschooling (but can’t say for sure because that isn’t where I am).  I live in a relatively small house right in the middle of town, if I lived in a big house on several acres out in the country, I might have continued home education (we spent a couple of years looking at different houses in the country but couldn’t sell our house in order to purchase one of those).  If my wife or I had different personalities, strengths and gifts than we do, we might have made a different decision.  If I was a missionary I might have made a different decision.  If my vocation was something other than what it is, I might have done differently.  All of that to say this, we made the decision that we believed was right for our family based on our unique circumstances.  Therefore, my decision is not an indication that I believe others who are home schooling or using Christian schools shouldn’t be.  Every family must make the decision that works best for who they are; a family is unique like an individual because each family is made up of individuals; we all know that every individual is unique (otherwise the word “individual” would be worthless) and so logically every family is unique.

The uniqueness of our family is sobering to me.  We have 6, very strong willed sons and 2 daughters who are not lacking in will themselves.  I have no passive children; the one that I used to think was passive has proven me wrong.  Our house is 3 bedrooms with only 2 baths, it is only 1640 square feet, and our yard is just an average city yard.  Natural energy must be expended for healthy growth, you can’t suppress it!  When we were homeschooling, we let our kids play outside (according to regular school hours 3pm till dark) to the point that our yard was dirt when it was dry and mud when wasn’t.  But, due to vehicles, my schedule, the ages and number of our children, it was impracticable to be constantly finding outings, and so it would often be that our kids never left our property from Sunday evening until Wednesday evening and from Wednesday evening until Sunday morning (imagine if the weather was in-climate and they couldn’t play outside; many adults would go crazy if they were in the house for that long, yet we think that children “just can’t get along”).   Living in such small confines with no outlet did not have a good effect on the general deportment of our family (understated).  Furthermore, the responsibilities were piling up on my wife: cooking for 9 people (now 10), directing laundry for 9 people (now 10), directing housekeeping for 9 (now 10) people, educating 5 children (at the time), restroom training the young ones, her own Christian walk with God, her relationship with me, and the fact that she is a pastor’s wife.  It took me too long to realize that with our family DNA, I was expecting too much of her.  To use the apostle Peter’s thoughts, I needed to “live with her intelligently, giving honor to her more delicate nature.” (1st Peter 3:7)   When I began to realize the toll that it was taking on her, I tried taking the 5 older children to church with me to do their school work there; that change made a huge difference for Carol, but while I was doing my pastoral work, I began to depend on the older children to help the younger ones get their work done.  The older ones were developing resentment because not only were they trying to get their own work done, but they were also expected to help the younger ones keep their work caught up to date.  Many will say that “young people should be taught to do their laundry, help with the cleaning, the dishes, and help take care of the younger kids!”  I agree and ours did and do, but by placing too many expectations on my children, my conscience began to tell me that I was in violation of Ephesians 6:4, “. . . fathers, provoke not your children to wrath. . . ” and Colossians 3:21 . . . “lest they be discouraged” all the while preaching to them 6:1, “children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right.”  I could see that down the road, my kids would be glad to be out of my home.  Essentially, home schooling for our family was unsustainable for me, for my wife, and for our children.  We (parents and children) were becoming quite frustrated trying to properly home educate our children but recognizing that we were unable to do so – and I can say with assurance that is not God’s design.

Again, I’m careful and quick to assert that this is a personal decision based on our circumstances.  There are families of an entirely different make up and lifestyle than ours that should be homeschooling.  There are families that should have their kids in a Christian school.

Personal observations of the results of the different methods of education:

