School Shootings
I watched the CNN Town Hall regarding the recent school shooting in Florida and I came away from that feeling even more troubled and burdened. We blame things like mental illness, lack of adequate gun control, failure to follow up on tips, etc. but in this “debate” and seemingly every other one no one ever, as you have said, speaks into the microphone clearly and states what the most fundamental problem is. That is that we refuse to repent of our sins, turn to Jesus in faith, and to worship Him and Him alone. How would you recommend that someone such as myself begin to speak up? Of course, we should engage in personal evangelism i.e. one on one conversation and I have passed out tracts and done some street preaching in the past. Those are good things, but I am thinking of other avenues like letters to the editor, speaking at school board and town board meetings, speaking to politicians, etc. I am so tired of the Word of God being totally absent from our public discussions. How can you speak pointedly without being a hot head jerk? Hopefully you will get the gist of what I am trying to ask. God bless.
William
William, agreed. But I would only add that this does not mean that if a sufficient number of people “believe in Jesus,” then suddenly things like school shootings will magically evaporate. However, it does mean if we turn back to Christ we will discover that we have also turned back to common sense, and we will stop pursuing insane diagnoses and solutions. In this most recent shooting, we had governmental failures at epic levels, from the FBI on down. When your reflexive response to this kind of thing is to propose we give much greater powers to government, while blaming the NRA, something is seriously demented. It is like a Philistine praying to Dagon while sitting on the back of the idol that was face-down on the threshold.
I sure do wish all the students who will be walking out of class in a few weeks to protest for more gun laws could actually read and comprehend this sincere and accurate critique of our times, but alas . . . public education.
CSarge
CSarge, yes. And the question that occurs to me is this—what will it actually take for all believing Christians to get their kids out of the government school system? How much worse will it have to get?
Complaineries
Having just finished my morning Bible reading about the Israelites complaining about not having meat in the wilderness, this article really struck home. Christian complaining (mine included) has reached an art form.
Melody
Melody, yes. And nothing stands out in contrast to the world’s way of doing things more than a refusal to complain. “Do all things without grumbling or disputing, that you may be blameless and innocent, children of God without blemish in the midst of a crooked and twisted generation, among whom you shine as lights in the world,” (Philippians 2:14–15, ESV).
Sensitivity Readers
I was reading World’s children’s book issue. Apparently publishing houses employ sensitivity readers to screen books so they conform to the current zeitgeist. This is horrifying.
Jeff
Jeff, yes. And not surprisingly, the results of this kind of treatment is that the results are unreadable.
The Other Rush
I recently read Intellectual Schizophrenia by R.J. Rushdoony. I was only somewhat familiar with the later theonomy of RJR. This book was written in 1961, before “the 60s” broke out, and it’s striking to see how everything we’re experiencing today was well under way by then. You read some of what he says, and it doesn’t appear on the outside it was close to as bad as he says it was, but it was. And he was prophetic about the results. Ideas indeed have consequences.
Mike
Mike, you are exactly right. The early Rushdoony was prophetic. I am recently rereading Politics of Guilt and Pity. Man.
God’s Law Down in the Details
I recently had a lengthy discussion with a dear brother about the relationship between God’s law and the laws that govern the U.S. I attempted to explain how God’s law has abiding validity (though not all of it in the same ways; some of it has been fulfilled and made no longer binding) over every nation no matter the year or culture. He pushed back on this idea. To his credit, he had good questions that I do not yet have clarity. One question that hounded me days and weeks after is this: What does God’s law have to say about the infrastructure of our country? What does God’s law say about our road system and other related specifics under the general category of “infrastructure.” As stated, I don’t have clarity on this topic, though I am inclined to think that those kinds of questions will be answered under the principal of “General Equity.” I am wondering if you have covered this topic somewhere on your blog and if you would be so kind to help me find it. Or, if there is some other resource you could point me to that you think would help me think through this, I would be thankful for any recommendation. I greatly appreciate the ministry God has given you and I’m asking Him to give you greater influence in the church, as I think you have clarity and wisdom where many evangelical leaders seem confused or simply inconsistent. Thanks.
Jake
Jake, I believe you are on the right track. Where God’s law des not give us specific instruction, we take the principles from what He did give us, and apply those principles to the new situation. You mention infrastructure, but another problem in this category would be water rights. There is nothing in biblical law about what to do when you have orchard farmers upstream and factories downstream. General equity it is. With regard to infrastructure, the Bible does teach us about taxation levels and property rights, so things like eminent domain would not be tools in the infrastructure build-out. But other than things like that, we should love God and do as we please.
Banning Porn?
Ross Douthat wrote this column in support of banning porn. I agree with his premise because of the insidious and idolatrous nature of porn, and what it does to individuals psychologically. I don’t think he addresses the question of what is the scope of the ban? How limited or broad is the power given to government to ban porn? What are the consequences to liberty in other areas of life if the porn ban is too broad?
Same thing with Matt Walsh’s recent column on his five reasons to ban porn and four rebuttals to his preconceived typical responses to porn bans. I agree with Matt’s premise, and he even attempts to address the slippery slope, but I don’t necessarily think he addresses it adequately and biblically.
How would the theocratic libertarian go about banning porn, while protecting individual liberty in other areas of life (preventing government from using the power from the porn ban to ban other forms of “art” and “thoughts” it might, at any given moment, think is equally insidious and grotesque as pornography)? What would prevent the Secularists or even Islamists from taking the definition of porn that’s used in the porn ban and apply it to “Christian art” to call it “Christian porn” because to their faith/worldview, Christians’ beliefs are insidious and grotesque?
Trey
Trey, both of those articles made some really good points. And the theocratic libertarian is working toward the day when there are laws against porn. But there is no way that such laws can save us. We are to be saved, if we are to be saved at all, by grace, through the preaching of the gospel. This means preaching the law, and preaching the gospel. Unless there is a great reformation and revival, turning Americans back to Christ, they cannot be brought to live as though they have been brought back to Christ. In other words, a saved culture can have laws against porn to deal with the outliers. But a degenerate culture cannot legislate its way back into decency. If good laws could save us, Jesus didn’t have to die. But both these articles are exactly right in recognizing that porn is killing us.
