s pecial c ontinuing e ducation i ssue

1http:// jae.adventist.org The Journal of Adventist Education • October/November 2010

T H E P H I L O S O P H Y

O F A D V E N T I S T

E D U C A T I O N

S P E C I A L C O N T I N U I N G E D U C A T I O N I S S U E

Websi te : h t tp : / / jae .advent is t .o rg October /November 2010T H E J O U RNA L O F

ADVENTIST EDUCATION

B Y G E O R G E R . K N I G H T

EDITORBeverly J. Robinson-Rumble

ASSOCIATE EDITOR(INTERNATIONAL EDITION)

Luis A. Schulz

SENIOR CONSULTANTSJohn Wesley Taylor V

Lisa M. Beardsley, Ella Smith Simmons

CONSULTANTSGENERAL CONFERENCE

John M. Fowler, Mike Mile Lekic, Hudson E. Kibuuka,Luis A. Schulz

EAST-CENTRAL AFRICA

EURO-AFRICABarna Magyarosi

EURO-ASIABranislav Mirilov

INTER-AMERICAGamaliel Flóres

NORTH AMERICALarry Blackmer

NORTHERN ASIA-PACIFICChek Yat Phoon

SOUTH AMERICAEdgard Leonel Luz

SOUTH PACIFICBarry Hill

SOUTHERN AFRICA-INDIAN OCEANEllah Kamwendo

SOUTHERN ASIANageshwar Rao

SOUTHERN ASIA-PACIFICLawrence L. Domingo

TRANS-EUROPEANDaniel Duda

WEST-CENTRAL AFRICAChiemela Ikonne

COPY EDITORRandy Hall

ART DIRECTION/GRAPHIC DESIGNHarry Knox

ADVISORY BOARDJohn Wesley Taylor V (Chair),

Lisa M. Beardsley, Larry Blackmer, Erline Burgess, Hamlet Canosa,John M. Fowler, Dunbar Henri, Hudson E. Kibuuka, Linda Mei Lin Koh, Mike Mile Lekic, Michael Ryan, Luis A. Schulz, Carole

Smith, Charles H. Tidwell, Jr., Bonnie Wilbur

Photo and art credits: Cover design, Harry Knox; p. 3 (large),Mark Kellner; p. 62, Ansel Oliver.

hile many teachers wereenjoying a well-deservedbreak from school, a newGeneral Conference (GC)education team was votedin this summer. Every five

years, the global Seventh-day Ad-ventist family convenes (this timein Atlanta) to elect the president ofthe church and other leaders whowill serve around the world. Educa-tion is well represented in the finalline-up. The newly voted president,Dr. Ted Wilson, earned a doctoratein religious education. Three gen-eral vice presidents have spent sig-nificant parts of their careers in ed-ucation: Drs. Ella Smith Simmons,Delbert Baker, and BenjaminSchoun. For the first time in the his-tory of the church, a woman waselected to head the General Confer-ence Department of Education(me!). This is evidence indeed of

the empowering and equalizingforce of education that should en-courage girls and women to studywell, in preparation for servicewherever the Lord may lead.We salute and say good-bye to

Dr. C. Garland Dulan, who dedi-cated 35 years of uninterruptedservice to the cause of educationin the Seventh-day AdventistChurch that culminated in leadingthe global work of education as di-rector of education. Dr. JohnFowler has not yet retired butplans to, having worked for thechurch for over half a century. Hispast 15 years have been here inthe Department of Education.Long-time readers of the JOURNALwill recognize his name as authorand consultant, if not having methim or heard him speak some-where in the world.Along with fond farewells, we

also welcome new associate direc-tors who join the GC EducationTeam: Drs. John Wesley Taylor (edi-tor of Dialogue and chair of theJOURNAL Advisory Board), MikeLekic (executive secretary of theAdventist Accrediting Association),and Hudson E. Kibuuka (our expert

2 The Journal of Adventist Education • October/November 2010 http:// jae.adventist.org

THE JOURNAL OF ADVENTIST EDUCATION publishes ar-ticles concerned with a variety of topics pertinent to Ad-ventist education. Opinions expressed by our writers donot necessarily represent the views of the staff or the offi-cial position of the Department of Education of the GeneralConference of Seventh-day Adventists.

THE JOURNAL OF ADVENTIST EDUCATION (ISSN 0021-8480) is published bimonthly, October through May, plus asingle summer issue for June, July, August, and Septemberby the Department of Education, General Conference of Sev-enth-day Adventists, 12501 Old Columbia Pike, Silver Spring,MD 20904-6600, U.S.A. TELEPHONE: (301) 680-5075; FAX:(301) 622-9627; E-mail: rum bleb@ gc.ad ventist.org. Sub-scription price: U.S.$18.25. Add $3.00 for postage outsidethe U.S. Single copy: U.S.$3.75. Periodical postage paid atSilver Spring, Maryland, and additional mailing office. Pleasesend all changes of address to P.O. Box 5, Keene, TX 76059,including both old and new address. Address all editorial andadvertising correspondence to the Editor. Copyright 2010General Conference of SDA. POSTMASTER: Send addresschanges to THE JOURNAL OF ADVENTIST EDUCATION, P.O.Box 5, Keene, TX 76059.

W

October/November 2010 • Volume 73, No. 1

ADVENTIST EDUCATIONThe Journal of

Continuing Education Issue on the Philosophy of Adventist Education by George R. Knight

Redemptive Education (Part I): A Philosophic Foundation

Page 4

Redemptive Education (Part II):Implications of Philosophy for Adventist Education

2

Redemptive Education (Part III):Implications of Philosophy for Adventist Education

(Continued)Page 38

C O N T E N T S

E D I T O R I A L

Introducing the New Team and Game PlanBy Lisa M. Beardsley

in math/science education andboard training). But not everyone isnew. Continuing on the team areAssociate Director Dr. Luis A.Schulz (editor of the internationaledition of the JOURNAL), Beverly J.Robinson-Rumble (editor of theEnglish edition of the JOURNAL), andSusana Schulz, editorial assistantfor our “other journal,” Dialogue.This journal equips university/col-lege students and young profession-als to successfully deal with the in-tellectual, spiritual, and lifestyleissues that challenge them as theystudy on secular campuses. Our team works with 13 world

division directors of education (seesidebar on page 61). They overseeaccreditation of K-12 education intheir region, along with many otheraspects of the educational work. Wework together with them on accred-itation of higher education, as wellas supporting teachers and adminis-trators through publication of theJOURNAL and presentation of confer-ences, workshops, and meetings.

Our GC team was selected on thebasis of their capacity to serve aglobal church. Among them, ninelanguages are spoken (English,Finnish, French, German, Kiswa hili,Luganda, Portuguese, Serbo-Cro -a tian, and Spanish), and eight pass-ports are in constant use (Argentina,Canada, Finland, Germany, Switzer-land, Uganda, the U.K., and theU.S.A.).Those are the players—a very

international team of dedicatedand well-qualified Adventist educa-tors. We also have a four-pointgame plan for the new quinquen-nium. Foremost is to reinforce Ad-ventist identity and mission, char-acterized by:a. Meaningful integration of

faith and learning in the variousdisciplines and a biblical world-view overall;b. Balanced, whole-person, re-

demptive education that developsthe ability “to think and to do” andrestores in students the image ofGod (Education, p. 17);c. Adventist essentials in gradu-

ate and professional programs;d. Adventist philosophy of edu-

cation in distance education, deliv-ery of intensives for non-residen-tial cohorts, and urban campuses; e. Academic quality;f. Spiritual master plans appro-

priate for the level and type of stu-dent; andg. Use of the Bible and Advent -

ist textbooks.The second goal is to

strengthen leadership and adminis-tration, and demonstrate accounta-bility and effective governancethrough robust institutional deci-sion-making processes and struc-tures, supported by journal arti-cles, handbooks, and boardtraining workshops.Third, we seek to expand the

capacity of all teachers to achievethe redemptive purposes of Advent -ist education and to model Advent -ist values and lifestyle; and to in-crease, where needed, the


Left to right: Beverly J. Robinson-Rumble, Editor, The Journal of Adventist Education: Lisa M. Beardsley, Director of Education; Esther Rodriguez, Administrative Assistant; Mike Mile Lekic, Associate Director of Education; John Wesley Taylor, V, Associate Director of Education; Luis A. Schulz, Associate Director of Education;Susana Schulz, Editorial Assistant, Dialogue; Chandra Goff, and Linda Torske, departmental secretaries. Inset: Hudson E. Kibuuka, Associate Director of Education.

Continued on page 61

APhilosophicFoundation

R E D E M P T I V E

E D U C A T I O N

P A R T I


A P P R O V E D F O R 0 . 5 C O N T I N U I N G E D U C A T I O N U N I T S *



hy study philosophy of education?After all, time is short, and there areso many practical things to learn.Why waste precious hours on some-thing so esoteric and useless?Those are good questions that re-

mind me of the multitude of lawsthat populate our world. The world, as we allknow, is full of laws; not only in the physicalrealm, but also in the social. I have been col-lecting these enlightening laws for some years.Take SCHMIDT’S LAW, for example: “If you

mess with a thing long enough, it will break.”Or WEILER’S LAW: “Nothing is impossible for

the man who doesn’t have to do it himself.”And then there is JONES’S LAW: “The per-

son who can smile when things go wrong hasthought of someone to blame it on.”Of course, we wouldn’t want to overlook

BOOB’S LAW: “You always find something inthe last place you look for it.”Having been enlightened by such wisdom, I

eventually decided to try my hand at developingsome cryptic and esoteric sagacity of my own.The result: KNIGHT’S LAW, with two corol-

laries. Put simply, KNIGHT’S LAW reads that“It is impossible to arrive at your destinationunless you know where you are going.” Corol-lary Number 1: “A school that does not comeclose to attaining its goals will eventually loseits support.” Corollary Number 2: “We thinkonly when it hurts.”Those bits of “wisdom” were created in my

days as a young professor of educational phi-

losophy, when I concluded, as I still believe,that a sound philosophy of education is themost useful and practical item in a teacher’srepertoire. That is true in part because philoso-phy at its best deals with the most basic issuesof life—such as the nature of reality, truth, andvalue. Closely related to philosophy is the con-cept of worldview, which “roughly speaking,. . . refers to a person’s interpretation of realityand a basic view of life.”1

People’s beliefs about the philosophic issuesof reality, truth, and value will determine every-thing they do in both their personal and profes-sional lives. Without a distinctive philosophicposition on those three categories, a person orgroup cannot make decisions, form a curricu-lum, or evaluate institutional or individualprogress. With a consciously chosen philoso-phy, however, a person or group can set goalsto be achieved and select courses of action toreach those goals.Of course, a human being can choose to

merely wander aimlessly through life and aprofessional teaching career. Or he or she canoperate on the basis of someone else’s decisionmaking. The first of those options, if taken se-riously, suggests a philosophic belief that lifeitself is aimless and without clearly definedpurposes, while the second may cause a personto act on a well-thought-out philosophy of ed-ucation but one that has the disconcerting re-sult of leading in the wrong direction.I would like to suggest that a consciously

thought-out philosophy of education is not only

W

H O W I T W O R K S :

After you have studied the content presented here, send for the test, using the form on page 60. Upon successful completionof the test, you will receive a report on the Continuing Education Units you’ve earned, and the certification registrar of yourunion conference office of education will be notified (North American Division only).

*Approved by the North American Division Office of Education. The tests for Parts I, II, and III must be successfully completed tomeet alternative teaching certification requirements as outlined in Section 5.1 of the K-12 Educators Certification Manual.

This article is the first of three on the philosophy of Seventh-day Adventist education.Part I examines the importance of the topic, describes the basic shape of philosophy, ex-amines the foundational philosophic categories from a biblical perspective, and indi-cates the importance of the biblical worldview in shaping an Adventist approach to edu-cation. Parts II and III will develop the implications of a biblical philosophic perspectivefor educational practice. Many of the topics covered in the first article are treated ingreater depth in the author’s Philosophy and Education: An Introduction in ChristianPerspective, 4th ed. (Berrien Springs, Mich.: Andrews University Press, 2006).

I N T R O D U C T I O N


an educator’s most practical acquisition, but alsohis or her most important one. Ellen White(1827-1915), Seventh-day Adventism’s proph eticthought leader, held the same viewpoint. “By amisconception of the true nature and object ofeducation,” she wrote, “many have been led intoserious and even fatal errors [eternally fatal inthe overall context of her writings]. Such a mis-take is made when the regulation of the heart orthe establishment of principles is neglected inthe effort to secure intellectual culture, or wheneternal interests are overlooked in the eager de-sire for temporal advantage.”2

Again, she wrote, “the necessity of establish-ing Christian schools is urged upon me verystrongly. In the schools of today many things aretaught that are a hindrance rather than a bless-ing. Schools are needed where the word of Godis made the basis of education. Satan is the greatenemy of God, and it is his constant aim to leadsouls away from their allegiance to the King ofheaven. He would have minds so trained thatmen and women will exert their influence on theside of error and moral corruption, instead ofusing their talents in the service of God. His ob-ject is effectually gained, when by pervertingtheir ideas of education, he succeeds in enlistingparents and teachers on his side; for a wrong ed-ucation often starts the mind on the road to infi-delity.”3

It is such thoughts that have led variousChristian denominations, including Seventh-dayAdventists, down through history to go to greatexpense and effort to establish their ownschools. Providing greater urgency has been Ad-ventists’ conviction that each of the church’schildren (as well as the church itself) is caughtin the midst of a great struggle between good andevil. Therefore, the church moved proactively toestablish an educational system based on notonly a general Christian understanding of reality,truth, and value, but one that also reflects dis-tinctively Adventist understandings.Coming to grips with the undergirding ideas

that have led to the establishment and operationof Seventh-day Adventist schools is the realm ofan Adventist philosophy of education. Of course,grappling with basic ideas is only part of the task.Other aspects include developing practices in har-mony with those foundational understandingsand implementing them in the life of the school.The first two of those goals fit under the rubricof educational philosophy. The practical aspect isthe educator’s responsibility to implement afterconsciously thinking through not only his or herbasic beliefs, but also how those beliefs can andshould impact daily life and professional practice.Before moving to a discussion of the basic is-

sues of philosophy, it is important to point outthat a philosophy of education is much broaderthan a philosophy of schooling. Schools are onlyone aspect of any social group’s educational sys-tem. The family, media, peer group, and churchalso share the responsibility for educating thenext generation, with the family holding thedominant role. That fact must be recognizedeven though these study materials will use cate-gories that are most often linked with schooling.But the insights being shared are just as impor-tant to educators in the church and family asthey are to teachers in the school. The best over-all educational experience, of course, takes placewhen parents, teachers, and church leaders allshare the same concerns and provide a learningenvironment in which each student experiencesa unified education rather than a schizophrenicone in which the significant educators all es-pouse different views. With that in mind, it is noaccident that Seventh-day Adventists have goneto the effort and expense of establishing a systemthat currently has almost 8,000 schools. Different systems of education have varying

goals, and those goals are based on differingphilosophies of education. With that thought inmind, we now turn to an examination of the is-sues basic to philosophy, followed by a look atthe Christian/Adventist understanding of thoseissues. Lastly, we will examine the educationalpractices that flow out of those understandings.

Philosophic Issues and Their Relevancefor EducationPhilosophy deals with the most basic issues

faced by human beings. The content of philos-ophy is better seen as asking questions ratherthan providing answers. It can even be said thatphilosophy is the study of questions. Van CleveMorris has noted that the crux of the matter isasking the “right” questions. By “right” hemeant questions that are meaningful and rele-vant—the kind of questions people really wantanswered and that will make a difference inhow they live and work.4

Philosophical content has been organizedaround three fundamental categories:1. Metaphysics—the study of questions con-

cerning the nature of reality;2. Epistemology—the study of the nature of

truth and knowledge and how these are at-tained and evaluated; and3. Axiology—the study of the question of

value.Without a distinctive philosophy of reality,

truth, and value, a person or group cannot makeintelligent decisions either for their individuallives or for developing an educational system.

Philosophy

deals with the most

basic issues

faced by human

beings.

The content of

philosophy is

better seen as

asking questions

rather than

providing answers.

C O N T I N U I N G E D U C A T I O N — P A R T I


The questions addressed by philosophy are sobasic that there is no escaping them. As a result,all of us, whether we consciously understand ourphilosophic positions or not, conduct our per-sonal lives and our corporate existence on thebasis of “answers” to the basic questions of life.There is no decision making that is unrelated tothe issues of reality, truth, and value. To put itsuccinctly: Philosophy drives decision making.For that reason alone, the study of the founda-tional questions of philosophy is important. Afterall, it is better to function with understandingthan to wander through life in ignorance of thefactors that shape our choices.With the importance of understanding the

basic issues in mind, in the next few pages wewill briefly describe the three main philosophiccategories and then move on to an Adventistperspective on each of them.

METAPHYSICS

One of the two most basic philosophic cate-gories is metaphysics. That rather threatening-sounding word actually comes from two Greekwords meaning “beyond physics.” As such,metaphysics is the branch of philosophy thatdeals with the nature of reality. “What is ulti-mately real?” is the basic question asked in thestudy of metaphysics.At first glance, the answer to that query

seems rather obvious. After all, most peopleseem to be quite certain about the “reality” oftheir world. If you ask them, they will probablytell you to open your eyes and look at the clockon the wall, to listen to the sound of a passingtrain, or to bend down to touch the floor be-neath your feet. These things are, they claim,what is ultimately real.But are they? Their answers are located on the

plane of physics rather than metaphysics. Thereare surely more foundational questions. For ex-ample, where did the material for floors, thepower that runs trains, and the regularity of timeultimately originate? It makes no difference ifyour answer is related to design, accident, ormystery, because once you have begun to dealwith the deeper questions, you have moved be-yond physics to the realm of metaphysics.We can gain a glimpse into the realm of meta-

physics by examining a list of major questionsconcerning the nature of reality. The queries ofthe metaphysician are amongst the most generalquestions that can be asked. It is important to re-alize, however, that people need the answers tothese questions before they can find satisfactoryanswers to their more specific questions. Yetcomplete verification of any particular answer to

these questions is beyond the realm of humandemonstration or proof. But that does not makethe discussion of these issues irrelevant or a mereexercise in mental gymnastics since people,whether they consciously understand it or not,base their daily activities and long-range goalsupon a set of metaphysical beliefs. Even peopleseeking answers to more specific questions—physicists or biologists or historians, for exam-ple—cannot ignore meta phys i cal questions.Thus, undergirding science is the philosophy ofscience, and foundational to historical under-standing is the philosophy of history. It is the phi-losophy of science and history that provides thetheoretical framework for understanding and in-terpreting the meaning of the facts in each field.Metaphysical questions may be divided into

four subsets. First, the cosmological aspect. Cos-mology consists in the study of theories aboutthe origin, nature, and development of the uni-verse as an orderly system. Questions such asthese populate the realm of cosmology: “Howdid the universe originate and develop? Did itcome about by accident or design? Does its ex-istence have any purpose?” A second metaphysical aspect is the theologi-

cal. Theology is that part of religious theory thatdeals with conceptions of and about God. “Isthere a God? If so, is there one or more than one?What are the attributes of God? If God is both allgood and all powerful, why does evil exist? IfGod exists, what is His relationship to human be-ings and the ‘real’ world of everyday life?”People answer such questions in a variety of

ways. Atheists claim that there is no God, whilepantheists posit that God and the universe areidentical—all is God and God is all. Deists viewGod as the maker of nature and moral laws, butassert that He exists apart from, and is not par-ticularly interested in, the daily events of humanlives or the physical universe. On the other hand,theists believe in a personal Creator God who hasa deep and ongoing interest in His creation. Poly-theism disagrees with mono theism in regard tothe number of gods, with poly theists holdingthat deity should be thought of as plural andmonotheists insisting that there is one God.5

A third subset of metaphysics is the anthro-pological. Anthropology deals with the study ofhuman beings and asks questions like the follow-ing: “What is the relation between mind andbody? Is mind more fundamental than body,with body depending on mind, or vice versa?”“What is humanity’s moral status? Are peopleborn good, evil, or morally neutral?” “To whatextent are individuals free? Do they have freewill, or are their thoughts and actions deter-mined by their environment, inheritance, or a di-

METAPHYSICS



vine Being?” “Does each person have a soul? Ifso, what is it?” People have obviously adopteddifferent positions on these questions, and thosepositions influence their political, social, reli-gious, and educational ideals and practices.The fourth aspect of metaphysics is the onto-

logical. Ontology is the study of the nature of ex-istence, or what it means for anything to exist.Several questions are central to ontology: “Isbasic reality found in matter or physical energy(the world we can sense), or is it found in spiritor spiritual energy? Is it composed of one ele-ment (e.g., matter or spirit), or two (e.g., matterand spirit), or many?” “Is reality orderly and law-ful in itself, or is it merely orderable by thehuman mind? Is it fixed and stable, or is changeits central feature? Is this reality friendly, un-friendly, or neutral toward humanity?”

Metaphysics and EducationEven a cursory study of either historical or

contemporary societies will reveal the impact ofthe cosmological, theological, anthropological,and ontological aspects of metaphysics upontheir social, political, economic, and scientificbe liefs and practices. People everywhere em-brace answers to these questions and then livetheir daily lives in keeping with those assump-tions. There is no escape from metaphysical deci -sions—unless one chooses to vegetate—and eventhat choice would be a metaphysical deci sionabout the nature and function of humanity.Education, like other human activities, cannot

operate outside the realm of metaphysics. Meta-physics, or the issue of ultimate reality, is centralto any concept of education, because it is impor-tant for the educational program of the school(or family or church) to be based upon fact andreality rather than fancy, illusion, error, or imag-ination. Varying metaphysical beliefs lead to dif-fering educational approaches and even separatesystems of education.Why do Adventists and other Christians

spend millions of dollars each year on privatesystems of education when free public systemsare widely available? Because of their meta-physical beliefs regarding the nature of ultimatereality, the existence of God, the role of God inhuman affairs, and the nature and role ofhuman beings as God’s children. At their deep-est levels, men and women are motivated bymetaphysical beliefs. History demonstrates thatpeople are willing to die for those convictions,and that they desire to create educational envi-ronments in which their most basic beliefs willbe taught to their children.The anthropological aspect of metaphysics

is especially important for educators of all per-

suasions. After all, they are dealing with mal-leable human beings at one of the most impres-sionable stages of their lives. Views about thenature and potential of students form the foun-dation of every educational process. The verypurpose of education in all philosophies isclosely tied to these views. Thus, anthropolog-ical considerations lie extremely close to theaims of education. Philosopher D. Elton True-blood put it nicely when he asserted that “untilwe are clear on what man is, we shall not beclear about much else.”6

It makes a great deal of difference whethera student is viewed as Desmond Morris’s“naked ape”7 or as a child of God. Likewise, itis important to know whether children are in-nately evil or essentially good, or good but rad-ically twisted by the effects of sin. Variations inanthropological positions will produce signifi-cantly different approaches to the educationalprocess. Other examples of the impact of meta-physics upon education will become evidentfurther on in our study.

EPISTEMOLOGY

Closely related to metaphysics is the issue ofepistemology. Epistemology seeks to answersuch basic questions as “What is true?” and“How do we know?” The study of epistemologydeals with issues related to the dependability ofknowledge and the validity of the sourcesthrough which we gain information. Accordingly,epistemology stands—with metaphysics—at thevery center of the educative process. Becauseboth educational systems as a whole and teach-ers in those systems deal in knowledge, they areengaged in an epistemological undertaking.Epistemology seeks answers to a number of

fundamental issues. One is whether reality caneven be known. Skepticism in its narrow sense isthe position claiming that people cannot acquirereliable knowledge and that any search for truthis in vain. That thought was well expressed byGorgias (c. 483-376 B.C.), the Greek Sophist whoasserted that nothing exists, and that if it did, wecould not know it. A full-blown skepticism wouldmake intelligent action impossible. A term closelyrelated to skepticism is agnosticism. Agnosticismis a profession of ignorance in reference to the ex-istence or nonexistence of God.Most people claim that reality can be known.

However, once they have taken that position,they must decide through what sources realitymay be known, and must have some concept ofhow to judge the validity of their knowledge.A second issue foundational to epistemology

is whether all truth is relative, or whether some

EPIS

TEM

OLOG

Y



truths are absolute. Is all truth subject tochange? Is it possible that what is true todaymay be false tomorrow? If the answer is “Yes”to the previous questions, such truths are rela-tive. If, however, there is Absolute Truth, suchTruth is eternally and universally true irrespec-tive of time or place. If Absolute Truth exists inthe universe, then educators would certainlywant to discover it and make it the core of theschool curriculum. Closely related to the issueof the relativity and absoluteness of truth arethe questions of whether knowledge is subjec-tive or objective, and whether there is truth thatis independent of human experience.A major aspect of epistemology relates to the

sources of human knowledge. If one accepts thefact that there is truth and even Truth in the uni-verse, how can human beings comprehend suchtruths? How do they become human knowledge?Central to most people’s answer to that

question is empiricism (knowledge obtainedthrough the senses). Empirical knowledge ap-pears to be built into the very nature of humanexperience. Thus, when individuals walk out ofdoors on a spring day and see the beauty of thelandscape, hear the song of a bird, feel thewarm rays of the sun, and smell the fragranceof the blossoms, they “know” that it is spring.Sensory knowing for humans is immediate anduniversal, and in many ways forms the basis ofmuch of human knowledge.The existence of sensory data cannot be de-

nied. Most people accept it uncritically as repre-senting “reality.” The danger of naively embrac-ing this approach is that data obtained from thehuman senses have been demonstrated to beboth incomplete and undependable. (For exam-ple, most people have been confronted with thecontradiction of seeing a stick that looks bentwhen partially submerged in water but appearsto be straight when examined in the air.) Fatigue,frustration, and illness also distort and limit sen-sory perception. In addition, there are sound andlight waves that are inaudible and invisible tounaided human perception.Humans have invented scientific instruments

to extend the range of their senses, but it is im-possible to ascertain the exact dependability ofthese instruments since no one knows the totaleffect of the human mind in recording, interpret-ing, and distorting sensual perception. Confi-dence in these instruments is built upon specu-lative metaphysical theories whose validity hasbeen reinforced by experimentation in whichpredictions have been verified through the useof a theoretical construct or hypothesis.In summary, sensory knowledge is built

upon assumptions that must be accepted by

faith in the dependability of human sensorymechanisms. The advantage of empiricalknow ledge is that many sensory experiencesand experiments are open to both replicationand public examination.A second influential source of knowledge

throughout the span of human history has beenrevelation. Revealed knowledge has been ofprime importance in the field of religion. It dif-fers from all other sources of knowledge be-cause it presupposes a transcendent supernat-ural reality that breaks into the natural order.Christians believe that such revelation is God’scommunication concerning the divine will.Believers in supernatural revelation hold

that this form of knowledge has the distinctadvantage of being an omniscient source of in-formation that is not available through otherepistemological methods. The truth revealedthrough this source is believed by Christians tobe absolute and uncontaminated. On the otherhand, it is generally realized that distortion ofrevealed truth can occur in the process ofhuman interpretation. Some people assert thata major disadvantage of revealed knowledge isthat it must be accepted by faith and cannot beproved or disproved empirically.A third source of human knowledge is au-

thority. Authoritative knowledge is accepted astrue because it comes from experts or has beensanctified over time as tradition. In the class-room, the most common source of informationis some authority, such as a textbook, teacher,or reference work.Accepting authority as a source of knowl-

edge has its advantages as well as its dangers.Civilization would certainly stagnate if peoplerefused to accept any statement unless theypersonally verified it through direct, firsthandexperience. On the other hand, if authoritativeknowledge is built upon a foundation of incor-rect assumptions, then such knowledge willsurely be distorted.A fourth source of human knowledge is rea-

son. The view that reasoning, thought, or logicis the central factor in knowledge is known asrationalism. The rationalist, in emphasizing hu-manity’s power of thought and the mind’s con-tributions to knowledge, is likely to claim thatthe senses alone cannot provide universal, validjudgments that are consistent with one another.From this perspective, the sensations and expe-riences humans obtain through their senses arethe raw material of knowledge. These sensationsmust be organized by the mind into a meaning-ful system before they become knowledge.Rationalism in a less extreme form claims

that people have the power to know with cer-


The study of

epistemology

deals with

issues related

to the

dependability of

knowledge

and the

validity of the

sources

through which

we gain

information.

tainty various truths about the universe that thesenses alone cannot give. In its more extremeform, rationalism claims that humans are capa-ble of arriving at irrefutable knowledge inde-pendently of sensory experience.Formal logic is a tool used by rationalists.

