Category: Culture

From and Toward: STEAM-Style

Posted on by Kelly Hayes in Biblical Integration, Culture, STEAM/STEM

Biblical integration means teaching all things from and toward the glory of God. These two directions—from and toward—are both important. In STEAM subjects like science, and all other subjects, we need build on strong foundations (from) and aim for healthy goals (toward). Sadly, some of the work done in scientific fields has recently been marred by an uncritical acceptance of two beliefs: naturalism and cultural relativism.

From: Foundations of Science

Naturalism is “the philosophical belief that reality is composed solely of matter and that all phenomena can be explained in terms of natural causes (e.g., law of gravity).” In other words, there is no supernatural.

John A. Bloom helpfully noted, in The Natural Sciences: A Student’s Guide, that “contemporary science has chosen to restrict itself to giving naturalistic explanations no matter what,” (21) and this leads to perceived conflict between between science and Christianity. Bloom helps us understand that there is no real conflict between science and the Christian faith. No, he helpfully illustrates that the real conflict is between naturalistic and Christian commitments. Therefore, the science vs. faith narrative that is often conveyed in popular culture is not accurate to real life. Instead, the faith commitments of naturalism and Christianity provide differing perspectives on the foundations of scientific study.  

Naturalism and Christianity are both faith commitments. The question is: which is more scientific? And which provides a better foundation? Naturalism assumes materialism (the belief that all things are composed of matter, energy, or ideas). Christianity, on the other hand, holds that there is a God who works in and above the material world. God is able to do this because He is not a part of creation; He is the Creator.

Christianity offers a stronger foundation to build upon because it can engage all the laws of nature, and it gives reasonable support by demonstrating that the laws of the natural world were decreed by a Law-maker. Naturalism assumes laws of nature, but can give no account for the origin or enforcement of these laws. Instead of limiting the study and understanding of the world to the natural, Christians can study the natural universe and investigate natural causes most accurately and confidently because we understand that God is the Originator, Designer, and Sustainer. We have a foundation to build on. Those committed to a secular worldview are looking for a “God-particle,” a theory of everything, and other unifying ideas, but they are searching for what Christians have already found—God.

Toward: Right Aims of STEAM-Subjects

While science is invested in investigating the what of various phenomena, engineering and technology is working with the how and why. Tech companies want to design, enhance, and engineer items to make the world better. And, in many ways, they have succeeded. We have devices that can clean water, perform accurate surgeries, preserve food, and much more. However, the big question that needs to be asked is: What is the definition of better?

Is cheaper, more accessible food better? Are GMOs good or bad? Are fossil-fuels good because of all the advances that they provide? Or are they a problem because of the pollutants they emit?

STEAM subjects must wrestle with ethics because engineering and technology are ethically guided. Many technologies have made things easier for the developed world, but easier doesn’t always mean better. The prevailing moral construct of secularism is cultural relativism—“the belief that truth and morals are relative to (or defined by) one’s culture.” This is a shaky concept. It would mean that the will of the people (the culture) is what determines what is good. In other words, what we want is what we should get. On its face, this is a dangerous way to live. Every one of us wants things that are not good. There are numerous historical examples of cultures gone wrong—think about slavery, greed, discrimination, and other evils that have marked era after era. Why would a rational person (like a scientist) want to live according to a hypothesis that has already been tested and been found disastrous?

Christians have a vision of the good life. We have a reason to believe in innate human rights. We have an understanding of the brokenness of mankind. We have a commitment to follow Christ in helping those in need.

Christian engineers and technologists have concrete aims and standards. This is a major advantage when it comes to inventing, designing, or improving. We can wrestle with whether or not our work is honoring to God. We can choose projects that do more than make things easy—we can work on projects that meet needs, advance the gospel, support equity, and explore God’s creation.

In my next post, we will examine the aim of the scientific method and how that relates to biblical integration.

Sin, Satan, and Biblical Integration: Our Arguments Matter

Posted on by Kelly Hayes in Biblical Integration, Culture, Holy Spirit, Leading

Here is a very small sampling of the messages that our students hear regularly:

“Follow your heart!”
“You just do you.”
“Struggle is bad.”
“You’ll never be any good. There is just no point.”
“More is better than less.”
“You are the captain of your fate.”
“The most important thing about you is what others think.”
“You would be happy… if only you were taller/smarter/better/etc.”
“Just do it. No one is watching. No one will know.”
“The only person you have to please is yourself.”
“The most important thing about you is your grades/happiness/sports/popularity/mentions.”
“Things will just work themselves out in the end.”
“You are on your own.”
“Only you can give your life meaning.”
“You’ll have time later. Put it off.”
“If you have less than me, you are less than me.”
“Whiter teeth, newer cars, trendier clothes… these are the building blocks of happiness.”