Strong Communities
Fantastic piece. Our Father and strong communities. As our enemy from below has utilized those on the left to dismantle our moral culture, I am reminded of this admonition, do not tear down a fence if you do not know why it was built in the first place.
Jayne, thanks.
Billy Graham
With the recent passing of Billy Graham, I’ve seen a number of friends post interviews where Graham says that people can be Christians without knowing the name of Jesus or the gospel (one such example). How should we respond to the legacy of Graham? His preaching generally seems to be orthodox on the main issues, and he clearly led many to Christ. But he sometimes spoke heresy. Should we label him a false teacher? A good teacher who occasionally stumbled? Thanks.
Brent
Brent, I wrote something about Billy Graham on our church web site here. I would describe him as a great man faithful at the center, but who stumbled in some critical ways.
Caring About?
I care about racial reconciliation because God himself gives us the ministry of reconciliation. I care about the environment because it honors the Creator and shows love for our neighbor, a kind of mini-summary of the Law.
Douglas
Douglas, amen, as far as that goes. But we have to go a few steps beyond that. We have to ask what the specific content of our efforts at racial reconciliation will be. If it is unvarnished gospel for black and white sinners alike, then amen, and pour it on. But if it is refried cultural Marxism, tricked out with evangelical clichés, then one thing it won’t accomplish is racial reconciliation. The same thing with the environment. My objection to green policies is that they have the effect of turning everything brown. In other words, we might share ultimate goals but differ radically on how best to get there. But in our politicized times, those who want to reconcile blacks and whites by some other means than the current social justice route as glibly assumed to be “white supremacist.” And this is a great illustration of how counterproductive the whole thing is.
Cultural Marxism and the Comics
Where did you come across that X-Men image for your Second Paragraph post?
Ian
Ian, just a little cultural appropriation from the Internet.
I was curious if you were aware of the full context of the X-Men picture you used in this article. There’s an interesting culture war going on within comics right now. Marvel comics in particular has made it a personal point to saturate all of their properties with radical Marxist and intersectional collectivist theory. The fundamental problem with this plan being, their customers are primarily young white men who are completely uninterested in the kind of social engineering they want to talk about. So when they launch a new character designed to meet their identity checkboxes, black, Muslim, gay, whatever it is at the time, sometimes all three, nobody buys the book. To try and maneuver around the actual interests and tastes of their customers, they’ve began to try and retroactively change their existing popular character to fit the political agenda. Captain America now “always was” secretly a Nazi, while Thor is now a woman, there’s a new half black half Latino Spiderman, a new Hulk who’s Asian, so on and so forth. Part of this attempt at slipping in the propaganda under the radar is they made Ice Man, a character who has been overtly straight since the 60’s, gay. The X-Men traveled back in time and met their earlier selves. Jean Grey, with her telepathic abilities, read young Ice Man’s mind and “discovered” that in his subconscious, he really was gay all this time and “unlocked” his gayness so to speak. So now the character’s half century of history has been rewritten to fit the agenda. The picture you used is an example of how they’re now using the newly gay Ice Man as a political puppet to attack anyone who criticizes the SJW worldview. There’s something of a social civil war going on in the comics community about it and Marvel’s sales have been suffering, hitting historic record lows in number of copies sold. Meanwhile, the writers themselves have been openly attacking their customers on Twitter as “racists” for not buying their monthly manifesto.
Justin
Justin, I am not up on the cultural currents in the world of comics at all. But I have been generally aware that the battle that is raging everywhere is also raging there.
The Ineffective Wilson?
That second paragraph. This is weird. I’m pretty sure that I’m the only person that disagrees with you (or one of few) who reads your blog. And that’s probably due to your writing style. It’s not that you writing style is wrong or anything, it’s just that it’s completely ineffective. If you wanted to convince people you would be academic, and fair minded, and humble. If you want to get on the Internet and let off steam because you’re mad at the left, then your style is perfect. Yes, if you want to fight, you do exactly as you do, but if you want to actually change anyone’s mind, you’ll swap your boxing gloves for a suit and notebook. So yes, your position is defensible. And if you want to make your readers more set in their ways and more angry and antagonistic to the left, then you’re doing a great job. But if you want someone to change their mind, or if you want people who disagree with you to pay attention or think about the issues, then sure, you CAN use your style, it is not morally wrong, but it’s just counterproductive.
Malik
Malik, the goal is not to write in such a way as to simply harden my readers in their prejudices. But neither is this blog set up to persuade non-believers. Rather, my desire is to write in such a way as to attract people who share my faith in Christ, and general worldview outlook, and then to encourage and equip them. The goal is to equip them with arguments, which, if you look closely, you can see buried under all the gaudy adjectives.
I would not say that your writing is like a cup of Martha Stewart punch at all— cinnamon ice or not. No, it’s more like a fajita plate with tomatoes and peppers and tortillas and salsa and some real, actual meat sizzling on the cast iron. Yessir, another helping please! On the other hand, I have noticed that when I share one of your posts, occasionally (just occasionally) one of the recipients will act as if I had dumped a plate of medium rare chicken livers with pureed Brussel sprouts in his or her lap. This is to be expected because, as you point out in the last paragraph, there are elements of our society who have an adverse reaction to the pleasant aroma of sizzling red meat rising before the throne. But then,
Dan
Dan, thanks. Would you mind having a little word with Malik?
A Particular Problem
To cut to the chase, our city council in a small and barely conservative-leaning rural town in Western Washington (Stanwood if you must know) is having a second go-round on considering putting a pot shop on main street after the recent elections saw the retirement and replacement of a couple of conservative members. On the last go-round just enough folks turned out and a fairly predictable vote (5-4) was had. I’m not optimistic about this round, but am not giving up either. I appreciate your take on the sinfulness of marijuana, but the council I am sure will have less appreciation for it. You’ve talked in places about taxes (revenue as they call it down at City Hall) serving more or less as a bribe. One question I could pose to the council is to ask if they would even consider this if additional revenue for the city (and boy is there plenty to be had) were not on the table? Would they still want it downtown, kitty corner from the police station, and two blocks from the middle school? Or anywhere in our community for that matter? This is one approach, but looking for any more practical civic advice you’d pass my way. As these things go, they’re trying to run this through in the dark of night, and we just heard today that the planning commission meets Monday and the City Council on Thursday. Though I heard the council might be there this Thursday to consider some of it as well. Details are still coming in. Wiley movement nonetheless. Understand you probably get hundreds of these to prioritize so leaving this to your discretion and divine providence. Thank you.
