The Christian School Manifesto

I've been driven toward Two Kingdoms by the shallow and left-leaning public policy views of certain celebri Hmm, what to say. I've been driven toward Two Kingdoms by the shallow and left-leaning public policy views of certain celebrity preachers - I want a theological reason for them to keep quiet about politics and preach the gospel. Therefore I've been reading a lot of Michael Horton and D. But they seem to advocate a kind of "radical" Two Kingdoms that just doesn't square in my mind and what I read the Bible and what I see in history. But on the other hand, Schaeffer is more transformational - like Keller et al.

He makes that argument here. It's dated, since the Moral Majority has long since been six feet under and the conservative renaissance of the "open window" for moral and worldview reform began to slow after and collapsed in That lends the book a poignant air. If Schaeffer could see , based on this book he would say we lost.

Still, Schaeffer has put his foot in the door and kept me open minded. That issue aside - wow, it's great to be reading Schaeffer again. View all 8 comments. Jul 31, John Yelverton rated it it was amazing. A fantastic read that is sadly necessary to combat those who downplay this belief instead of respecting it as a legitimate philosophy on life. Sep 18, Tony Smith rated it really liked it. I have read this work more than once. Schaeffer's basic arguments and philosophy hold up well over time. I would say his thoughts and logic are being proven correct by present culture and circumstances.

Cultural and political changes do not make truth untruthful. They simply make identifying true truth more difficult to discern due to all of the verbal and other detritus used to try to hide the truth. Schaeffer does a good job separating truth from the clutter. May 30, David Sarkies rated it it was ok Recommends it for: A typical rant about the collapse of American moral society 1 June After reading the first couple of chapters of this book I have come to understand why it is that Schaeffer's son has broken with the groups that his father was involved in and moved over to the Christian Left.

While I do generally like Schaeffer's writings, and also his ability to connect with people from various backgrounds, this book, at first, felt like a rant against the direction that US society is heading, and in partic A typical rant about the collapse of American moral society 1 June After reading the first couple of chapters of this book I have come to understand why it is that Schaeffer's son has broken with the groups that his father was involved in and moved over to the Christian Left.

While I do generally like Schaeffer's writings, and also his ability to connect with people from various backgrounds, this book, at first, felt like a rant against the direction that US society is heading, and in particular his attacks against abortion. There are a number of things that I agree with in this book, and a number of things with which I disagree. Schaeffer is correct when he writes about the separation of church and state and that the state should not seek to enter and influence the realm of the church.

In a sense that is similar to how the state should not be overtly interventionist in the lives of the individual person, however while standing up against the state seeking to combat and attack the church, he seems to advocate that the state also take a moral stance with regards to the lives of individuals. He speaks about how the laws of our society are based on a Christian world view, and he clearly has the Ten Commandments in mind. This is something that I generally balk against because the first five commandments deal with our obligations towards God which includes honouring our parents as that is reflective of our relationship with God and the last five deal with our obligations towards our fellow human beings.

However, Jesus clearly stated that all the law and prophets come down to two points: While he speaks of our law losing its Christian foundation and moving into a more relativistic mindset it is clear here that he is speaking mainly of abortion, and this is something that I will address a little later. I actually support the removal of the Ten Commandments from the Schools and from the courts. These laws are personal laws that apply to us, and in fact, if the state begins to legislate religion, in the form of the first and second commandments, then suddenly the whole argument of the separation of church and state becomes a moot point because all of the sudden the state is legislating religion.

However, let us consider the last five commandments: However, one needs to consider the definition of murder, and that is an unlawful killing. There are numerous instances were the state has sanctioned a killing, such as during war, for self-defense, and a policeman in the line of duty. However, in all of these instances with maybe the exception of war the state will vigorously examine each of these events to determine whether it has been sanctioned or not.