Systems of logic have the advantage of possess-ing internal consistency, but they risk being dis-connected from the external world. Systems ofthought based upon logic are only as valid asthe premises upon which they are built.A fifth source of knowledge is intuition—the

direct apprehension of knowledge that is not de-rived from conscious reasoning or immediatesense perception. In the literature dealing withintuition, one often finds such expressions as“immediate feeling of certainty.” Intuition occursbe neath the threshold of consciousness and isoften experienced as a sudden flash of insight.In tuition has been claimed under varying circum -stances as a source of both religious and secularknowledge. Certainly many scientific break-throughs have been initiated by intuitive hunchesthat were confirmed by experimentation.The weakness or danger of intuition is that

it does not appear to be a safe method of ob-taining knowledge when used alone. It goesastray very easily and may lead to absurdclaims unless it is controlled by or checkedagainst other methods of knowing. Intuitiveknowledge, however, has the distinct advantageof being able to bypass the limitations ofhuman experience.At this juncture, it should be noted that no

one source of information is capable of supplyingpeople with all knowledge. The various sourcesshould be seen as complementary rather thanantagonistic. It is true, however, that most peoplechoose one source as being more basic than, orpreferable to, the others. That most basic sourceis then used as a benchmark for testing othersources of knowledge. For example, in the con-temporary world, knowledge obtained empiri-cally is generally seen as the most basic and re-liable type. Most people denigrate any purportedknowledge that does not agree with scientifictheory. By way of contrast, biblical Christianitysees revelation as providing the basic frameworkagainst which other sources of knowledge mustbe tested.

Epistemology and EducationEpistemology has a direct impact upon edu-

cation on a moment-by-moment basis. For exam-ple, assumptions about the importance of vari-ous sources of knowledge will certainly bereflected in curricular emphases and teachingmethodologies. Because Christian teachers be-

lieve in revelation as a source of valid knowl-edge, they will undoubtedly choose a curriculumand a role for the Bible in that curriculum thatdiffers substantially from the curricular choicesof nonbelievers. In fact, the philosophic world-view of their faith will shape the presentation ofevery topic they teach. That, of course, is true forteachers from every philosophic persuasion andthus constitutes an important argument for edu-cating Adventist youth in Adventist schools.

The Metaphysical-Epistemological DilemmaThe careful reader has probably realized by

now that humanity, so to speak, is suspendedin midair both metaphysically and epistemolog-ically. Our problem: It is impossible to makestatements about reality without first adoptinga theory for arriving at truth. On the otherhand, a theory of truth cannot be developedwithout first having a concept of reality. We arecaught in a web of circularity.Through the study of basic questions people

are forced to recognize their smallness and help-lessness in the universe. They realize that noth-ing can be known for certain in the sense of finaland ultimate proof that is open and acceptableto all people, not even in the natural sciences.Trueblood affirmed that point when he wrotethat “it is now widely recognized that absoluteproof is something which the human being doesnot and cannot have. This follows necessarilyfrom the twin fact that deductive reasoning can-not have certainty about its premises and that in-ductive reasoning cannot have certainty about itsconclusions. The notion that, in natural science,we have both certainty and absolute proof is sim-ply one of the superstitions of our age.”8 Everyperson—the skeptic and the agnostic, the scien-tist and the businessperson, the Hindu and theChristian—lives by a faith. The acceptance of aparticular metaphysical and epistemological po-sition is a “faith-choice” made by each person,and entails a commitment to a way of life.The circular nature of the reality-truth

dilemma is certainly a distressing aspect ofphilosophical thought; but since it exists,human beings are obligated to make them-selves aware of its implications. Of course, thisdilemma comes as no surprise to mature scien-tists who have come to grips with the limita-tions of their discipline and the philosophyupon which it is built. Neither does it pose athreat to believers in certain religious persua-sions who have traditionally viewed their basicbeliefs in terms of personal choice, faith, andcommitment. The whole problem, however,does come as a source of shock and distress tothe average secular individual.


In a

Christian

epistemology,

the findings of

reason must

always be checked

against the

truth of

Scripture.


The result of the metaphysical-epistemologi-cal dilemma is that all persons live by faith in thebasic beliefs they have chosen. The challenge isnot having to make a choice, but making themost adequate choice that takes into considera-tion the full range of realities and knowledgeshuman beings possess. Later in this article, wewill begin to explore a Christian/Adventist ap-proach to the major philosophic issues. But wefirst need to explore the third great philosophicissue—axiology or the question of values.

AXIOLOGY

Axiology is the branch of philosophy thatseeks to answer the question, “What is ofvalue?” All rational individual and social life isbased upon a system of values. Value systemsare not universally agreed upon, and differentpositions on the questions of metaphysics andepistemology produce different value systemsbecause axiological systems are built upon con-ceptions of reality and truth.The question of values deals with notions of

what a person or a society regards as good orpreferable. Axiology, like metaphysics and epis-temology, stands at the very foundation of theeducational process. A major aspect of educationis the development of values. And in that con-text, the classroom is an axiological theater inwhich teachers cannot hide their moral selves.By their actions, teachers constantly instructgroups of highly impressionable young peoplewho assimilate and imitate their teachers’ valuestructures to a significant extent.Axiology has two main branches—ethics

and aesthetics. Ethics is the study of moral val-ues and conduct. “How should I behave?” is anethical question. Ethical theory seeks to provideright values as the foundation for right actions.In many ways, ethics is the crucial issue of ourtimes. World societies have made unprece-dented technological advances, but have notadvanced significantly, if at all, in their ethicaland moral conceptions.Both as individuals and within societies,

human beings exist in a world in which theycannot avoid meaningful ethical decisions.Thus, schools must teach ethical concepts totheir students. The problem is that people em-brace different ethical bases and feel quite neg-atively about having their children “indoctri-nated” in a moral view that is alien to theirfundamental beliefs. That fact has put schoolsat the center of the various “culture wars” thathave rocked society at large.9 It has also led Ad-ventists and other Christians to establish theirown schools. The desire to pass on to their chil-

dren a specific system of moral values is a pow-erful motivator for most parents.At the heart of ethical discussions are such

questions as, “Are ethical standards and moralvalues absolute or relative?” “Do universalmoral values exist?” “Can morality be sepa-rated from religion?” and “Who or what formsthe basis of ethical authority?”The second major branch of axiology is aes-

thetics. Aesthetics asks such questions as “Whatis beautiful?” and “What should I like?” Aesthet-ics is the realm of value that searches for theprinciples governing the creation and apprecia-tion of beauty and art in both “the higher arts”and the things of daily life, such as school archi-tecture, television programs, and billboards.Evaluations of beauty and ugliness fall into theaesthetic realm. Thus aesthetic valuation is apart of daily life and cannot be avoided.The aesthetic experience is tied to the cog-

nitive world of intellectual understanding, butalso soars beyond the cognitive into the affec-tive realm because of its focus on feeling andemotion. Aesthetic experiences enable peopleto move beyond the limits imposed by purelyrational thought and the inadequacies ofhuman language. A picture, song, or story maycreate an impression in a person that couldnever be conveyed through logical argument.Human beings are aesthetic beings; thus, it

is equally impossible to avoid teaching aesthet-ics in the school, home, media, or church as itis to avoid inculcating ethical values. However,the realm of aesthetics does not exist in a vac-uum. To the contrary, aesthetic belief is directlyrelated to other aspects of people’s philosophy.For example, if subjectivity and randomness areembraced in epistemology and metaphysics,they will be reflected in both aesthetics andethics. People’s aesthetic values reflect theirtotal philosophy.

Philosophic Issues and EducationalGoals and PracticesFigure 110 (page 12) illustrates the relationship

between philosophical beliefs and practice. It in-dicates that a distinct metaphysical and episte-mological viewpoint will lead the educator to avalue orientation. That orientation, with its cor-responding view of reality and truth, will deter-mine what educational goals are deliberatelychosen by teachers as they seek to implementtheir philosophical beliefs in the classroom.As a consequence, educators’ goals suggest

appropriate decisions about a variety of areas:students’ needs, the teacher’s role in the class-room, the most important things to emphasizein the curriculum, the teaching methodologies


AX

IOLO

GY


PR

AC

TIC

ES

that will best communicate the curriculum, andthe social function of the school. Only when aneducator has taken a position on such matterscan appropriate policies be implemented.As Figure 1 indicates, philosophy is not the

sole determinant of specific educational practices.Elements in the everyday world (such as politicalfactors, economic conditions, social forces, andexpectations of the students’ families or commu-nity) also play a significant role in shaping andmodifying educational practices. However, it isimportant to realize that philosophy still providesthe basic boundaries for educational practice forany given teacher in a specific setting.Only when teachers clearly understand their

philosophy and examine and evaluate its impli-cations for daily activity in an Adventist settingcan they expect to be effective in reaching theirpersonal goals and those of the schools forwhich they teach. That is so because, asKNIGHT’S LAW declares: “It is impossible toarrive at your destination unless you knowwhere you are going.”Corollary Number 1 is also important for

every teacher and school: “A school [orteacher] that does not come close to attainingits goals will eventually lose its support.”Dissatisfaction occurs when Adventist

schools lose their distinctiveness and Adventistteachers fail to understand why their institu-tions must be unique. Such teachers andschools should lose their support, since Ad -ventist education without a clearly understoodand implemented Adventist philosophy is animpossible contradiction and a waste of money.Corollary Number 2 is therefore crucial to

the health and even the survival of Adventistschools—and the educators in those schools.

“We think only when it hurts.” In too manyplaces, Advent ist education is already hurting.The greatest gifts we as educators can give to theAd ventist educational system and to society are(1) to consciously examine our educational phi-losophy from the perspective of biblical Christi-anity, (2) to carefully consider the implicationsof that philosophy for daily classroom activity,and then (3) to implement that philosophy con-sistently and effectively.

AN ADVENTIST APPROACH TO PHILOSOPHY

Toward a Christian MetaphysicsThe most fundamental and inescapable

observation facing every human being is the re-ality and mystery of personal existence in acomplex environment. Atheistic philosopherJean-Paul Sartre raised that issue when henoted that the basic philosophic problem is thatsomething is there, rather than that nothing isthere. Francis Schaeffer, reflecting upon that in-sight, wrote that “nothing that is worth callinga philosophy can sidestep the question of thefact that things do exist and that they exist intheir present form and complexity.”11

Complexity is a key word in that sentence.Yet despite the complexity of existence, it doesseem to be intelligible. Humans do not live ina universe “gone mad” or one behaving errati-cally. To the contrary, the world around us andthe universe at large apparently operate accord-ing to consistent laws that can be discovered,communicated, and used in making trustwor-thy predictions. Modern science is predicatedupon that predictability.Another thing about our universe is that it is

basically friendly to humans and other forms of


Figure 1. The Relationship of Philosophy to Educational Practice

EDUCATIONAL PRACTICE

Philosophic Determinants Educational IssuesContextual Modifying Factors

Social Function of Educational Institutions

TeachingMethodologies

Curricular Emphasis

Role of the Teacher

Nature of the Student

Goals

Epistemological Beliefs

Axiological Beliefs

Metaphysical Beliefs PoliticalDynamics

SocialForces

EconomicConditions

Expectationsof ImmediateFamily or Community


life. If it were intrinsically hostile, life wouldmost certainly be extinguished by the ceaselessassault of an unfriendly environment upon rela-tively feeble organisms. The natural world ap-pears to be made-to-order to provide food, water,temperature, light, and a host of other necessitiesthat are essential to the continuation of life. Theparameters of the conditions necessary for themaintenance of life are quite narrow, and evensmall changes in the availability of life’s essen-tials would threaten the existence of life as weknow it. Thus the continuing existence of lifepoints to a basically friendly universe.But is it really friendly? Clearly, one doesn’t

have to be especially brilliant to realize thatmany things are wrong with our world. Wedaily observe a beautiful world seemingly madefor life and happiness, but filled with animosity,deterioration, and death. We are faced with theseemingly intractable problem of pain anddeath existing in the midst of orderliness andlife. There appears to be a great controversy be-tween the forces of good and the forces of evilthat manifests itself in every aspect of life. Theuniverse may be friendly toward life, but thereis no denying that it is often antagonistic topeace, orderliness, and even life itself. Human-ity’s habitat is not a place of neutrality. Rather,it is often an arena of active conflict.The problem we face is making sense of the

complex world in which we live. The almostuniversal longing of human beings to makesense of their world has led them to ask thosequestions that form the heart of philosophy.Some people believe that there is no ultimate

meaning to existence. But others find it less thansatisfactory to suggest that intelligence flows outof ignorance, order out of chaos, personality outof impersonality, and something out of nothing.It seems more likely that an infinite universe pos-tulates an infinite Creator, an intelligent and or-derly universe points to an ultimate Intelligence,a basically friendly universe points to a benevo-lent Being, and the human personality reflects aPersonality upon which individual personalitiesare modeled. People refer to this infinite Creator,ultimate Intelligence, benevolent Being, and orig-inal Personality as “god,” while at the same timerealizing that this word is meaningless until it isdefined.But how to define god becomes a very real

problem, especially when we acknowledge themental limitations of the human race. Not onlyare we faced with our serious ignorance of thecomplexities of our immediate environment,but also with our inability even to begin to copewith the apparent infinity of time, space, andcomplexity in the universe at large. And obvi-

ously, if we have difficulty grasping the com-plexity of the creation, we have an even greaterchallenge in understanding the Creator, since amaker must be more complex and greater thanthat which is made.And that reality brings us to the jagged fron-

tier between metaphysics and epistemology.Because of our innate human inability to un-derstand the complex reality of the world inwhich we live, the Creator-God has seen fit toprovide a revelation of Himself, His world, andthe human predicament in the Bible.“In the beginning God” (Genesis 1:1)12 are the

very first words of the Bible. With those words,we find the ultimate foundation of an Adventistapproach to metaphysics. Everything else is sec-ondary to God’s existence. God is the reason foreverything else. And if God is central to the Bibleand reality itself, He must also be at the centerof education. An education that leaves God outof its program is of necessity inadequate. Howcould it be adequate if it leaves out of its ap-proach to learning this most important fact?But God not only exists, He also acts. Thus

the Bible’s first verse continues with thesewords: “. . . God created the heavens and theearth.” The material world as we know it didnot come about by accident. Rather, its intrica-cies reflect both design and a Designer. Genesistells us that God did not create a flawed world,but one that He could call “very good” near theend of creation week (Genesis 1:31).Two things are noteworthy about that “very

good” statement. The first is that God createda perfect world. The second is that the materialworld is inherently good and valuable and not,as regarded by some forms of Greek philoso-phy, an evil aspect of reality. According to thebiblical view, the physical environment we in-habit should be respected and cared for be-cause it is God’s good creation.The final act in creation week was the estab-

lishment of a memorial that would remind hu-mans of who God is and what He has done.“Thus,” we read, “the heavens and the earthwere finished, and all the host of them. And onthe seventh day God finished his work which hehad done, and he rested on the seventh day fromall his work which he had done. So God blessedthe seventh day and hallowed it, because on itGod rested from all his work which he had donein creation” (Genesis 2:1-3).The Sabbath is one of the first educational

features in Genesis. A weekly object lesson, itsobservance by humans was enshrined in theFourth Commandment (Exodus 20:8-11) and isrelevant throughout human history. One of thefinal messages to be given to earth’s inhabi-


The most

fundamental and

inescapable

observation facing

every human

being is the reality

and mystery of

personal existence

in a complex

environment.


The almost

universal longing of

human beings to

make sense of their

world has led

them to ask those

questions that form

the heart of

philosophy.

tants before the second coming of Jesus is to“‘worship him who made heaven and earth,the sea and the fountains of water’” (Revelation14:7), an obvious reference back to the TenCommandments and through them to the me-morial of Creation in Genesis 2.Central to Christian metaphysics are the

facts that God exists and that He acted in cre-ation. But He not only created birds and trees,He also created human beings in His ownimage (Genesis 1:26, 27). Of all God’s crea-tures, human beings are the only ones made tobe like God. Thus in its original state, humanitywas sinless and pure. Beyond that, humanswere created in a responsible relationship totheir Maker. God gave them “dominion” overevery living creature and “all the earth” (vs.26). Human beings were created to be God’sstewards, His vice-regents on earth.A fourth important element in a Christian

understanding of reality is the “invention” ofsin by Lucifer, who forgot his own creatureli-ness and sought to put himself in the place ofGod (Isaiah 14:12-14; Ezekiel 28:14-17). Withthe entrance of sin, we find the genesis of thecontroversy between good and evil that we ex-perience in the world around us. Sin is bad enough in the abstract. But, the

Bible tells us, it didn’t just remain “out there”in the universe. Rather, Lucifer spread it toearth. How sin entered planet Earth and thehuman race is set forth in Genesis 3, which de-scribes the corruption of humanity as a resultof what theologians call “the Fall.”The effects of sin have been devastating to the

human race. Not only did sin cause estrange-ment between God and humans (Genesis 3:8-11),humans and their fellow beings (vs. 12), humanswith their own selves (vs. 13), and humans withGod’s created world (vss. 17, 18), but it also ledto death (vs. 19) and a partial loss of the imageof God (Genesis 9:6; 5:3; James 3:9).Accompanying the invention of sin by Lucifer

and its spread to humanity at the Fall is the real-ity of the ongoing conflict between Christ andSatan (often referred to as the “Great Contro-versy”) that began before the creation of thisearth and will not be terminated until the finaldestruction of the devil and his works at the endof the millennium (Revelation 20:11-15). Thatcontroversy dominates the pages of the Biblefrom Genesis 3 through Revelation 20. The focalpoint of this warfare is Satan’s attempt to dis-credit God’s character and to pervert human per-ceptions of His law of love (Matthew 22:36-40;Romans 13:8-10). God’s foremost exhibition ofHis love was not only sending Jesus to rescue afallen race but more particularly Christ’s death

on the cross. The Book of Revelation indicatesthat God’s law of love will be an issue in the con-troversy between the forces of good and evil untilthe end of earthly history (12:17; 14:12).The Fall of Genesis 3 is a central tenet of the

biblical worldview. Without the Fall, the rest ofthe Bible makes no sense. Starting with Genesis3, the Bible features both the results of humantransgression and God’s plan and efforts fordealing with the sin problem. As we will seewhen we discuss the needs of students, the Falland its results are foundational issues in Chris-tian education. They are, in fact, issues thatmake Christian education unique among his-tory’s educational philosophies.Another aspect of a Christian metaphysic is

the inability of human beings, without divineaid, to change their own nature, overcome theirinherent sinfulness, or restore the lost image ofGod. Lost is the word the Bible uses to describethe human condition. The daily news reflectsthe results of that lostness in its continuous re-porting of greed, perversion, and violence. Andif the news were not enough, popular entertain-ment focuses on illicit sex and violence. TheBible describes the same problems as occurringeven among God’s heroes.Of course, ever since the Fall, there have been

people who have wanted nothing to do with Godand His principles. But many humans havewanted to be good. Among them are those whomake long lists of resolutions and attempt to liveflawless lives, but to no avail. They repeatedlyexperience failure as their passions, appetites,greed, and natural inclination toward selfishnessovercome their best intentions; and they repeatthe dynamics of the Fall in a personal fall intosinful ways. Another group have achieved a fairamount of goodness or respectability throughself-control and law keeping, but have ended upbeing proud of their righteousness. Included inthis group are the Pharisees throughout the ageswho smugly declare that they are better thanother people, not recognizing their own blind-ness to their real condition (Luke 18:9-14). Nomatter how hard human beings try to be right-eous, they still remain lost and confused.As a result of universal human lostness in its

several variations, the Bible pictures God takingthe initiative for humanity’s salvation andrestoration through the incarnation, life, death,resurrection, and heavenly ministry of JesusChrist. Evidence of God’s initiative in the rescueplan of salvation appears throughout the Bible.We first find that initiative in Genesis 3:9, but itruns throughout the Old Testament and into theNew, where we are told that “God so loved theworld that He gave his only Son, that whoever



PRINCIPLESbelieves in him should not perish but have eter-nal life” (John 3:16). Jesus put it somewhat dif-ferently when He claimed that His mission was“‘to seek and to save the lost’” (Luke 19:10).An important aspect of Christ’s incarnation

is that it reveals God’s character. “In many andvarious ways,” we read in the opening wordsof the Book of Hebrews, “God spoke of old toour fathers by the prophets; but in these lastdays he has spoken to us by a Son, whom heappointed the heir of all things, through whomalso he created the world. He reflects the gloryof God and bears the very stamp of his nature”(1:1-3). Jesus is the fullest revelation of God’scharacter. The Bible declares that “God is love”(1 John 4:8), but reading those parts of it thatmake Him appear to be less than loving makesus wonder about His real nature. The earthlylife of Jesus, however, illustrates God’s love andepitomizes the other attributes of His character.As a result, Jesus’ character and life provide anethical ideal for His followers.Because of human lostness, God sent the

Holy Spirit to implement His plan for restoringHis image in fallen humanity. That work in-cludes the calling out of a community of believ-ers. The Bible pictures the rescue of the lost asa divine act in which individuals are born ofthe Spirit (John 3:3-6), transformed in theirminds and hearts (Romans 12:2), and resur-rected to a new way of life in which they modelChrist’s character (Romans 6:1-14). Each ofthose acts results from the work of the HolySpirit, the third Person of the Godhead.Those who respond positively to the Spirit’s

work become a part of the community of saintswhich the Bible calls the Church or the body ofChrist (Ephesians 1:22, 23). But we must notconfuse the Church and the church. The visiblechurch on Earth is made up of members whomay or may not be under the guidance of theSpirit. But the Church of God includes onlythose believers who have truly surrenderedtheir hearts to God and have been born of theSpirit, who is central to God’s great plan of res-cuing the lost and restoring the divine ideals.Some of those ideals relate to social action.

God commands His people to feed the hungry,care for the sick, and seek in all ways not onlyto preserve the Earth but also to make it a betterplace. But in the end, He knows that even thebest human efforts at reform will fall short ofwhat needs to be done to clean up the mess cre-ated by sin. Thus, social action is an importantfunction of God’s people, but an inadequate onein the sense of eradicating the problem.As a result, Christ has promised to return at

the end of earthly history to put an end to sin

and its results. At that time, He will not onlyfeed the hungry but also abolish hunger, notonly comfort the grieving but also eradicatedeath. The Bible pictures the Second Advent asthe hope of the ages (Titus 2:13; Revelation21:1-4). It describes the final act in the dramaof salvation as the restoration of Planet Earthand its inhabitants to their Edenic condition (2Peter 3:10-13). The Bible closes with a pictureof the restored Earth and an invitation for peo-ple to join God and Christ in their great plan ofredemption and restoration (Revelation 21, 22).

Summary of the Biblical Frameworkof Reality• The existence of the living God, the Creator.• The creation by God of a perfect world and

uni verse.• Humanity’s creation in the image of God

as His responsible agents on earth.• The “invention” of sin by Lucifer, who for-

got his own creatureliness and sought to puthimself in the place of God.• The spread of sin to the earth by Lucifer,

resulting in the Fall of humanity and the partialloss of God’s image.• The conflict or Great Controversy between

Christ and Satan over the character of God andHis law of love, which runs throughout earthlyhistory.• The inability of human beings, without di-

vine aid, to change their own nature, overcometheir inherent sinfulness, or restore the lostimage of God within themselves.• The initiative of God for humanity’s salva-

tion and its restoration to its original statethrough the incarnation, life, death, resurrec-tion, and heavenly ministry of Jesus Christ.• The revelation of God’s character in the life

and teachings of Christ, which provides thefoundation for Christian ethics.• The activity of the Holy Spirit in the plan

for restoring God’s image in fallen humanityand His work in the calling out of the commu-nity of believers, the Church.• The command of Christ for the Church to

be socially active in the interim between Hisfirst and second advents.• The return of Christ at the end of earthly his-

tory to put an end to sin and solve the problemsthat human social action could not eradicate.• The eventual restoration of the earth and

its faithful inhabitants to the Edenic condition.

Metaphysics and Adventist EducationThe above discussion presents the basic out-

line of a Christian view of reality. Because Chris -tianity is a supernatural religion, it is thoroughly



RE

AL

IT

Yantithetical to all forms of naturalism, to thosetheistic schemes that do not place God at thecenter of the human educational experience, andto humanism, which purports that humanity cansave itself through its own wisdom and good-ness. Adventist education, to be Christian in ac-tuality and not so in name only, must con-sciously be built upon a biblical metaphysicalposition.A Christian view of metaphysics provides the

foundation for Adventist education. Christian ed-ucational systems have been established becauseGod exists and because His existence sheds lighton the meaning of every aspect of life. Other ed-ucational systems have alternative foundationsand cannot be substituted for Christian educa-tion. Belief in the Christian view of reality moti-vates people to sacrifice both their time and theirmeans for the establishment of Christian schools.The same is true for Adventist education, whichnot only sets forth those teachings that it shareswith other Christians, but also those biblical be-liefs that make the Seventh-day Adventist Churcha distinct Christian movement with an end-timemessage to share with the world. Adventistschools that teach only those beliefs that the de-nomination shares with other Christians have noreason for existing.A biblical metaphysic determines what shall

be studied in the school, and the contextualframework in which every subject is presented.As such, the biblical view of reality supplies thecriteria for curricular selection and emphasis.The biblically based curriculum has a uniqueemphasis because of Christianity’s unique meta-physical viewpoint. Adventist education musttreat all subject matter from the perspective ofthe biblical worldview. Every course must be for-mulated in terms of its relationship to the exis-tence and purpose of the Creator God.Thus, every aspect of Adventist education is de -

termined by the biblical view of reality. Biblicalmetaphysical presuppositions not only justifyand determine the existence of, curriculum usedin, and social role of Adventist education; theyalso explicate the nature, needs, and potential ofthe learner, suggest the most beneficial types ofre lationships between teachers and their students,and provide criteria for the selection of teachingmethodologies. Those topics will be further de-veloped in the second and third installments ofthese continuing-education study materials.