Home schooling and Christian schooling do not guarantee that children will turn out as they should.  I was in a Christian school through 6th grade and I taught in a Christian school for 2 years.  Unfortunately, many of the young people that were my school mates and many of the young people that I taught have no evidence of spiritual life today.  I have also known many home schoolers through the years and sadly, many of them have not turned out in a manner that is pleasing to the Lord.  On the contrary and for sake of argument, there are many public school kids that have turned out well.  In fact, many of the people who are home schooling now, went through the public schools themselves and turned out to be dedicated Christians.  The argument will certainly be made that “the public schools are far worse now than they were 30 years ago!”  That is a relative statement – so are many churches.  In the public school in the 60’s and 70’s my dad had to deal with immoral reading assignments, mandatory dancing in P.E., the rock and roll culture with drugs and immorality, a teacher or two who undermined and mocked religion at every opportunity, the dating game, and etc.  But most importantly, it was when he was a teenager in the public school that he realized, “if what I’m taught in science is correct about evolution and biology, then my mom and my pastor are wrong and have been teaching me fairy tales from the Bible.”  After expressing this concern to his mother, she gave him a copy of the book Evolution and the Modern Christian by Henry Morris.  He became convinced that the Bible was true and that conclusion led him to another very reasonable conclusion, “nothing but Christ matters!”  He has been pastoring for over 40 years and as someone who knows him as well as anyone – other than my mom, he is the most genuine Christian I know – and I know his faults too.  The public school served to prove his faith.  It is a false assumption that “your children will turn out right if you put them in the Christian school or home school them” and it is also a false assumption that “you will lose your children if you put them in the public school.”  Dogmatic statements like those can’t be verified and so they should be left out of a reasonable decision making process.  I’m not asserting what it is that causes children to turn out right (I have some beliefs, but am saving them for another writing), but I can say with assurance, that whether children turn out in a manner pleasing to the Lord – and benefiting to the church or society – is not based on whether they are home schooled, have gone through Christian school or have been in the public school.

Practical education:

My wife and I both completed bachelor’s degrees; I have a master’s degree and a doctorate.  We are not dumb and are probably at least – if not better qualified than the average parent to home school, but we recognized that there are limitations to what we could do with our children’s education.  When we toured the junior high school where our two older children would be attending, we were amazed at the science lab, the computer labs and technology, the art lab, the library and etc., that were being used for sixth and seventh graders.  We could never, even if we had more substantial financial resources, provide those things for our children.  Furthermore, we are not specifically trained as experts in the different subjects like their teachers in the public school.  For instance, I went through Algebra II in high school, but would have to re-learn it to help my kids get through it now.  On the other hand, their math teachers now specialize as those teaching everything from consumer math to advanced trigonometry.  So, as painful as the conclusion is for me, my weakness would have created a deficit in their education.  I understand that there are resources, such as videos, that can be used – but you can’t ask a video a question and get one on one attention from an expert.  Even the resource, such as Bob Jones Academy has, that allows interaction with a teacher can only provide those things via a screen, not a lab.  My conscience began to tell me that I was limiting the potential of my children by not allowing them to have the resources that were immediately available in the local schools.

Regarding the potential of my children, I don’t expect or anticipate that all of my children will be in vocational ministry.  I think that some of them may, but I also think I might have some who are like Aquilla and Priscilla, Lydia, Luke, Stephen and Phillip.  I desire for my children to have influence, no matter their vocation.  Perhaps a congressman, doctor, teacher, businessman, or something like that lies in the future for one of my children.  It seemed to me that the best path to the education that would support that kind of a calling was through the traditional system.  (I speak from experience – sadly, the homeschooling curriculum that my family used when I was in high school did not award a diploma.  So, even though I did quite well on my ACT test, I still had to get a G.E.D. before I could enter the first College that I attended.)  Adjusting to college from the homeschooling format was difficult for me.  I was an excellent reader and had great retention.  I could study well in preparation for a test, but unless the professor wrote out a pretty detailed outline on the board and I had time to copy it verbatim, I did not do well with the lecture system.  I have observed this problem with others who have struggled to adapt to the traditional classroom format.  The traditional school format seemed to be the best way to prepare our children for higher education than the homeschooling format.  For me to have continued home schooling, I would have had to have been convinced that the education that I could offer them was superior to that which the traditional schools could.  Some home schooling parents have been able to give their children a superior education – I could not and so it would not have been just to my children to have continued.

Some might say, “a Christian school is a traditional school format.”  I understand that, but we are 45 minutes from the nearest one, simply put it was not only cost prohibitive, but impossible.

To conclude this point, I feel very well prepared to help my children work through philosophy, but not math and other academic subjects.  So, I’m utilizing my strengths to help them through their educational journey and allowing the current secular education system’s strengths meet the other needs.

Is it Biblically acceptable to use the public schools?

Yes.

I know that some will argue this point – vehemently.  Please do not assume that because my children are in the public school that they are not getting a Christian education.  I am a Biblical philosopher by choice and I am constantly indoctrinating my children with the application of the truths of God’s Word to everyday life.  The chief part of wisdom is the fear of the Lord; it doesn’t matter where one’s academics originate if they do not see the fear of the Lord as the most important part of any education.  So, though I’m an imperfect parent and pastor, my children are still getting a Christian education.