However, then comes the issue of the death penalty. It seems that there are a lot of people in the United States that support the death penalty, and in fact the Republicans known colloquially as God's Own Party have since brought the death penalty back in a lot of states. Thus, we have on the one hand a reaction against abortion, but on the other hand an acceptance of the death penalty. To me that sounds like hypocrisy. While I am a big believer in faithfulness in marriage, this is one area of the law that the state needs to back away from.

However, there are always repercussions, for marriages will and do break up over these things, and the results of adultery can be quite tragic for many people. However, to make adultery a criminal offence, or to return to a fault based system for divorce pretty much winds the clock back.

Isn't it interesting that the one law that seems to dominate our society is number eight on the list, and that is the law of private property. To say that we have moved away from our Christian roots is to ignore the fact that private property plays a huge importance in our economic system. In fact, it is probably right in saying that our laws have become ambiguous when we hold private property far above everything else.

However, you try to steal somebody's lawn mower, break into their house, or even try to steal their idea, you will find that the law of private property comes into play very strongly. Okay, this book was written in so the whole concept of patenting genes and seeds was not as evident as it is today. However, it is very much the case today, and many people can find themselves on the wrong side of a law suit simply by being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Companies like Monsanto are pretty much buying up the rights to living organisms, and corporations are drowning out public places and replacing them with shopping malls where their laws hold greater power. In a shopping centre one is restricted in many ways, including freedom of speech and freedom of expression.

This is not necessarily restricted to lying in court but takes in all forms of defamation and gossip. I can assure you that the libel and slander laws are alive and well, and actually go to a point where criticism of anybody or anything is banned. The axiom of 'if you can't say anything nice then don't say anything at all' is alive and well. Of course, that does not apply when one is criticising religion or somebody's left wing political views. This is simply having a desire to possess something that somebody else has, but the idea I get from the Bible is that it is extreme.

Basically this is a thought control type of law and is impossible to legislate against. On the other hand, it seems that the idea of covetousness is what makes our current economic system work. If we were not forever 'keeping up with the Joneses' then our economy would grind to a halt.

Thus, the basic human desire of coveting something means that we will go out and spend money that we do not have to acquire something that they do not need just so that we look good among our neighbours. Therefore I have outlined a number of areas briefly as to how the current legal system is nowhere near as bad as what Schaeffer, and others, are saying. However, there are a few more points, such as the story he tells of how somebody committed suicide when he attended counselling with a pastor and not a professional.

I have spoken to a pastor recently who has agreed that while a psychologist may not be a Christian, he may be much better to deal with mental illness than a pastor. In fact Pastors are not, and are not trained to be, psychologists. My experience with using pastors as psychologists and even small group leaders has always ended up in disaster. Simply put, they are so biblically focused, and many are so caught up on the 'don't worry, God loves you' mentality that they do not understand the root causes of mental illness.

From my experience, one major issue I had in church was bullying by self-righteous Christians, and that caused me significant angst to say the least. However, when one approaches a pastor about this, the standard response is 'forgive them and reconcile with them. However, responding with 'this is a fallen world, and the church is full of fallen people, so grin and bare it' does not address the problem, and in the end punishes the victim and rewards the perpetrator. So this now comes down to the issue of abortion which I have said that I will talk about.

Basically I am pro-life meaning that any sanctioned taking of human life by anybody should be very few and far between, and that includes war. War should be the absolute last resort for any dispute between countries.

A Manifesto For Christian Schools Religion Essay

People should be tried and given the opportunities to repent of their actions, and the death penalty may end up hindering that process even though from conviction to execution in the United States still takes years. Abortion should be used in rare circumstances and not on an on demand basis as an exception to contraception. However, abortion is also a form of oppression against woman, and to make abortion the central facet of what is wrong with America is to completely miss the point.

By bringing abortion to the centre stage is to say that women should be punished for promiscuity and not men, but is also to say that you have freedom of choice, unless of course you are a woman, then that freedom is denied to you. Now I am going to jump back a bit to education and suggest that while I am a creationist I do not believe that creation should be taught in public schools.