Bryan
Bryan, I obviously don’t know the circumstances on the ground there. But the question I would ask a city council under such circumstances is this. If you do this in order to increase tax revenue, and the presence of the pot shop turns out to be a public nuisance (because it turned into three pot shops and stoners hanging around downtown all day), how have you not structured our affairs such that the city government now has perverse incentives to hope for an increase in the public nuisance because of the revenue they get from it. Like cameras at traffic lights incentivize the cops to want you run the yellow light . . .
“if you want to make your readers more set in their ways and more angry and antagonistic to the left,” (Malik’s letter) In modern history, I would say that one of our chief political problems worldwide is that people aren’t antagonistic *enough* to the left. The right, have allowed compromise after compromise which the left doesn’t view as a compromise whatsoever but just one milestone on the path to expelling the infidels against Marxism. I would say though Malik that you’re incorrect about Doug’s ability to change minds. I hadn’t ever questioned my opposition to paedobaptism until I started following… Read more »
Yeah makes sense.
I’m amused that I’m not the only person who commented on the comic book panel. :)
Marvel’s chased me away from buying their books in recent years. No small feat. I have a considerable collection. I was actually a reviewer for a major Spider-Man fan site and resigned when the newest major relaunch of Amazing Spider-Man was all about revealing a minor character was gay and the issue was the gay wedding. Peter Parker described the gay wedding of his old short term employer (no one you’d have heard of) as “the best moment of his life”. I couldn’t finish the book, much less keep reviewing the nonsense.
Malik said: “If you wanted to convince people you would be academic, and fair minded, and humble. ” I don’t see “academic, and fair minded, and humble” in the general behavior of the liberal or progressive groups. Instead, I see emotional rhetoric, based on a skewed understanding, presented as if the listener is an idiot if they disagree. For example, look at the response to the school shooting in Florida. They don’t care about convincing people they are right, they care about getting what they want and they seem to be willing to do whatever it takes to get it.… Read more »
Academic, fair minded, and humble people are often persuaded by academic and fair minded arguments. But, seriously, people who excel at all three qualities are going to be a minority in any culture and are probably not in a position to influence public policy. And it’s hard to see that appealing to people’s sense of academic fairness is the role of the preacher or the prophet! How often did John the Baptist say “My reading of the evidence may be mistaken” or “Let’s consider this from another point of view”?
I think the position of John the Baptist and Wilson are kind of completely different though. In a Bible analogy I would cast his more as Paul, who had plenty of nice calm conversations.
And yeah in our political situation there are very few academic and fair minded people left. I think that is no excuse not to strive for it.
“I think that is no excuse not to strive for it.”
That’s a very different argument though than the one you made, which was effectiveness. I would suggest though that if you want academically formulated arguments from Wilson, you don’t have to look very far. His published works do an admirable job. Blogs that are updated quite regularly don’t lend themselves quite so easily to that format.
“There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy.”
Two of the “few academic and fair minded people left” are the Princeton professor, Robert George, and the New York Times columnist, Ross Douthat.
“Academic” and “fair-minded” are not synonymous. Dante and Shakespeare were the most fair-minded men of their times; neither wrote in academic tones. Both strove to persuade men of truth by means of entertainment.
I am not comparing our host to either of those men – but I do admire him for striving to persuade using entertainment.
“I don’t see ‘academic, and fair minded, and humble’ in the general behavior of the liberal or progressive groups. Instead, I see emotional rhetoric, based on a skewed understanding, presented as if the listener is an idiot if they disagree.” Absolutely not. Look at some of Jordan Peterson’s debates and encounters with the progressives. He’s really a moderate and not an orthodox Christian. Yet because he questions the sacred doctrine of SJWs, his opponents act like he’s Hitler’s secret grandchild. Very good point about the two shootings, too. Or for that matter, the one person killed in the car incident… Read more »
So then you stoop to their level?
In my expirience, being academic and fair minded is the only way to get anywhere, and brain bashing people does less than nothing. I see now that his point however is not to convince anyone, so it’s hardly relevant.
Malik,
Choosing a different style is not necessarily stooping to a bad level as you imply. I tried to point out that, in our society today, it seems that being academic and fair-minded is unlikely to “get anywhere”. In fact, behaving otherwise seems to be more likely to do it. I don’t consider “academic” to be a good way to influence most people. “Fair-minded” is good but it does NOT mean that one has to abandon God’s standard.
“I don’t consider “academic” to be a good way to influence most people. ”
This is what I was trying to get to in my response. While an academic approach *should* be the way to reach people, the history of the human race suggests a thousand times over that it isn’t a very effective one. Indeed, it’s hard to even garner an audience with an academic approach, much less change that audience’s mind.
I would disagree. When is the last time you got in an argument with someone and then it cleared up as soon as you started screaming. Never is the answer for me. However in arguments, and political discussions I have gotten a long ways with the most stubborn of people by being fair, listening, and the being academic in responses. Not doing so leads to the political situation we have now where everyone is angry and hates everyone. I’m surprised that you think more hammering at people will help. You have to stop digging when you realize you are stuck.
I agree with you, Malik, which makes me want to say to you: do it here! Be fair minded, open to other people’s viewpoints, and assume the best about their motives until you have definite evidence otherwise. A calm reasonableness goes a long way in getting people to take you seriously!
Jill- I will do my best ????
” When is the last time you got in an argument with someone and then it cleared up as soon as you started screaming”
It isn’t a binary distinction. It isn’t “academic argument” or “screaming”. There are degrees. I wouldn’t categorize any argument you’ve ever made on here as “academic” but I also certainly wouldn’t call them screaming.