Satan and the world argue that these things are true. And they argue ferociously. There is no better advertiser than the devil. He pretends to be an angel of light (2 Cor 11:14). Satan pretends to be something that he is not to sell something he doesn’t have. Couple his work with the what the world uses — the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life (1 John 2:16) — and we have an even more difficult situation. The sinful nature uses the power of love to lead us astray by aiming hearts designed for pleasure in God toward pleasure in the flesh, the eyes, and in this life (1 John 2:15). Satan and sinfulness are always arguing to convince our students to buy into a lie. They are making their cases without rest. And their cases lead to destruction. This is why the teacher must enter the fray too. We have been tapped to represent God, his ways, and his truth. We have been chosen to combat the lies of the enemy with better arguments.

Thankfully, our Lord has not left us here to fight for Him on our own. He has given us his Spirit. He is working through us. John didn’t just describe the power of worldliness, but also of God in us, saying, “the one who is in you is greater than the one who is in the world,” (1 John 4:4). And God is not interested in fighting to a draw. Our God never ties a match; much less loses. He cannot be stopped. And He chose us to accomplish his unstoppable plan. We were chosen for his work, “having been predestined according to the plan of him who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will,” (Eph 1:11) we know that He will do it.

So, make his case. Argue, argue, argue with your students on behalf of God. (Remember that arguing is not about an ugly exchange, but making a logical case.) Lovingly argue. Compellingly argue. Consistently argue. Biblically argue. That is what integration is all about. You are arguing from math, science, English, and art that God is God. You are using the evidence of your subject to show your students the truth. Truth. The world doesn’t have that. Satan doesn’t have that either. But you do. You do. The enemies of God are making their case. Are you giving your life to making God’s case? Does your classroom reflect that?

 

Worship Music and Wolves: Biblical Integration and Critical Thinking

Posted on by Kelly Hayes in Bible, Biblical Integration, Culture, Leading, Music

Some of the most popular Christians teachers and theologians are musicians. As Christians, we might listen to a sermon podcast. We might study a book by a professor. But we sing and memorize the theology of musicians. This means that they must be held to the highest standard. Songs are in our minds, on our lips, and in our hearts. James 3:1 says that not many should desire to be teachers because teachers will be judged more strictly than others.

One of the large issues facing the believers today is that our most popular worship musicians are often not from churches with a strong, biblical theology. For example, I believe that “Living Hope” by Phil Wickham and Brian Johnson is one of the best worship songs released recently. It has excellent, moving, and accurate words that poetically express the gospel. However, Brian Johnson’s church, Bethel, is known for errant theology and practice . Likewise, Hillsong pastor Joel Houston stated that “evolution is undeniable,” in reference to a questions about the popular song “So Will I.” (I wrote about that song a few months ago in light of their lyric on evolution.) Hillsong produces many of the most popular worship songs sung today. The list continues. “Death Was Arrested” is a fantastic and valuable worship song. It came out of North Point Church where Andy Stanley is the pastor. He recently made waves by saying that we should “unhitch” from the Old Testament. Let me repeat: many of the most popular Christian, worship songs are coming out of churches that are not teaching in accordance with the historic, Christian faith.

As biblical integrators, we must be working hard to develop the critical-thinking skills of our students. I am not contending that we should stop singing all the songs from churches like Bethel, Hillsong, or North Point. However, I do think that we need to stop singing them uncritically. We don’t want to raise up a generation that trusts a church or band simply because they are  able to write catchy songs. We want our students to develop into young Bereans who test every teaching against the Word (Acts 17:10-12).

This is where we come in. Yes, Bible class and chapel should assist in helping students trust the Bible and navigate its ideas, but much of the work is done in other classes. An English teacher helps students discover which sources are credible. A math teacher assists students in sniffing out faulty logic. A science teacher shows students how to measure and understand reality. A history teacher helps students learn from the mistakes of the past. An art teacher equips students to note the ideas conveyed in various styles and forms. A speech teacher shows brings to light the art of arguments and persuasive techniques.

We are not trying to shield our students from the ideas that these churches and church leaders are promoting. But we must be investing extreme effort to help our students develop the skills needed to assess the situation themselves. They will face dangerous and errant theology throughout their lives. We must prepare them. They need to know what to do when the most popular teachers are peddling attractive heresies. We all know that devil can attack from the outside, but he is even more dangerous when the attack comes from within. As Jesus warned, “Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves” (Matt 7:15). Let’s teach our students to critically apply the Word of God to detect falsehood. Souls are on the line.

What Do Words Mean?: Literature, Government, and the Bible

Posted on by Kelly Hayes in Bible, Biblical Integration, Culture, Government, Literature, Writing

Merriam-Webster defines a word as “a speech sound or series of speech sounds that symbolizes and communicates a meaning usually without being divisible into smaller units capable of independent use.” One key element of this definition is that words communicate a meaning. Every word means something. But who gets to assign that meaning? Now, the answer may seem obvious, but it has been anything but settled in education for decades.