A Christian Epistemological PerspectiveEpistemology, as we noted above, deals with

how a person knows. As such, it has to do withone of the most basic problems of human exis-tence. If our epistemology is incorrect, then it

follows that everything else in our philosophicunderstanding will be wrong or, at the veryleast, distorted. We earlier saw that every philo-sophic system develops a hierarchy of episte-mological sources that becomes foundational.For Christians, God’s revelation in the Bible is

the foremost source of knowledge and the mostessential epistemological authority. All othersources of knowledge must be tested and verifiedin the light of Scripture. Underlying the authori-tative role of the Bible are several assumptions:• Humans exist in a supernatural universe

in which the infinite Creator God has revealedHimself to finite minds on a level they can com-prehend in at least a limited fashion.• Human beings were created in the image

of God, and even though fallen, are capable ofrational thought.• Communication with other intelligent be-

ings (people and God) is possible in spite of hu-manity’s inherent limitations and the inadequa-cies of human language.• The God who cared enough to reveal Him-

self to people also cared enough to protect theessence of that revelation as it was transmittedthrough succeeding generations.• Human beings are able to make suffi-

ciently correct interpretations of the Biblethrough the guidance of the Holy Spirit to ar-rive at valid truth.The Bible is an authoritative source of Truths

that are beyond the possibility of attainment ex-cept through revelation. This source of knowl-edge deals with the big questions, such as themeaning of life and death, where the world camefrom and what its future will be, how the prob-lem of sin arose and how it is being dealt with,and the like. The purpose of Scripture is to “in-struct” people “for salvation through faith inChrist.” Beyond that, it is “profitable for teach-ing, for reproof, for correction, and for trainingin righteousness” (2 Timothy 3:15, 16). It shouldbe apparent, then, that the Bible is not an ex-haustive source of knowledge and never was in-tended to be a “divine encyclopedia.” It leavesmany questions unanswered. On the other hand,because it answers the most basic questions offinite humanity, it provides a perspective and ametaphysical framework in which to exploreunanswered questions and to arrive at coherent,unified answers.The Bible does not try to justify its claims,

and thus must be accepted by faith based uponboth external and internal evidences, such asthe discoveries of archaeology, the witness offulfilled prophecy, and the satisfaction its wayof life brings to the human heart. Reinforcingthis idea, we read in Steps to Christ that “God



never asks us to believe, without giving suffi-cient evidence upon which to base our faith.His existence, His character, the truthfulness ofHis word, are all established by testimony thatappeals to our reason; and this testimony isabundant. Yet God has never removed the pos-sibility of doubt. Our faith must rest upon evi-dence, not demonstration. Those who wish todoubt will have opportunity; while those whoreally desire to know the truth will find plentyof evidence on which to rest their faith.”13

Seventh-day Adventists believe that theBible teaches that the prophetic gift will be inthe church until the Second Advent (Ephesians4:8, 11-13) and that Christians are not to rejectthe claims of those who believe they have theprophetic gift, but to test their teachings by thetestimony of the Bible (see 1 Thessalonians5:19-21; Matthew 7:15-20; 1 John 4:1, 2).Having done that testing, the Seventh-day Ad-

ventist Church early concluded that Ellen G.White had a valid gift of revelatory proph ecy forthe Adventist community that would help it tobe faithful to biblical principles during the periodbefore the Second Advent. That gift was notgiven to take the place of the Bible or to providenew doctrines, but to help God’s people under-stand and apply God’s Word as revealed in theBible. “The written testimonies,” Ellen Whitepenned, “are not to give new light, but to im-press vividly upon the heart the truths of inspi-ration already revealed. Man’s duty to God andto his fellow man has been distinctly specified inGod’s word, yet but few of you are obedient tothe light given. Additional truth is not broughtout; but God has through the Testimonies simpli-fied the great truths already given and in Hisown chosen way brought them before the peopleto awaken and impress the mind with them.”14

It is important to note that Ellen White hada great deal to say about education in the con-text of the biblical worldview. As a result, wewill quote her insights where they contributeto rounding out an Adventist philosophy of ed-ucation.The source of knowledge next in importance

for the Christian is that of nature as people en-counter it in daily life and through scientificstudy. The world around us is a revelation of theCreator God (Psalm 19:1-4; Romans 1:20). The-ologians have given the term “special revelation”to the Scriptures, while they have viewed thenatural world as a “general revelation.”Regarding the relationship between special

and general revelation, Ellen White writes:“Since the book of nature and the book of rev-elation bear the impress of the same mastermind, they cannot but speak in harmony. By

different methods, and in different languages,they witness to the same great truths. Scienceis ever discovering new wonders; but shebrings from her research nothing that, rightlyunderstood, conflicts with divine revelation.The book of nature and the written word shedlight upon each other. They make us ac-quainted with God by teaching us something ofthe laws through which He works.”15

Yet even the casual observer soon discoversproblems in interpreting the book of nature. Heor she sees not only love and life, but also hateand death. The natural world, as observed byfallible humanity, gives a garbled and seem-ingly contradictory message concerning ulti-mate reality. The apostle Paul noted that thewhole of creation has been affected by the Fall(Romans 8:22). The effects of the controversybetween good and evil have made general rev-elation by itself an insufficient source of knowl-edge about God and ultimate reality. The find-ings of science and the daily experiences of lifemust be interpreted in the light of scripturalrevelation, which supplies the framework forepistemological interpretation.16

The study of nature does enrich humanity’sunderstanding of its environment. It also pro-vides answers for some of the many questionsnot dealt with in the Bible. However, the inves-tigative value of human science must not beoverestimated. As Frank Gaebelein points out,scientific people have not produced the truth ofscience. They have merely uncovered or foundwhat is already there. The “hunches” gainedthrough patient scientific research that lead toa further grasp of truth are not mere luck. Theyare a part of God’s disclosure of truth to hu-manity through the natural world.17

A third epistemological source for the Chris-tian is rationality. Humans, having been createdin the image of God, possess a rational nature.They can think abstractly, be reflective, andreason from cause to effect. As a result of theFall, human reasoning powers have been less-ened but not destroyed. God’s plea to sinful in-dividuals is that they might “reason together”with Him concerning the human predicamentand its solution (Isaiah 1:18).The role of rationalism in Christian epistemol-

ogy must be clearly defined. The Christian faithis not a rationalistic production. People do notar rive at Christian truth through developing bythemselves a system of thought that leads to acorrect view of God, humanity, and the nature ofsin and salvation. Rather, Christianity is a re-vealed religion. Unaided human reason can bede ceitful and lead away from truth. Christians,therefore, while not rationalistic in the fullest


If our

epistemology is

incorrect, then it

follows that every-

thing else in our

philosophic

understanding will

be wrong or, at

the very least,

distorted.



The Bible

provides a per-

spective and a

metaphysical

framework in which

to explore

unanswered ques-

tions and to arrive

at coherent,

unified answers.

sense of the word, are rational. Bernard Rammhas correctly remarked that reason is not asource of religious authority, but rather a mode ofapprehending truth. As such, “it is the truth ap -prehended which is authoritative, not reason.”18

The rational aspect of epistemology is an es-sential part in, but not the sole element of, know-ing. It helps us understand truth obtainedthrough special and general revelation, and en-ables us to extend that knowledge into the un-known. In a Christian epistemology, the findingsof reason must always be checked against thetruth of Scripture. The same principle must beapplied to knowledge gained through intuitionand from the study of authorities. The all-encom-passing epistemological test is to compare allpurported truth to the scriptural framework.In closing, we need to make several other

observations about a Christian approach toepistemology:• From the biblical perspective, all truth is

God’s truth, since truth finds its source in Godas the Creator and Originator.19

• There is a Great Controversy underway in thearea of epistemology, just as there is a similar ten-sion in nature. The forces of evil are continuallyseeking to undermine the Bible, distort humanreasoning, and convince people to rely on theirown inadequate fallen selves in their search fortruth. The epistemological conflict is of crucial im-portance because misdirection in this area willshift every other human endeavor off-center.• There are absolute Truths in the universe,

but fallen humans can gain only a relative orimperfect grasp of those absolutes.• The Bible is not concerned with abstract

truth. It pictures truth as related to life. Know-ing, in the fullest biblical sense, means apply-ing perceived knowledge to one’s daily life.• The various sources of knowledge avail-

able to the Christian are complementary. Thus,while all sources can and should be used by theChristian, each one should be evaluated in thelight of the biblical pattern.• The acceptance of a Christian epistemol-

ogy cannot be separated from the acceptanceof a Christian metaphysics, and vice versa.

Epistemology and Adventist EducationThe Christian view of truth, along with

Christian metaphysics, lies at the foundation ofthe very existence of Adventist education. Theacceptance of revelation as the basic source ofauthority places the Bible at the heart of Chris-tian education and provides the knowledgeframework within which all subject matters areto be evaluated. That insight particularly im-pacts upon the curriculum. We will see in our

later discussion of curriculum that the biblicalrevelation provides both the foundation and thecontext for all subjects taught in Christianschools. Christian epistemology, since it dealswith the way people come to know anything,also influences the selection and application ofteaching methodologies.

Aspects of Christian AxiologyChristian values build directly upon a bibli-

cal perspective of metaphysics and epistemol-ogy. Both a Christian ethic and a Christian aes-thetic are grounded in the biblical doctrine ofcreation. Ethical and aesthetic values exist be-cause the Creator deliberately created a worldwith these dimensions. Thus, the principles ofChristian axiology are derived from the Bible,which in its ultimate sense is a revelation of thecharacter and values of God.A crucial consideration in a Christian axiol-

ogy is that Christian metaphysics sets forth aposition of radical discontinuity from otherworldviews, in terms of the normality of thepresent world order. While most non-Christiansbelieve that the present condition of humanityand earthly affairs is the normal state of things,the Bible teaches that human beings have fallenfrom their normal relationship to God, otherpeople, their own selves, and the world aroundthem. From the biblical perspective, sin and itsresults have altered people’s nature and af-fected their ideals and valuing processes. As aresult of the present world’s abnormality, peo-ple often value the wrong things. Beyond that,they are liable to call evil “good” and good“evil” because of their faulty frame of reference.Christ Himself was an axiological radical. His

radicalism stemmed in part from the fact that Hebelieved humanity’s true home is heaven andnot earth. But He did not teach that the presentlife is not of value. Rather, He claimed that thereare things of more value, and that they shouldbe the foundation for human activity. When oneapplies Christ’s teaching, his or her life will bebased upon a different set of values from thelives of persons who feel at home in the abnor-mal world of sin. To be normal in terms of em-bracing God’s ideals will therefore make a Chris-tian appear abnormal by the standards of thepresent social order. Christian values must be built upon Christian

principles. Thus, they are not merely an exten-sion of non-Christian values, even though thereare certainly areas of overlap. As noted earlier,the two major subsets of axiology are ethics (therealm of the good) and aesthetics (the realm ofthe beautiful). The absolute basis of Christianethics is God. There is no standard or law be-



PERSPECTIVEyond God. Law, as it is revealed in Scripture, isbased upon God’s character, which centers onlove and justice (Exodus 34:6, 7; 1 John 4:8; Rev-elation 16:7; 19:2). Biblical history provides ex-amples of divine love and justice in action.The concept of love is a meaningless idea

until it is defined. The Christian looks to theBible for a definition because it is there that theGod who is love has revealed Himself in a con-crete way that is understandable to humanminds. The Bible’s fullest elucidations of themeaning of love appear in the actions and atti-tudes expressed by Jesus, the exposition of lovein 1 Corinthians 13, and in the underlyingmeaning of the Ten Commandments. Even abrief study reveals a distinct qualitative differ-ence between what “normal” humans refer toas love and the biblical concept of divine love.John Powell captured the essence of divine lovewhen he pointed out that love focuses on giv-ing rather than receiving.20 It works for the verybest good of others, even those thought of asenemies. In that same vein, Carl Henry hasaptly written that “Christian ethics is an ethicsof service.”21 Thus, it is that Christian ethicsand Christian love stand in radical discontinu-ity from what is generally thought of as love byhuman beings.That concept leads us to the ethical expres-

sion of God through His revealed law. All toomany Christians believe that God’s basic law isthe Ten Commandments. That is not the positionJesus took. When asked about the greatest law,He replied that “‘You shall love the Lord yourGod with all your heart, and with all your soul,and with all your mind. This is the great and firstcommandment. And a second is like it, You shalllove your neighbor as yourself. On these twocommandments depend all the law and theprophets’” (Matthew 22:37-40). The Ten Com-mandments thus are an extension and concreteillustration of the Law of Love. The first fourcommandments explain a person’s duties in re-gard to love to God, while the last six explainvarious aspects of a person’s love for otherhuman beings (see Romans 13:8-10). In onesense, the Ten Commandments may be seen asa negative version of the Law of Love, explainedin a way that gives people some definite guide-lines that they can apply to daily life.One of the difficulties with a negative ethical

base is that people are always seeking to knowwhen they can stop loving their neighbor, whenthe limit has been reached. Peter’s question inregard to the limits of forgiveness is a case inpoint. Like all “normal” individuals, Peter wasmore interested in when he could stop loving hisneighbors than in how he could continue to love

them. Christ’s 70 times 7 answer indicates thatthere are no limits to love (Matthew 18:21-35).There is never a time when we can stop lovingand cut loose and be our “real selves.” That is themessage of Christ’s two great commandments.Thus, the Christian ethical perspective is pri-

marily positive rather than negative. That is,Christian ethics focuses primarily on a life ofloving action and only secondarily on what weshould avoid. Christian growth does not comefrom what we don’t do, but is rather a productof what we actively do in our daily lives. Andthat positive ethic is based upon the new birthexperience (John 3:3-6). Christians have notonly died to the old way of life; they have alsobeen resurrected to a new way of life as theywalk with Christ (Romans 6:1-11).Before concluding our discussion of Chris-

tian ethics, there are several more points tomake. One is that a biblical ethic is internalrather than external. Jesus, for example, re-marked that harboring thoughts of hate or adul-tery is just as immoral as the acts themselves(Matthew 5:21-28). He also taught that all ex-ternal actions flow out of the heart and mind(Matthew 15:18, 19). Second, the Christian ethic is based upon a

personal relationship with both God and otherpeople. It involves actually loving both God andpeople and cannot be satisfied with a mere legaland/or mechanical relationship. Of course, ourrelationships with others should be legal, but be-yond that, they must also be personal.Third, the biblical ethic is based upon the

fact that every individual is created in theimage of God and can reason from cause to ef-fect and make moral decisions. They canchoose to do good or evil. Thus, the Christianethic is a moral enterprise. Unthinking moralityis a contradiction in terms.Fourth, Christian morality is not merely con-

cerned with people’s basic needs. It wants thevery best for them.Fifth, a Christian ethic, contrary to many

people’s perspective, is not something that in-terferes with the good life. “In reality, moralrules are directions for running the human ma-chine. Every moral rule is there to prevent abreakdown, or a strain, or a friction, in the run-ning of that machine.”22

Sixth, the function of the Christian ethic is re-demptive and restorative. Because of the Fall,human beings became alienated from God, otherpeople, their own selves, and their physical en-vironment. The role of ethics is to enable peopleto live in a way that helps to restore those rela-tionships and to bring people into the position ofwholeness for which they were created.



Christian

growth does not

come from what

we don’t do,

but is rather a

product of what we

actively do in

our daily lives.


AestheticsThe second major branch of axiology is aes-

thetics. It is an important function of all educa-tional systems to develop in students a healthysense of what is beautiful and ugly.What is a Christian aesthetic? To arrive at a

definition, several points need to be made. Thefirst is that humans are, by their very nature,aesthetic beings. They not only appreciatebeauty, but also seem to be compulsive creatorsof it. That is one result of their being created inthe image of God. God not only created func-tional things—He also created things of beauty.He could have created the world destitute ofpleasing colors, without the sweet scents offlowers, or the amazing array of birds and ani-mals. The existence of beauty in nature sayssomething about the Creator. Of course, onedifference between the creatorship of peopleand that of God is that He created out of noth-ing (Hebrews 11:3), while humans in theirfiniteness must fashion and mold that which al-ready exists.A second point to note is that while creativ-

ity is good, not everything that humans createis good, beautiful, or edifying. That is true be-cause even though human beings were createdin the image of God, they have fallen and nowhave a distorted view of reality, truth, andvalue. Art forms, therefore, not only revealtruth, beauty, and goodness, but also illustratethe unnatural, erroneous, and perverted. Be-cause the galactic controversy between goodand evil has invaded every aspect of humanlife, it also affects the aesthetic realm and is es-pecially powerful in the arts due to their emo-tional impact and their profound involvementin the intricacies of human existence.A leading question in the area of Christian

aesthetics is whether the subject matter of artis-tic forms should deal only with the good andbeautiful, or whether it should also include theugly and the grotesque. Using the Bible as amodel, we perceive that it does not deal onlywith the good and the beautiful. But neitherdoes it glorify the ugly and evil. Rather, sin,evil, and ugliness are put in perspective andused to point out humanity’s desperate need ofa Savior and a better way. In summary, the re-lationship of the good and ugly in the Bible istreated realistically so that the Christian, withthe eyes of faith, learns to hate the ugly be-cause of his or her relationship with the Godwho is beauty, truth, and goodness.Dealing with the relationship between the

beautiful and the ugly in art forms is vital toChristian aesthetics because of Paul’s warningthat by beholding we become changed (2

Corinthians 3:18). Aesthetics has a bearing onethics. What we read, see, hear, and touch hasan effect on our daily lives. Aesthetics, therefore,lies at the very center of the Christian life and areligious system of education. As a result, aChristian producer of art (which in one sense isall of us) ideally is a responsible servant of Godwho, out of a heart filled with Christian love,functions “to make life better, more worthwhile,to create the sound, the shape, the tale, the dec-oration, the environment that is meaningful andlovely and a joy to mankind.”23

Perhaps that which is most beautiful from aChris tian perspective is whatever contributes to-ward restoring individuals to a right relationshipto their Maker, other people, their own selves, andthe environment in which they live. Whatever ob-structs the restorative process is, by def ini tion,evil and ugly. The ultimate goal of Chris tian aes-thetics is the creation of a beautiful character.

Axiology and Adventist Education“Education,” Arthur Holmes writes, “has to do

with the transmission of values.”24 It is that tru -ism that places axiology alongside of metaphy sicsand epistemology as a foundational reason whySeventh-day Adventists have chosen to establishand maintain a separate system of schools.A Christian perspective on such axiological is-

sues as ethics and aesthetics is an essential con-tribution of Adventist education in a world thathas lost a balanced and healthy biblical orienta-tion. The cultural tension in differing value sys-tems is central to what David Naugle labels“worldview warfare.”25 James D. Hunter andJonathan Zimmerman explore the explosive im-plications of those axiological issues in bookswith such expressive titles as Culture Wars: TheStruggle to Define America and Whose America?Culture Wars in the Public Schools.26

Values education is a central reason for theexistence of Adventist schools. And Adventisteducators need to be both informed and activeas they seek to transmit to their students a bib-lically based approach to values.

Adventist Philosophy and EducationThe existence of Adventist schools is no acci-

dent. To the contrary, the church early in its his-tory realized that because its philosophy differedsignificantly from other segments of society, ithad a responsibility to pass on that philosophyto young people through the development of aneducational system. That was a conscious choicebuilt upon philosophic principle. The result hasbeen the creation of an Adventist system of edu-cation that currently has almost 8,000 schools,colleges, and universities.

NOTES AND REFERENCES


That system and the expense undergirdingit can be justified only if the church’s schoolsare faithful to the philosophic foundation uponwhich they were established. The best way, inthe descriptive language of Shane Anderson,“to kill Adventist education” is to neglect thosephilosophic underpinnings.27 For that reasonalone, the study of the philosophy of Adventisteducation is of crucial importance to educators,school board members, pastors, and parents.Thus far in our presentation we have exam-

ined the biblical philosophic position that mustinform Adventist educational practice. In Parts IIand III, we will discuss what that philosophymeans in terms of the needs of the student, therole of the teacher, the formation of the curricu-lum, the selection of teaching strategies, and thesocial function of the Adventist school in thechurch and the larger world. �

POINTS TO PONDER• Why is metaphysics so important to edu-

cation?• What are the implications of epistemology

for the operation of a Christian school?• In what specific ways can (or should) a

Christian ethic shape your daily activities as aneducator?• Why is it that aesthetics are controversial

in a Christian (or even a non-Christian) envi-ronment?

This continuing education article has been peer reviewed.

Dr. George R. Knight hastaught at the elementary,secondary, and universitylevels, and has also servedthe Seventh-day AdventistChurch as a school admin-istrator and pastor. He haswritten widely in the areasof Adventist educational

philosophy as well as Adventist educational andchurch history. Now retired, but still writing andspeaking at conventions and camp meetings, helives in Rogue River, Oregon.

NOTES AND REFERENCES1. David K. Naugle, Worldview: The History of a Con-

cept (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 2002), p. 260.2. Ellen G. White, Counsels to Parents, Teachers, and

Students (Mountain View, Calif.: Pacific Press Publ. Assn.,1943), p. 49.

3. __________, Fundamentals of Christian Education(Nashville, Tenn.: Southern Publ. Assn., 1923), p. 541.

4. Van Cleve Morris, Philosophy and the AmericanSchool (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1961), pp. 19, 20.

5. For a helpful treatment of the various “isms,” seeNorman L. Geisler and William D. Watkins, Worlds Apart:A Handbook on World Views, 2d ed. (Grand Rapids,Mich.: Baker, 1989); a broader treatment is found inJames W. Sire, The Universe Next Door: A Basic WorldviewCatalog, 3d ed. (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity, 1997).

6. David Elton Trueblood, Philosophy of Religion (NewYork: Harper and Row, 1957), p. xiv.

7. Desmond Morris, The Naked Ape (New York: Dell,1967).

8. David Elton Trueblood, A Place to Stand (New York:Harper and Row, 1969), p. 22. For a fuller discussion onthe limits of proof, see Trueblood’s General Philosophy(New York: Harper and Row, 1963), pp. 92-111.

9. See James Davison Hunter, Culture Wars: The Strug-gle to Define America (New York: Basic Books, 1991);Jonathan Zimmerman, Whose America? Culture Wars inthe Public Schools (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard UniversityPress, 2002).

10. From George R. Knight, Philosophy and Education:An Introduction in Christian Perspective, 4th ed. (BerrienSprings, Mich.: Andrews University Press, 2006), p. 34.Reproduced by permission.

11. Francis A. Schaeffer, He Is There and He Is NotSilent (Wheaton, Ill.: Tyndale House, 1972), p. 1.

12. Unless otherwise indicated, all Bible texts in this ar-ticle are quoted from the Revised Standard Version. Bibletexts credited to RSV are from the Revised Standard Versionof the Bible, copyright © 1946, 1952, 1971, by the Divisionof Christian Education of the National Council of theChurches of Christ in the U.S.A. Used by permission.

13. Ellen G. White, Steps to Christ (Mountain View,Calif.: Pacific Press Publ. Assn., 1892, 1893, 1956), p. 105.

14. __________, Testimonies for the Church (MountainView, Calif.: Pacific Press Publ. Assn., 1948), vol. 5, p. 665.

15. __________, Education (Mountain View, Calif.: Pa-cific Press Publ. Assn., 1952), p. 128.

16. See Ibid., p. 134.17. Frank E. Gaebelein, “Toward a Philosophy of

Christian Education,” in An Introduction to EvangelicalChristian Education, J. Edward Hakes, ed. (Chicago:Moody, 1964), p. 44.

18. Bernard Ramm, The Pattern of Religious Authority(Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1959), p. 44.

19. See Arthur F. Holmes, All Truth Is God’s Truth(Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1977), pp. 8-15.

20. John Powell, The Secret of Staying in Love (Niles,Ill.: Argus Communications, 1974), pp. 44, 48.

21. Carl F. H. Henry, Christian Personal Ethics (GrandRapids, Mich.; Eerdmans, 1957), p. 219.

22. C. S. Lewis, Mere Christianity (New York: Macmil-lan, 1960), p. 69.

23. H. R. Rookmaaker, Modern Art and the Death of aCulture, 2d ed. (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity, 1973),p. 243.

24. Arthur F. Holmes, Shaping Character: Moral Edu-cation in the Christian College (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerd-mans, 1991), p. vii.

25. Naugle, Worldview, op cit., p. xvii.26. Hunter, Culture Wars: The Struggle to Define Amer-

ica, op cit.; Zimmerman, Whose America? Culture Warsin the Public Schools, op cit.

27. Shane Anderson, How to Kill Adventist Education(and How to Give It a Fighting Chance!) (Hagerstown,Md.: Review and Herald Publ. Assn., 2009).


Implicationsof Philosophy for

Adventist Education

R E D E M P T I V E

E D U C A T I O N

P A R T I I





he need to implement a bibli cal/ Chris -tian/Adventist philosophy in Seventh-dayAdventist schools ought to be obvious.But all too often that synthesis is not ev-ident in the schools themselves or in thepractice of the professional educatorswho operate them. Addressing that point

in the context of Lutheran education, one of theprincipal speakers at a meeting of the Associa-tion of Lutheran College Faculties observed thatthe denomination’s American colleges “oper-ated according to no distinctive Luth eran oreven Christian philosophy of education, buthad simply imitated secular patterns to whichthey had added chapel services, religion clas -ses, and a religious ‘atmosphere.’”1

That observation, unfortunately, also de-scribes a number of Adventist schools. All toooften, Adventist education has not intentionallybeen built upon a distinctively Adventist philos-ophy. As a result, many of the church’s schoolshave offered something less than Adventist edu-

cation and have thereby failed to achieve thepurpose for which they were established. Philosopher Gordon Clark once noted that

what goes by the name of Christian educationis sometimes a program of “pagan educationwith a chocolate coating of Christianity.” Headded that it is the pill, not the coating, thatworks.2 Adventist education tends to sufferfrom this problem as well. Adventist educatorsand the institutions they serve need to conducta thorough and ongoing examination, evalua-tion, and correction of their educational prac-tices to ensure that they align with the church’sbasic philosophic beliefs. These articles willhelp you flesh out a basis for that ongoing eval-uation and orientation.3

While this article focuses on Adventist educa-tion in the school, much of its content can be ap-plied within the framework of the home andchurch since parents and church workers arealso educators. The home, the church, and theschool all deal with the same children, who have

T


After you have studied the content presented here, send for the test, using the form on page 60. Upon successful completionof the test, you will receive a report on the Continuing Education Units you’ve earned, and the certification registrar of yourunion conference office of education will be notified (North American Division only).

*Approved by the North American Division Office of Education. The tests for Parts I, II, and III must be successfully completed tomeet alternative teaching certification requirements as outlined in Section 5.1 of the K-12 Educators Certification Manual.

This article is the second of a three-part continuing education course on the philosophy ofAdventist education. The first article dealt with the importance of the topic; described thebasic shape of philosophy in terms of reality (metaphysics), truth (epistemology) and ethi-cal and aesthetic values (axiology); provided a biblical approach to each of those philo-sophic issues; and pointed out the importance of that philosophic worldview in shaping anAdventist approach to education.

While the first installment of this series on “Redemptive Education” laid the philo-sophic basis for a genuinely Adventist schooling, Part II will begin to develop the implica-tions of that philosophy for educational practice, especially in regard to the needs of thestudent, the function of the teacher, and the aims of Adventist education. The final articlewill focus on the philosophic implications for the curriculum, along with their impact onteaching methodologies and the social function of the Adventist school.