Nor would a reasonable person characterize Wilson’s approach as screaming, so I’m wondering why that dichotomy is even relevant.
Actually it comes off that way. Figuratively of course. He’s just like attacking and beating dead horses right and left. There is nothing to learn from it. Even if you agree, let alone if you don’t.
Malik,
Dead horses? So you thought your letter might influence him to improve? Based on your understanding and approach, I fear the future of the USA, indeed the world.
I have been known to recommend listening to audio of Doug if this is how you “hear” his writing. He is not a screamer. He is not a tantrumer. He’s not a temper-loser. People tend to imagine him so because it’s how they would have to be in order to write this way. But imputing motives is a far greater hindrance to communication than serrated edginess is.
That’s fair. I find the audio almost worse though. Drives me crazy the way he agrues.
Malik, I have one or two points of major disagreement with Doug, and when he is presenting an opinion in direct opposition to my own, I find myself not necessarily liking the tenor of his argument. But, when I think about it objectively, I am not sure that anything other than “Jill is probably right” would please me!
It’s very easy to get my intellectual assent to a good academic argument. It is much, much harder to get me to care about it or to do something about it.
I think it might be more useful to say that, as Christians, we have a duty to be fair even when our opponents are not. And that, in the long run, thought is more useful than emotion.
“It is much, much harder to get me to care about it or to do something about it.”
I don’t buy it, Jilly. I think you are curious enough to care about almost anything. :)
So your sins aren’t doxic, they’re praxic?
Well, that sent me to the dictionary! Yes. If the goal is to get me off the sofa and into the fray, I need more than propositions that strike me as eminently reasonable! The charities that show photos of a hungry child with the text “You can feed little Carlos for the price of a cup of coffee a day or you can turn the page” know what they’re doing.
Malik, you know, there are people who are a lot less “academic” than Wilson!????
John 6:50-52
50 But here is the bread that comes down from heaven, which anyone may eat and not die. 51 I am the living bread that came down from heaven. Whoever eats this bread will live forever. This bread is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.”
52 Then the Jews began to argue sharply among themselves, “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?”
I’m confused, are you comparing Wilson to Jesus? And yeah there are less academic people. They tend to be the screamers that you see at protests or on Twitter.
Malik, Jesus convinced people with wisdom and truth. Frequently, “academics” is neither wise or truthful. Think Jonathan Gruber and the ACA.
The ACA was not wise, truthful or effective, but it sure was academic!
????
Pro tip, “wise” and “academic” are not synonymous.
I know they are different. But smart is not bad? If that is what you are saying?
You know Malik, I do like to joke around, and you do loft a lot of soft balls. But I’ll resist.
Wisdom is good, better than “smart”.
Very often, as in the ACA example, “academic” is not wise or smart or effective.
The above is what I am saying!????
Yes it isn’t always. And you seem to have missed the soft ball. Wisdom is better, but most wise people also contain some knowledge. Which is smart. Or close enough. And academic discourse is advisable, no matter what the information in the discourse is. If academic discourse is used with poor information it is not the fault of academicness rather the information.
Malik, you value academia much more than I do. I consider academic discourse is likely to end up with arguments like how many angels can dance on a pin.
Then you have a funny definition for academic discourse. And some funny people talking. Academic discourse is just like you don’t tell or use fallacies, or attack the person, you’re calm and stay away from hit lines, stuff like that. The angel nonsense has nothing to do with it.
Malik, From what I’ve heard, there have been many academic disagreements that failed to meet your ideas. I found this definition: “Academic discourse, which is historically grounded, includes all lingual activities associated with academia, the output of research being perhaps the most important.” The last phrase seems right in line with the “angel nonsense”.
Malik, I think the anti-academic reaction you’re getting has a lot more to do with the kinds of people who latch themselves on to academia, rather than the process of academic practice itself. Two quotes from notable conservatives come to mind, both themselves having the highest levels of success in academia: “I am obliged to confess I should sooner live in a society governed by the first two thousand names in the Boston telephone directory than in a society governed by the two thousand faculty members of Harvard University.” -William F. Buckley The most fundamental fact about the ideas of… Read more »
I think that the rules, rather than the substance, of academic discourse are helpful in calming tempers and finding common ground. Can I state your argument fairly and in a way that you recognize as accurate? Do I understand that I can’t just invent stuff to support my point of view? Can I state my disagreement without launching a personal attack on all you hold sacred?
Of course, my time in academia was centuries ago, and for all I know, the rules have vanished along with hoop skirts and parasols.
Oh! I didn’t miss your soft ball Malik, I had let it pass. When you say: “But smart is not bad?”, the obvious response is, “Try “smart” sometime and find out Malik!” ; – ) But anyway ac·a·dem·ic is defined as 1. relating to education and scholarship. “poor information” is the result of poor education and poor scholarship. Again, the ACA “Affordable care Act”, was designed by Jonathan Gruber and Ezekiel Emanuel, both Harvard “educated” ignorami. They created their own “poor information” about the ACA, and it shows in the total failure of the ACA as proposed and intended. (No… Read more »
Saying it is legitimate to pattern oneself after Someone who never did anything wrong or ineffective is not the same as saying that someone is equal to that Someone in holiness, wisdom, or ability. It’s just saying it’s okay to act like Him in specific ways.
Malik is truly MeMe, v. 2.0. He’s so dishonest that he’s hardly worth engaging.
For instance, calm, nuanced, fair-minded dialogue, eh? Then how about riots at colleges when right-wing speakers come, any of the actions by Antifa, or the leftists who have done many public shootings?
Of course, I expect no reply. If I received one, it would be “but conservatives do it too, blah blah.”
Not worth engaging. He’s either deliberately dishonest or just trolling for lolz, which is still dishonest but of a different type.
But cannot there be a valid discussion about pastor Wilsons style that does not depend on what ”leftists” do or do or do or do or do not do? Is your argument that a christian has to behave exactly like their opponents (not that I am saying that pastor Wilson does).