Steve Cornell of Summit Ministries states, “In a postmodern world, truth and reality are understood to be individually shaped by personal history, social class, gender, culture, and religion.” For postmoderns, the meaning in words is shaped by individuals. This means that a phrase could have as many unique meanings as there are people in the world–upwards of 7 billion.

Christians often seem to think that postmodernism does not affect them, but they are wrong. We see it in our Bible studies every time someone says, “To me, this verse means…” Those who use this phrase are implicitly stating that the text of the Bible legitimately has different meanings to different people. However, this is not the case. None of the Bible or its meaning is determined by the reader. The reader only gets to recognize, understand, and apply what God says. 2 Peter 1:21 is helpful in that it states that the prophets were carried along by the Holy Spirit as they wrote words from God. God has decided what his Book will say and what it will mean. I’ll leave this paragraph at that (though much more could be said) so that we can move toward integration in literature and government.

Literature, by nature, relates to words. Its business is words. Government is possibly just as word-driven. Why? Because laws, treaties, constitutions, and orders are all made up of… you guessed it: words.

In literature, reader-response criticism is a theory that basically says that the meaning of a text is the responsibility of the reader; not the writer. It doesn’t really matter what the poet was writing about. The real meaning is in what the reader understands, feels, or thinks. In government, we can see people try to interpret constitutions as if they are “living,” evolving documents. Instead of trying to hold to what the document originally meant to those who developed it, people try to find out what it should have meant or what it should mean today.

Both reader-response theory and the idea of a living Constitution are related to postmodernism. They are both related to individualism. They are both related to human pride. They say, “I get to decide. My will should be done. My preference is key. My understanding is best. I am in control.” However, as Christians, we understand that words have been endowed with meaning. Yes, we are embedded in culture and time. Yes, authors and framers were embedded in their limited culture too. However, God is above and beyond those things. And, as people made in his image, He has invited us to participate in the use of language with Him.

So what do words mean? They mean what the author intended them to mean. God authored the Bible so He determined its meaning. Harper Lee penned To Kill a Mockingbird so she determined what its words mean. Our founders crafted the US Constitution and, therefore, they determined its meaning.

So what are we after when we read? We want to get to the author’s original intent. Why that word? Why that phrase? It might take work to get to the meaning, but it is fruitless to assign our own meaning. We might enjoy the control, but we are sacrificing the truth. Our task as believers and Christian educators is to understand the Author’s original meaning and then respond rightly to it. Literature and government have been battered by postmodern theories of understanding for a long time. What a wonderful battlefield to help our students see why it is necessary to fight to hear God’s voice. It will require us to humble ourselves and submit to his words, but, while difficult, his words are sweeter than honey to the taste (Ps 119:103).

Here are some concepts for future integration.

In literature: What is the role of an author? What are the consequences when we misunderstand a word or message? If the reader/listener defines the meaning of words/messages, can a promise have any value? What is reader-response criticism? How does our understanding of authorship and meaning affect our understanding of the Bible?

In government: What role do words play in laws, treaties, or orders? Can society function if we cannot agree on meanings of the words in governing documents? What is originalism? What is textualism? What is a living document? How does our understanding of governing documents affect our understanding of the Bible?

The Aim of Christian Education: Biblical Integration Around the Country and in Your Classroom

Posted on by Kelly Hayes in Biblical Integration, Culture, Quotes

Christian education and biblical integration are diverse topics because Christianity is made up of diverse people and groups. While Christian schools (should) all want to be successful in their missions, not all Christian schools have the same mission. Take a moment to think about the Christian schools in your area: do they all seem to be targeting the same goals?

To illustrate and engage this idea, I have taken short quotes from some well known Christian colleges in the US (feel free to click on the links to see the context that surrounds each quote). I have added emphasis (bold type) and summarized the aim of each one to highlight some key differences.

As you read, please thoughtfully consider which concepts resonate best with you and your understanding of Christian education. (Note: I do not intend to put these schools in competition so that we can decide which ones are better. The goal is simply to engage with many excellent, but different, ideas.)

Biola University

“Learning the art of pursuing truth is, indeed, at the center of a Biola University education. Our faculty teach and model this pursuit in order to develop in our students patterns of thought that are rigorous, intellectually coherent and thoroughly biblical.”

The aim: shaping how students think in biblical ways.

Charleston Southern University

“Charleston Southern University has developed a leadership center to build Christian men and women who will lead our businesses, government, education, media, arts and entertainment, churches and families from the foundation of a distinctively biblical worldview; a center that would equip Christian leaders to integrate their faith into every area of life and culture; that would reach into the marketplace locally and globally to engage and challenge men and women whom God has placed there to live out their calling as Ambassadors for Christ.”

The aim: developing Christian leaders who live undivided lives.

Colorado Christian University

“Our undergraduate and graduate curriculum integrates faith and learning in a scholarly environment that fosters critical and creative thinking, academic excellence, and professional competence.”

The aim: creating an environment where Christian growth occurs.