A more complete discussion of many of the topics covered in this article may be foundin the author’s Philosophy and Education: An Introduction in Christian Perspective, 4thed. (Berrien Springs, Mich.: Andrews University Press, 2006) and Myths in Adventism: AnInterpretive Study of Ellen White, Education, and Related Issues (Hagerstown, Md.: Re-view and Herald Publ. Assn., 1985, 2010).


Although she

had no formal train-

ing as a philoso-

pher, Ellen White hit

the pivot point of

educational philoso-

phy when she

placed the human

problem of sin

at the very center of

the educational

enterprise.


the same nature and needs in the several differ-ent venues of their education. Furthermore, thehome and church have a curriculum, a teachingstyle, and social function akin to that of theschool. There is a great need for parents, churchworkers, and professional educators to gaingreater insight into the interdependent nature oftheir educative functions and to develop effectiveways to communicate and reinforce one an-other’s work. A collaboration between the Ad-ventist teacher in the school and Adventist teach-ers in the home and church is important becauseAdventist education is more than Adventistschooling. The home, church, and school are en-trusted with the responsibility of working withthe most valuable things on earth, God’s chil-dren, and ideally each is founded upon the sameprinciples. Having said that, I need to point outthat the educative categories that I will be deal-ing with in the following pages are consciouslytied to schooling rather than to the wider realmof education. However, the same principles areimportant within the various educative contexts.

The Nature of the Student and theGoals of Adventist Education

The Heart of Ellen White’s Educational PhilosophyIn defining the goals of Adventist education,

Ellen White’s opening pages in Education areas good a place to start as anywhere. One of themost perceptive and important paragraphs inthe book is found on the second page. “In orderto understand what is comprehended in thework of education,” she writes, “we need toconsider both [1] the nature of man and [2] thepurpose of God in creating him. We need toconsider also [3] the change in man’s conditionthrough the coming in of a knowledge of evil,and [4] God’s plan for still fulfilling His gloriouspurpose in the education of the human race.”4

She fleshes out the core of her philosophy ofeducation by refining those four points in the nextfew paragraphs. First, in reflecting upon humannature, she emphasizes that Adam was created inthe image of God—physically, mentally, and spir-itually. Second, she highlights the purpose of Godin creating human beings as one of constantgrowth so they would ever “more fully” reflect“the glory of the Creator.” To that end, God en-dowed human beings with capacities that werecapable of almost infinite development.“But,” thirdly, she notes in discussing the

entrance of sin, “by disobedience this was for-feited. Through sin the divine likeness wasmarred, and well-nigh obliterated. Man’s phys-ical powers were weakened, his mental capac-

ity was lessened, his spiritual vision dimmed.”While those three points are foundational to

Ellen White’s philosophy of education, it is herfourth and last point that is absolutely crucialand that, for her, fully expresses the primarypurpose of education. She notes that, in spiteof its rebellion and Fall, “the race was not leftwithout hope. By infinite love and mercy theplan of salvation had been devised, and a lifeof probation was granted. To restore in man theimage of his Maker, to bring him back to theperfection in which he was created, to promotethe development of body, mind, and soul, thatthe divine purpose in his creation might be re-alized—this was to be the work of redemption.This is the object of education, the great objectof life.”5

Ellen White returns to that theme in thefourth chapter of Education, where she de-scribes each person’s life as the scene of a mi-crocosmic great controversy between good andevil, and every human being as having a desirefor goodness but also possessing a “bent toevil.” Building upon her earlier insight thatGod’s image is not totally obliterated in fallenhumanity, she notes that every human being“receives some ray of divine light. Not only in-tellectual but spiritual power, a perception ofright, a desire for goodness, exists in everyheart. But against these principles there isstruggling an antagonistic power.” As the her-itage of the Edenic Fall there is within each per-son’s nature an evil force which “unaided, hecannot resist. To withstand this force, to attainthat ideal which in his inmost soul he acceptsas alone worthy, he can find help in but onepower. That power is Christ. Co-operation withthat power is man’s greatest need. In all edu-cational effort should not this co-operation bethe highest aim?”6

On the next page, she develops this point abit more, writing that “in the highest sense thework of education and the work of redemptionare one, for in education, as in redemption,‘other foundation can no man lay than that islaid, which is Christ Jesus’. . . . To aid the stu-dent in comprehending these principles, and inentering into that relation with Christ which willmake them a controlling power in the life,should be the teacher’s first effort and his con-stant aim. The teacher who accepts this aim isin truth a co-worker with Christ, a laborer to-gether with God.”7

Although she had no formal training as aphilosopher, Ellen White hit the pivot point ofeducational philosophy when she placed thehuman problem of sin at the very center of theeducational enterprise. Illustrative of that in-

C O N T I N U I N G E D U C A T I O N — P A R T I I

FOUNDATION


sight is Paul Nash’s Models of Man: Explo-rations in the Western Educational Traditionand The Educated Man: Studies in the Historyof Educational Thought, which Nash developedin conjunction with two other authors.8 Bothbooks demonstrate the centrality of views ofphilosophical anthropology or human nature toall educational philosophies. Exemplifying thatpoint are such chapter titles as “The PlannedMan: Skinner,” “The Reflective Man: Dewey,”“The Communal Man: Marx,” and “The Natu-ral Man: Rousseau.” Even though the focalpoint of education ought to be the needs of stu-dents, to my knowledge, no one has yet pub-lished a synthesized, systematic approach toeducational philosophy from the perspective ofvarying views of the nature and needs ofhuman beings.It’s not difficult to insert Ellen White’s phi-

losophy in Nash’s framework. The title for hischapter on her would be “The Redeemed Man:Ellen White” (“Redeemed Person” for modernreaders). The problem of sin and its cure—re-demption and restoration—dominate her ap-proach to education.That same emphasis, of course, is found in

the very framework of Scripture, which beginswith humans being created in the image of Godwith infinite potential, continues with the Falland the entrance of sin, and moves on to God’sgreat redemptive plan as He seeks through amultitude of agencies to rescue humans fromtheir predicament and to restore them to theirlost estate. That sequence represents the planof the Bible, in which its first two (Genesis 1,2) and last two chapters (Revelation 21, 22) de-pict a perfect world. The third chapter from thebeginning (Genesis 3) presents the entrance ofsin, and the third chapter from the end (Reve-lation 20) focuses on sin’s final destruction. Inbetween, from Genesis 4 through Revelation19, the Bible sets forth God’s plan for redeem-ing and restoring the fallen race.Although all these points represent basic

Christian doctrine, surprisingly enough, theyhave too often escaped significant treatment byChristian philosophers of education. In fact, Iknow of no book that gives them the same cen-trality as Ellen White’s Education. Allan HartJahsmann’s What’s Lutheran in Education?comes closest, noting in one essay the samebasic points as Ellen White and concludingwith the dictum that “the first concern ofLutheran education must always be the leadingof a people to a conviction of sin and a personalfaith in Jesus Christ as the Lamb of God.”9 Un-fortunately, Jahsmann’s insights on the Fall andthe restoration of God’s image are not widely

represented in evangelical educational theory.But, as noted above, these concepts stand atthe very center of Ellen White’s understandingof education and are implied in the Bible. It waswith those teachings in mind that I wrote someyears ago that “the nature, condition, and needsof the student provide the focal point for Chris-tian educational philosophy and direct educa-tors toward the goals of Christian education.”10

Before moving away from the big picture ofEllen White’s understanding of educational phi-losophy, we need to examine one other state-ment. Education’s very first paragraph presentsanother foundational pillar in her approach toeducation. “Our ideas of education,” we read,“take too narrow and too low a range. There isneed of a broader scope, a higher aim. True ed-ucation means more than the pursual of a cer-tain course of study. It means more than apreparation for the life that now is. It has to dowith the whole being, and with the whole pe-riod of existence possible to man. It is the har-monious development of the physical, the men-tal, and the spiritual powers. It prepares thestudent for the joy of service in this world andfor the higher joy of wider service in the worldto come.”1 1

The key word in that paragraph is whole, aword she uses with two dimensions. First, Ad-ventist education must emphasize the “whole”or entire period of human existence. Thus it isnot merely focused on helping students learnhow to earn a living or become cultured by thestandards of the present world. Those aimsmay be worthy and important, but they are notsufficient. The realm of eternity and prepara-tion for it must also come under the purviewof any Adventist education worthy of churchsupport. On the other hand, some pious butmisdirected individuals might be tempted tomake heaven the focus of education while ne-glecting the present realm and preparation forthe world of work and participation in humansociety. Ellen White asserted that neither ex-treme is correct. Rather, preparation for boththe earthly and the eternal worlds must be in-cluded in Adventist education and placed inproper relationship to each other.The second aspect of wholeness in the above

paragraph is the imperative to develop the entireperson. Adventist education needs to aim at de-veloping all aspects of human beings rather thanfocusing merely on the intellectual, the spiritual,the physical, the social, or the vocational. Inshort, the goal of Adventist education is to de-velop whole persons for the whole period of ex-istence open to them in both this world and theworld to come. In that sense it transcends the



HUM

AN N

ATUR

E


possibilities of secular education, as well asmany forms of Christian education, and, unfor-tunately, some so-called Adventist education.One other key word in Education’s opening

paragraph is service (“the joy of service in thisworld and . . . the higher joy of wider servicein the world to come”). It should be noted thatthe centrality of service is not only featured inthe book’s first page, but also on the last, whichpoints out: “In our life here, earthly, sin-restricted though it is, the greatest joy and thehighest education are in service. And in the fu-ture state, untrammeled by the limitations ofsinful humanity, it is in service that our greatestjoy and our highest education will be found.”12

That emphasis on service should come as nosurprise to any reader of the Bible. Jesus morethan once told His disciples that the very essenceof Christian character was love for and serviceto others. Such characteristics, of course, are notnatural human traits. “Normal” people are moreconcerned with their own needs and beingserved than they are in a life of service to others.The Christian alternative outlook and set of val-ues does not come about naturally. Rather theBible speaks of it as a transformation of the mindand heart (Romans 12:2). And Paul appeals to usto let Christ’s mind be our mind, pointing outthat even though Christ was God, He came as aservant (Philippians 2:5-7).In our brief overview of the key concepts of

Ellen White’s understanding of education, threeitems stand out:• Proper education is, in essence, redemption.• Education must aim at the preparation of

the whole person and the whole period of exis-tence possible for human beings.• The joy of service stands at the very heart

of the educative process.Those concepts are not only central to edu-

cation but also to life itself. Thus they must in-form any genuine approach to Adventist edu-cational theory and practice.

Additional Observations Regarding Human NatureJim Wilhoit points out that the biblical

“view of human nature has no parallel in sec-ular theories of education and is [therefore] themain obstacle to the Christian’s adopting anysuch theory wholesale.”13 For that reason, Ineed to re-emphasize the truth that the ele-ments of an Adventist approach to educationmust always be consciously developed in thelight of human need and the human condition.We will return to the goals of Adventist educa-tion when we examine the work of the teacher.But before moving to that topic, we need to

scrutinize several aspects of human nature thatare of importance to Adventist education.First is the confused status in which educators

and students find themselves. On the one handare negative perspectives on human nature. Inthat realm is the dictum of 17th-century philoso-pher Thomas Hobbes, who insightfully observedthat human life is “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish,and short.”14 And then there are such leadinglights as 20th-century psychologist B. F. Skinnerand 18th-century theologian Jonathan Edwards.The first claimed that people have neither free-dom nor dignity,15 while the second in his mostfamous sermon pictured humans as loathsomeinsects suspended over the pit of hell by anangry God.16 Also, consider the view of biologistDesmond Morris, who wrote that “there are onehundred and ninety-three living species of mon-keys and apes. One hundred and ninety-two ofthem are covered with hair.” His point was thathuman beings comprise the exception in thatthey are in essence “naked apes.”17

But are they? Holding a contrary view abouthuman nature, the Enlightenment scholars de-veloped the doctrine of the infinite perfectibilityof humanity and the essential goodness anddignity of humans. Such modern psychologistsas Carl Rogers affirmed that perspective, advo-cating learning theories built upon the assump-tion that leaving children “free” enough in alearning environment will cause their naturalgoodness to assert itself.18

So what are we to believe as educators?What is the basic nature of our students? Ani-mal or a bit of divinity? Good or evil? The shortanswer is “all of the above.”Moving beyond our emotional response to

Darwinism, it is difficult to deny that humanbeings are animals. We share much with theanimal world, from structural similarities in ourphysical bodies to our digestive and respiratoryprocesses. Furthermore, we participate in manyof the same activities. Both people and dogs,for example, enjoy riding in automobiles, eatinggood food, and having their heads rubbed af-fectionately. Clearly, we share a great deal withour canine (and other animal) friends.The point that needs to be emphasized,

however, is not that people are animals but thatthey are more than animals. What does thatmean? Jewish philosopher Abraham Heschelnoted that “the animality of man we can graspwith a fair degree of clarity. The perplexity be-gins when we attempt to make clear what ismeant by the humanity of man.”19

Social theorist E. F. Schumacher wrote thathumans share much with the mineral realm,since both people and minerals consist of mat-


The point that

needs to be

emphasized,

however, is not

that people

are animals but

that they are

more than

animals.


ter; that humans have more in common withthe plant world than the material realm, sinceboth plants and people have life in addition toa mineral base; and that humans have evenmore yet in common with the animal world,since both people and animals have conscious-ness as well as life and a mineral base. But, ob-served Schumacher, only humans have reflec-tive self-awareness. Animals undoubtedlythink, he claimed, but humanity’s uniquenessis people’s self-conscious awareness of theirown thinking. Schumacher pointed out that wecan learn a lot about humans by studying themat the mineral, plant, and animal levels—“infact, everything can be learned about [them]except that which makes [them] human.”20 Forthat essential insight, we noted earlier, we needto go to the Bible, in which Genesis describesessential human nature as being created in theimage and likeness of the divine (Genesis 1:26,27), although that image that has been “well-nigh obliterated” by the Fall (Genesis 3).21

The question that we as Christian educatorsneed to face is how to deal with the complexi-ties of human nature. One thing we need to rec-ognize is that no one lives up to his or her fullpotential as God’s image bearer. In fact, manyexist at subhuman levels—at the mineral levelthrough death, at the vegetable level throughparalyzing and brain-destroying accident, or atthe animal level through living primarily to sat-isfy their appetites and passions.Few, of course, choose to live at the mineral

or vegetable stages, but many opt for the ani-mal level. The proverb that “every man has hisprice” is no idle jest. It is based upon experi-ence and observation. Think about it for a mo-ment. If I offered you $5 to commit a one-time-only indecent or dishonest act that would neverbe exposed, you would probably refuse. But ifI offered you $500, you might begin to thinkabout it. By the time I got to $50,000, I wouldhave many takers. And even the die-hardswould begin to waver as the offer rose to $5million and then $50 million.Behavioral psychologists have discovered

that animal behavior can be controlled throughrewards and punishments. In other words, an-imals do not have freedom of choice; theirneeds and environment control them. Throughrewards and punishments people can train ananimal to do anything on command that it iscapable of—including starving itself to death.The question that has divided psychologists,

educators, philosophers, and theologians is,“Can human beings be trained to do anythingthey are capable of?” Regarding those who liveat the animal level, the answer is a definite Yes.

Like animals, people who operate at the levelof their appetites and passions can be con-trolled by rewards and punishments.Unfortunately, most people live most of their

lives at the level of their “animalness.” This factunderlies the apparent validity of behaviorism’sclaim that human beings are not free and thata person’s behavior can be shaped to any de-sired pattern if the controller has enough timeand sufficient knowledge of that individual andhis or her environment.But the crucial point for educators to remem-

ber is that their students can rise above the ani-mal level of existence. They can do so becausethey are uniquely related to God and because Hehas given them both self-awareness and the aidthat Christ supplies through the Holy Spirit.Since people bear the image of God, they can

reason from cause to effect and make responsi-ble, spiritually guided decisions. Their freedomof choice is not absolute in the sense that theyare autonomous and can live without God. Butit is genuine in that they can either choose JesusChrist as Lord and live by His principles, orchoose Satan as master and be subject to the lawof sin and death (see Romans 6:12-23).The Adventist educator functions in a school

full of young people in the midst of an identitycrisis that impacts their lives simultaneously atseveral levels. One of the most important issuesthey face is choosing whether to live primarilyat the level of their animal propensities or riseto their divine possibilities. Closely related arechoices between good and evil. It doesn’t helpmatters that educators themselves are also in-volved in a daily ongoing struggle over thesame issues.But the great truth of the gospel is that each

person can become fully human through apersonal relationship with God through JesusChrist. That fact is a central pillar in an edu-cation whose primary purpose is helping peo-ple achieve a restored relationship with God,that sees every person as a child of God, andthat seeks to help each student develop to hisor her highest potential. Ellen White forcefullypointed out the infinite and eternal possibili-ties inherent in every person when she wrotethat “higher than the highest human thoughtcan reach is God’s ideal for His children. God-liness—godlikeness—is the goal to bereached.”22 To transform that ideal from poten-tiality to actuality is the function of Adventisteducation in the home, school, and church.A second aspect of human nature that af-

fects Adventist education is closely related tothe first: In the time that has elapsed since theFall, the problems of the human race have not

Christian

educators see

beneath the veneer

of outward

conduct to get at

the core of the

human problem—

sin, separation from

the life and

character of God.


changed. Throughout history, human beingshave been affected by the struggle between theforces of good and evil. Ever since the introduc-tion of sin, there have been two basic cate-gories of human beings—those who are still inrevolt, and those who have accepted Christ asSavior. Most schools and classrooms containstudents from both orientations. Sensitivity tothat fact is vital to Adventist educators sincethey must deal daily with the complex interac-tion between the two types of students.Tied to the recognition of the two types of

human beings is the fact that the underlyingprinciples of the great controversy between goodand evil have remained constant despite changesin the particulars of the human predicament overtime. Thus, people today face the same basictemptations and challenges that confrontedMoses, David, and Paul. It is because of the un-changing nature of the human problem throughboth time and space (geographical location) thatthe Scriptures are timeless and communicate auniversal message to all people. The Bible is avital resource in education because it addressesthe heart of the problem of sin and its solution—issues that all persons in every educational insti-tution must face every day.A third aspect of human nature that must be

considered in the Adventist school is the ten-sion between the individual and the group. Onthe one hand, the Christian educator must rec-ognize and respect the individuality, unique-ness, and personal worth of each person.Throughout His life, Jesus revealed His regardfor the individuality and worth of persons. Hisrelationship both with His disciples and withthe population at large contrasted with thementality of the Pharisees, Sadducees, andeven the disciples, who tended to see “others”in terms of “the herd.” As it seeks to relate ed-ucation to the learner, a distinctively Christianphilosophy can never lose sight of the impor-tance of human individuality.A proper respect for individuality does not,

however, negate the importance of the group.Paul, in writing to the Corinthians concerningspiritual gifts, uplifted the value of the socialwhole as well as the unique value of each person(1 Corinthians 12:12-31). He wrote that the body(social group) will be healthy when the impor-tance and uniqueness of its individual membersare respected. That holds true for educational in-stitutions as well as for churches. The whole-some classroom, from that perspective, is notone of unlimited individualism, but rather onein which respect for individuality is balancedwith respect for the needs of the group.A final significant point about human nature

is that the whole person is important to God.We touched upon that topic earlier in dealingwith Ellen White’s emphasis on wholeness ineducation. But we need to expand upon it. Tra-ditional education elevated the mental dimen-sion of students above the physical, while somemodern approaches have done just the oppo-site. Yet others have focused on the spiritual.But whatever affects one part of a human beingwill eventually affect the whole. Balanceamong the spiritual, social, physical, and men-tal aspects of a person is the ideal as illustratedin the development of Jesus (Luke 2:52). Partof humanity’s present dilemma is that since theFall, people have suffered from a lack of healthand balance in each of these areas as well as intheir interrelationship. As a result, part of theeducative function of redemption is to restorepeople to health in each of those aspects andin their total beings. Restoration of God’simage, therefore, has social, spiritual, mental,and physical ramifications, as does education.Such an understanding will have a definite im-pact on curriculum choices.Christian educators, understanding the com-

plexity of students, realize that each one is a can-didate for God’s kingdom and deserves the verybest education that can be offered. Christian ed-ucators see beneath the veneer of outward con-duct to get at the core of the human problem—sin, separation from the life and character ofGod. In its fullest sense, Christian education isredemption, restoration, and reconciliation. As aresult, each Adventist school must seek toachieve a balance between the social, spiritual,mental, and physical aspects of each student inall of its activities and through its total program.The purpose and goal of Adventist education isthe restoration of the image of God in each stu-dent and the reconciliation of students with God,their fellow students, their own selves, and thenatural world. Those insights take us to the roleof the Adventist teacher.

The Role of the Teacher and theAims of Adventist Education

Within the school, the teacher is the key ele-ment in educational success for he or she is theperson who communicates the curriculum to thestudent. The best way to ensure better educa-tional results is not improved facilities, bettermethods, or a more adequate curriculum, as im-portant as those items are, but to hire and retainquality teachers. Elton Trueblood spoke to thatpoint when he remarked that “if there is any oneconclusion on which there is conspicuous agree-ment in our current philosophy of education it


RESTORATION


concerns the supreme importance of the goodteacher. It is easy to envisage a good college withpoor buildings, but it is not possible to envisagea good college with poor teachers.”23 The same,of course, holds true of elementary and second-ary schools. Trueblood wrote in another con -nection that “it is better to have brilliant teachingin shacks than to have sloppy teaching inpalaces.”24

Some years ago, James Coleman’s massivestudy of American schools empirically sup-ported those observations. He found that theschool factors with the greatest influence onachievement (independent of family back-ground) were the teacher’s characteristics, notfacilities or curriculum.25 Employing qualityteachers is also the primary element in improv-ing the spiritual impact of an educational pro-gram. Roger Dudley, in his study of Adventistacademy students in the United States, foundthat “no other factor was as strongly related toteen-age rejection of religion as was the religioussincerity of their academy teachers.”26

If quality teachers are the crucial factor forsuccess in a school system that aims merely atpreparing people for living and working on thisearth, how much more important in an educa-tion that is preparing young people for eternity!With that thought in mind, it is of the utmost im-portance that Adventist parents, teachers, admin-istrators, and school boards understand the min-istry of teaching, how that ministry facilitates aschool’s reaching its goals, and the essentialqualifications of those called to undertake theawesome task of shaping the next generation.

Teaching Is a Form of MinistrySince education and redemption are one,27

Adventist teaching by definition is a form ofChristian ministry and a pastoral function. TheNew Testament clearly defines teaching as a di-vine calling (Ephesians 4:11; 1 Corinthians 12:28;Romans 12:6-8). Furthermore, the Scriptures donot separate the functions of teaching and pas-toring. On the contrary, Paul wrote to Timothythat a bishop (pastor) must be “an apt teacher”(1 Timothy 3:2).28 In writing to the Ephesiansthat “some should be apostles, some prophets,some evangelists, some pastors and teachers”(Ephesians 4:11), Paul used a Greek constructionthat indicates that the same person holds boththe office of pastor and teacher. F. F. Bruce, incommenting on this passage, has remarked that“the two terms ‘pastors (shepherds) and teach-ers’ denote one and the same class of men.”29 Bycontrast, Scripture lists the other gifts separately.The significance of this point is that we cannotdivide these two gifts if they are to remain func-

tional. Pastors must not only care for the soulsof their flock, but also teach by precept and ex-ample both to individuals and the corporatebody of the church. Teachers, likewise, must notmerely transmit truth but also commit them-selves to caring for the individuals under theirtutelage. Thus, Christian teachers function in apastoral role to their students. The major difference between the roles of

pastors and teachers in our day has to do withthe current division of labor. In 21st-century so-ciety, the Christian teacher may be seen as onewho pastors in a “school” context, while thepastor is one who teaches in the “larger reli-gious community.” It is important to rememberthat their function is essentially the same, eventhough by today’s definitions they have chargeof different divisions of the Lord’s vineyard.Teaching young people is not only a pastoral

function but also one of the most effective formsof ministry, since it reaches the entire populationwhile at its most im pres sionable age. ReformerMartin Luther recognized that fact when hewrote that “if I had to give up preaching andmy other duties, there is no office I wouldrather have than that of school-teacher. For Iknow that next to the [pastoral] ministry it isthe most useful, greatest, and best; and I amnot sure which of the two is to be preferred. Forit is hard to make old dogs docile and oldrogues pious, yet that is what the ministryworks at, and must work at, in great part, invain; but young trees . . . are more easily bentand trained. Therefore let it be considered oneof the highest virtues on earth faithfully to trainthe children of others, which duty but very fewparents attend to themselves.”30

The clearest and fullest integration of the giftof teacher-pastor appeared in the ministry ofChrist. One of the terms by which people mostoften addressed Him was “Master.” The actualmeaning of the word is “Teacher.” Christ maybe seen as the best example of teaching interms of both methodology and meaningful in-terpersonal relationships. A study of theGospels from the perspective of Christ asteacher will contribute a great deal to our un-derstanding of ideal Christian instruction.We will examine Christ’s teaching method-

ology in a subsequent section. But here we willstudy the relationship aspect of His teachingministry, an especially important topic sincegood relationships stand at the very center ofsuccessful teaching. Several statements fromEllen White offer insight into this topic.Part of the reason for the success of Christ’s

ministry was that people knew that He reallycared. For example, we read that “in His work


MIN

ISTR

Y


as a public teacher, Christ never lost sight ofthe children. . . . His presence never repelledthem. His large heart of love could comprehendtheir trials and necessities, and find happinessin their simple joys; and He took them in Hisarms and blessed them.”31 Children are quiteperceptive. They can tell after talking to anadult whether that person is just listening totheir “small” joys and concerns to be polite orfeels genuine interest—if he or she really cares.How many times have we as parents or teach-ers listened to our children, nodded our heads,and then sent them off to play without havingthe slightest idea what they were trying to com-municate? An excellent way to alienate childrenis to let them feel that grown-ups are more con-cerned with “important” adult thoughts thanwith their well-being. Ellen White has sug-gested that even if teachers have limited literaryqualifications, if they really care for their stu-dents, realize the magnitude of their task, andhave a willingness to improve, they will suc-ceed.32 At the very heart of Christ’s teachingministry was the caring relationship.That relationship in His case exuded a spirit

of confidence regarding the possibilities of eachlife. Thus, even though “Christ was a faithful re-prover,” in “every human being, however fallen,He beheld a son of God, one who might be re-stored to the privilege of his divine relationship.. . . Looking upon men in their suffering anddegradation, Christ perceived ground for hopewhere appeared only despair and ruin. Whereverthere existed a sense of need, there He saw op-portunity for uplifting. Souls tempted, defeated,feeling themselves lost, ready to perish, He met,not with denunciation, but with blessing. . . .“In every human being He discerned infinite

possibilities. He saw men as they might be,transfigured by His grace. . . . Looking uponthem with hope, He inspired hope. Meetingthem with confidence, He inspired trust. Re-vealing in Himself man’s true ideal, He awak-ened, for its attainment, both desire and faith.In His presence souls despised and fallen real-ized that they still were men, and they longedto prove themselves worthy of His regard. Inmany a heart that seemed dead to all thingsholy, were awakened new impulses. To many adespairing one there opened the possibility ofa new life. Christ bound men to His heart bythe ties of love and devotion.”33

That quotation highlights the very spirit ofChrist’s teaching ministry that made Him sucha force for good in the lives of those He taught.The statement itself contains the ultimate chal-lenge for teachers, parents, and everyone elsewho works with human beings. To see infinite

possibilities in every person, to see hope in thehopeless, takes an infusion of God’s grace. Butit is the key to good teaching. The alternativeis to look upon people with hopelessness andthereby inspire hopelessness.Psychologist Arthur Combs cites several re-

search studies that indicate that good teacherscan be clearly distinguished from poor ones onthe basis of what they believe about people.34 Ina similar vein, William Glasser, the psychiatristwho developed “reality therapy,” believes thatfailures in both school and life find their roots intwo related problems—the failure to love and thefailure to achieve self-worth.35 We develop ourself-worth from our perceptions of what othersthink of us. When parents and teachers con-stantly give messages that children are stupid,delinquent, and hopeless, they are shaping theseyoung people’s sense of self-worth, which theyouth will act out in daily living.Fortunately, the self-fulfilling prophecy also

works in the positive direction. Earl Pullias andJames Young note that “when people are askedto describe the teacher that did the most forthem, again and again they mention a teacher,often the only one in their experience, who be-lieved in them, who saw their special talents,not only what they were but even more whatthey wanted to be and could be. And theybegan to learn not only in the area of their spe-cial interest but in many others.” As such, ateacher is an inspirer of vision.36

On the other hand, Christ’s ability to see thepotential in each person did not entail a blind-ness to human limitations. Within the biblicalframework, no one has every talent, even thougheach has some. At times students need definiteguidance into areas where their personalities andnatural gifts will make them most effective. So itwas in Christ’s ministry. He knew the specialneeds and potentials of Peter, John, and Andrewand guided them accordingly.While the caring relationship was central to

Christ’s teaching ministry, that relationship wascarefully balanced in daily practice. Thus EllenWhite writes that “He showed consistency with-out obstinacy, benevolence without weakness,tenderness and sympathy without sentimental-ism. He was highly social, yet He possessed a re-serve that discouraged any familiarity. His tem-perance never led to bigotry or austerity. He wasnot conformed to the world, yet He was attentiveto the wants of the least among men.”37

Adventist teachers and others concerned withthe church’s education system will gain muchthrough a study of Christ as master teacher. Suchstudy will also put them in direct contact withthe aims and goals of Christian education.