Well you’ll get a reply, and it won’t be that. My response is that yes the left does it too. But as Michael points out, that is no excuse for Wilson to stoop to their level. Also if you go back and re-read my letter I never tried to defend the lefts way of discourse, nor is that a task that I want any part in. On a separate note, before going to college older Christians warned non stop about how the liberal college would disway me from my faith. When me and my other Christian friends got to college… Read more »
I don’t think of Wilson as stooping, or that it is stooping, first of all.
And second, there are colleges, and professors, that try to dissuade people from Christian values or ideas. They exist and are out there. Happy for you if you haven’t encountered that. But to pretend like it never happens anywhere is a reach.
mys,
Knowing that Malik is accepting of homosexual marriage, for example, and believes he can justify that position biblically, I question if he would recognize the difference between Christian and non-Christian values when they were presented, directly or indirectly, at his college.
OKRickety
I would agree.
I know people who are very conservative Christians who would agree. They may get pushback for a belief, but no more(i expect much less) than when I would speak my mind in my conservative school about something. But I’ve actually talked to them about it and most say there have been 0 problems, one said that he feels a little out of place because most people disagree with him but that it isn’t a big deal. I’m not saying in never happens, but it isn’t unavoidable as many people present it.
Your first point isn’t much of a point. My whole argument was we aren’t comparing him to the left, and this doesn’t seem to follow. Also after all you said about me and what seems like you think is a reasonable réponse, do you want to apologize for the crap about what my reply would be like?
Or a MeMe/Jonathan hybrid after a few drinks…
Jonathan is not Meme
I don’t know. Some of his views seem like internet memes to me.
Bazinga.
I didn’t say he was…I think you need to read the comment again, especially the “/” and “hybrid” parts.
I did note the hybrid. But thought it unfair regardless.
Letter-writer Douglas said: “I care about racial reconciliation because God himself gives us the ministry of reconciliation.” The Apostle Paul said: “Now all these things are from God, who reconciled us to Himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation, namely, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and He has committed to us the word of reconciliation. Therefore, we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God were making an appeal through us; we beg you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God.” [2 Cor. 5:18-20 NASB] Douglas… Read more »
“Douglas appears to conflate “ministry of reconciliation” with “racial reconciliation”, which I would suppose is typical of Christians who focus on social justice.”
Did you just mean to imply that Doug Wilson focuses on social justice?
There was a letter by a Douglas.
Ah. Thanks. Missed it.
Justin, I suggested to Wilson that he change the formatting on these “letters” posts to make it easier to distinguish between each letter and his reply, but he has not done so as far as I can tell. I think the current formatting increases the likelihood of confusion, for example, your conflation of “Douglas” the letter-writer and @Douglas Wilson.
At the Fall our relationship with God was broken. At the same time our relationship with our spouse, our family, our neighbor and the rest of Creation was broken. I understand the ministry of reconciliation as God working to restore all these disrupted relationships, first to God but not to God alone. If this was the only text in Scripture, then OKRickety would have a good argument, but there are proof texts galore for this larger picture. You prove my point in quoting Galatians 3:28.
dchammers, “I understand the ministry of reconciliation as God working to restore all these disrupted relationships, first to God but not to God alone.” While I agree that God desires many relationships to be reconciled, primarily those with fellow Christians, I think the phrase “ministry of reconciliation” should be limited to the scope of man to God. Other relationships might also be important, but I think our relationships with Satan and evil people are not ones to be reconciled. The most important reconciliation, however, is that of man to God. I think it would be a stretch to consider Galatians… Read more »
I’ve seen some odd dissing of public schools above.
As someone who grew up in a home where people thought this I always believed it, until I actually came into contact with public schools and people who had gone to public school, and to me it is another boogie man.
What sort of complaint are you trying to respond to? Public school effectiveness? Culture? The character of those involved in them? They’re all very different conversations. At the very least, in terms of effectiveness, it’s pretty hard to make any kind of argument based on real evidence that public schools aren’t objectively worse than the other options available.
Um, I think they are one of the better options. But I am responding to the second letter where Wilson talks about people needing to take their kids out of government schools. I grew up in a house where there was definitely this view, but all the arguments were kind of hollow and blown up. As humans like to do people in homeschooling communities especially love to heap hate on public schools, I’m not sure if it is to justify the effort or something but it does not make sence to me. If you want to do it great, but… Read more »
“Um, I think they are one of the better options. ” Based on what evidence? They test lower than private and significantly lower than homeschool. I can understand wanting to public school for a variety of reasons. Cost effectiveness, you have no other options, you’re concerned about their socialization, but I’ve never seen any kind of an argument based on scholastic results. ” If you want to do it great, but attacking the public system with downright false claims is in effective.” If you take issue with a claim, can you explain how it is false? Because thus far, your… Read more »
Lol, public schools is not an area that I can have a super academic approach, but I can be more academic than the attack was. Yes, private and homeschoolers are smarter on average. Let’s think about the other factors in that stat. Private schooled kids tend to come from wealthy families where education is prized. Public schools not nessisarily. Maybe in a perfect world everyone would go to a private school, but while you guys talk about how great it is, most people don’t have the money to go to one. Now if you controlled the statistics by school district,… Read more »
” Private schooled kids tend to come from wealthy families where education is prized. Public schools not nessisarily. ” This is bafflingly false. How you could come to this conclusion I have no idea. The vast majority of private and homeschool families are barely making ends meat. How you could have attended private school and come to this conclusion is mind boggling. “Poor family” private schools run out of low end falling apart churches out number the blue blood prep school 100 to 1. “Maybe in a perfect world everyone would go to a private school, but while you guys… Read more »
In MO you can’t do extra curriculars if you are not enrolled. I tried. And if you can it is still part of the public school system and should be atribbuted as such. In STL most private schools are along the lines of Westminster, that’s where the assumption comes from. STL is most likely not a good sample it’s a weird city, with a weird private school culture. And I used anocdotals mainly just to break the universal framing that homeschooling families like to put homeschool in. I know it doesn’t make for hard evidence. Some of the points still… Read more »
“In MO you can’t do extra curriculars if you are not enrolled. I tried.” They are obligated to make the services available for all children in the area. They’re legally obligated to let you. You could have called a lawyer. As for credit, I can’t say I find this very convincing. The existence of the public school activities which are created with the force of a government monopoly deprives the private sector of the requisite need to make such groups. Why make a private football league when everyone’s already in the public school league which the public school gets to… Read more »
Only if you are enrolled though. Then they are obligated.