Columbia International University

“Yes, we want students to excel academically, but we also want to help you yield to Christ unconditionally while enriching your spiritual life, achieve your personal and career goals, and practice your vocational skills wherever God leads you.”

The aim: cultivating excellent students who desire to follow Christ.

Gordon College

“Our primary responsibility is to prepare students for the long haul, to make them spiritually, intellectually, relationally and professionally ready for a lifetime of growth—from the first job out of college and beyond, into fields not yet existing.”

The aim: preparing students for a life of Christian growth and service.

Houston Baptist University

“HBU endeavors to bring together Athens, the world of academic learning, and Jerusalem, the world of faith and Christian practice. Faith and learning, so often seen as separate, and indeed as contraries, are deeply embedded in each other at HBU. In fact, instead of two different worlds, they are part of the same world – twin gifts given to humanity by the Creator and Redeemer. Since the book of nature and the book of scripture have the same author, the rigorous study of nature, what otherwise might be called “secular” learning symbolized by Athens, is a unique act of worship.”

The aim: restoring the relationship between faith and academics.

The King’s College

“We educate young leaders to seamlessly integrate their faith, ethics, and morality into their lives and careers. Students are immersed in challenging academic and spiritual study that demands thinking, communicating, and problem-solving with the mind, heart, and soul.”

The aim: educating leaders to practice integration themselves.

Liberty University

[Liberty] understands “education as the process of teaching and learning, involves the whole person, by developing the knowledge, values, and skills which enable each individual to change freely. Thus it occurs most effectively when both instructor and student are properly related to God and each other through Christ.”

The aim: developing gospel-partnership between teacher and student.

Clearly, these Christian educational institutions have their own unique goals and character. Each practices biblical integration in its own way. Each is aiming for a slightly different end through a slightly different process. Which ones seem to fit you best? Which ones seem to fit your school? Self-knowledge and understanding is immensely valuable. We need to know what we are aiming toward in our classrooms.

“Truth Isn’t Truth:” Biblical Integration and Telling Truth

Posted on by Kelly Hayes in Biblical Integration, Culture, Quotes

One of the prime reasons for biblically integrated teaching is to help students see the world as it is: the real world. Biblical integrators are invested in telling truth. These truths include the following facts: 1) God is the Creator and Owner of all, 2) Jesus is Lord, 3) People are created in the image of God, 4) Our actions matter, 5) There is right and there is wrong, 6) Those who call on the name of the Lord will be saved, and 7) We are created for his glory. This list of facts could continue to fill volumes, but I simply want to illustrate that we are in the truth business. And we do not want the One who is the way, truth, and life left out of the teaching of his world. However, the wider culture often has a different view of what truth is. Take a moment to watch the following video where a well-known politician states vehemently, “Truth isn’t truth!” (Note: the purpose of posting this video is not related to political ideology, but a more foundational set of beliefs.)

Integrators need to note two things: we are on the side of truth and of the truth. First,  truth is a concrete thing. It is not relative or variable. Truth actually is truth. Second, the Bible is clear that we must be honest and tell the truth. Those who are on the side of truth do not need to take time to get their story straight. They are free to just tell it like it is.

In Total Truth, Nancy Pearcey says that biblical worldview is “the imprint of God’s objective truth on our inner life.” Objective is defined as “not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts.” Objective truth is the way things actually are. It is reality. And, as Pearcey points out, objective truth belongs to God because He is the Author and Sustainer of all things. He is the prime reality. He is the realest of real. He is the foundation of everything. A culture that chips away at the concept of truth is chipping away at an accurate understanding of God, ourselves, the world, the meaning of life, true pleasure and joy, relationships, and everything else.

Think about it. If there is no truth, there is no right or wrong. There are no laws of physics or mathematics. There is no true love. Therefore, biblical integrators must contend for truth. It is what we do. We want God’s objective truth imprinted on the lives of our students. When culture-shapers (like the politician in the video) make a case against truth, they are making a case against God and godliness.

In addition to contending for truth as a concept, we contend for the truth in real-world situations. This means that we teach and model honesty to our students. Honesty means aligning our words with the way things really are in the world: telling it like it is. For example, when we share the gospel, we are being honest because the truth is that mankind is dead in sin, but Christ came to save sinners. We are spreading the Good, true News.  Proverbs 14:25 says, “A truthful witness saves lives, but a false witness is deceitful.” Truth is life-giving because it rightly represents God, and He is a life-giver.

So in our world that maligns the idea of truth and says that many options could be “truths,” we need to stand up and say that truth is truth. Then we must demonstrate the truth of that statement by living lives of honesty.

Ethics: Biblical Integration and a Better Answer

Posted on by Kelly Hayes in Bible, Biblical Integration, Culture, history

Reading is a powerful biblical integration tool. Reading widely can give a person wider understanding of the world. It can broaden horizons. For example, I may never live on a whaling ship, but reading Moby Dick can help me understand some of what that was like in the past.