At times

students need

definite guidance

into areas

where their

personalities and

natural gifts

will make them

most effective.


The Primary Aim of Education and the Adventist Teacher as an

Agent of Redemption

We have already noted that from both theBible and Ellen White’s perspective that thegreatest human need is to get into a right rela-tionship with God. Said in another way, humanlostness provides the purpose of Christian edu-cation. The greatest human need is to become“unlost.” Thus Jesus claimed that He came “toseek and to save that which was lost” (Luke19:10, KJV). Such seeking and saving is thetheme of the Bible from Genesis to Revelation.Luke 15, which records the parables of the

lost sheep, the lost coin, and the lost son, is es-pecially pertinent as we think about the role ofthe Christian teacher. The teacher, from the per-spective of that chapter, is someone who seeksout and attempts to help those lost and caughtin the web of sin, whether they are like (1) thesheep (those who know they are lost but do notknow how to get home); (2) the coin and olderson (those who do not have enough spiritualsense to realize their own lostness); or (3) theyounger son (those who know they are lost andknow how to get home, but do not want to re-turn until their rebellion has run its course).Lostness has many varieties, all of which areexhibited in each school and classroom. Butboth rebels and Pharisees and all the othertypes of human beings have one commonneed—to get “unlost.” Thus, it is little wonderthat Christ identified the core of His mission asseeking and saving the lost (Luke 19:10).To those passages may be added Jesus’ ex-

perience with the ungrateful and inhospitableSamaritans when they refused to provide Himwith a place to stay because they perceived Hewas on His way to Jerusalem. On that occasion,James and John were incensed with the ingrat-itude of the Samaritans and sought Jesus’ per-mission to call down fire from heaven to de-stroy them. Jesus responded that “the Son ofman is not come to destroy men’s lives, but tosave them” (Luke 9:51-56, KJV).The primary goal of Christ’s life and of Chris-

tian education can also be found in the keynoteverse of the Gospel of Matthew, which predictedthat Mary would bear a son who would “save hispeople from their sins” (Matthew 1:21). Thesame thought is brought out by John’s Gospel,which claims that “God so loved the world thathe gave his only Son, that whosoever believes inhim should not perish but have eternal life. ForGod sent the Son into the world, not to condemnthe world, but that the world might be savedthrough him” (John 3:16, 17).

Adventist teachers are God’s agents in theplan of redemption and reconciliation. LikeChrist, their primary function is “to seek andto save that which was lost.” They must bewilling to work in the spirit of Christ, so thattheir students can be brought into harmonywith God through the sacrifice of Jesus and berestored to God’s image.Teaching is much more than transmitting in-

formation and filling students’ heads withknowledge. It is more than preparing them forthe world of work. The primary function of theChristian teacher is to relate to the MasterTeacher in such a way that he or she becomesGod’s agent in the redemptive plan.Edwin Rian caught that point when he noted

that most writers in educational philosophy, re-gardless of their philosophical and religiousperspectives, “agree on considering the prob-lem of ‘sin and death,’ which is the problem ofman, according to Pauline and ReformedProtestant theology, as irrelevant to the ques-tions of the aims and process of education.”Such a position, he indicated, cannot help pro-ducing “miseducation and frustration for theindividual and for the community.” From theperspective of humanity’s predicament, Rianuplifted “education as conversion.”38 HerbertWelch, president of Ohio Wesleyan Universityearly in the 20th century, made the same pointwhen he claimed that “to win its students fromsin to righteousness is . . . the highest achieve-ment of a Christian college.”39

Christian education is the only education thatcan meet humanity’s deepest needs, becauseonly Christian educators understand the core ofthe human problem. The redemptive aim ofChristian education is what makes it Christian.The primary aim of Christian education in theschool, the home, and the church is to lead peo-ple into a saving relationship with Jesus Christ.That restored relationship heals the principalalienation in Genesis 3—that between humansand God. And the healing of the God/human re-lationship sets the stage for the removal of hu-manity’s other basic alienations. Thus, educationis a part of God’s great plan of redemption oratonement. Its role is to help bring people backto at-one-ness with God, other people, one’s ownself, and the natural world. The whole messageof the Bible points forward to the day when thework of restoration will be complete and theEdenic condition will be restored in the realm ofnature because of the healing of humanity’smanifold lostness (Revelation 21, 22; Isaiah 11:6-9; 35).The essence of the Fall was human beings’

decision to place themselves rather than God at


The primary

function of the

Christian teacher is

to relate to the

Master Teacher in

such a way that he

or she becomes

God’s agent in the

redemptive plan.


the center of their lives. Redemption reinstatesGod as the focal point of personal existence. Itis a dynamic experience called by many names,including conversion and new birth. The Biblealso refers to it as the obtaining of a new heartand mind. Paul vividly described the experi-ence when he claimed that the Christian is onewho has had his or her entire way of thinkingand living transformed (Romans 12:2). TheGreek word he used for transformation is“metamorphosis,” the term we use in Englishto indicate the change that takes place when acaterpillar becomes a butterfly. It is a radicalchange that involves a discontinuity with thepast and a new beginning. Carlyle B. Haynescaught the central nature of the experiencewhen he wrote that “the Christian life is notany modification of the old life; it is not anyqualification of it, any development of it, notany progression of it, any culture or refinementor education of it. It is not built on the old lifeat all. It does not grow from it. It is entirely an-other life—a new life altogether. It is the actuallife of Jesus Christ Himself in my flesh.”40

The student’s greatest need, then, is for aspiritual rebirth that places God at the center ofdaily existence. Paul noted that such renewal isa daily experience (1 Corinthians 15:31), andJesus taught that the Holy Spirit accomplishesthe transformation (John 3:5, 6). Christian ed-ucation is thus impossible without the dynamicpower of the Holy Spirit.Ellen White wrote that the “all-important

thing” in education “should be the conversionof . . . students, that they may have a new heartand life. The object of the Great Teacher is therestoration of the image of God in the soul, andevery teacher in our schools should work inharmony with this purpose.”41 Adventist edu-cation can build upon the foundation of thenew birth experience to achieve its other aimsand purposes. But if it fails at this foundationaland primary point, it has failed entirely.

Some Secondary Aims of Adventist EducationThe healing of humanity’s alienation from

God sets the stage for treating its other basicalienations and thereby helps to define the sec-ondary purposes of education. We have repeat-edly noted that education is a part of God’s greatplan of redemption or atonement; that educa-tion’s role is to help bring people back to at-one-ness with God, their fellow humans, their ownselves, and the natural world. Within that con-text, the focal point of Christian teaching is thehealing of broken relationships between individ-uals and God. This, in turn, prepares the way forChristian education to accomplish its secondary

purposes, such as character development, the ac-quisition of knowledge, job preparation, and thenurturing of students socially, emotionally, andphysically.Character development is certainly a major

goal of Adventist education. Ellen White notedthat character determines destiny for both thislife and the one to come and that “characterbuilding is the most important work ever en-trusted to human beings.”42 C. B. Eavey relatedcharacter development to the fundamental pur-pose of education when he stated that “thefoundational aim in Christian education is thebringing of the individual to Christ for salva-tion. Before a man of God can be perfected,there must be a man of God to perfect; withoutthe new birth there is no man of God.”43 Inother words, true character can develop only inthe born-again Christian. When we equate theprimary objective of Christian education—tobring students into relationship with Christ—with such theological concepts as conversion,new birth, and justification, it follows that char-acter development, as a secondary aim, mustbe synonymous with sanctification and Chris-tian growth in grace.Such an equation is exactly what we find in

the writings of Ellen White. “The great work ofparents and teachers,” she penned, “is charac-ter building—seeking to restore the image ofChrist in those placed under their care. Aknowledge of the sciences sinks into insignifi-cance beside this great aim; but all true educa-tion may be made to help in the developmentof a righteous character. The formation of char-acter is the work of a lifetime, and it is for eter-nity.”44

Character development and sanctification areessentially two names for the same process. Ed-ucators and theologians have, unfortunately, de-veloped different vocabularies to describe thesame process. At this point, it is important to re-member that the concept of Christian characterdevelopment is antithetical to the humanisticview, which implies merely a refinement of thenatural, unrenewed person. Christian characterdevelopment never occurs outside of the conver-sion experience or apart from Christ and theagency of the Holy Spirit (Philippians 2:12, 13;John 15:1-17). Only the dynamic power of theHoly Spirit can develop the image of God in theindividual and reproduce the fruit of the Spirit—love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness,faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control—in thelife of each student (Galatians 5:22-24). HansLaRondelle has indicated that at least part of therestoration process occurs as we behold the “at-tractive loveliness of Christ’s character.” Through


REDEMPTION


that experience we assimilate His image.45 Thusit is imperative that every phase of Adventist ed-ucation—the character of the teacher, the cur-riculum, the methods of discipline, and everyother aspect—reflects Christ.Jesus Christ is the beginning, the middle, and

the end of Adventist education. The Holy Spiritseeks to implant the likeness of Christ’s characterin each of us as educators and in our childrenand students. The Spirit uses parents, teachers,and other educators as agents or mediators ofsalvation. But each person must continuouslysurrender the will to God’s infilling power andthen follow the directions of the Holy Spirit inhis or her life. Character development is an actof God’s grace just as much as justification. Be-cause of its vital role, the science of character de-velopment should form a central pillar in thepreparation of teachers, parents, and others inpositions of educational influence.Adventist education obviously has other,

secondary, goals such as the acquisition ofknowledge and preparation for the world ofwork, but such goals sink into “insignificance”when compared to the redemptive work of ed-ucation, which relates to conversion and char-acter development.46 After all, “what is a manprofited, if he shall gain the whole world, andlose his own soul?” (Matthew 16:26, KJV).Beyond character development, another sec-

ondary goal of Christian education is the devel-opment of a Christian mind. While that task doesinvolve the transmission of information, it is farbroader than that. It means helping students gaina way of viewing reality and organizing knowl-edge within the framework of the Christianworldview. Gene Garrick pointed out the second-ary importance of knowledge acquisition whenhe wrote that “there can be no truly Christianmind without the new birth since spiritual truthis apprehended and applied spiritually (1Corinthians 2:1-16).”47

We will return to the discussion of develop-ing the Christian mind at greater length in thesection on curriculum. But before leaving thetopic, it is important to point out that a Chris-tian never views gaining knowledge—even bib-lical or Christian knowledge—as an end in it-self. In acquiring knowledge and in developinga Christian mind, Christian teachers must neverlose sight of their ultimate goal for their stu-dents: more effective service to both God andtheir fellow beings. Thus knowledge, from aChristian perspective, is instrumental ratherthan an end in itself.Another secondary aim of Adventist educa-

tion is to maximize physical and emotionalhealth. Ellen White wrote that: “since the mind

and the soul find expression through the body,both mental and spiritual vigor are in great de-gree dependent upon physical strength and ac-tivity; whatever promotes physical health, pro-motes the development of a strong mind and awell-balanced character. Without health no onecan as distinctly understand or as completelyfulfill his obligations to himself, to his fellowbeings, or to his Creator. Therefore the healthshould be as faithfully guarded as the character.A knowledge of physiology and hygiene shouldbe the basis of all educational effort.”48

Because human beings are not merely spiri-tual, or mental, or physical machines but wholis-tic creations in which imbalance in one aspect oftheir nature affects the whole, it is also crucialthat the educational system promote emotionalhealth. After all, angry, depressed individualscannot relate to either God or their fellow humanbeings in a functional manner. Just as the Fallfractured God’s image spiritually, socially, men-tally, and physically, so must education aim atrestoring health and wholeness in each of thoseareas and their interrelationship with one an-other.A final secondary aim of Adventist educa-

tion is to prepare students for the world ofwork, a topic on which Ellen White had a greatdeal to say. From her perspective, useful laboris a blessing to both the individual and thecommunity and “a part of God’s great plan forour recovery from the Fall.”49 Career prepara-tion, however, like every other aspect of theChristian life, cannot be separated from the is-sues of the new birth, character development,the development of a Christian mind, theachievement of physical and mental well-being,and the development of a sense of social re-sponsibility. The Christian life is a unit, andeach aspect of it interacts with the others andthe total person. Thus, Adventist teachers willencourage their students to view even so-calledsecular occupations within the context of an in-dividual’s wider vocation as a servant of Godand humankind. That idea brings us to the ul-timate and final goal of Adventist education.

The Ultimate Aim of Adventist EducationThe life of Jesus was one of service for hu-

manity. He came to our planet to give Himselffor the betterment of others. Thus, His follow-ers have the same function, and the ultimateend (i.e., final outcome) of education is to pre-pare students for that task. Along that line, Her-bert Welch concluded that “education for itsown sake is as bad as art for art’s sake; but cul-ture held in trust to empower one better toserve one’s fellow men, the wise for the igno-


SER

VIC

E


rant, the strong for the weak,” is education’shighest aim. “The Christian character,” he pos-tulated, “which does not find expression inservice is scarcely worthy of the name.”50

Ellen White agreed. Beginning and endingher classic Education with the “joy” of service,she considered it the “highest education.”51

“The true teacher,” she noted, “is not satisfiedwith second-rate work. He is not satisfied withdirecting his students to a standard lower thanthe highest which it is possible for them to at-tain. He cannot be content with imparting tothem only technical knowledge, with makingthem merely clever accountants, skillful arti-sans, successful tradesmen. It is his ambitionto inspire them with principles of truth, obedi-ence, honor, integrity, and purity—principlesthat will make them a positive force for the sta-bility and uplifting of society. He desires them,above all else, to learn life’s great lesson of un-selfish service.”52

Figure 153 (page 35) indicates that conversion,character development, acquiring a matureChristian mind and good health, and occupa-tional preparation are not ends in thems elves.Each is, instead, an essential element in a per-son’s preparation for service to humanity as partof God’s plan to heal the alienation between peo-ple that developed at the Fall. The essence ofChristian love and of the Christlike character isservice to others. Teachers should help their students realize

that most people have gotten their educationalpriorities backward. We hear the following sen-timents: “Society owes me a good living be-cause of all the years I spent getting an educa-tion.” “I deserve the benefits of the good lifebecause of what I have accomplished.” Eventhose who claim to be Christians often make—or at least imply—such sentiments. Unfortu-nately, these ideas represent the antithesis ofthe ultimate aim of Christianity.It is morally wrong for people to use the ben-

efits of society’s gift of education for self-aggran-dizement. George S. Counts wrote from a hu-manistic perspective that “at every turn the socialobligation which the advantages of a college ed-ucation impose must be stressed: too often havewe preached the monetary value of a college ed-ucation; too widely have we bred the convictionthat the training is advantageous because it en-ables the individual to get ahead; too insidiouslyhave we spread the doctrine that the collegeopens up avenues to the exploitation of less ca-pable men. Higher education involves higher re-sponsibility . . . ; this cardinal truth must be im-pressed upon every recipient of its advantages.In season and out of season, social service, and

not individual advancement, must be the motifof college training.”54 If Counts from his secularperspective saw that fact so clearly, then thecommitted Christian should recognize it evenmore distinctly.The message of the parable of the talents is

that the greater a person’s natural endowmentsand his or her opportunities for their develop-ment, the more responsibility he or she has torepresent Christ in faithful service to those withmental, spiritual, social, emotional, or physicalneeds (Matthew 25:14-30).The Christian teacher has the responsibility

not only to teach the ideal of service, but alsoto model it. Thus, a major task of Christian ed-ucation is to “help students unwrap their God-given gifts” so that they can find their place inservice to others.55

In conclusion, it should be emphasized thatChristian service is a response to God’s loverather than an altruistic humanitarianism thatstill allows people to congratulate themselvesfor their personal goodness and sacrifice. TheChristian’s gratitude to God for salvation in-spires him or her to become a channel of God’slove by participating in His ministry of recon-ciliation.In one sense, as we note in Figure 1, char-

acter development lays the foundation for serv-ice. But such service also helps to develop char-acter (thus the two-way arrow betweencharacter development and service). As a re-sult, the two work in tandem, each contributingto the other. It is a truism that character devel-opment cannot occur without service, but it isequally true that character leads to service.Teachers should seek to instill in their stu-

dents the conviction that Christian service isnot something that begins after graduation orwhen they are older. Rather, it is an integralpart of a Christian’s life from the time of con-version. Teachers in the church, home, andschool need to provide their students with op-portunities for serving others both inside andoutside of their religious communities. In short,a crucial function of Christian teaching is tohelp students not only internalize God’s lovebut also to externalize it. Teachers, as agents ofredemption, need to help their students dis-cover their personal roles in God’s plan of rec-onciliation and restoration.

Qualifications of the Adventist TeacherBecause of the centrality of the teacher to

the educational process, it is absolutely essen-tial that teachers be in harmony with the phi-losophy and goals of the schools for which theyteach. With that in mind, Frank Gaebelein



wrote that there can be “no Christian educationwithout Christian teachers.”56 It is just as truethat there can be no Adventist education with-out Adventist teachers. That is true because ofthe distinctive doctrinal understandings andapocalyptic mission that set Adventism apartfrom other Christian perspectives and must in-form the content of Adventist education.The selection of qualified teachers and conse-

crated school employees is of crucial importance,given their powerful role in the educationalprocess. Along that line, Ellen White stressedthat “in selecting teachers we should use everyprecaution, knowing that this is as solemn a mat-ter as the selecting of persons for the ministry.

birth (John 3:3, 5). C. B. Eavey has written that“only one who has been made a new creature inChrist can mediate to others God’s grace or nur-ture others in that grace.” As a result, those whominister in Christian education “must have inthemselves the life of Christ and be possessed bythe Spirit of God. Christian education is no mat-ter of mere human activity but one of individualsmeeting God in Christ.”58

Ellen White expands upon that idea whenshe writes that “it is only life that can beget life.He alone has life who is connected with theSource of life, and only such can be a channelof life. In order that the teacher may accom-plish the object of his work, he should be a liv-ing embodiment of truth, a living channelthrough which wisdom and life may flow. Apure life, the result of sound principles andright habits, should therefore be regarded as hismost essential qualification.”59

Thus, qualification number one for Advent -ist teachers is that they have a personal savingrelationship with Jesus. If their spiritual life isin harmony with God’s revealed will, they willhave a reverence for the sacred, and their dailyexample will be one from which their studentscan profit.A second qualification relates to their mental

capabilities and development. “While rightprinciples and correct habits are of first impor-tance among the qualifications of the teacher,”Ellen White wrote, “it is indispensable that heshould have a thorough knowledge of the sci-ences. With uprightness of character, high lit-erary acquirements should be combined.”60

But Adventist teachers must not only be wellversed in the general knowledge of their cul-ture. They must also have a grasp of the truthsof Scripture and be able to communicate thesubjects they teach in the context of the Chris-tian and Adventist worldview. They should beindividuals who can lead their students beyondthe narrow realm of their field of study by re-lating each course to the ultimate meaning ofhuman existence.A third area of development underlying the

qualification of Adventist teachers is the social.The social relationships of Christ with His“pupils” in the Gospels make an interesting andprofitable study. He did not seek to isolate Him-self from those He was teaching. Rather, Hemixed with them and engaged in their socialevents.Ellen White has written that “the true

teacher can impart to his pupils few gifts sovaluable as the gift of his own companionship.. . . To strengthen the tie of sympathy betweenteacher and student there are few means that

. . . The very best talent that can be secured isneeded to educate and mold the minds of theyoung and to carry on successfully the manylines of work that will need to be done by theteacher in our . . . schools.”57 No one wants tohire underqualified physicians, lawyers, or air-plane pilots, even if they are “cheaper.” Whyshould there be a blind spot in hiring qualifiedteachers—individuals who work with the mostvaluable entities on earth, the future generation?First in importance among the qualifications

is the spiritual. That is true because the essenceof the human problem is sin or a spiritual disori-entation from God. It is sin, as we noted earlier,that is at the root of all the other alienations anddisorientations that are so destructive both to in-dividuals and societies. The Bible teaches thathumanity in its “natural” condition is sufferingfrom a form of spiritual death (Genesis 3), andthat the greatest need of people is a spiritual re-

Figure 1. Purposes of Christian Education That Inform Teaching

Primary Aim Secondary Aims Ultimate Aim orFinal Outcome

Leadingyoung peopleinto a savingrelationshipwith JesusChrist

Service to God and otherpeople for both here and the hereafter

Character Development

Development ofa Christian mind

Development of gifts for social responsibility

Development of physical,

emotional, andsocial health

Development forthe world of work


Why should there

be a blind spot

in hiring qualified

teachers—

individuals who

work with the most

valuable entities

on earth, the future

generation.



count so much as pleasant association togetheroutside the schoolroom.”61 On another occa-sion, she suggested that if teachers “wouldgather the children close to them, and showthat they love them, and would manifest an in-terest in all their efforts, and even in theirsports, sometimes even being a child amongchildren, they would make the children veryhappy, and would gain their love and win theirconfidence. And the children would sooner re-spect and love . . . [their] authority.”62 To alarge extent, the relationship between teacherand student outside the classroom colors andconditions the one inside it.A fourth sphere of teacher qualification is

good physical, mental, and emotional health.Without balanced health, it is well-nigh impos-sible to maintain a sunny disposition and eventemper that reflect the image of Christ.Christian teachers must strive for the contin-

ual improvement of their personal qualifica-tions. That is the same as the goal that theyseek for their students—a restoration of theimage of God physically, mentally, spiritually,and socially. That balance, as it is found in thelife of Christ, will form the basis for their pro-fessional activity. Because teaching is the art ofloving God’s children, Adventist teachersshould have a desire to let God make them themost effective “lovers” possible.Said in another way, an overall qualification

of Christian teachers is to be a good model orexample of what they want their students to bein every aspect of their lives. It is almost im-possible to overestimate the power of a teacheras an example for either good or evil. Pulliasand Young note that “being an example arisesout of the very nature of teaching” and that“being a model is a part of teaching that noteacher can escape.”63 Ellen White highlightsthe facts that “the teacher should be himselfwhat he wishes his students to become” andthat “in His life, Christ’s words had perfect il-lustration and support. . . . It was this that gaveHis teaching . . . power.”64

What has been said about the qualificationsof teachers also applies to other employees in anAdventist school. They, too, make a significantimpact on students and thus need to be not onlyspiritual leaders but also healthy and balancedin every way. Teachers are only one part of aneffective, integrated educational team.This second installment in the philosophy of

Adventist education has examined, from theperspective of a biblical philosophy, the natureof the student, the role of the teacher, and theaims of Adventist education. The final install-ment will develop an Adventist approach to

curriculum, explore the implications of a bibli-cal perspective for teaching methodology, anddiscuss the social role of Adventist educationin the context of the great controversy betweengood and evil. �

POINTS TO PONDER• In what specific ways will the Adventist

view of human nature shape Christian educa-tion?• In what ways does the Bible’s teaching on

human nature “demand” that Christian educa-tion be different from other philosophies of ed-ucation?• In what ways is Christian teaching a form

of ministry?• How does the ministry function affect a

teacher’s aims?• In what ways does the view of teaching as

ministry enrich our understanding of the im-portance of Adventist education?• In your own words, describe the pur -

pose(s) of Adventist education.• What are the implications of that/those

purpose(s) for you personally as a teacher?



NOTES AND REFERENCES1. Harold H. Ditmanson, Harold V. Hong, and Warren A.

Quanbeck, eds., Christian Faith and the Liberal Arts (Min-neapolis, Minn.: Augsburg, 1960), p. iii.

2. Gordon H. Clark, A Christian Philosophy of Education(Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1946), p. 210.

3. This series of articles is not the first time an Adventistphilosophy of education has been formulated. See especially“A Statement of Seventh-day Adventist Educational Philoso-phy,” developed by a group of Adventist educators for consid-eration at the First International Conference on the Seventh-day Adventist Philosophy of Education, convened by theGeneral Conference Department of Education and held at An-drews University, April 7-9, 2001. That statement was pub-lished in the Journal of Research on Christian Education, vol.10, special edition, pp. 347-355, and is available at the GeneralConference Department of Education Website. Go tohttp://edu ca tion.gc.adventist.org; click on “Publications”; andchoose the title of the document as listed above.

4. Ellen G. White, Education (Mountain View, Calif.: Pa-



cific Press Publ. Assn., 1952), pp. 14, 15.5. Ibid., pp. 15, 16.6. Ibid., p. 29.7. Ibid., p. 30.8. Paul Nash, Models of Man: Explorations in the Western

Educational Tradition (New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1968);Paul Nash, Andreas M. Kazamias, and Henry J. Perkinson, TheEducated Man: Studies in the History of Educational Thought(New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1965).

9. Allan Hart Jahsmann, What’s Lutheran in Education?Exploration Into Principles and Practices (St. Louis: Concordia,1960), p. 8.

10. George R. Knight, Philosophy and Education: An Intro-duction in Christian Perspective, 4th ed. (Berrien Springs,Mich.: Andrews University Press, 2006), p. 207.