There are several reasons why I believe it is acceptable for me to put my children in the public school, some are philosophical and some are Scriptural.

1.  Inoculation instead of isolation.  Isolation is not the same as inoculation.  My dad put us in summer baseball leagues, he let us work for people in the community, he let us play with the kids in our town.  His intent was to help us see what the world was and he carefully guided us through that introduction to the world so that when we were old enough to face it on our own, we weren’t shocked by the depravity that we saw.  To illustrate this problem, think of the chicken pox.  Children that are vaccinated will usually have a mild fever and flu like symptoms for a couple of days and then their body has recognized that sickness and from then on they are immune to that disease.  Some parents avoid vaccinations and allow their children to be exposed to chicken pox (this is not recommended by me or doctors); the children get a full case of it with the sores, fever, and etc.  Those children pull through it after a week or two and then are typically immune to the sickness.  However – doctors will tell you, that when an adult gets the Varicella virus, some of the possible complications are pneumonia, swelling of the brain, and vision loss.  All said, it is far worse for an adult to get chicken pox than a child.  Using those medical facts to help build a principle, I chose – for my family – to begin inoculating my children to the world when I’m able to help guide them through the process and when they are far more resilient.  I want them inoculated to the world so that they can live in the world (more on that later), I don’t want them isolated from the world, so that when they face it – and they will – that its effects are more dangerous.

As I was wrestling through this decision, I was going through David McCullough’s book on John Adams.  When John was getting ready to go to France during the Revolutionary War and he and Abigail were trying to decide whether their 10 year old son John Quincy should accompany his father, Abigail – fearing the influences of the French – wrote to her son, that he would “assuredly . . . encounter temptation, but to exclude him from temptation would be to exclude him from the world in which he was to live.” (Page 176)  Anyone who knows anything about John Quincy Adams knows that he was one of the most accomplished men that ever lived.

2.  A litmus test.  Perhaps many of you will think I’m crazy for thinking this way, but I’m not interested in raising hypocrites.  I was a pastor’s kid and I know that it wasn’t until I faced the real world and my faith was tested that I really knew who I was.  The only life I know is that of a pastor’s family.  I could live the pastor’s life without giving it much thought; it is the kind of life in which I’m comfortable and can operate freely.  Fortunately, the truths of God’s Word sunk deep into my heart and began to bear fruit as an older teenager.   However, I’m convinced that many pastor’s kids grow up, some do and some don’t go into the ministry, they are not really dedicated Christians, but they continue attending church, putting their kids in the Christian schools, teaching Sunday school, singing in the choir, and etc, but it is not because they are committed disciples so much as it is the only life that they have ever known, they are comfortable in it, and they can live that life by default.  If they are even disciples, it is pretty clear that their works are wood, hay and stubble because they are not built on the foundation of Christ. (1st Corinthians 3).  I want my children to be genuine disciples and the public school is what I have chosen for a proving ground.  I think it is far more difficult to raise a hypocrite in the public school than in home school or Christian school.

3.  An influence for truth.  By most evaluations, I have a quiver full of children (Psalm 127).  The simple question is, what is the purpose of an arrow?  Its intent is to be shot forth (the Hebrew word for “law” – torah has a nuance of “something shot forth” . . . food for thought).  Are not my children supposed to be a testimony of truth impacting those around them – or perhaps a tool of truth used by the Holy Spirit in our society?  Some might argue that you spend the formative years “sharpening the arrow.”  However, the Psalmist clearly says “the children of the youth.”  Read Psalm 127.

4.  Separate . . . but from whom?  1st Corinthians 5 is not typically a passage used in relation to a parent’s choices for children.  However, there is a principle there from which I’ve not been able to escape.  Paul was rebuking the Corinthians for their tolerance of immorality.  In context, what we call “1st Corinthians” was not actually his first letter to them.  He had already written at least one letter to them and he realized that they had misunderstood part of the first letter.  He had told them to separate from fornicators.  They thought he meant fornicators of the world, but he meant fornicators who claimed to be a brother.  He made the point, that the only way for them to separate from fornicators, or covetous, or extortioners, or idolaters of the world – would be for them to go out of the world – he seems to view that option as practically impossible.  Paul’s assertion was, “I meant separate from those who are immoral and claim to be Christians, I didn’t mean that you should separate from those who are immoral of the world, otherwise you can’t even exist in the world.”  An argument might be made that “these are adults.”  Perhaps, but they weren’t acting like it.  Paul told them they were fleshly and selfish (attributes of most children); they were arguing constantly and generally didn’t behave themselves with any maturity.  Paul’s expectation was that Christians would be living in the world – my children will be living in the world.