Memoir and autobiography are two related genres of reading that are especially powerful in this way. There is value in reviewing a person’s actions, but even more in getting a window into that person’s mind.

Over the past few days, I have been reading a memoir called Ahead of the Curve: Two Years at Harvard Business School. The author, Philip Delves Broughton, offers insight into his experience pursuing an MBA there from 2004 to 2006. Early in the book, he tells of a meeting called by the administration to discuss ethics. His time at Harvard took place immediately following the Enron scandal which was carried out, in large part, through the leadership of a Harvard MBA graduate named Jeff Skilling. The school recognized that they needed to respond to this news and address ethical issues.

Harvard Business School needed to answer the question, “How can we point our students toward ethical decision-making in a world filled with corruption?”

Sadly, HBS, while elite, had an astonishingly weak understanding of ethics. Broughton recalls the school saying, “Ethical lapses… were sometimes necessary to survive… Behaving ethically in business was less about following a set of graven principles than about adapting to changing situations in as decent a way as possible.” Harvard made the case that the problem with being ethical is not that we are selfish and sinful. Instead, the problem is on the outside, and we need to try to survive in this messed up world as best we can.

In the same way that I am unlikely to be a whaler, I am unlikely to set foot into Harvard Business School. However, this window is helpful… and disturbing. The plan to recover from an ethical shortcoming of an alumnus was to tell students that the world is a hard puzzle, so ethics must (at times) be bypassed. Further, they said that ethics were not set in stone, but were situational. There are no real standards of right and wrong. On top of that, the goal of ethics is not to do right, but to try to simply be as decent as possible.

While a Christian school may not hold the elite status of a Harvard in the eyes of the wider culture, it has something better. The Christian school has the even more elite status of teaching in accordance with the Word of God which has been written out for us (some of it literally graven into stone). The Christian school has the gospel. This is the primary difference between the HBS view of ethics and the biblical view–the gospel.

When confronted with the guilt of a graduate, Harvard told its students that the problem is on the outside. It called them to try harder, to do their best, and attempt decency. But they needed to remember that the standard was too high to for them to realistically follow it. When confronted with guilt, the gospel agrees that the Law is impossible for people to follow; we don’t earn God’s pleasure by trying to be good or ethical (Rom 3:10-12). But the gospel does not say “Try harder!” It says to look to Jesus and live.

Jesus told this to Nicodemus in John 3:14. To illustrate his point, Christ brought Moses to mind. Back in the wilderness, the people had turned against God and, as a result, they were attacked by a plague of venomous snakes. When they had been bitten, they did not need to get their life together to be made right. They did not need to work or try harder. No. All they were asked to do was look up in faith at a statue of a bronze snake that Moses had lifted up. The people simply needed to look in order to live. In the same way, Jesus said that He would be lifted up so that everyone who looks to Him in faith would live too (John 3:15).

The Christian school has a strong answer to the question, “How can we point our students toward ethical decision-making in a world filled with corruption?”

First, we understand the corruption: we have all been bitten by the snake of sin and we are all dying because of it. The problem is on the inside. Second, we see the solution: Christ has accomplished righteousness for us on the cross so that if we look to Him we will live. Finally, we see the outworking: the Christian looks to live in ways that please Christ by the power of Christ. God is the One who empowers us to live ethically so that our choices demonstrate the powerful work of God (John 3:21). For the lost person, the law of God shows us how sinful we are (Rom 3:20). For the believer, we consider ourselves dead to sin (Rom 6:11), so we seek to follow God’s ethical standards in order to become more like Him and represent Him with our lives (Rom 6:22). That is a much better answer to the question than the message that Harvard offered its students.  

Cultural Attack on Biblical Truth: Practice for Integrating Teachers

Posted on by Kelly Hayes in Bible, Biblical Integration, Culture

“The Golden Rule is terrible relationship advice… It’s the worst relationship advice, like, ever.” So says Jennifer Furlong at a 2017 TED Talk event held in Florence, SC. [Note: The linked video momentarily displays a Facebook post with a profane word in it from 4:30-4:37.] The Golden Rule is a scriptural mandate (Matt 7:12; Luke 6:31) so there is going to be serious conflict between Mrs. Furlong and the Christian.

What makes the Golden Rule so “terrible” in her eyes? Here are a few elements that she mentions: 1) It is good for kids, but not for complex issues that adults deal with in our relationships, 2) People have different ideas about what it means, and 3) It makes us think about ourselves rather than others.

What does she suggest people use instead? The Platinum Rule: “Treat others the way they want to be treated.”

**Before reading on, take a moment to think about how you would respond to a student who shared this idea in your class. Imagine that some of your students attended the TED Talk on Evans St. and came back with these ideas. How would you deal with this worldview conflict?**

There are myriad ways to respond, but I will offer one basic observation and then five good ideas that might work well with different students:

Observation: This all boils down to a misunderstanding of the Golden Rule. It does not mean, “If I want vanilla ice-cream, then I should make you eat vanilla too.” Instead, the person practicing the Golden Rule would recognize that some people enjoy certain desserts and others do not. The Golden Rule is an attitude that seeks to notice, understand, and serve others. The Platinum Rule can be understood as an application of the Golden Rule. That would resolve any tension. The problem arises when people look to replace clear biblical teaching with a more culturally acceptable version. Now… on to some ideas for responding to students who might come into the classroom with this idea.