• Loving Death;
• Christian School Manifesto - Suggestions from an experienced educator.?
• A Manifesto For Christian School Education Theology Religion Essay.

Once again that is the state encroaching into the area of the religious, and to force creationism, especially seven day creationism, to the exclusion of all other theories, is to force one brand of Christianity onto a society that is not necessarily Christian. The same with the Ten Commandments in the schools.

Behind the Manifesto

If a child asks a teacher, who does not understand the underlying nature of the Ten Commandments, what they are, they are probably going to be more confused than otherwise. Which brings me to my final point, and that is the idea that we we're a Christian nation. That is absolute rubbish. The past may have had the state dictating our religion as was the case in England or a large portion of the population claiming to be Christian, but we were never Christian. If we were Christian we would not have brutally murdered the natives of our respective countries, overthrown governments in the pursuit of business interests, or oppressed minorities simply because they were different.

To say that the American Rebellion had Christian foundations is also to miss the point because it was purely an economic rebellion. It was based mostly upon taxation. Further, the rebellion was a rebellion of the American ruling class against the British ruling class. The founding fathers were all wealthy, white, male, land owners. In fact, many of the people in the United States at the time were against the rebellion.

Jun 11, Patrick S.

• John Hitchcock - Author;
• Atrévete a bucear (Color) (Deportes nº 46) (Spanish Edition);
• A Manifesto For Christian School Education Theology Religion Essay.
• The Christian Manifesto.
• What the Bible says about Christian Education:.

This was my first taste of Schaeffer and I liked what I got pretty much. To be fair the book is a bit dated as it is commententing on political themes and situations. But the influx of humanism was starting to peak in the s and we can see today the political climate and world view of the state and humanism from when it peaked.

This was my first political book that started with a worldview assumption. The worldview here being of Christianity. Schaeffer makes his point for Christianity of This was my first taste of Schaeffer and I liked what I got pretty much. Schaeffer makes his point for Christianity of course and the reason why humanism has no firm foundation. This book is a response to humanism and its manifestos over the last century. It's nice to see a political book stating that "by what system you interpret facts and what basic views you hold determine what decisions you make". My favorite part of the book was the part I've been thinking over for some time.

As an American and libertarian in political thought , Romans 13 has always been a struggle for me. The thrust is that Christians are called to obey the lawful ruling authority in as such time it tells us to violate what God's Word says. The latter chapters deal with degrees of resistance. It also ties in examples such as the Reformation and the Revolutionary War, among others.

Schaeffer seems to have a good grasp on presuppositional arguementation and application of God's Word. My biggest flaw with this book is how little Scripture is used to support specific points. While there is some which are well used. There is more adherence to Samuel Rutherford's "Lex Red" which may indeed have more and he is pointing to that work for specifics. After all, this is a manifesto not an apology. Final Grade - B Dec 24, Gus Stevens rated it it was ok Shelves: This "manifesto" is the philosophical justification for the Moral Majority that seemed plausible in the 80s but, when read in , the parochial and selective nostalgia of the book becomes quite obvious.

The author pines for a religious revival that will manifest itself in the American legal system, particularly in reference to abortion, but he refuses to concede that what he is advocating is a theocratic system or in any way an establishment of a state religion. In fact, Schaeffer would prefer This "manifesto" is the philosophical justification for the Moral Majority that seemed plausible in the 80s but, when read in , the parochial and selective nostalgia of the book becomes quite obvious. In fact, Schaeffer would prefer a return to a "Christian" society, in which Christianity, and a moral system based upon it, are the visible and present norm rather than an embarrassing and abandoned memory.

While I would agree with Schaeffer on his central point of application that the practice of human abortion should be abolished , I am unwilling to say that the means of doing so is to enforce a christian moral sentiment upon a largely post-christian and unregenerate culture.