Hahahaha who the hell has money to hire a lawyer?
I think Justin may be right about extracurricular activities but I have little doubt that the school administration would fight it tooth and nail because it is contrary to their vested interests and reduces their power. However, I agree with you regarding the lawyer. Ideally, it should not be needed.
Oh I wasn’t suggesting hiring the lawyer was practical. I’m suggesting that Malik was owed those services and was being cheated by the public school system he’s defending. I went through the same song and dance with my local school district. I’m just fortunate to have a father capable of more verbose and official language than even myself rendering the lawyer unnecessary.
And they do it because they have bigger classes and more kids, so they can fill a ridiculous number of classes. For example my private school a while year of kids was like 15 kids. And you had zero choice in your schedule. It’s common sence. If you have 3000 kids, chances are more than 20 will be interested in just about anything, so you can make someone interesting classes. For example the average public school has like what, 6 foreign language programs. We had one. While pub kids can take buissness or psych or anything like that, every kid… Read more »
Malik said:
And much less likely to be shot at school or sexually molested by a teacher.
As for the false claims, for example. People would say in my homeschooling circles how dumb all public schoolers are, so I would list all the smartest people we knew and guess what they all went to public school. So they said well, everyone except them????????. Or saying that they force feed you evolution, or teachers try to diswade you from Christianity, all which in the expirience of my friends is false. They would say they are bad at math, meanwhile my public schooled firends are in 10th grade doing calc 2 and have tons of aps. Or they don’t… Read more »
“Based on what evidence? They test lower than private and significantly lower than homeschool.” I used to believe this, but when I went to dig into the data I found it wasn’t there. We have Dr. Ray’s research which is so badly designed and intrinsically biased that it is utterly worthless. And we have some SAT stats that suffer some very strong selection effects. Indeed, after looking into it more I am more concerned with the overall academic outcomes for homeschooled kids. Do you have any evidence that honeschooled and private schooled kids outperform public schooled kids, after accounting for… Read more »
Are you entirely confident in that? Because one quick google search and I’m being buried in data. It’s more a matter of picking the highest quality one to give you. Back with that in a moment.
Edit: I’ll start with this and give you more if you want more. Clearly the site itself has a pro homeschooling opinion, but it cites 5 separate sources so it gives me a great deal of economy for one link. http://www.pros-and-cons-of-homeschooling.com/homeschooling-vs-public-schools.html
I’m not, no. That’s why I asked.
It is very difficult to design experiments because homeschoolers aren’t required to take tests, so only the most motivated families participate.
In general, I agree with your premise. In fact, it’s arguably not at all possible to test educational theory. Who would be the control group? That’s why we do the best we can with what we have.
There are some better designed papers, though still not great like the one discussed here: http://icher.org/blog/?p=3711 Or this https://www.researchgate.net/publication/232544669_The_Impact_of_Schooling_on_Academic_Achievement_Evidence_From_Homeschooled_and_Traditionally_Schooled_Students The problem is that many people quote the Ray studies which are so bad they are worthless. The college performance data shows that homeschoolers with = SAT score perform about the same traditionally schooled students, but there is reason to believe that a much smaller percent of homeschoolers take the ACT/SAT. https://www.responsiblehomeschooling.org/should-we-be-concerned-about-low-homeschool-sat-taking/ My current belief, pending better data, is that homeschoolers from top flight academic families perform a bit better than their pub school peers. From less academic families I don’t… Read more »
Justin, I think that comparisons are impossible based on the reality that public schools must accept and retain all comers. When a public school is able, because it is a magnet or specialized charter, to handpick its students and keep only the well-behaved ones, test scores soar.
I think you can test certain kinds of theory in public schools with virtually identical demographics. You can say, for example, that children in a given census tract who had Singapore math in primary school had higher average standardized test scores than children who had Scott Foresman.
“Justin, I think that comparisons are impossible based on the reality that public schools must accept and retain all comers.” Well I agreed with this at a root level. The evidence that exists isn’t perfect. What can’t be denied though, is the evidence is entirely in one direction. “I think you can test certain kinds of theory in public schools with virtually identical demographics. ” Where can you find any two batches of students with “virtually identical demographics”? Two children from the exact same household with the exact same upbringing, genetics, economic status, and daily habits can do wildly differently… Read more »
Justin,
You are forgetting, I presume, that one of the benefits of a larger sample size is that the individual variations average out and any higher-frequency variations become visible. In other words, cloning is not needed to achieve effectively identical samples, which is what I suppose Jill meant by “virtually identical demographics”.
Where are you going to find a sample size large enough to remove that variance that is still “virtual identical” in the other important ways?
A public school system that has to try to educate 750,000 students!
You haven’t accounted for the demographics yet!
We’re not just talking about economics or racial differences. Values, religions, local culture, distance from home to school, distance from home to a library, quality and access to internet, the list goes on. If you’re demanding data that has legitimately removed all the variables, it is a tall and I claim virtually impossible task.