1) Biblical Response (Good to use with students who are believers and have a high view of God)

To say that a command in the Word of God is “terrible advice” is dangerous. This is especially true since Jesus says in Matthew 7:12 that the Golden Rule sums up all the Law and Prophets. Therefore, to cut out this teaching is to undermine the whole Bible.
Who are we to say that God made a mistake? If there is conflict between what He says and what we say, we are certainly wrong. It seems unwise to say that the One who knows everything made a mistake.

2) Logical Response (Good to use with students who are critical thinkers and may not be strong in their belief)

Is it really wise to always give people what they want? Sometimes love means not giving a person what they want. Sometimes love says, “No.” A child might be afraid of the dentist and say, “I don’t want to get my teeth cleaned!” But the loving response is not to give in, but to stand with the child, reassure her, and help her learn to handle scary situations.
Beyond that, how do we even know that individuals want to be respected and cared for? Because we want to those things too. In other words, the only leg that the Platinum Rule can stand on is actually the Golden Rule.

3) Practical Response (Good to use with students who are trying to figure out how things work in the real world)

What would it be like if everyone did unto others as they wanted done unto them? Every student wants an A in your class. Should you give it to them? Also, in some situations it might be very difficult to know how a person wants to be treated… that is, unless you use the Golden Rule. The Golden Rule, contrary to what Mrs. Furlong says, actually gives us a reference for how we can treat others well.  

4) Genetic Response (Good to use with students who need to know why people think the way they do)

As often happens, this TED Talk took a reasonable idea and then took it too far–it became something it was never meant to be. Dr. Tony Alessandra, who wrote the book on the Platinum Rule, is complimentary of the Golden Rule. He says he believes in that Golden Rule “110%… when it comes to values, ethics, honesty, consideration, etc.” So if he believes in the Golden Rule, why does he promote the Platinum Rule? Because when he moved from NYC to San Diego, he learned that he need to manage his employees as San Diegans rather than New Yorkers. If he treated everyone as if they were just like him (a New Yorker), he would have problems. His idea of the Platinum Rule was to: “Talk to people in ways that make it easy for them to listen. Manage and lead people in ways that internally motivate them to want want to follow.” That sounds an awful lot like the Golden Rule. He may not think of it this way, but his Platinum Rule idea is just the Golden Rule applied to differences between people. Mrs. Furlong ran with this idea so far that she said the Golden Rule is terrible relationship advice.

5) Identity Response (Good to use with students who need to better understand who they are in Christ)

God created mankind in his own image (Gen 1:26-27). Therefore, when we do unto others as we want them to do unto us, we are pressing into the reality that God made us like Him. In other words, the Golden Rule means that we should treat others with dignity and respect because God made all humans in his image.
In Luke’s account of the Golden Rule, the context is loving one’s enemies. The goal of the teaching is to help those who will listen show kindness to all. Even our enemies are made in his image. In Matthew’s account, the Rule is at the end of a passage about God’s goodness in answering prayer. He is a kind and giving Father. Therefore, we should be kind and giving to one another.

As an integrating teacher, are you ready to handle to worldview conflict that students will bring to your class? They need you to be.

Malcolm Gladwell, Norton Juster, and the Biblically Integrated Syllabus

Posted on by Kelly Hayes in Biblical Integration, Culture, history, Quotes, Syllabus

In his foreword to The Course Syllabus, Robert M. Diamond opens by saying,

“The research on teaching and learning is consistent: the more information you provide your students about the goal of a course, their responsibilities, and the criteria you will use to evaluate their performance, the more successful they will be as students and the more successful you will be as a teacher.” (xi)

This has at least one clear implication concerning biblical integration: If learning more about God, his world, and our role in it (biblical integration) is a goal of the courses you teach, then that goal should be outlined in the syllabus. This should include what the details of that integration will be, what role the students will play in it, and how their understanding of it will be measured. When these goals, means, and measures are outlined in the syllabus at the start of the course, they are much more likely to be successfully carried out until the end. They are also more likely to be organized and helpful, while less rushed or stressful.

So where should you start? I think an idea from noted author Malcolm Gladwell can help. In an appendix to What the Dog Saw and Other Adventures, he explains that he often works to make “lateral connections”—combining together two good stories in order to build one great one. Why does this combination turn good to great? Because the two stories illuminate and illustrate each other. In Christian education, we are, in a sense, working to do this type of work. Through biblical integration, we show the glory of God through our subject matter, but we also show the uniqueness/importance of our subject in light of the God who made it and us.