The social duty of the Christian is not, as Schaeffer insinuates, to establish a christian culture that holds back the darkness of voluntary sin, but to protect victims from the actions of others. I think that we can still agree with our non-christian neighbors that victims ought to be protected from harm; now we simply need to convince them that the unborn are humans worthy of such protection and that such protections should be codified into law. Prophetic written in Feb 26, Eric rated it did not like it. Well, that book was the opposite of worthwhile. I have GOT to stop adding books to my "to read" list based only on an interesting title!

• Croc-Blanc (French Edition).
• Living Moxie: Daily Living Answers;
• Navigation menu.
• Where The Mind Matters Most as Learning Meets Life.

While I'm at it, I'll go ahead and remove any other Francis Schaeffer books lying in wait on that ominous list View all 4 comments. Jan 29, Larry Taylor rated it did not like it. Dec 09, Gary rated it liked it Shelves: There are some great principles set forth in here, and I agree with most of it, but somehow my high expectations were not realized. I definitely welcomed discussion of Samuel Rutherford's Lex Rex.

If I had read it in the s had I been old enough then to do so! I think it would have struck me more powerfully. As it is, it is slightly dated now, and I feel the good folk at The Calvinist International and The Davenant Trust are offering a more developed reformational p Some disjointed thoughts: As it is, it is slightly dated now, and I feel the good folk at The Calvinist International and The Davenant Trust are offering a more developed reformational position.

Still, we can all learn from his call to action. Also, Doug Wilson has clearly read this book! Perhaps in the s! And I think he has said much of it better than the author, which is probably mostly why it disappointed. View all 6 comments. Jul 03, Jeremy marked it as to-read Shelves: Adapted from this book. I read this book on the recommendation of a friend, and am thoroughly impressed.

Schaeffer starts out by making the case for why we need a manifesto. Namely, that the Christian worldview has been supplanted in this country, in the west even, by the humanist or what he regularly calls the material-energy, chance worldview. As a result, the freedoms we once had because of the Christian worldview foundation are being lost. They are being lost because the humanist worldview depends not on the Lords I read this book on the recommendation of a friend, and am thoroughly impressed.

They are being lost because the humanist worldview depends not on the Lordship of Christ, but upon itself. He then moves into what the Christian response to this should be. He makes a historical case for civil disobedience, pointing to men like Wesley, Finney, Knox, and especially Samuel Rutherford and his Lex Rex. Having justified civil disobedience, he explains what it should look like.

First, the individual Christian must protest lawsuits, sit-ins, etc. Second, in the case of the first step failing, the individual Christian must flee although he acknowledges this is more difficult than it was in Rutherford's day. Third, in the case of step two failing or being impossible, the individual Christian must resist through refusal to submit and the defensive use of force. Examples for this include refusal to pay taxes, and refusal to disobey God's Law as in, providing your children with a Christian education, should that be banned.

In the case of institutions, like the Church, fleeing is impossible, and so they can only protest or resist. He makes two phenomenal points. God is the center of all things, and therefore the foundation for Law and Freedom. Thus, Christians have a basis for freedom and for disobedience. The "humanists, having no god, must put something at the center, and it is inevitable society, government, or the state.

Christians must resist tyranny, because to not do so is resist God and the Liberty He offers. Dec 11, Bob Ladwig rated it really liked it. People have mixed feeling about this book, I think because most Christians have a rather mechanical view of Romans 13 and the relation between the Christian and the state. It seems most Christians apply Rom 13 rather woodenly and fail to contextualize both Paul's day and ours.

Schaeffer points out that the grounds for Christian disobedience to the state is much greater than just preaching issues and this is where most Christian wince. I found the book extremely helpful in forming and understandi People have mixed feeling about this book, I think because most Christians have a rather mechanical view of Romans 13 and the relation between the Christian and the state. I found the book extremely helpful in forming and understanding of the proper role of government and Christian duty in relation to government.