Okay, work with the example I gave above (or below) of my neighborhood schools. 95% Hispanic does mean a strong local culture, and in Los Angeles it overwhelmingly means Catholic. Libraries not typically within walking distance for most Los Angeles children; ditto parks. Families poor enough that almost all children qualify for free breakfast and lunch, and free afterschool care. Children either uninsured or have MediCal. Parents are renters, and typically work several low wage jobs. The parents, if immigrants themselves, were not educated past elementary school. I think there is a much higher level of uniformity than one might… Read more »
” But I don’t think these differences can show up in the data.” The claim being put on the table was that the evidence for homeschooling available does not meet scientific criteria for a conclusion. I’m responding such that I am because that request is impossible to fulfill. “I don’t think these will show up in the data” is not a scientific standard. As for dealing with the variables listed, all you’ve done is paint a broad generalization for one geographic area. That’s not what was asked. You need to find two schools who’s body separately fits all of these… Read more »
About 20 years ago,I had a talk with an LA teacher. She said there were 113 languages spoken in LAUSD and only three got ESL help. Spanish Mandarin and Armenian
Justin, I think that you can make useful comparisons when the sample is large enough. I was thinking of the neighborhood schools in my immediate area. The school’s state “report cards” provide demographic information: for example, for the two elementary schools closest to me, 95% of the children are Hispanic, 75% do not speak English at home, and almost all qualify for USDA free lunch. Given elementary schools with enrollments of 1500+ students, those groups are surely large enough that you could deduce trends from the data if you controlled for one thing–such as a particular curriculum choice.
As stated below, those aren’t remotely close to accounting for all the variables.
Justin, I think I am being dense here because I’m not understanding your objection. Are you saying that given the demographic similarities between these two large groups, the variables are still too significant to make it possible to draw inferences? But, if that is true, why do these two schools have virtually identical standardized test results when they follow the state standards and use identical scripted reading programs? Why don’t these variables kick in to make one school of disadvantaged Hispanic kids more academically successful than another? Statistics is truly not my thing, but if we argue that some variables… Read more »
I’m not saying there *would be* significant differences in the results, I’m saying that in order to fulfill the standard of evidence that was being asked of homeschooling, you need to account for the possibility of a difference in results.
At the base level, it isn’t possible to remove the key variable from the homeschooling question “the types of people who choose to homeschool their kids”. Variable free data isn’t possible, and yet those who came to any conclusion whatsoever were being criticized as looking “inept at evaluating scientific/statistical information.”
I think I am being dense here
Public school system.
QED.
“… public schools must accept and retain all comers.”
Apparently, that now includes all students with special needs and they must be included in regular classes, even in cases where there is absolutely no way that they can possibly do what the classwork requires. It makes no sense to me.
OKR, if parents only knew the half of it, they would be up in arms. If you dare say that this is not working or that it is unfair to students without disabilities, everyone howls at you as if you had suggested euthanizing the handicapped.
Jill, I presume that “everyone” primarily includes the parents of the special needs students, followed closely by the education establishment and other government entities who have a vested interest.
I think it was a disaster of good intentions and lack of forethought, and it reminds me of the closing of the mental hospitals. Parents understandably wanted the least restrictive environment. The assumption was that children would be mainstreamed as much as possible, but that they would continue to receive specialized care and support. This might conceivably have worked if regular schools had programs run by specially trained people, medical support for children with physical needs, one-on-one aides for children who can only learn (or behave normally) with an adult sitting beside them, and so on. But, if there was… Read more »
I pecked out a longish comment on my phone but I put in too many links so it is stuck in moderation… I think we can say with confidence: 1. Some homeschoolers perform very well academically. 2. When correcting for demographics *college attending* homeschoolers perform a bit better on verbal SAT and a bit worse on math SAT than their public schooled peers. 3. SAT score predicts the college success of homeschool and pub school students about equally well. 4. Homeschool students are significantly less likely to take the SAT/ACT and attend college than public school students. And the big… Read more »
I was going to give a lengthy response, but it occured to me that your comment in moderation may have the data I was about to criticize you for not providing. For the moment I’ll leave it at this: “And the big take away is that homeschool advocates shouldn’t make bold claims about the superior academic value of homeschooling without better data because it is misleading and it makes them look inept at evaluating scientific/statistical information.” Most who say such things aren’t making any kind of scientific evaluation to begin with, so I’m not sure how it could make their… Read more »
“They’re speaking from the conclusion they’ve made when “they evaluated the difference between their local public school and their homeschooling options for themselves, and accurately relaying how many more resources are obviously available for homeschooling.” On the contrary, I often see people make bold claims about how “the research” shows that homeschoolers perform better than public schoolers. Indeed in your earlier comment you said “They test lower than private and significantly lower than homeschool.” Which is an empirical claim. The data is very suspect all around. For statement 2 above I am relying Belfield’s 2004 paper, but after looking around… Read more »
“On the contrary, I often see people make bold claims about how “the research” shows that homeschoolers perform better than public schoolers.” Aside from being anecdotal, this doesn’t itself speak to someone’s analytical skills. I say with confidence for example that research shows that vaccines are effective at combating various illnesses. I say that in spite of not having dug very deeply in reading that research. It’s a matter of where my faith is placed when I came to that conclusion, not my actual ability to evaluate the data. Most everyone on the planet who says “research shows” is not… Read more »
A lot of studies have been done on the effectiveness of reducing class size, and the results aren’t necessarily what the teachers’ unions want to hear. Same with up to date textbooks. Assuming you aren’t using history books written in 1950 to teach the fall of communism, up to date textbooks are not that important in most high school academic classes. A good teacher can work miracles in badly maintained facilities with few resources as long as the students are well behaved and eager to learn. I think that both “public school” and “homeschool” cover so much ground that it… Read more »
Jill! What are you doing!? You’re disarming my rhetorical trap! I had a perfectly good “no lose” question set up where I could either support homeschooling or attack public teachers and boosters no matter which answer was chosen and you had to go and ruin it. I wouldn’t say homeschooling is better for everyone. There’s definitely a significant social element to it and I’m sure some kids would do much better facing the rigors of bitter and vindictive peers at a younger age. That said, at the moment I don’t trust the base level curriculum of Seattle area public schools… Read more »
The teachers here also regularly complain about their pay, although there do not seem to be studies showing that increased pay improves education results. In fact, my local news just said teachers are wanting a day off to go to the state capitol to protest their low pay.
“4. Homeschool students are significantly less likely to take the SAT/ACT and attend college than public school students.”
Based on what?
You could add
5. Public schools are poor stewards of tax dollars, spending much more per student than private schools.
Hi, JP. This link gives some data on your fourth point: https://www.responsiblehomeschooling.org/should-we-be-concerned-about-low-homeschool-sat-taking/. From reading it quickly I think it said SATs are taken by around 10% of homeschooled seniors and around 53% of non-homeschooled high school graduates as of 2014. The writer of the article disputes the 10% figure, but he is concerned about the disparity.