Let’s dig deeper into Gladwell’s essay writing. He brings two stories together so that the content of each can be more clearly understood. He shows that the two are actually one story that is more connected than we might think at first.

One of his essays is called “The Picture Problem: Mammography, Air Power, and the Limits of Looking.” In that piece, he shows the difficulty of dealing with incomplete information and varying interpretations. Both x-rays of the human body and satellite photos of hostile territories can include helpful information, but no one is certain about what these pictures mean exactly. By bringing together two seemingly unrelated topics—military reconnaissance and cancer detection—Gladwell is able to get to the heart of deeper issue… in this case, that rightly interpreting limited data is difficult (or impossible). By writing about two seemingly separate issues together, he illuminates both. The two aren’t actually so separate after all. When we integrate our teaching, we are showing those same kinds of connections. But instead of medical and tactical issues, we are working with biblical worldview and course content.

Let’s jump back to syllabus design. We don’t have to be great essayists (though that would be great!), but we do have to write a meaningful course description. The Course Syllabus says:

“A strong course description early in the syllabus can generate student interest by providing a stimulating overview of the course, including its content, value, and the philosophical assumptions behind it. You can increase students’ enthusiasm and motivation by emphasizing the relevance of the course. You will also want the description to reflect your own values and attitudes.” (51)

In your syllabus (or course outline/essential goals/etc.), you must include the ultimate rationale for your course—biblical integration. Students need to understand the great value that they are receiving in understanding God, his world, and their place/role in his world better.

One of my most treasured books is The Phantom Tollbooth by Norton Juster. I believe that it may be the most important piece of fiction that elementary students should encounter. At the start, the reader is introduced to Milo; a little boy who “didn’t know what to do with himself… When he was in school he longed to be out, and when he was out he longed to be in.”  Why was he so disinterested?

“It seems to me that almost everything is a waste of time,” he remarked one day as he walked dejectedly home from school. “I can’t see the point in learning to solve useless problems, or subtracting turnips from turnips, or knowing where Ethiopia is or how to spell February.” And since no one bothered to explain otherwise, he regarded the process of seeking knowledge as the greatest waste of time of all. (9)

Throughout the book, Milo encounters all kinds of conflict and questions on his way to meeting Rhyme and Reason. By the end, he has been transformed in his thinking so that he is fully engaged and invested in living a meaningful life.

When we integrate our courses, we are explaining to our students the ultimate why behind what we teach. We are sharing with our Milos why they should bother with our classes. We are to be Justers and Gladwells because we are showing meaningful connections to students so that they can understand how their work fits in with the ultimate questions of origin, meaning, morality, and destiny.  So, let’s get to the nitty-gritty. How do we put all this together?

The syllabus is a manifesto, a treasure map, a workout plan, a personal letter, a contract. And we want it to be a meaningful, vibrantly biblical one. I have offered some ideas about getting started here: Ideas on How to Do Biblical Integration. In addition, I walked through the three options in that post from a math point of view here, here, and here. Those are all good examples that I suggest you look at and make use of before the launch of the next school year.

Elementary School teachers, simple questions like, “What does this show me about God?” or “How can this help me live for Jesus?” can go a long way. For example, if students are learning to count, you might ask them if there is a number that God can’t count. Or you might point out how amazing He is since He knows the number of hairs on each of our heads (Luke 12:7). If you are working on reading, you might talk about how important it is to read so that we can hear God speak in the Bible—the book He put together for us. And the list could go on. But it really helps to put these questions in your course objectives (and even match them to specific units) in the beginning of the year. It will help things move smoothly, systematically, and less stressfully all year long.

Middle and High School teachers, I would suggest including a mention of biblically integrated rubrics in your syllabus. Using a rubric that includes an integration component helps the students see that it is a priority and it allows them to participate in the integrative work themselves.

Finally, below are some examples from Liberty University’s online syllabi. I have copied the course descriptions from  three subjects and included thought-provoking questions of my own in parentheses. These questions can function as samples that you can use as you integrate your own course description. Look for one in your subject area and think through it. The basic idea is to get your thinking jump-started.

English 101: COURSE DESCRIPTION/RATIONALE

Through the critical engagement of a variety of texts, including written, oral, and visual, this course prepares students to become careful readers, critical thinkers, and skilled writers. (Can you think of any biblical reasons behind why growing as reading, thinkers, and writers might be valuable?) Drawing upon rhetorical theory, it emphasizes the practices of analytical reading, informed reasoning, effective writing, and sound argumentation. (Why is it important that we can understand others and make a case to them?) The course requires 4,000 words of writing in no fewer than five writing projects, three of which are argumentative essays incorporating external sources. (Why is practice important? Why must we support our arguments with credible sources?)

Reading and writing are essential for success in college and in life. (Why are they so essential?) In English 101, the student will further develop his/her skills in analyzing texts, processing that information in the context of his/her worldview, and articulating his/her conclusions clearly to a particular audience. (What does it look like to process content according to a Christian worldview? Why should we be able to customize and argument for different audiences?)