5.  In the world but not of the world.  In John 17, Jesus prayed for His disciples knowing that they would soon be without His physical presence.  He spoke of the fact that while He was with them in the world, He kept them (12).  But He would be leaving them in a world that hated them (14) and His prayer to the Father was not that He would take them out of the world, but that He would keep them from the evil (15).  The disciples – just like Christ – were not of the world (but were still in the world) and so the prayer of the Lord was, “sanctify them through Thy truth: Thy Word is truth” (17).  Jesus sent the disciples into the world and expected the Father to guard them while there.  Call me presumptuous if you want, but Jesus later spoke in the same prayer that His praying was not only for the original disciples, but for all those who would believe on Him that  . . . “the world may believe that Thou hast sent me.”  So, I’m sending my children into the world (understanding the context of John 17) believing that they can be kept by God and used of God to help the world see that Christ is of God.

6.  Illustrations.  Moses and Daniel and the other three Hebrew young men are examples of young men who were thrust into the secular educational systems of their day.  It is safe to say that the Egyptians and the Babylonians did not teach creation by Jehovah; I’m sure that the morals of the Egyptians and the Babylonians were far different from the morals of the Hebrews.  Yet these young men not only survived but were great examples of faithfulness to the truths that had been instilled into them by their parents (Moses for just a few short years while his mother nursed him for Pharaoh’s daughter and Daniel and the other three in captivity in their middle teen years).  Obviously, these young men did not have the typical Hebrew upbringing, but the point should be accepted that it is possible for someone to be educated by secular institutions and still be a person of faith.

7.  Delegated education.  Some assert that the education of children is incumbent upon the parents.  I don’t disagree, but I do argue that it is acceptable to delegate training to others should the parent desire.  Did not Paul acknowledge that schoolmasters existed when he used them as an illustration in Galatians?  (Theology is not my point here; I’m simply proving that Paul spoke of the fact that there were people whose purpose it was to teach the children of others.)

8.  Isn’t Christian education mandated in the Bible?  As much as I love the O.T. (my master’s degree is in O.T. and I spent several years of my doctorate reading about Israelology), many of the arguments that I’ve seen people and organizations use to promote either home schooling or Christian schooling are supported with O.T. passages of Scripture that relate to Israel.  That is fine if your method of interpretation allows you to apply the O.T. instruction to Israel to the N.T. church, but I’m a dispensationalist (follow the link to read an article that I wrote on dispensational interpretation and application). It would be inconsistent hermeneutics to demand that I home school my children based on Deuteronomy 6:7.  (Many homeschooling organizations are not dispensational anyways, and some even push dominion theology.)  The common passages in the N.T. that relate to the education of Christian children are Ephesians 6:4 and Colossians 3:21.  For Pastors, there is also 1st Timothy 3:4-5 and Titus 1:6.  One can also learn from 2nd Timothy 3:14-17, but none of these mandate home education or prohibit public education.

9.  Silence . . . ?  I know that in the rules of logic, an argument from silence is not valid.  However, since Peter stated that God has given us all things that pertain to life and godliness (2nd Peter 1:3), I’m disinclined to allow that particular rule to dictate my thinking.  So, Biblically speaking, the argument from silence on many issues is valid and puts them in the category of individual soul liberty. 

Other than 1st Corinthians 9, in which Paul acknowledged that some of the apostles were married (the gospels speak of Peter’s mother-in-law), we know nothing of their wives or children.  I was exploring the web site of a home school organization (The now disgraced Vision Forum Ministries) several years ago and noticed that they asserted that the “family is the backbone of the church and the fundamental vehicle for evangelization.”  That statement assumes more than the Bible teaches either by precept or precedent (1st Corinthians 11 tells us Who the Head is and chapter 12 tells us of the members being the different parts of the body, but nothing is ever said of the family being the backbone.  Also, to claim that the family is the fundamental vehicle for evangelization is to ascribe more purpose to the home than the Scripture does. According to the N.T., the individual, Spirit-filled believer is clearly the fundamental vehicle for evangelization).  Assertions such as these are actually quite revealing of a theological bias rather than letting Scripture speak for Itself.  It is unfortunate that such statements have been accepted by so many as Biblical truth.  (This discussion will have to be taken up on another post.)