But no one could argue with your fifth point!
I’m not entirely certain why he’s concerned, or in fact why point number 4 even exists as a complaint. Not taking the SAT’s and/or not attending college is not a measure of the success of the schooling unless the reason for not doing so is inability. The SAT’s in particular are a non-complaint. I didn’t take the SAT’s, but that was because I was in running start. By the time SAT scores would be relevant, you’ve already earned an AA, rendering your scores completely moot in college admissions. It wasn’t until quite recently that you didn’t just get automatic acceptance… Read more »
I agree. Also, unless you’re going into a specialized field like medicine, I think college (especially brick-and-mortar types) is becoming less and less relevant…especially if you do a cost-benefit analysis and the student isn’t getting a premium scholarship.
Add to that the fact that in many states it is almost impossible to get an exemption from testing for even quite low IQ children or those who have serious learning disabilities. Private schools typically don’t admit such children; nor do they take children who can’t speak English, let alone read it. I can see a lot of value in homeschooling, but I have often wondered how parents handle a very academic curriculum (AP level sciences, for example) without access to a community college. How on earth does someone recreate a fully equipped chem lab in his or her house–well,… Read more »
Jill, the answer is that they don’t. Homeschooling doesn’t usually mean “I do literally 100% of my schooling at home with my Mom from all the way through high school”. I was homeschooled and so was my wife. We met in highschool. How? Because generally once you hit junior high your kids are so far ahead they have nothing else to do without special programs. We went to a Homeschool Co Op group that hired private real teachers for 2 days a week and each assigned a week’s worth of homework, and by the time we were juniors in high… Read more »
Justin, do you attribute that to the individual attention? The ability to learn at one’s own pace? Better curriculum? I think that elementary school, with its glacial pace, is a nightmare for bright children who go to school already knowing how to read and write. I can’t think of many things my child learned in the first five grades that she couldn’t have learned at home. But I think a private school would probably have been equally deadly. And schemes that put all the bright children together have problems of their own. If I were doing it again, I would… Read more »
I can only reliably speak for myself, but I would attribute it primarily to pacing. For any individual student, a large portion of your time in a day at Public school is wasted waiting for the slowest person to finish everything. In a homeschool environment, school runs as quickly as you do. You can burn through the morning 8-11 am, and go through more material than a full public school day. Spend the rest of your time doing something else or just getting further ahead. It’s common sense really. Taking a bus to get where you want to go makes… Read more »
In many states, homeschoolers are required to take a recognized standardized test in certain years. Surveying one of these states might only get you a narrow band, but it would definitely be a fair comparison.
Well, as your opposite, let me counterpoint. I grew up in public school, and now homeschool my children. Some of my peers in church growing up had their faith waylaid. Public school played a big role. I know because I saw it. Sure, I came through a believer, but I would say I surivived, rather than thrived. I had to deal with ungodly influences. I know, I know, ungodly influences are in the world. But I was exposed to them at an age where I was too young/immature to know what to do with them. Now, we have the public… Read more »
I guess, but I have friends who went to religions schools fall away too. More often in fact. And yeah I guess there are those cases, but all my friends who went to public school, including my brother, found no one was hostile to their faith. And if you cannot take some hostility what is the point of faith? I hear you that there are problems, but I would contest that they are not as fire as many say.
“found no one was hostile to their faith. ”
If you don’t mind my asking, roughly where are you from? Because as a Seattle area resident, this is beyond absurd to me. I was abused for being Christian in literally every circumstance where I interacted with public school kids.
I live in quite a culturally conservative area, and my kids go/have gone to public high school (homeschooled before that.) And the idea that you could possibly go through a public school of any size and find “no one” hostile to your faith is laughable. My kids have had quite a number of supportive Christian teachers, and many legitimate Christian peers, and still the idea of “no one” hostile beggars belief.
Jane-
Right, my school area where I was raised was mostly conservative…mostly I guess. Not as conservative as Wyoming but no San Francisco, and yeah, there’s hostility.
It’s stuff like this that makes me wonder if Malik is being totally honest with us.
“It’s stuff like this that makes me wonder if Malik is being totally honest with us.”
Ironically, in my first interaction with him, he said he didn’t believe a personal account I gave on double-standards and reverse racism (it obviously went against his narrative).
But he constantly brings up his own anecdotal evidence as solid proof… and gets upset and personal if you point out holes and inconsistencies in it.
I don’t remember that. What happened?
I don’t get upset when you attack anocdotals… Lol. Can you give an example?
I completely believe without hesitation that he’s being honest with us insofar as he’s aware. I think it’s a different problem.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/UnreliableNarrator
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/InnocentInaccurate
It should be noted that morality is more important than pride, so when I say he’s being honest and just can’t accurately reproduce events, that’s to his benefit and not a condemnation.
Sorry bad phrasing. Very few people. No more than anyone else gets bullied in HS.
“…the idea that you could possibly go through a public school of any size and find “no one” hostile to your faith is laughable.”
I could cite my own experience. Does it count if you’re over 40 years past high school? :-)
STL
@Jill Smith (replying to your comment last week) “I have noticed that on many religious boards hosted by women, people will express enthusiastic agreement with things that, if they think about them, don’t make a lot of sense.” I have my doubts that they really do think. Why? Ignorance? Stupidity? Or brainwashed to think that women are more spiritual than men so they blindly accept that a Christian woman must be right? “… any woman who isn’t validating the thoughts and feelings of every other woman is seen as cold and unfeminine. […] I have wondered if Christian women of… Read more »
Wilson wrote: “The goal is to equip them with arguments, which, if you look closely, you can see buried under all the gaudy adjectives.”
The problem, as I see it, is that those arguments are indeed “buried”. Under gaudy adjectives, references to literature not known to all, etc. I think this results in the average reader being less informed by the material than they should. For myself, I seldom read most of the posts. I do not find enough nuggets to justify the digging.