11. White, Education, p. 13.12. Ibid., pp. 13, 309.13. Jim Wilhoit, Christian Education and the Search for

Meaning, 2d ed. (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker, 1991), p. 61.14. Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan, Richard E. Flathman and

David Johnston, eds. (New York: W. W. Norton, 1997), p. 70.15. B. F. Skinner, Beyond Freedom and Dignity (New York:

Bantam, 1971).16. Jonathan Edwards, “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry

God,” in Thomas H. Johnson, ed., Jonathan Edwards, rev. ed.(New York: Hill and Wang, 1962), pp. 155-172.

17. Desmond Morris, The Naked Ape (New York: Dell,1969), p. 9.

18. Carl R. Rogers, Freedom to Learn (Columbus, Ohio:Charles E. Merrill, 1969).

19. Abraham J. Heschel, Who Is Man? (Stanford, Calif.:Stanford University Press, 1965), p. 3.

20. E. F. Schumacher, A Guide for the Perplexed (New York:Harper Colophon, 1978), pp. 18, 20.

21. White, Education, p. 15.22. Ibid., p. 18.23. David Elton Trueblood, The Idea of a College (New

York: Harper and Brothers, 1959), p. 33.24. __________, “The Marks of a Christian College,” in

John Paul von Grueningen, ed., Toward a Christian Philosophyof Higher Education (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1957), p. 168.

25. James Coleman, et al., Equality of Educational Oppor-tunity (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Health, Educa-tion, and Welfare, 1966).

26. Roger L. Dudley, Why Teenagers Reject Religion andWhat to Do About It (Washington, D.C.: Review and HeraldPubl. Assn., 1978), p. 80.

27. White, Education, pp. 16, 30.28. Unless otherwise indicated, all Bible texts in this article

are quoted from the Revised Standard Version. Bible texts cred-ited to RSV are from the Revised Standard Version of the Bible,copyright © 1946, 1952, 1971, by the Division of Christian Edu-cation of the National Council of the Churches of Christ in theU.S.A. Used by permission.

29. F. F. Bruce, The Epistle to the Ephesians (Westwood,N.J.: Fleming H. Revell, 1961), p. 85.

30. Martin Luther, “Sermon on the Duty of Sending Chil-dren to School,” in Luther on Education, F. V. N. Painter, ed.(Philadelphia: Lutheran Publication Society, 1889), p. 264.

31. Ellen G. White, Counsels to Parents, Teachers, and Stu-dents (Mountain View, Calif.: Pacific Press Publ. Assn., 1943),p. 179.

32. __________, Education, p. 279.33. Ibid., pp. 79, 80.34. Arthur W. Combs, Myths in Education: Beliefs That

Hinder Progress and Their Alternatives (Boston: Allyn andBacon, 1979), pp. 196, 197.

35. William Glasser, Schools Without Failure (New York:Harper and Row, 1975), p. 14. For more on Glasser, see JimRoy, Soul Shapers: A Better Plan for Parents and Educators

(Hagerstown, Md.: Review and Herald Publ. Assn., 2005).36. Earl V. Pullias and James D. Young, A Teacher Is Many

Things, 2d ed. (Bloomington, Ind.: Indiana University Press,1977), p. 128.

37. White, Counsels to Parents, Teachers, and Students, p.262.

38. Edwin H. Rian, “The Need: A World View,” in JohnPaul von Grueningen, ed. Toward a Christian Philosophy ofHigher Education (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1957), pp. 30,31.

39. Herbert Welch, “The Ideals and Aims of the ChristianCollege,” in The Christian College (New York: Methodist BookConcern, 1916), p. 21.

40. Carlyle B. Haynes, Righteousness in Christ: A Preacher’sPersonal Experience (Takoma Park, Md.: General ConferenceMinisterial Association, n. d.), pp. 9, 10.

41. Ellen G. White, Fundamentals of Christian Education(Nashville, Tenn.: Southern Publ. Assn., 1923), p. 436.

42. __________, Education, p. 109, 225.43. C. B. Eavey, “Aims and Objectives of Christian Educa-

tion,” in J. Edward Hakes, ed., An Introduction to EvangelicalChristian Education (Chicago: Moody, 1964), p. 62.

44. White, Counsels to Parents, Teachers, and Students, p.61.

45. Hans K. LaRondelle, Christ Our Salvation: What GodDoes for Us and in Us (Mountain View, Calif.: Pacific PressPubl. Assn., 1980), pp. 81, 82.

46.White, Counsels to Parents, Teachers, and Students, pp.49, 61; __________, Fundamentals of Christian Education, p.27.

47. Gene Garrick, “Developing Educational Objectives forthe Christian School,” in Paul A. Kienel, ed., The Philosophyof Christian School Education, 2d ed. (Whittier, Calif.: Associ-ation of Christian Schools International, 1978), p. 73.

48. White, Education, p. 195.49. Ibid., p. 214.50. Welch, “The Ideals and Aims of the Christian College,”

in The Christian College, op cit., pp. 23, 22.51. White, Education, pp. 13, 309.52. Ibid., pp. 29, 30.53. From George R. Knight, Philosophy and Education: An

Introduction in Christian Perspective, 4th ed. (Berrien Springs,Mich.: Andrews University Press, 2006), p. 216. Reproducedby permission.

54. J. Crosby Chapman and George S. Counts, Principlesof Education (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1924), p. 498.

55. Gloria Goris Stronks and Doug Blomberg, eds., A Vi-sion With a Task: Christian Schooling for Responsive Disciple-ship (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker, 1993), p. 25.

56. Frank E. Gaebelein, The Pattern of God’s Truth: Prob-lems of Integration in Christian Education (Chicago: Moody,1968), p. 35.

57. Ellen G. White, Testimonies for the Church (MountainView, Calif.: Pacific Press Publ. Assn., 1948), vol. 6, p. 200; cf.__________, Counsels to Parents, Teachers, and Students, pp.150, 151.

58. Eavey, “Aims and Objectives of Christian Education,”in An Introduction to Evangelical Christian Education, op cit.,p. 61.

59. White, Counsels to Parents, Teachers, and Students, p. 31.60. Ibid., p. 199.61. White, Education, p. 212; cf. __________, Counsels to

Parents, Teachers, and Students, p. 502; __________, Funda-mentals of Christian Education, p. 116.

62. __________, Fundamentals of Christian Education, pp.18, 19.

63. Pullias and Young, A Teacher Is Many Things, op cit.,p. 68.

64. White, Counsels to Parents, Teachers, and Students, p.65; __________, Education, pp. 78, 79.


Implicationsof Philosophy for

Adventist Education

R E D E M P T I V E

E D U C A T I O N

P A R T I I I



( C O N T I N U E D )



he term curriculum comes from the Latinword currere, which means to run a race.”In a general sense it represents “all thecourses and experiences at an institution.”1

One author defines it as “a road map inbroad strokes that points individuals in thedirection of Christian maturing.”2

But, we need to ask, what should be includedin the map? And on what basis should decisionsbe made? Those questions bring us to the issueof what knowledge is of most worth.

What Knowledge Is of Most Worth?One of the most enlightening and coherent es-

says ever published on the relationship of philo-sophic beliefs to the content of the curriculumwas developed by Herbert Spencer (a leading so-cial Darwinist) in 1854. “What Knowledge Is ofMost Worth?” was both the title and the centralquestion of the essay. To Spencer, this was the“question of questions” in the realm of educa-tion. “Before there can be a rational curriculum,”he argued, “we must settle which things it mostconcerns us to know; . . . we must determine therelative value of knowledges.”3

Spencer, in seeking to answer his question,

classified human activity in a hierarchical orderbased on importance. He chose the followingstratification, in terms of descending conse-quence: (1) those activities relating directly toself-preservation, (2) those activities that indi-rectly minister to self-preservation, (3) thoseactivities having to do with the rearing of off-spring, (4) those activities pertaining to politi-cal and social relations, (5) those activities thatrelate to the leisure part of life and are devotedto the tastes and appetites.4

His essay then proceeded to analyze humanaffairs from a naturalistic-evolutionary perspec-tive, and eventually provided an unequivocalreply to his leading question: “What knowledgeis of most worth?—the uniform reply is—Sci-ence. This is the verdict on all the counts.”Spencer’s explanation of his answer related Sci-ence (broadly conceived to include the socialand practical sciences, as well as the physicaland life sciences) to his five-point hierarchy oflife’s most important activities. His answer wasbuilt upon the principle that whichever activitiesoccupy the peripheral aspects of life should alsooccupy marginal places in the curriculum, whilethose activities that are most important in life

T“


After you have studied the content presented here, send for the test, using the form on page 60. Upon successful completion ofthe test, you will receive a report on the Continuing Education Units you’ve earned, and the certification registrar of yourunion conference office of education will be notified (North American Division only).

*Approved by the North American Division Office of Education. The tests for Parts I, II, and III must be successfully completedto meet alternative teaching certification requirements as outlined in Section 5.1 of the K-12 Educators Certification Manual.

Part I in this sequence discussed the major philosophic categories related to reality,truth, and value and examined each of those areas from an Adventist perspective. Build-ing upon that philosophic foundation, Part II began to explore its implications for educa-tional practice, particularly in terms of the nature of the student, the aims of Adventisteducation, and the ministerial role of the teacher. Part III discusses a Christian approachto curriculum, moves on to the implications of a Christian philosophy for teachingmethodology and the social function of Adventist education, and closes with a perspec-tive on the importance of Adventist educators being faithful to the philosophy that un-dergirds their schools.A fuller discussion of many of the topics covered in this article may be found in the

author’s Philosophy and Education: An Introduction in Christian Perspective, 4th ed.(Berrien Springs, Mich.: Andrews University Press, 2006) and Myths in Adventism: AnInterpretive Study of Ellen White, Education, and Related Issues (Hagerstown, Md.: Re-view and Herald Publ. Assn., 1985, 2010).


Why should there

be a blind spot

in hiring qualified

teachers—

individuals who

work with the most

valuable entities

on earth, the future

generation.

C O N T I N U I N G E D U C A T I O N — P A R T I I I


jects of the curriculum in such a way that theymake sense, but to discover such a pattern. Welive in a world that has so fragmented knowl-edge that it is difficult to see how our variousrealms of expertise relate to the whole. It is inthis context that C. P. Snow’s “Two Cultures”—with its discussion of the great gulf between thehumanities and the sciences—takes on partic-ular significance and meaning.8

Our world is one in which subject-areascholars have too often lost the ability to com-municate with one another because they fail tosee the significance of their subject matter inrelation to the ”big picture.” To complicate mat-ters, we find existentialists and postmodernistsdenying external meaning, and analytic phi - losophers suggesting that since we can’t dis-cover meaning, we should focus on definingour words and refining our syntax.The search for meaning in the total educa-

tional experience has been a major quest formore than a century. Some have defined the in-tegrating center as the unity of the classics, whileothers have viewed it in terms of the needs of so-ciety, vocationalism, or science. None of thoseapproaches, however, has been broad enough,and their claims have usually been divisiverather than unifying. We seem to live in a schiz-ophrenic world in which many claim that thereis no external meaning, while others base theirscientific research on postulates that point to anoverall meaning. Modern secular people havethrown out Christianity as a unifying force andhave tended to concentrate on the details of theirknowledge rather than on the whole. As a result,intellectual fragmentation continues to be a largeproblem as human beings seek to determinewhat knowledge is of most worth.For Adventist educators, the problem is quite

different. They know what knowledge is of mostworth, because they understand humanity’sgreatest needs. They know that the Bible is a cos-mic revelation that transcends the limited realmof humanity, and that it not only reveals thehuman condition but also the remedy for thatcondition. They further realize that all subjectmatter becomes meaningful when seen in thelight of the Bible and its Great Controversy strug-gle between good and evil. The problem for Ad-ventist educators has not been to find the patternof knowledge in relation to its center, but ratherto apply what they know.All too often the curriculum of Christian

schools, including Adventist institutions, hasbeen “a patchwork of naturalistic ideas mixedwith Biblical truth.” That has led, Frank Gae-belein claims, to a form of “scholastic schizo-phrenia in which a highly orthodox theology

should be given the most important place in thecourse of studies.5

Christians will of necessity reject Spencer’sconclusions, which are built upon a naturalisticmetaphysics and epistemology, but they mustnot miss the larger issue underlying his argu-ment. It is crucial that Adventists understandthe rationale for the curriculum in their institu-tions of learning. Mark Van Doren noted that“the college is meaningless without a curricu-lum, but it is more so when it has one that ismeaningless.”6

The Adventist educator must, with Spencer,settle the issue of “which things it most con-cerns us to know.” The answer to that ques-tion, as Spencer noted, leads directly to an un-derstanding of the relative values of variouskinds of knowledge in the curriculum. Ad -ventist educators can study Spencer’s essay andthe methodology included therein and gainsubstantial insights into the important task ofcurriculum development in the context of theirdistinctive worldview.Authentic and viable curricula must be de-

veloped out of, and must be consistent with, aschool’s metaphysical, epistemological, and ax-iological bases. It is therefore a foundationaltruth that different philosophic approaches willemphasize different curricula. One implicationof that fact is that the curriculum of Adventistschools will not be a readjustment or an adap-tation of the secular curriculum of the larger so-ciety. Biblical Christianity is unique. Therefore,the curricular stance of Adventist educationwill be unique.Another major issue in curriculum develop-

ment is to discover the pattern that holds the cur-riculum together. Alfred North Whiteheadclaimed that curricular programs generally sufferfrom the lack of an integrating principle. “Insteadof this single unity, we offer children—Algebra,from which nothing follows; Geometry, fromwhich nothing follows; Science, from whichnothing follows; History, from which nothing fol-lows; a Couple of Languages, never mastered;and lastly, most dreary of all, Literature, repre-sented by plays of Shakespeare, with philologicalnotes and short analyses of plot and character tobe in substance committed to memory. Can sucha list be said to represent Life, as it is known inthe midst of the living of it? The best that can besaid of it is that it is a rapid table of contentswhich a deity might run over in his mind whilehe was thinking of creating a world, and has notyet determined how to put it together.”7

However, the crux of the problem has notbeen ignorance of the need for some overallpattern in which to fit together the various sub-

Modern secular

people have thrown

out Christianity

as a unifying force

and have tended to

concentrate on

the details of their

knowledge

rather than on the

whole.

QUALIFICATIONS


UNITY OF TRUTH


can develop—an educational context in whichyoung people can be taught to think “Chris-tianly” about every aspect of reality.12

The Strategic Role of the Bible inthe CurriculumA second postulate follows that of the unity

of all truth: The Bible is the foundational andcontextual document for all curricular items inthe Christian school. This postulate is a naturaloutcome of a bibliocentric, revelational episte-mology. Just as special revelation forms the basisof epistemological authority, so also it must bethe foundation of the curriculum. Our discussionof epistemology noted that the Bible is not an ex-haustive source of truth. Much truth exists out-side of the Bible, but it is important to note thatno truth exists outside the metaphysical frame-work of the Bible. “The teaching authority ofScripture,” Arthur Holmes asserts, “commits thebeliever at certain focal points and so providesan interpretive framework, an overall glimpse ofhow everything relates to God.”13

The concept of an interpretive frameworkneeds constant emphasis in Adventist education.The Bible is not the whole of knowledge, but itdoes provide a frame of reference within whichto study and interpret all topics. Whether thatframework is the view of evolutionary natural-ism, the Greek and Roman classics, the biblicalworldview, or some other perspective makes agreat deal of difference. An Adventist school isChristian only when it teaches all subjects fromthe perspective of God’s Word.Elton Trueblood noted that “the important

question is not, Do you offer a course in religion?Such a course might be offered by any institu-tion. The relevant question is, Does your reli-gious profession make a difference? . . . A meredepartment of religion may be relatively insignif-icant. The teaching of the Bible is good, but it isonly a beginning. What is far more important isthe penetration of the central Christian convic-tions into the teaching” of every subject.14

Frank Gaebelein was making the same pointwhen he wrote that there exists “a vast differ-ence between education in which devotionalexercises and the study of Scripture have aplace, and education in which the Christianityof the Bible is the matrix of the whole programor, to change the figure, the bed in which theriver of teaching and learning flows.”15

An educational system that maintains a splitbetween the areas it defines as secular or reli-gious can justify tacking on religious elementsto a basically secular curriculum. It may evengo so far as to treat the Bible as the “firstamong equals” in terms of importance. But the

coexists uneasily with a teaching of non-reli-gious subjects that differs little from that in sec-ular institutions.”9 The challenge confrontingthe curriculum developer in an Adventistschool is to move beyond a curricular view fo-cused on the bits and pieces, and to find a wayto clearly and purposefully integrate the detailsof knowledge into the biblical framework. Thattask brings us to the unity of truth.

The Unity of TruthA basic postulate underlying the Christian

curriculum is that “all truth is God’s truth.”10

From the biblical viewpoint, God is the Creatorof everything. Therefore, truth in all fields stemsfrom Him. Failing to see this point clearly has ledmany to construct a false dichotomy between thesecular and the religious. That dichotomy im-plies that the religious has to do with God, whilethe secular is divorced from Him. From thatpoint of view, the study of science, history, andmathematics is seen as basically secular, whilethe study of religion, church history, and ethicsis viewed as religious.That is not the biblical perspective. In the

Scriptures, God is seen as the Creator of the ob-jects and patterns of science and math, as wellas the Director of historical events. In essence,there are no “secular” aspects of the curricu-lum. John Henry Newman pointed to that truthwhen he wrote that “it is easy enough” on thelevel of thought “to divide Knowledge intohuman and divine, secular and religious, andto lay down that we will address ourselves tothe one without interfering with the other; butit is impossible in fact.”11

All truth in the Christian curriculum,whether it deals with nature, humanity, society,or the arts, must be seen in proper relationshipto Jesus Christ as Creator and Redeemer. It istrue that some forms of truth are not addressedin the Scriptures. For example, nuclear physicsis not explained in the Bible. That, however,does not mean that nuclear physics is not con-nected with God’s natural laws or that it doesnot have moral and ethical implications as itsapplications affect the lives of people. Christwas the Creator of all things—not just thosethings people have chosen to call religious(John 1:1-3; Colossians 1:16).All truth, if it be truth indeed, is God’s truth,

no matter where it is found. As a result, the cur-riculum of the Christian school must be seen asa unified whole, rather than as a fragmented andrather loosely connected assortment of topics.Once that viewpoint is recognized, educationwill have taken a major step forward in creatingan atmosphere in which the “Christian mind”

FRA

MEW

OR

K


school whose constituency and teachers em-brace the idea that “all truth is God’s truth” willfind itself bound by that belief to develop a cur-ricular model in which the biblical worldviewpermeates every aspect of the curriculum.According to Ellen White, “the science of re-

demption is the science of all sciences,” and theBible is “the Book of books.”16 Only an under-standing of that “science” and that “Book”makes everything else meaningful in the fullestsense. Viewed in the light of “the grand centralthought” of the Bible, Ellen White points out,“every topic has a new significance.”17 Every stu -dent, she noted in another connection, shouldgain a knowledge of the Bible’s “grand centraltheme, of God’s original purpose for the world,of the rise of the great controversy, and of thework of redemption. He should understand thenature of the two principles that are contendingfor supremacy, and should learn to trace theirworking through the records of history and proph -ecy, to the great consummation. He should seehow this controversy enters into every phase ofhuman experience; how in every act of life hehimself reveals the one or the other of the twoantagonistic motives; and how, whether he willor not, he is even now deciding upon which sideof the controversy he will be found.”18

The conflict between good and evil has leftno area of existence untouched. On the nega-tive side, we see the controversy in the deteri-oration of the world of nature, in war and suf-fering in the realm of history and the socialsciences, and in humanity’s concern with lost-ness in the humanities. On the positive side, wediscover the wonder of a natural order thatseems to be purposefully organized, in human-ity’s ability to relate to and care for its fellowsin social life, and in its deep visions and desiresfor wholeness and meaningfulness. “Why,”every individual is forced to ask, “is there evilin a world that seems so good? Why is theredeath and sorrow in an existence that is so del-icately engineered for life?”The questions go on and on, but without su-

pernatural help, earthbound humans are help-less as they seek to discover ultimate answers.They can discover bits and pieces of “truth”and build theories concerning their meaning,but only in God’s cosmic breakthrough to hu-manity in its smallness and lostness is that ul-timate meaning provided.God’s special revelation contains the answers

to humankind’s “big questions.” It is that reve-lation, therefore, that must provide both thefoundation and the context for every humanstudy. Each topic within the curriculum, and

even human life itself, takes on new meaning inthe light of God’s Word. It is imperative, there-fore, that Adventist schools teach every subjectfrom the biblical perspective.Gaebelein, in his classic treatment of the

issue, has suggested that what we need is the“integration” of every aspect of the school pro-gram with the biblical worldview. Integration“means ‘the bringing together of parts into thewhole.’”19 “The call, then,” he writes, “is for awholly Christian worldview on the part of oureducation. We must recognize, for example,that we need teachers who see their subjects,whether scientific, historical, mathematical, lit-erary, or artistic, as included within the patternof God’s truth.”20 This is the rightful place ofreligion in education, claimed Henry P. VanDusen in his Rockwell Lectures, not becausethe churches say so or because it is dictated bytradition, but “because of the nature of Real-ity.”21 After all, God is the being whose exis-tence brings unity and meaning to the universe,and it is His revelation that provides unity andmeaning to the curriculum.Unfortunately, in the most common curricu-

lum design, Bible or religion is just one topicamong many, as illustrated in Figure 122 onpage 43. In that model, every topic is studiedin the context of its own logic, and each is re-garded as basically independent of the others.History or literature teachers are not concernedwith religion, and religion teachers do not in-volve themselves with history or literature,since all teach their own specialty. Each subjecthas its own well-defined territory and tradi-tional approach. This model rarely delves intothe relationship between fields of study, letalone their “ultimate meaning.” In an attempt to correct the above problem,

some enthusiastic reformers have gone to theother extreme and developed a model that is il-lustrated in Figure 2.23 This model seeks tomake the Bible and religion into the whole cur-riculum, and, as a result, also misses the mark,since the Bible never claims to be an exhaustivesource of truth. It sets the framework for thestudy of history and science and touches uponthose topics, but it is not a “textbook” for allareas that students need to understand. On theother hand, it is a “textbook” in the science ofsalvation and a source of inspired informationconcerning both the orderliness and the abnor-mality of our present world, even though itnever claims to be a sufficient authority in allareas of possible truth.A third organizational scheme could be la-

beled the foundational and contextual model



schools must approach each subject in the lightof the biblical perspective in order to under-stand its fullest meaning.The broken lines in Figure 3 signify the lack

of rigid divisions between the various subjects,and the absence of any false dichotomy betweenthe sacred and the secular. The two-headed ar-rows indicate not only that the Bible helps us un-derstand every topic in the curriculum, but alsothat the study of history, science, and so on alsosheds light on the meaning of Scripture. God hasrevealed Himself through the Bible in a specialrevelation, and through His created world in ageneral revelation. We can grasp the significanceof the latter only in the light of the former, butboth shed light on each other since all truth hasits origin in God. Every topic in the curriculumhas an impact upon every other, and all achievemaximum meaning when integrated within thebiblical context.

Christianity and the Radical Reorientationof the CurriculumOne of the challenges that educators must

face in developing a biblically oriented curricu-lum in the 21st century is the diverse world-views that permeate contemporary society, in-cluding that of postmodernism, which claimsthat there is no such thing as a genuine world-view anchored in reality—that all worldviewsor grand narratives are human constructions.But that claim is itself a worldview with defi-nite metaphysical and epistemological presup-positions.26

That thought raises the issue of the generallack of self-consciousness evidenced by mostpeople. Harry Lee Poe reflects upon that topicwhen he writes that “every discipline of theacademy makes enormous assumptions andgoes about its business with untested and un-challenged presuppositions. We are used tothis. Assumptions and presuppositions havebecome so much a part of the fabric of life thatwe do not notice the threads. These threadsmake up the worldview of the culture in whichwe live. They are the things ‘everybody knows’and that, therefore, go untested. They are sodeeply ingrained in us that we are rarely evenaware of them.”27 In short, worldviews formany people are subliminal—a part of thelarger culture that is accepted without chal-lenge.On the other hand, Poe notes that “in the

marketplace of ideas, the fundamental assump-tions . . . to which people cling are the verythings that Christ challenges.”28 Clearly, thebiblical worldview and the predominant men-

(see Figure 324 below). It implies that the Bible(and its worldview) provides a foundation anda context for all human knowledge, and that itsoverall meaning infuses every area of the cur-riculum and adds significance to each topic.This corresponds with what Richard Edlin help-fully refers to as the “permeative function of theBible.” “The Bible,” he notes, “is not frostingon an otherwise unaltered humanist cake. Itneeds to be the leaven in the educational loaf,shaping the entire curriculum from its base upas it permeates through the whole school pro-gram.”25 Figure 3 sets forth an integrationmodel, indicating that educators in Adventist

Figure 1. Curriculum Model: Self-Contained Subject Matter Areas

Figure 2. Curriculum Model: The Bible as the Whole

Figure 3. Curriculum Model: The Bible as Foundational and Contextual

B I B L I C A L P E R S P E C T I V E

BIBLICAL PERSPECTIVE

B I B L I C A L P E R S P E C T I V E

BIBLICAL PERSPECTIVE

Liter

atur

e

Hist

ory

Mat

hem

atic

s

Scie

nce

Et C

eter

a

Liter

atur

e

Hist

ory

Mat

hem

atic

s

Bible and Religion

Scie

nce

Et C

eter

a

Relig

ion


The impact of

literary study is all

the more powerful

because it is

delivered in a pack-

age with which

humans emotionally

identify.


tality of the larger culture are often at odds, andthere are different religious and even differentChristian worldviews. Making people aware ofthe contrasts results in what sociologist PeterBerger refers to as “collisions of conscious-ness”29 and what philosopher David Naugle la-bels “worldview warfare.”30

From that perspective, by its very nature, thebiblically based curriculum challenges othermethods of curricula organization and suggestsa radical reorientation of the subject matter inAdventist schools. The essential point that theAdventist educator must grasp is that the teach-ing of any topic in an Adventist school must notbe a modification of the approach used in non-Christian schools. It is rather a radical reorien-tation of that topic within the philosophicalframework of Christianity.A good place to begin examining the radical

reorientation of the curriculum is the field ofliterary study.31 The study of literature holds acrucial position in all school systems becauseliterature addresses and seeks to answer peo-ple’s most important questions; reveals human-ity’s basic desires, wishes, and frustrations; anddevelops insight into human experience. Be-yond raising aesthetic sensitivity, the study ofliterature leads to inductive insights in suchareas as psychology, philosophy, religion, his-tory, and sociology; and it provides informationabout such topics as human nature, sin, andthe meaning and purpose of human existence.The impact of literary study is all the more

powerful because it is delivered in a packagewith which humans emotionally identify. Thatis, it reaches people at the affective and cogni-tive levels simultaneously. In the fullest senseof the words, literary content is philosophicaland religious because it deals with philosophi-cal and religious issues, problems, and an-swers. Literary study, therefore, holds a centralposition in curricular structures and providesone of the most powerful educational tools forthe teaching of religious values.Secularist John Steinbeck caught the signif-

icance of the central core of great literature inhis classic East of Eden when he wrote that “Ibelieve that there is one story in the world, andonly one. . . . Humans are caught—in theirlives, in their thoughts, in their hungers andambitions, in their avarice and cruelty, and intheir kindness and generosity too—in a net ofgood and evil. . . . There is no other story.”32