HIEU 201: COURSE DESCRIPTION/RATIONALE  

A survey of the major currents in Western civilization from its beginnings in the ancient Near East to 1648. (Why is it important to trace the history of civilization? How does the Bible, the Church, and the biblical worldview fit into the development of Western Civ?)

This survey course introduces students to political, economic, military, religious, and cultural developments of the ancient, medieval, and early modern periods that constitute the foundation for the modern West. (How does the biblical worldview come to bear on how we think about politics, economics, the military, religion, and culture? How have these ideas developed over time?) It is a required prerequisite for upper-level courses in European history, and it may also fulfill a portion of the General Education requirement.

MATH 201: COURSE DESCRIPTION/RATIONALE

Introduction to descriptive statistics and probability, probability distributions, estimation, tests of hypotheses, chi-square tests, regression analysis, and correlation with applications in business and science. (What role do these measurements play in understanding the world? What do they tell us about our ability to know things? [Crosslisted with BUSI 230] (Why is this information so valuable to business?)

As members of a society increasingly devoted to the use and misuse of numbers, students must learn to correctly interpret and construct statistical presentations in all areas of public discourse, especially in their major fields. (Why is our society tilting toward mathematical/scientific presentations?) This course emphasizes the major applications of statistical knowledge rather than its theory. The course seeks to educate men and women who will make important contributions to their workplaces and communities, follow their chosen vocations as callings to glorify God, and fulfill the Great Commission. (How do we make the most of these skills for the glory of God?)

GQ Magazine vs the Bible

Posted on by Kelly Hayes in Bible, Biblical Integration, Culture, Questions

GQ Magazine recently published an article called “21 Books You Don’t Have to Read.”  In it, they point out why many famous books are unnecessary, evil, boring, etc., and suggest books to read instead. You may not be surprised to see the Bible come in at #12. They say we don’t need to read the Good Book because some parts may be good, but “overall it is certainly not the finest thing that man has ever produced.” They go on to call it “repetitive, self-contradictory, sententious, foolish, and even at times ill-intentioned.”  We are going to note three important questions that differentiate between GQ’s view and the understanding that Christians hold.

1) Who Produced the Bible?

GQ is correct that the Bible is “not the finest thing that man has ever produced.” We can heartily agree with that statement because man did not produce it—all Scripture is breathed out by God (2 Tim 3:16). Of course, GQ’s words may be technically correct in this case, but their intent is disastrous. The secular, man-centered perspective that the famous magazine offers is in direct contradiction with what Christians know to be true. However, they make their point with confidence and without any apparent need to support their view. The magazine presents their perspective as authoritative.

Questions: How would you go about refuting GQ’s claims? How can we effectively share the truth about this with a culture that leans away from the Word’s unique authorship?

2) Why Do We Read the Bible?

The article in GQ offers several reasons for us to avoid reading the Bible. A red-flag should go up in the mind of the believer, not just because of a challenge to the Bible, but because many of the reasons are self-centered preference issues. But should we choose not to read truth because it doesn’t fit with our desired style/content? The author of the article calls the Bible repetitive and filled with moral lessons (that’s what “sententious” means… just in case you are prepping for the SAT) as if those are negatives. The argument is something like: “We don’t like being reminded of how we should live.” But not liking something does not mean that we do not need it or that it is bad. An individual with an illness may choose surgery. Why? Not because they like the experience, but because it can sustain life. Likewise, mothers do not like the pain of childbirth, but it is a good thing. I love the Bible because it is God’s words and I love Him. But when it corrects me, I don’t always want to hear it. The issue here is not that there is a problem with the Bible. I don’t like what it might say at times because there is a problem with me.

Questions: Why do you read the Bible? Why should we encourage others to do so?

3) What Guides Our Lives?

This is where we get to the real heart of the issue (magazine pun intended). GQ exists to report on and analyze men’s fashion and style news. It claims to be an “unrivaled guidance and companion for a successful man.” Here we can see why it might have issue with the Bible. The Bible also claims to be an unrivaled guidance and companion for a successful man. Psalm 119:105 says that the Word of God is a lamp to guide our feet and a light to show our path. Proverbs 2:6 points out that the Lord gives knowledge, wisdom, and understanding. 2 Timothy 3:17 declares that the Bible prepares men for every good work.

In other words, GQ can’t approve of the Bible as the sufficient guide because it is itself claiming to be an unrivaled guide. GQ is trying to fill the shoes that the Bible has worn for past millennia. Just like a sports-team might talk negatively about a rival, this magazine has reason to put the Bible down. GQ has set itself up as competition for God’s Word. But God has no rivals (Rom 11:33-36). Psalm 115:3 says it so well: “Our God is in heaven; He does whatever pleases Him.” And of course the Bible explains this well: the Word is how He speaks.

Questions: What does our culture look to for guidance? How can we explain that the Bible is better?