I don't give it a 5 star because the book needs more clarity, it lays some good ground rules for understanding tyranny, this both can be expanded but also I think a strategy for responding Christianly to tyranny, I think he should have leaned on Calvin more here. A Christian Manifesto is a book I endeavored to read back when I first became aware of Francis Schaeffer in my Christian walk 20 years ago.

It wasn't until now that I was able to grab a copy of the book and make my way through it. All in all, don't let the amount of time that it took me to get through the book fool you.

A Christian Manifesto by Francis A. Schaeffer

The actual time it took me to read the book was very short. A Christian Manifesto is the response to the Humanist Manifesto of and He lays out profound truth in terms A Christian Manifesto is a book I endeavored to read back when I first became aware of Francis Schaeffer in my Christian walk 20 years ago. He lays out profound truth in terms of the societal change of worldview and where that will lead us ultimately. It is a call for those who are the followers of Jesus Christ to stand up and fight in a necessary way by the necessary means that a Christian has in a democratic republic society.

And like you always do, you listened and learned. Just like you did in reality when I told you about my bisexuality, as I would have called it then. You listened, asked sincere and well-thought-out questions, made some brilliantly groan-worthy puns, and left your own prejudices behind. As we continued to talk in the dream, you dragged more and more nuggets of Ari-truth out of me.

Chapter One

I mentioned briefly and flippantly that I now co-host a podcast called the Gaytheist Manifesto. Then, as if I were drunk, I felt a sudden compulsion to divulge everything. The process of dreaming serves to strengthen neural connections that were created during waking and thereby consolidates memory. No god planted that in my mind; no nebulous cosmic force influenced my sleep imagery with omens. It may have just been totally random, a byproduct of specific areas of my brain being activated and bringing to mind memories of the past.

It may not even be too terribly different from the version of myself you knew, the one you now hold in your mind as the Platonic ideal of me. I still have the same esoteric sense of humor, the same passion for pursuing knowledge and nuance, and the same fear of losing control of my mind that I used to write to you about when I was experience the height of my panic disorder.

But there are lots of things about me that are different now. Some of them were inside me all along, waiting until it was safe to come out. Some of them were simply a result of chance events building on one another to result in an incremental but ultimately monumental outcome. You were one of the first people I came to when I was first filled with the Holy Spirit, and I still remember well the joy you expressed when I told you the news that I had been saved in spite of my many months of pestering you with relentless cynicism and doubt in Worldview class.

If I told you that I inject myself in the thigh once a week with testosterone out of a vial, would you furrow your brow in confusion, or would put your thumb to your chin with a curious smile and ask a hundred questions about every relevant aspect of endocrinology, anatomy and psychology that you could conceive of? If I told you I changed my name, would you tell me my new name suits me better, or would you mourn for the old one that I hate? If I told you that I co-host an atheist-targeted podcast about LGBTQ issues, would you express sadness at the loss of my relationship with Jesus, or would you ask for links to my favorite episodes and begin an hours-long discussion about how to be a better ally to queer and trans people?

What would you say if I told you that the critical thinking and reasoning skills you spent hundreds of hours fostering in me inside and outside the classroom caused me to abandon your religion? What if you knew that by teaching me in-depth about apologetics, you armed me with the very ammunition I now use to try to convince your peers to discard their belief system?

What would you think if I told you I went to Washington, D. What if I told you I make fun of your deeply-held beliefs on a daily basis and that I think you have no good evidence on which to rest the foundation of your life? Would that hurt you? Would you be saddened and confused by the life that gives me so much fulfilment? Would you wish I could return to the days before I understood my gender, when things seemed so much more simple and natural from the outside?

Or would you be proud of me for becoming myself? Would you look at me and see someone who is more genuine, fulfilled, confident and comfortable in my own skin than the me you used to know? Would you hug me like always and challenge me to our customary six-hour-long verbal sparring match?