While there may be no other story, there arecertainly multiple interpretations of the impli-cations of that story. For Steinbeck, from hisearthbound perspective, there is no hope. Theend is always disastrous despite hopeful signs

along the way. By way of contrast, the Biblefeatures hope in spite of serious problems. Italso explores the “only story,” but with revela-tory insight into the meaning of a world thatforms the battleground for a cosmic clash be-tween the forces of good and evil.The responsibility of the literature teacher in

the Adventist school is to help students learnto read critically so that they can grasp themeaning of their assignments in terms of thegreat controversy between good and evil.33 Lit-erary study is not merely a relaxing excursioninto the realm of art. T. S. Eliot observed thatwhat we read affects “the whole of what weare. . . . Though we may read literature merelyfor pleasure, of ‘entertainment’ or of ‘aestheticenjoyment,’ this reading never affects simply asort of special sense: it affects our moral andreligious existence.”34 There is no such thing asartistic neutrality. The function of literary studyin an Adventist school is not just to help stu-dents become “learned” in the great writers ofthe past and present; it must also help them toview the issues at stake in the controversy be-tween good and evil with more clarity and sen-sitivity.The Bible in this context provides an inter-

pretive framework that transcends human in-sights. “Every topic,” including literature, “hasa new significance,” Ellen White suggests,when viewed in the light of the “grand centraltheme” of the Scriptures.35 The Bible is quite arealistic book. Those literary extremes that ig-nore evil at one end of the spectrum or glorifyit at the other are neither true nor honest andcertainly allow no room for a viable concept ofjustice. The challenge for Christians is to ap-proach literary study in such a way that it leadsreaders to see the reality of humanity and itsworld as it actually is—filled with sin and suf-fering, but not beyond hope and the redeeminggrace of a caring God.The interpretive function of literary instruc-

tion has generally been approached in two dif-ferent ways (see Drawings A and B in Figure 436

on page 45). Drawing A represents a classroomapproach that emphasizes the literary qualitiesof the material and uses the Bible or ideas fromthe Bible from time to time as asides. The onlydifference between this approach and the wayliterature is taught in non-Christian institutions,is that biblical insights are added.Drawing B depicts the study of literature in

the context of the biblical perspective and itsimplications for humanity’s universal and per-sonal dilemmas. It interprets literature from thedistinctive vantage point of Christianity, recog-nizing the abnormality of the present world and



God’s activity in that world. Using that ap-proach, the study of literature in a Christian in-stitution can be richer than in a secular school,since non-Christians are handicapped by theirlack of the all-important (in terms of insightand interpretation) biblical view of sin and sal-vation. That does not mean that literary ele-ments such as plot and style are unimportant,but rather that they are not, within the contextof Christianity, the most important aspects ofliterary study.Note also that in Drawing B the arrows indi-

cate a two-way transaction between the biblicalperspective and literary study. Not only doesthe biblical worldview help us interpret litera-ture, but literary insights also help us to betterunderstand religious experience within the con-text of religious truth.Adventist teachers must help students move

beyond the story to the meaning of its insightsfor daily life. The function of literary study in aChristian institution, Virginia Grabill writes, isto help students learn how to “think” about theissues of life—their personal identity and pur-pose, the presence of good and evil, justice andforgiveness, the beautiful and the ugly, sexual-ity and spirituality, ambition and humility, joyand suffering, purity and guilt, and so on.37

C. S. Lewis made a similar point when hewrote that “one of the minor rewards of con-version is to be able at last to see the real pointof all the literature we were brought up to readwith the point left out.”38 The goal of literarystudy in a Christian school is not to transmit abody of knowledge, but to develop a skill—theability to think critically and to interpret literaryinsights from the perspective of the biblicalworldview.We have spent a great deal of time examin-

ing literary study in the reoriented Christiancurriculum. Similar observations could bemade about history and social studies. Historyin the Christian curriculum is viewed in thelight of the biblical message as God seeks towork out His purpose in human affairs. TheBible is seen as providing the interpretiveframework for events between the fall of Adamand the second coming of Jesus. The Bible isnot treated as a comprehensive history text-book, but as an account that focuses on the his-tory of salvation. There are, of course, points ofintersection between general history and theBible in terms of events, prophecy, and archae-ology. But the Christian teacher of history real-izes that the specific points of intersection arein the minority, and that the major function ofthe Bible in his or her discipline is to provide aperspective for understanding.

The same might be said of the life, physical,and social sciences, or physical education, oragriculture in the curriculum of an Adventistschool. The Bible provides the framework forunderstanding a troubled world, while the dis-ciplines bring forth the bits and pieces. TheBible provides the pattern that gives interpre-tative meaning to the otherwise meaninglessdetails uncovered by the scholar. The Bible thusbecomes the focal point of integration for all ofhuman knowledge.That fact is especially important in the sci-

ences, an area in whichthe past century has wit-nessed one of the mostsignificant “cultural wars”of all time. Unfortunately,unproven hypotheses re-lated to macroevolution39

have too often beengranted the status of“fact” and then been usedto provide the interpretiveframework for science inmost schools.The basic problem: The

cosmologies of macr o -evolution and biblical cre-ationism are incompati-ble. The latter begins witha perfect creation, contin-ues on with humanity’sfall into sin, and thentransitions to God’s solu-tion for removing the ef-fects of the Fall. But themacroevolution scenariois diametrically opposedto the biblical model.From the perspective ofmacroevolution, all crea-tures originated as less-complex organisms andhave been improvingthrough the processes ofnatural selection. In that model there is no needfor redemption and restoration.The biblical framework for interpreting nat-

ural history is constructed from the Genesis ac-count, which states that God created the earthin six days, and that He created human beingsin His own image. The basic facts of the Gene-sis creation story do not allow for eithermacroevolution (in which God has no involve-ment) or theistic evolution (which limits Godto the role of mere initiator of the evolutionaryprocess). Adventist schools must be unapolo-getically creationist. The biblical metaphysic

Figure 4. The Contextual Role of the Biblical Perspective

A

B

L I T E R A T U R E

B I B L I C A LP E R S P E C T I V E

Bibleand

Religion

Literature


BA

LAN

CE


stands at the very foundation of why the Sev-enth-day Adventist Church chose to establishAdventism’s educational alternative.The integration of human knowledge into

the biblical framework is important, but it mustbe done with care and wisdom. Frank Gae-belein, in discussing how to develop correla-tions between Christian concepts and the sub-ject matter of the various fields of study, pointsout some necessary cautions. A major pitfall,as he sees it, is the danger “of a false integra-tion through forced correlations that are nottruly indigenous to the subject in question.Such lugging in of stilted correlations, eventhough motivated by Christian zeal, is liable todo more harm than good through giving the im-pression that integration of specific subjectswith God’s truth is a put-up job.“What may be needed is a more relaxed at-

tack upon the problem and a clearer realizationof the limits under which we are working. Herea suggestion by Emil Brunner is useful. Speak-ing of the distortion brought into our thinkingthrough sin, he sees it at its greatest in suchareas as theology, philosophy, and literature,because these are nearest man’s relation to Godand have thus been most radically alteredthrough the fall. They therefore stand most inneed of correction, and in them correlationwith Christianity is at its highest. But as wemove from the humanities to the sciences andmathematics, the disturbance through sin di-minishes almost to the vanishing point. Thusthe Christian teacher of the more objective sub-jects, mathematics in particular, ought not toseek for the detailed and systematic correla-tions that his colleagues in psychology, litera-ture, or history might validly make.”40

Gaebelein does not mean that there are nopoints of contact between Christianity and top-ics such as mathematics, but rather that theyare fewer and less obvious.41 Christian teacherswill utilize those points while not seeking toforce integration in an unnatural manner.However, the integration of mathematics

and the physical sciences with Christian beliefmay be even more important than the integra-tion of literature and the social sciences withChristianity because many students have im-bibed the idea that they are “objective,” neu-tral, and functional and have no philosophicalpresuppositions, biases about reality, or cosmo-logical implications. On the contrary, the studyof mathematics and the “hard” sciences is to-tally embedded in bias and assumption.Mathematics, for example, like Christianity,

is built upon unprovable postulates. Beyondthat, assumptions such as the orderliness of the

universe and the validity of empirical observa-tion are metaphysical and epistemological pre-suppositions that undergird science but arerejected by many modern and postmodern peo-ple in both Western and Eastern cultures. It isessential to make these assumptions evident inclass presentations because they are oftentaken as facts and are “invisible” to the averagestudent who has been raised in an age that hasplaced its uncritical faith in science and math-ematics rather than in the Creator of scientificand mathematical reality. This integration ismost natural at the elementary, secondary, andintroductory college levels, since courses atthese levels provide the intellectual context forsuch sophisticated courses as theoretical me-chanics and advanced calculus.Christian math and science teachers will

also creatively utilize the natural points of in-tegration between their subject matter and re-ligion. Mathematics, for example, certainly hascontact points with the Christian faith when itdeals with such areas as infinity and the exis-tence of numbers in other parts of daily life,from music to crystallography and astronomy.The world of mathematical precision is God’sworld; thus, mathematics is not outside the pat-tern of God’s truth.42

Before moving away from the radical reori-entation of the curriculum, we need to empha-size that it is of the utmost importance for Ad-ventist educators and their constituents torealize that the biblical worldview must domi-nate the curriculum of our schools to ensure thatthey are Adventist in actuality rather thanmerely in name. Adventist educators must askthemselves this probing question: If I, as ateacher in an Adventist school, am teaching thesame material in the same way that it is pre-sented in a public institution, then what rightdo I have to take the hard-earned money of myconstituents? The answer is both obvious andfrightening. Adventist education that does notprovide a biblical understanding of the arts, sci-ences, humanities, and the world of work is notChristian. One major aim of Adventist educa-tion must be to help students think christianly.

The Balanced CurriculumBeyond the realm of specific subject matter

in the Adventist school is the larger issue of theintegration of the curricular program in such away that it provides for the balanced develop-ment of the various attributes of students asthey are being restored to their original positionas beings created in the image and likeness ofGod. In the section on the nature of the stu-dent, we noted that at the Fall humanity, to a



large extent, experienced a fracturing of thatimage in the spiritual, social, mental, and phys-ical realms. We also saw that education is basi-cally an agent of redemption and restoration asGod seeks to use human educators to restorefallen individuals to their original state.The curriculum must, therefore, establish an

integrated balance that facilitates that restora-tion. It cannot focus merely on mental devel-opment or career preparation. It must developthe whole person—the physical, social, spiri-tual, and vocational as well as the mental needsof each student.Unfortunately, traditional education focused

almost exclusively on the mental. Greek ideal-ism set the stage for more than two millenniaof miseducation that ignored or denigrated bothphysical development and preparation for use-ful vocations.By contrast, the Bible is neither anti-physical

nor anti-vocational. After all, God created aphysical earth He deemed “very good” (Genesis1:31),43 and He intends to resurrect human be-ings with physical bodies at the end of time (1Thessalonians 4:13-18; Philippians 3:21). Be-yond that, Jesus was educated to be a carpen-ter, and the wealthy Paul was trained as a tentmaker even though it appeared that he wouldnever need to work at the trade.But those biblical principles were obscured

in the early centuries of the Christian Churchwhen its theology amalgamated with Greekthought. That resulted in some very non-bibli-cal educational theory and practice.The 19th century experienced a wave of re-

form, with calls for a return to balanced edu-cation. Ellen White spoke about that needed re-form. In fact, it was at the center of hereducational philosophy. We saw that in thevery first paragraph of Education, in which shenoted that “true education . . . is the harmo-nious development of the physical, the mental,and the spiritual powers.”44

To restore individuals to wholeness, Advent -ist education cannot neglect the balance be-tween the physical and the mental. The impor-tance of that balance is highlighted by the factthat it is the body that houses the brain, whichpeople must use in order to make responsiblespiritual decisions. Whatever affects one partof a person affects the total being. Individualsare wholistic units, and the curriculum of theAdventist school must meet all their needs toensure that they achieve wholeness and operateat peak efficiency. Ellen White was speakingabout the traditional imbalance in educationwhen she wrote that “in the eager effort to se-cure intellectual culture, physical as well as

moral training has been neglected. Many youthcome forth from institutions of learning withmorals debased, and physical powers enfee-bled; with no knowledge of practical life, andlittle strength to perform its duties.”45 The prac-tical aspects of life were important to EllenWhite’s sense of educational balance. Thus shecould write that “for their own physical healthand moral good, children should be taught towork, even if there is no necessity so far aswant is concerned.”46

Balance is equally important in the informalor extracurricular aspects of the school’s cur-riculum. This includes a multiplicity of organi-zations and activities, such as clubs, musicalgroups, athletics, work experiences, schoolpublications, and so on, which must all bebrought into harmony with the purpose of theinstitution and integrated with the Christianmessage, just as is the formal curriculum, toensure that the school does not give a dichoto-mous message to its students, constituency,and onlookers. The Adventist school has twomajor tasks in regard to the informal curricu-lum—the choice of activities and the creationof guidelines for the implementation of the ac-tivities selected. Both of those tasks must bebased on biblical values.That thought brings us to the topic of values

education throughout the curriculum. ArthurHolmes made an important point when henoted that “education has to do with the trans-mission of values.”47 The issue of values is cen-tral to much of the conflict over educationtoday. What we find in most places, includingschools, is an ethical relativism that goesagainst the very core of the Bible’s teachings.When modern culture lost the concept of aneternal God it also lost the idea that there areuniversal values that apply across time, indi-viduals, and cultures. Ronald Nash was correctwhen he asserted that “America’s educationalcrisis is not exclusively a crisis of the mind,”but also a crisis of the “heart,” a values crisis.48

This crisis is evident not only in schools, butalso in the public media, which all too oftenpromotes values that are non-Christian or evenanti-Christian.These are realities that the Adventist school

cannot afford to ignore. The good news is thatChristian educators, operating within the bibli-cal framework, have a strategic advantage overthose with other orientations because they havean epistemological and metaphysical groundingfor their value system, which is not available toothers. As Robert Pazmiño puts it, “the Chris-tian educator can propose higher values be-cause he or she can answer such questions as:

Adventist

education that does

not provide a

biblical understand-

ing of the arts,

sciences, humani-

ties, and the

world of work is not

Christian.


When modern

culture lost the

concept of an eter-

nal God it also

lost the idea that

there are

universal values

that apply

across time, individ-

uals, and cultures.


What are persons and their ultimate end? Whatis the meaning and purpose of human activity?What, or rather, who is God? These questionscan be answered with a certainty and suretywhich is not possible outside of a revealedfaith.”49

Pazmiño also points out the existence of ahierarchy of values, with spiritual values pro-viding the context for evaluating options inethics and aesthetics, as well as in the scien-tific, political, and social realms.50 That beingthe case, Christian educators must purposefullydevelop formal and informal curricula in thelight of biblical values. The biblical value sys-tem stands at the very foundation of Christianeducation.And, we need to note, the values taught in

a biblically based school system will not relateonly to individual decision-making but will alsoreflect upon the social whole. Like the Old Tes-tament prophets, Adventist education will raisesignificant issues related to social justice in anunjust world because biblical valuing involvesthe public as well as the private world of be-lievers.As we view the Christian curriculum in all

of its complexity, we must never forget the con-troversy between the forces of good and thepowers of evil within our metaphysics, episte-mology, axiology, and our individual lives. Theconflict between Christ and Satan is evident inthe curriculum. Each Adventist school is a bat-tlefield in which the forces of Christ are beingchallenged by the legions of Satan. The out-come will, to a large extent, be determined bythe position given to the Bible in the Adventistschool. If Adventist schools are to be trulyChristian, then the biblical perspective must bethe foundation and context of all that is done.

Methodological Considerations forAdventist Educators

A major determinant of the teaching andlearning methodologies of any philosophy ofeducation is the educational goals of that per-spective and the epistemological-metaphysicalframework in which those goals are couched.The aims of Adventist education go beyond ac-cumulating cognitive knowledge, gaining self-awareness, and coping successfully with theenvironment. To be sure, Adventist educationshares those aspects of learning with other sys-tems of education, but beyond that, it has themore far-reaching goals of reconciling individ-uals to God and one another and restoring theimage of God in them. The methodologies cho-sen by the Adventist educator must take those

pre-eminent purposes into consideration.That does not mean that somehow Adventist

education will invent unique and original waysof teaching in the same sense that Christianityis a unique religion and Christ is a unique per-son. Obviously, Adventist educators will usemany, if not all, of the same methods as otherteachers. They will, however, select and em-phasize those methodologies that best aid themin helping their students to develop Christlikecharacters and reach the other goals of A d -ventist education.

Education, Thinking, Self-Control, and DisciplineCentral to the issue of the development of

Christian character is recognizing that humanbeings are not simply highly developed animalsthat respond to reward and punishment. TheBible pictures human beings as being createdin the image of God and having, even in theirfallen state, the ability to think reflectively.Because humans can engage in reflective

thought, they can make meaningful decisionsabout their own actions and destiny. Studentsin an Adventist school must be educated tothink for themselves rather than merely betrained, like animals, to respond to environ-mental cues. Human beings, created in God’simage, are to be educated “to be thinkers, andnot mere reflectors of other men’s thought.”51

It is true that there are some training aspects inthe human learning process, but those ap-proaches generally dominate only when theperson is very young or mentally impaired. Theideal, as we shall see below, is to move as rap-idly as possible, with any given student, fromthe training process to the more reflective ed-ucative process.At the heart of Adventist education is the

goal of empowering students to think and actreflectively for themselves rather than just torespond to the word or will of an authority fig-ure. Self-control, rather than externally im-posed control, is central in Adventist educationand discipline. Ellen White put it nicely whenshe wrote that “the discipline of a human beingwho has reached the years of intelligenceshould differ from the training of a dumb ani-mal. The beast is taught only submission to itsmaster. For the beast, the master is mind, judg-ment, and will. This method, sometimes em-ployed in the training of children, makes themlittle more than automatons. Mind, will, con-science, are under the control of another. It isnot God’s purpose that any mind should bethus dominated. Those who weaken or destroyindividuality assume a responsibility that can


QUALIFICATIONSEM

POWERM

ENT


result only in evil. While under authority, thechildren may appear like well-drilled soldiers;but when the control ceases, the character willbe found to lack strength and steadfastness.Having never learned to govern himself, theyouth recognizes no restraint except the re-quirement of parents or teacher. This removed,he knows not how to use his liberty, and oftengives himself up to indulgence that proves hisruin.”52

It is for that reason that Ellen White neverseemed to tire of driving home the point that“the object of discipline is the training of thechild for self-government. He should be taughtself-reliance and self-control. Therefore as soonas he is capable of understanding, his reasonshould be enlisted on the side of obedience. Letall dealing with him be such as to show obedi-ence to be just and reasonable. Help him to seethat all things are under law, and that disobe-dience leads, in the end, to disaster and suffer-ing.”53

Please note that in the above quotationsEllen White ties together education, thinking,self-control, and discipline. That is an impor-tant insight and one that we too often overlook.In fact, most people equate discipline and pun-ishment. But they are two quite distinct con-cepts. Ideally, punishment comes into play onlyafter discipline has failed. Punishment is a neg-ative, remedial activity, whereas discipline ispositive and stands at the core of developing aChristian character.In a Christian approach to education, human

beings must be brought to the place where theycan make their own decisions and take respon-sibility for those choices without continuallybeing coaxed, directed, and/or forced by apowerful authority. When that goal is achieved,and the power to think and to act upon one’sthoughts is internalized, then people havereached moral maturity. They are not under thecontrol of another, but are making their ownmoral decisions about how to act toward Godand other people. Such is the role of self-controlin the shaping of human beings in the image ofGod. Psychiatrist Erich Fromm makes the samepoint when he writes that “the mature personhas come to the point where he is his ownmother and his own father.”54

Discipline is not something an authority fig-ure does to a child, but something that adultshelp children learn to do for themselves. JohnDewey, America’s most influential 20th-centuryphilosopher, reflected on that point when hewrote that “a person who is trained to considerhis actions, to undertake them deliberately . . .is disciplined. Add to this ability a power to en-

dure in an intelligently chosen course in theface of distraction, confusion, and difficulty,and you have the essence of discipline. Disci-pline means power at command; mastery of theresources available for carrying through the ac-tion undertaken. To know what one is to doand to move to do it promptly and by use of therequisite means is to be disciplined.”55

Discipline as self-control has its roots deepin the Christian concepts of character develop-ment, responsibility, and perseverance. Wenoted earlier that character development is oneof the major aims of Adventist education. Char-acter development and discipline are inextrica-bly entwined. “Strength of character,” EllenWhite wrote, “consists of two things—power ofwill and power of self-control.”56 The will, fur-thermore, “is the governing power in the natureof man, the power of decision, or choice.”57 Partof the function of Christian discipline in thehome and school is to guide and mold thepower of the will as students move toward ma-turity.Internal discipline concentrates on developing

children’s wills through allowing them to makechoices and to experience the consequences.Arthur Combs has pointed out that “responsibil-ity is learned from being given responsibility; itis never learned from having it withheld. . . .Learning to be responsible requires being al-lowed to make decisions, to observe results, andto deal with the consequences of those decisions.A curriculum designed to teach responsibilityneeds to provide continuous opportunities forstudents to engage in such processes. To do so,however, requires taking risks, a terribly fright-ening prospect for many teachers and adminis-trators.”58

But even the very problem of allowing oth-ers to make mistakes arises from the nature ofGod and His love. After all, He created a uni-verse in which mistakes are possible when Hecould have established one that was fool-proof—but only at the price of creating humansas something less than beings in His image. Be-ings without genuine choices are automatonsrather than free moral agents. God created hu-mans in such a way as to make character de-velopment a definite possibility. It is importantto remember that when people do not have theoption of making wrong choices, neither dothey have the ability to make correct ones. Peo-ple cannot develop character if they are con-stantly controlled through having their choicescurtailed. They are then, in essence, merelycomplex machines rather than moral agentscreated in God’s image. Love and freedom arerisky and dangerous, but they are the way God


DIS

CIP

LIN

E


has chosen to run His universe.In a Christian framework, the answer to a

lack of discipline is not bigger and better strate-gies to bring young people under control, butconscious development and application of tech-niques to build self-control and a sense of re-sponsibility in each child. We gain nothing ifby authoritative methodologies we manage toproduce quiet, order, and student conformitywhile sacrificing intelligent behavior, responsi-bility, and creativity.Developing intelligent self-control in others is

not an easy task. Ellen White writes that “thiswork is the nicest [most delicate and discerning],the most difficult, ever committed to human be-ings. It requires the most delicate tact, the finestsusceptibility, a knowledge of human nature, anda heaven-born faith and patience.”59

The number of biblically based books writtenon this crucial aspect of Adventist education isnot great. The best place to begin is the chapterentitled “Discipline” in Ellen White’s Educa-tion.60 It is perhaps the most insightful chapterthat she ever wrote in the field of education.Deeply rooted in a Christian philosophy, it is amethodological exposition second to none. Read-ing those 11 pages every week for their entire ca-reer, would enrich every teacher’s ministry. Hereare a few samples from that chapter:• “The wise educator, in dealing with his

pupils, will seek to encourage confidence andto strengthen the sense of honor. Children andyouth are benefited by being trusted. . . . Sus-picion demoralizes, producing the very evils itseeks to prevent. . . . An atmosphere of unsym-pathetic criticism is fatal to effort.”61

• “The true object of reproof is gained onlywhen the wrongdoer himself is led to see hisfault and his will is enlisted for its correction.When this is accomplished, point him to thesource of pardon and power.”62

• “Many youth who are thought incorrigibleare not at heart so hard as they appear. Manywho are regarded as hopeless may be reclaimedby wise discipline. These are often the oneswho most readily melt under kindness. Let theteacher gain the confidence of the tempted one,and by recognizing and developing the good inhis character, he can, in many cases, correct theevil without calling attention to it.”63

Such are the challenges and possibilities ofredemptive discipline in line with Christ’s min-istry of seeking the lost and shaping the char-acters of those in a relationship to God throughHim. Many of the principles of redemptive dis-cipline are expounded upon in a very practicalway in Jim Roy’s Soul Shapers,64 which de-scribes the methodologies that lie at the foun-

dation of the practice of Adventist education.One model that describes the progressive in-

ternalization of discipline appears in Figure 565

on page 51. It illustrates in a general way the re-lationship between internal and external controland the weaning process that is the goal of re-demptive discipline. Infants and extremely youngchildren need a great deal of external control, butthe maturation process should lead progressivelyto greater self-control and less external control,until individual children have reached the pointof moral maturity. At that time, they are ready totake their place as responsible persons in theadult world. Christian discipline, therefore, isboth a positive and liberating power. It “is not,”A. S. De Jong points out, “to keep the child downor to break him, but to lift him up or to heal him;for that reason discipline may be called upon torepress only in order to set free, to train childrenin the exercise of the freedom of the children ofGod.”66 The end product of Christian disciplinewill be young people who “do right because theybelieve it is right and not because some authoritytells them to.”67

The connection between the developing ofself-control and the restoration of the image ofGod has serious implications for educators asthey select appropriate methodologies for theChristian school. That concept should act as ascreening device for Adventist educators as theychoose learning and teaching strategies for theclassroom. They must utilize those methodolo-gies that will help to develop what Harro VanBrummelen refers to as “responsible disciples.”68

Beyond Cognition to Commitment and Responsible ActionClosely related to the above discussion is the

idea that Christian knowing is not merely pas-sive. It is, as we noted in our discussion of epis-temology, an active, dynamic experience. Thus,in a Christian school, instructional methodol-ogy must move beyond strategies for passingon information. Nicholas Wolterstorff forcefullyargues that Christian education “must aim atproducing alterations in what students tend(are disposed, are inclined) to do. It must aimat tendency learning.” He points out that Chris-tian schools must move beyond techniques formerely teaching the knowledge and abilities re-quired for acting responsibly, since studentscan assimilate those ideas without developinga “tendency to engage in such action.” Thus “aprogram of Christian education will take thatfurther step of cultivating the appropriate ten-dencies in the child. It will have tendency learn-ing as one of its fundamental goals.”69

Donald Oppewal has developed a teaching



methodology explicitly based upon the dy-namic epistemology of Scripture. While notingthat actual practice is the ideal, Oppewal sug-gests a three-stage instructional methodologyaimed to produce a dynamic learning experi-ence. In the consider stage, the learner is pre-sented with the new material. During the sec-ond phase—the choose phase—“the options forresponse are clarified and their implicationsbetter understood. . . . If the first phase dram-atizes what it is the learner faces, the secondphase highlights whatever oughts are in-volved.” In the third stage—the commitphase—students move “beyond intellectual un-derstanding, beyond exposure of the moral andother considerations and toward commitment

The Bible makes it plain that this educa-tional environment was to be used to awakeninquiry and develop curiosity in the minds ofthe young. The interest thus developed was tobe followed by deliberate instruction. Note, forexample, the instructions given for the highlysymbolic keeping of the Passover. Moses wrotethat this ritual would lead the young to ask,“What do you mean by this service?” and thatthe family elders would then have a natural op-portunity to engage the minds of the youth in ameaningful learning experience (Exodus 12:25-27; see also 13:3-16; Deuteronomy 6:20-25).A major principle underlying Old Testament

pedagogy is that instruction should not beforced upon unready minds. Rather, instruc-tional methods used in the Old Testament cap-italized upon human beings’ natural interest ina topic in order to engage the people’s mindsin a dynamic interchange. Central to the wholeeducational complex of ancient Israel was thesacrificial system, which pointed forward to thelife, death, and work of Jesus. That system,with its pageantry, beauty, and life-taking awe-someness, provided one of the major object les-sons of the ancient world. It was an educationaldevice that taught through both its appeal tothe senses and the curiosity it generated.Moving into the New Testament, we find

Jesus as the ultimate teaching model. “In theTeacher sent from God,” Ellen White asserts,“all true educational work finds its center.”71

We can learn a great deal about appropriatemethods for conveying the Christian message,both in schools and elsewhere, through an ex-amination of the specific teaching techniquesChrist used and the way He related to people.We examined the relationship aspect of Histeaching above in the section on the ministryof teaching. Here our focus will be on His in-structional methods. This short discussion is atbest an introduction to that topic. But the Chris-tian educator can glean a great deal about thesubject through an inductive and analyticalstudy of Christ’s methods in the Gospels. EllenWhite’s education-related books are also veryinsightful on the topic.72

Roy Zuck has noted that “Jesus succeededas a masterful Teacher” largely because of “hisremarkable ability to capture the interest of hisaudience.” He aroused “their desire to learnwhat he was teaching.”73 That was especiallytrue in His use of parables, object lessons, andprovocative questions.Perhaps the most obvious teaching method

of Jesus was His use of illustrations. Two of Hismost frequent illustrative formats were theparable and the object lesson. Parables form a

Figure 5. A Developmental Model of Discipline

Point atWhich anIndividualBegins toReason

Point ofMoralMaturity(Self-controlled)

External Controland TrainingAspects

L IN E OF MO R

A L DE VE LO P

ME NT

Internal Controland EducationAspects

to act on both the is and the ought.” Commit-ment to a form of action, claims Oppewal, isthe very minimum expectation in the contextof biblical knowing and teaching.70 A fourthstage, of course, needs to be added wheneverpossible and practicable; namely the actionphase. In that phase opportunity for acting onthose commitments is provided.