If homeschooling by modern definition is the mandate of Christian parents – and is necessary for a strong church – and for proper evangelization to be accomplished, why do we know nothing of the apostle’s children and why did they not give explicit instructions on how it should be done?

Conclusion and some final thoughts (in no particular order):

1.  We understand the risks.  I think any one that knows me knows that I think things through very analytically and logically.  This was not a quick decision (it may have seemed that way, but that is only because I didn’t tell anyone I was contemplating it until I had decided what I would do).  Ultimately, this is the decision that my wife and I are convinced that God led us to make for this time in our lives.  You may not understand or agree with all of my reasons, but I can’t violate my conscience.  If I would have continued homeschooling at this point in our family, I would have been in violation of Ephesians 6:4, Colossians 3:21 (the parts about provoking them to wrath and discouraging them), and 1st Peter 3:7.

2.  Since this is a matter of conscience and not Biblical mandate, I ask for your prayers for our family.  I don’t mind further discussion if you are curious, but I’m not interested in debate.  I’ve thought through this matter very carefully and though I’m fallible, I know that I have not missed anything big enough that if you brought it to my attention that it would change my mind.

3.  I’m not bitter that I was homeschooled.  My parents did exactly what they believed God wanted them to do.  All of my siblings have turned out to be lovers of Christ and the truths of Scripture – but they will state strongly that it is not because of the method of education that they chose for us.  My dad would tell you that you can raise a Godly child in a Christian school, home school, or public school.  In fact, I’m glad I was home schooled; when my parents began homeschooling us it was the first time in my life that I began to have a relationship with my dad that was anything more than sporadic.  My parent’s devotion to our family and the support of the church that my dad pastored (there were no home schoolers in the church then) is a big part of the reason that my siblings and I love ministry today.

4.  The adaption to the local schools has not been perfect.  The kids have been exposed to the sinfulness of humanity as we expected, but since they are at an age when they trust us and communicate with us, we have had great opportunities to teach them as a result of the circumstances into which they have been thrust.

But, we have found that their teachers and the administration are generally conservative, if not Christian, and appreciative of the values that we and our children hold.  Even those who we suspect may not hold the same values or philosophies that we do, have been kind and supportive of our family.  The children seem to be respected by their teachers and schoolmates, they are doing well academically, and they love their teachers and schools.

5.  Carol’s life has been drastically eased.  She used to struggle with headaches, exhaustion, and all kinds of related stress, but life is conspicuously more cheerful.

6.  The demeanor of our home is far better than it used to be (though since we are all still sinners it is far from what we wish it to be; as of this writing we’ve had strep for a week and so we’ve all been cooped up again together).  Whereas they used to be eager to get away from home, they are now glad to come home and where they used to fight and argue, now they are typically chattering about the different happenings of each other’s day.

7.  We have met a multitude of people in the community – other parents, teachers, administrators, etc.  We feel like we are far more a part of this community than we have been for the previous 7 and 1/2 years.  We believe we can be more of an influence for Christ when we are less isolated.

There will probably be some updates or corrections of typos that follow, and as I rethink some wording, I may make some changes to this post, but by and large, it represents the various stages of thought through which I’ve traveled.

I want to state emphatically – one more time – I do not believe that my decision is right for everyone!  The fact that I have chosen the public schools should not be viewed to mean that I believe home schooling or Christian schooling are wrong – this decision is a part of “individual soul liberty” which I extend to every Christian!  All of my siblings home school their children; many of my dear friends in ministry either home school or participate in Christian schools; many of the people that I pastor did or do home educate their children.  If you are a part of a Christian school or if you are able to home school effectively, you have my respect!  I have been in your shoes, I know your struggles, I understand the labor involved; my prayer for all of us is that by investing in our children, no matter the method of education to which God leads us, we will be able to stand together as parents and grandparents some day and rejoice as we see our children and grandchildren influencing their generations for Christ and His truth!