The Bible and Instructional MethodologyThe central epistemological source for Chris-

tians, the Bible, provides a wealth of informationrelated to methodologies used by God in theprocess of educating human beings. Even acas ual reading of the Old Testament reveals thatancient Israel was immersed in a total educa-tional environment, which was consciouslyconstructed to aid in the spiritual, intellectual,social, and physical development of its citizens.This environment was structured to provide life-long learning experiences through holidays,sabbatical years, historic memorials, the arts,home instruction, public reading of the Torah,and a host of other devices.


A major principle

underlying Old

Testament peda-

gogy is that

instruction should

not be forced

upon unready

minds.


large portion of Jesus’ teachings recorded in theNew Testament—about 25 percent of Mark and50 percent of Luke is in the form of parables.The parable has the advantage of being con-crete, appealing to the imagination, and havingintrinsic interest. John Price has written that“people who turn away from facts and argu-ments will listen readily to stories. Not onlythat, but they will remember them and be in-fluenced by them.”74

Part of the power of Christ’s parables comesfrom their relevance to the everyday lives of Hishearers. When He dealt with the lost sheep, thesowing of seeds, and the good Samaritan, Hewas describing things in people’s daily experi-ence. That aroused interest, engaged theirminds, and helped them remember the storyand its lesson as they interacted with the topicsof His parables in their daily living.A second method of illustration used by

Jesus was the object lesson. While standing ona hillside, He discusses the topic of anxiety.Reaching down to pluck a lily, He notes itsbeauty, and gives the lesson that if God soclothed “the grass of the field, which today isalive and tomorrow is thrown into the oven,will he not much more clothe you” (Matthew6:30). His use of the coin in His discussionabout the paying of taxes certainly made Hisaccompanying words more effective (Matthew22:15-22).Commenting on Christ’s teaching methods,

Ellen White wrote that “in parables and com-parisons He found the best method of commu-nicating divine truth. In simple language, usingfigures and illustrations drawn from the naturalworld, He opened spiritual truth to His hearers,and gave expression to precious principles thatwould have passed from their minds, and leftscarcely a trace, had He not connected Hiswords with stirring scenes of life, experience,or nature. In this way He called forth their in-terest, aroused inquiry, and when He had fullysecured their attention, He decidedly impressedupon them the testimony of truth. In this wayHe was able to make sufficient impressionupon the heart so that afterward His hearerscould look upon the thing with which He con-nected His lesson, and recall the words of thedivine Teacher.”75

Another of Jesus’ teaching methods was theuse of thought-compelling questions. He usedthe 213 separate questions recorded in theGospels to drive home spiritual truths, to drawout responses of commitment, and to deal withHis detractors. Regarding that last point, teach-ers at times have students who would like toput them “on the spot.” Jesus answered His de-

tractors’ questions by asking questions. Byusing that strategy, He could maneuver theminto answering their own questions. His suc-cess in the disciplinary use of questions can beseen from the fact that the Gospels record at theclose of a series of questions engineered to trapHim that “after that no one dared to ask himany question” (Mark 12:34).In regard to the use of questions as a learn-

ing device, John A. Marquis has written that“teaching is not telling, because a great deal ofour telling elicits no mental response. So ourLord had a habit of throwing in a question nowand then that broke up the serenity of his classand made them sit up and think.”76 The aim ofthe Christian teacher is not to control minds,but to develop them.Jesus’ pedagogical methodology utilized

both theory and practice. For example, He al-ternated periods of instruction devoted to thedisciples with times when He sent them out toapply what they had learned (Matthew 10:5-15;Luke 10:1-20). That undoubtedly helped themrealize their need for further instruction, fixedthe successful lessons in their minds, and keptthem from separating the theoretical from theexperiential. The practical side of education isa most effective teaching-learning device. Jesuswas more interested in conveying knowledgethat would help men and women in their dailylives than He was in presenting knowledge asan abstraction. In the process, He united theo-retical knowledge with both daily life and theeternal realities of the kingdom of God and thegreat controversy between good and evil.So much more can be said about the teach-

ing methods of Jesus, but will require your fu-ture study. Meanwhile, we will close with threeinsightful quotes from Ellen White. First,“Christ always used simple language,” yet Hiswords had depth of meaning and spoke to theheart.77 Second, “in His teaching He camedown to” the level of His students.78 And, third,“Jesus did not disdain to repeat old, familiartruths,” yet “He separated [them] from thecompanionship of error,” and “reset them intheir proper framework.”79 That last statementis the informative, integrative, and interpretivefunction of Christ’s teaching methodology; afunction, we noted in our study of the Christiancurriculum, that must stand at the center of allAdventist education.

The Social Function of Adventist Education

Before delving into the specifics of Adventisteducation’s social function, we need to con-


QUALIFICATIONSM

ETHODOLOGY


sider the cultural transmission function of edu-cation. We find that function in the Bible. Abra-ham was chosen because God saw that hewould be faithful in teaching his household(Genesis 18:19). God through Moses gave theIsraelites an educational system that touchedevery phase of their lives, and Jesus’ partingwords were “‘teach all nations’” (Matthew28:19, 20, KJV).

The Strategic Role of EducationEducation holds a strategic position in every

society because all youth must pass throughsome type of educational experience to preparethem to fill society’s responsible positions. Thefuture of any society will be shaped by its cur-rent youth. And the direction they will take thatsociety will to a large extent be determined bytheir education. Thus the control of educationalinstitutions and the content to be taught inthose institutions has been a perennial socialissue.George S. Counts has noted that “to shape

educational policy is to guard the path thatleads from the present to the future. . . .Throughout the centuries since special educa-tional agencies were first established, the strate-gic position of the school has been appreciatedby kings, emperors, and popes, by rebels, re-formers, and prophets. Hence, among those op-posing forces found in all complex societies, astruggle for the control of the school is alwaysevident. Every group or sect endeavors to passon to its own children and to the children ofothers that culture which it happens to esteem;and every privileged class seeks to perpetuateits favored position in society by means of ed-ucation.”80

Likewise, Counts observed, the failure ofrev o lutions has been a record of their inabilityto bring education into the service of the revo-lutionary cause. Revolutionary bodies will pos-sess no more permanence than the small bandsof idealists who conceived them if the childrenof the next generation cannot be persuaded toembrace the values of the revolution. There-fore, the history of both the Soviets and the Na-tional Socialists has demonstrated that one ofthe first measures taken by revolutionary gov-ernments is to place all educational agenciesunder the direct control of the state and to givethe schools a central part in building the newsociety.81

A similar logic, of course, stimulated the for-mation of the American and other democraticeducational systems. And in that logic we findthe genesis of the Adventist interest in educa-tion in all its forms. Ellen White picked up on

that thinking when she wrote that “with suchan army of workers as our youth, rightlytrained, . . . how soon the message of a cruci-fied, risen, and soon-coming Saviour might becarried to the whole world! How soon mightthe end come—the end of suffering and sorrowand sin! How soon, in place of a possessionhere, with its blight of sin and pain, our chil-dren might receive their inheritance where ‘therighteous shall inherit the land, and dwelltherein forever.’”82

Adventist Education’s Conservativeand Revolutionary RolesGod’s ideal for Seventh-day Adventist edu-

cation reflects both a conservative social func-tion and a revolutionary one. It is to be conser-vative in the sense that it seeks to transmit theunchanging truths of the Bible across time, butit is to be revolutionary as a change agent of arighteous God in a sinful world.In that latter posture, it seeks to change the

status quo on the individual level through theconversion of human beings from their old wayof life to the Christian way. Transformation,conversion, and death and rebirth are some ofthe words that the Bible applies to the dynam-ics of Christianity as it transforms the lives ofindividuals, moving them from an orientationof self-centeredness to one of God-centeredservice to both Him and other people.But change at the individual level is only

one aspect of the church’s revolutionary role. Itis also to be an agent for broader change in theongoing struggle for social justice in a sinfulworld. It is part of God’s ideal not only to feedthe poor (Matthew 25:31-46), but also to helpmake this earth a better place to live throughsocial reform.But once again, the revolutionary role must

not stop there. According to the Bible, social re-form, for all of its good points, is insufficient tostraighten out a crooked world driven by theforces of sin and human greed. The only realsolution to the sin problem as pictured in theBible is the Second Advent. While the Gospelsset forth that truth (see Matthew 24), it is es-pecially evident in the Book of Revelation. Thatbook in particular indicates the divine solutionto earth’s woes. Thus the apex of the church’srevolutionary function is not merely to trans-form people from sinful selfishness to a life ofservice or to organize them to become changeagents for earthly reform, but to preach a mes-sage that helps prepare the world for the endof history and the establishment of a new earthbuilt upon God’s principles. That new earth,the Bible tells us, does not come about through


STR

ATE

GY


human effort, but as the result of God’s break-ing into human history through Christ’s secondcoming. That event is the Event of events inworld history. It is the ultimate revolution.Seventh-day Adventism from its beginning

has viewed itself as an agent of God in that ul-timate revolution. In particular, it has seen itscalling to be the preaching of the apocalypticmessage of the three angels that stands at theheart of the Book of Revelation (Revelation14:6-12); a message that God commanded to begiven immediately before the Second Advent(vss,14-20). It is a worldwide message that callspeople back to faithfulness to God, even ashuman societies move toward their final end.It is a message of the coming Christ who willnot only feed the poor but abolish hunger; whowill not only comfort the grieving but eradicatedeath (Revelation. 21:1-4). Adventism has beencalled to preach to a lost world the ultimateHope that by comparison pales all other hopes.The central purpose of Adventism is to preachthat ultimate Hope. And the primary reason forthe establishment of Adventist schools is to pre-pare people for that event and for the task ofspreading the good news of the coming Savior.Within that revolutionary apocalyptic con-

text, the conservative function of Adventist ed-ucation is twofold: (1) to pass on the legacy ofBible truth, and (2) to provide a protected at-mosphere in which that transmission can takeplace and in which Christian values can be im-parted to the young in their formative yearsthrough both the formal curriculum and the in-formal aspects of the educational program,such as the peer group and extracurricular ac-tivities.The Christian Church and its adherents have

the unique role of being in the world, withoutbeing of the world (John 17:14-18). How toachieve that seemingly contradictory positionhas remained a challenge to the church sincethe time of Christ.The separatist strand of the paradox has led

the church to establish protected atmospheresfor its youth during their formative years, suchas religious schools and youth groups. Suchagencies act as refuges where young peoplefrom Adventist families can learn skills, atti-tudes, values, and knowledge without beingoverwhelmed by the worldview and culturalmores of the larger society. The atmosphere inwhich these activities take place is designed tobe conducive to the transferring of Adventistculture to the younger generation. Parents andchurch members are willing to support thistype of education financially because they rec-ognize that it differs philosophically from the

cultural milieu of the larger society, and theybelieve that the Adventist worldview is the cor-rect one in terms of metaphysics, epistemology,and axiology.Seen from such a viewpoint, the primary

function of the Adventist school is not to be anevangelistic agency to convert unbelievers(even though that may be a side result), butrather to help young people from Adventisthomes meet Jesus and surrender their lives toHim. Implicit in this function is a distinct real-ization that if the majority of the student peergroup in a denominational school does not es-pouse Adventist values, then the school’s spir-itual mission probably will not be accom-plished. Ad ventist education’s conservativefunction there fore provides a protected atmos-phere for the nurturing of the church’s youth;an environment in which all values, skills, andaspects of knowledge can be taught from theAdventist philosophic perspective.Beyond the conservative function of Ad -

ventist education is its revolutionary role. Atthe beginning of the Christian era, Christ’s greatgospel commission sent His disciples into allthe world to make disciples of all nations, andto teach people everything that He had com-manded (Matthew 28:19, 20). And at the endof the Christian era Christ has commanded thatthe good news of salvation, Second Advent,and coming judgment also be preached “‘toevery nation and tribe and tongue and people’”(Revelation 14:6). While the commission ofMatthew 28 has been sounded by Christianityat large, the Church has neglected the impera-tive of Revelation 14. It is that latter commis-sion that forms the basis for the existence ofSeventh-day Adventism. From its inception, thechurch has believed that it has a unique com-mission to preach the three angels’ messages ofRevelation 14:6-12 to all the earth before theSecond Advent (vss. 14-20). Adventism’s mes-sage is a call to faithfulness to God as earthlyhistory moves toward its final days. The evan-gelistic imperative of Revelation 14 has literallydriven Adventism to every part of the earth.Christian churches (including Seventh-day

Adventism) have too often been conservativebastions of society, when they should functionas agents for change. The life of Jesus as por-trayed in the Bible can best be seen as model-ing change rather than conservatism. He wasthe Reformer of reformers. And He called out apeople to become change agents in His ongoingmission.The conservative functions of a Christian

school are important because they play a rolein the church’s revolutionary task of preparing



its youth to become evangelistic workers. Thatdoes not mean, it should be emphasized, thatall students will be educated for church em-ployment. Each one will, however, be trainedto be a witness to the love of God in a sinfulworld, regardless of his or her career goals.As such, the Adventist school can be seen

as a staging ground for Christian activism andmissionary work. It provides, ideally, not onlythe knowledge underlying the evangelistic im-perative of the church, but also practical,guided activities in the larger community thatensure that students develop the skills neces-sary to meet people with the message of Jesusand to perform their individual roles in the con-text of God’s church on earth. Edward Suther-land wrote that in God’s plan “the Christianschool should be the nursery in which reform-ers are born and reared—reformers who wouldgo forth from the school burning with practicalzeal and enthusiasm to take their places asleaders in these reforms.”83

In summary, the social function of the Ad-ventist school has both a conservative and arevolutionary aspect. The commingling of thosetwo roles empowers the developing student tobe in the world but not of the world. Inessence, the function of the Adventist school isto educate the youth of the church for serviceto God and their neighbors, rather than to trainthem for self-service through the acquisition ofa “good job” and a comfortable income. Thoseoutcomes, of course, may be by-products of Ad-ventist education, but they are not central to itspurpose.Service to others was the essence of Christ’s

life, and it is therefore the ultimate aim of Ad-ventist education. In harmony with the Bible,Adventist education will develop Christianswho can relate well to others in this world. Buteven more important, Adventist schools willeducate students for citizenship in the kingdomof heaven.

Closing Perspective

“The education that does not furnish knowl-edge as enduring as eternity, is of no pur-pose.”84 That frank statement was not made bya narrow religious bigot, but by a person whoin the same paragraph writes that “it is rightthat you should feel that you must climb to thehighest round of the educational ladder. Philos-ophy and history are important studies; butyour sacrifice of time and money will availnothing, if you do not use your attainments forthe honor of God and the good of humanity.Unless the knowledge of science is a stepping-

stone to the attainment of the highest purposes,it is worthless. . . . Unless you keep heaven andthe future, immortal life before you, your at-tainments are of no permanent value. But ifJesus is your teacher, not simply on one day ofthe week, but every day, every hour, you mayhave His smile upon you in the pursuit of liter-ary acquirements.”85 For Ellen White, the valueof education was related to perspective. Abroad literary education was of great value if itkept eternal realities, goals, and values at theforefront.That perspective brings us to the ultimate

questions regarding Adventist education thatmust be asked by parents, school boards, Ad-ventist educational professionals, and thechurch at large: Why have Seventh-day Ad -ventist schools? Why should the church spendhundreds of millions of dollars each year tosupport thousands of schools around the worldwhen free, high-quality public education isoften available? How can the denomination jus-tify such expenditures in the light of the otherpressing needs of the church and the world itserves? The answer to such questions obvi-ously has a link to the purpose of Adventist ed-ucation. If Adventist schools fulfill a sufficientlydistinctive and important purpose, the achieve-ment of that purpose is worth the expense.That answer brings us to the frontier of why

there should be Christian (rather than specifi-cally Adventist) schools in general. We havenoted throughout the study of the topic thatChristian education is the only education thatcan meet people’s deepest needs because onlyChristian educators understand the core of thehuman problem. The redemptive aim of Chris-tian education is what makes it Christian. Theprimary function of Christian education is tolead young people into a transforming, savingrelationship with Jesus Christ. It is in the con-text of that relationship that such secondaryfunctions as academic achievement, characterdevelopment, the formation of a Christianmind, and education for social responsibilityand the world of work must of necessity takeplace. But it is crucial to realize that all but oneof those secondary goals can take place in anon-Christian school. Thus, when Christian ed-ucators aim only at the goals that fall withinthe realm of all education they have failed evenbefore they begin. As a result, when Christianeducators neglect to emphasize the redemp-tive role of their schools, they make theirschools both unimportant and unnecessary.But what about distinctively Adventist Chris-

tian schools? What justifies their existence if allChristian schools ideally aim at the redemptive

According to the

Bible, social reform,

for all of its good

points, is insuffi-

cient to straighten

out a crooked world

driven by the

forces of sin and

human greed.


For Ellen White,

the value of educa-

tion was related

to perspective.

A broad literary edu-

cation was of

great value if it kept

eternal realities,

goals, and values at

the forefront.


function of education? The answer to thosequestions brings us to the heart of why the Sev-enth-day Adventist Church even exists as a sep-arate Christian denomination.Too often, we see Adventism as merely an-

other denomination with a few different doc-trines and some countercultural dietary prac-tices. But the core of Adventist identity from itsvery inception has been its conviction that it isa movement of prophecy, a church with a spe-cial message to proclaim to all the world as setforth in the heart of the Apocalypse of John.86

And there are sound biblical reasons for thatunderstanding. Revelation 12:17 highlights thefact that at the end of time God will have a peo-ple that keep all His commandments and thattheir commandment keeping will eventuallystimulate a reaction from the last-day dragonpower. “And the dragon,” John wrote, “waswroth with the woman, and went to make warwith the remnant of her seed, which keep thecommandments of God” (KJV). Revelation 13and 14 pick up that theme, with chapter 13 ex-panding on the dynamics of the last-day dragonpower, and chapter 14 presenting the messageof the last-day woman (church) and climaxingwith the second advent of Christ. In that con-text, the three angels’ messages of Revelation14:6-12 highlight an everlasting gospel that isto be preached to all the world, a judgment-hour emphasis as earth’s history moves towardits conclusion, a call to worship the CreatorGod in contrast to honoring the beast, and adeclaration regarding the fall of oppressiveBabylon that has confused humanity by substi-tuting human words for the word of God. Thethird angel climaxes its message in verse 12,which reads: “Here is the patience of the saints:here are they that keep the commandments ofGod, and the faith of Jesus” (KJV).Seventh-day Adventists noted from their be-

ginning that the Sabbath commandment is em-phasized in Revelation 12-14. At the end oftime, we are told in Revelation 14, everybodywill be worshipping somebody: either the Cre-ator God of the Sabbath who made heavenand earth and sea (14:7; Exodus 20:8-11; Gen-esis 2:1-3) or the beast (Revelation 14:9). AndAdventists have been quick to note that imme-diately after the giving of the three angels’messages Christ comes to harvest the earth(vss. 14-20).While the general Christian community has

largely ignored those messages in their escha-tological context, Seventh-day Adventism foundin them its marching orders and purpose as adistinct denomination. It is that purpose thathas literally driven Adventism to the ends of

the earth until it has become the most wide-spread unified Protestant body in the history ofChristianity. Adventists have been willing tosacrifice their lives and their money to achievethat goal. And in the process they developed achurch organization to spearhead that thrustand an educational system and publishing min-istry to enlighten and convict its membershipand prepare them to either go to all the worldthemselves or to sponsor others to fulfill the de-nomination’s unique mission. It is no accidentthat Adventism sent its first overseas mission-ary and opened its first denominationally spon-sored school the same year (1874). Nor is it co-incidental that every major revival in Adventisteducation has been stimulated by a revival inits apocalyptic mission.87

We dare not become bashful about that mis-sion. It is the only valid reason for the existenceof Seventh-day Adventism. The possibility oflosing its apocalyptic vision and Adventism’splace in prophetic history is the greatest threatthat the denomination and its educational sys-tem face.88

That threat brings me to my next point. AnAdventist educational ministry that has lost itshold on the apocalyptic vision has failed—notjust partially, but totally.Let me illustrate the depth of the problem.

Some time ago, I received a call from an acad-emy principal who had been inspired by mykeynote at the 2006 North American Divisioneducational convention on “Seventh-day Ad-ventist Education and the Apocalyptic Vi-sion.”89 As a result, he determined to hireteachers who truly understood the uniquenessof Adventism and its mission to the world.With that commitment in mind, he went to thelocal Adventist college and interviewed each ofthe graduating education majors. His questionto each was the same: What is the differencebetween Adventist education and evangelicalChristian education? Not one student could tellhim. Somehow, he concluded, that college hadfailed in passing on Adventism’s unique iden-tity and mission, even though the institutionhad been established to develop educationalprofessionals.That thought brings me to the bottom line—

Adventist education is important only if it istruly Adventist. A school that has lost sight ofits reason for being, that has forgotten its mes-sage and mission, will eventually lose its sup-port. And it should. To be absolutely frank, aSeventh-day Adventist school that is not bothChristian and Adventist is an unnecessary in-stitution. All its functions can be achieved byschools in the evangelical sector, and most of


QUALIFICATIONS


them by the public sector.Pastor Shane Anderson is right on in his re-

cently published How to Kill Adventist Educa-tion when he points out that “Adventist parentsincreasingly aren’t willing to pay the price tosend their kids” to institutions that have losttheir purpose. “After all,” he writes, “why paythousands of dollars to send your child to aschool that is now no longer substantially dif-ferent from the average Christian school—or thelocal public school—down the street?”90

With that insight, we are back to the impor-tance of the study of the philosophy of educa-tion and KNIGHT’S LAW and its two corollar-ies. Put simply, KNIGHT’S LAW reads that “Itis impossible to arrive at your destination un-less you know where you are going.” CorollaryNumber 1: “A school that does not come closeto attaining its goals will eventually lose its sup-port.” Corollary Number 2: “We think onlywhen it hurts.” The purpose of the study of Ad-ventist educational philosophy is to get thosewho teach and administer in Adventist schoolsthinking before it hurts and to put them in aproactive mode to develop schools that are ed-ucative in the fullest sense while at the sametime being both self-consciously Christian andAdventist. �

POINTS TO PONDER• Discuss why the Bible is so important in

Christian education.• In what ways does Herbert Spencer’s ques-

tion (“What Knowledge Is of Most Worth?”)help us understand a Christian curriculum?• What do we mean when we say that the

Bible is the foundation and context of a Chris-tian approach to curriculum?• Why is it that a Christian teaching method-

ology will not be unique?• What are the main methodological lessons

that we can learn from the teaching ministry ofJesus?• How is it that the Christian school can

have both a conservative and a revolutionarysocial function? Is one function more importantthan the other? Why?• Discuss the implications when we say that

the denomination’s schools must be both Chris-tian and Adventist.

This continuing education article has beenpeer reviewed.




NOTES AND REFERENCES1. Daryl Eldridge, “Curriculum,” in Evangelical Diction-

ary of Christian Education, Michael J. Anthony, ed. (GrandRapids, Mich.: Baker, 2001), p. 188.

2. Les L. Steele, On the Way: A Practical Theology of Chris-tian Education (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker, 1990), p. 186.

3. Herbert Spencer, Education: Intellectual, Moral, andPhysical (New York: D. Appleton, 1909), pp. 1-87; see espe-cially, pages 10 and 11.

4. Ibid., pp. 13, 14.5. Ibid., pp. 84-86, 63.6. Mark van Doren, Liberal Education (Boston: Beacon

Press, 1959), p. 108.7. Alfred North Whitehead, The Aims of Education and

Other Essays (New York: Free Press, 1967), p. 7.8. C. P. Snow, The Two Cultures: And a Second Look

(New York: Cambridge University Press, 1964).9. Frank E. Gaebelein, “Toward a Philosophy of Christian

Education,” in An Introduction to Evangelical Christian Edu-cation, J. Edward Hakes, ed. (Chicago: Moody, 1964), p. 41.

10. Arthur F. Holmes, All Truth Is God’s Truth (GrandRapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1977).

11. John Henry Newman, The Idea of a University (NotreDame, Ind.: University of Notre Dame Press, 1982), p. 19. Onthe false dichotomy between the sacred and the secular, seeGeorge R. Knight, Myths in Adventism: An Interpretive Studyof Ellen White, Education, and Related Issues (Hagerstown,Md.: Review and Herald Publ. Assn., 2010), pp. 127-138.

12. Harry Blamires, The Christian Mind (London, S.P.C.K.,1963); Holmes, All Truth Is God’s Truth, op cit., p. 125.

13. Arthur F. Holmes, The Idea of a Christian College, rev.ed. (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1987), p. 18. Italics sup-plied.

14. David Elton Trueblood, “The Marks of a ChristianCollege,” in John Paul von Grueningen, ed., Toward a Chris-tian Philosophy of Higher Education (Philadelphia: Westmin-ster, 1957), p. 163.

15. Frank E. Gaebelein, “Toward a Philosophy of Chris-tian Education,” op cit., p. 37.

16. Ellen G. White, Education (Mountain View, Calif.:Pacific Press Publ. Assn., 1952), p. 126; Ellen G. White,Counsels to Parents, Teachers, and Students (Mountain View,Calif.: Pacific Press, 1943), p. 442.

17. White, Education, p. 125.18. Ibid., p. 190



19. Frank E. Gaebelein, The Pattern of God’s Truth: Prob-lems of Integration in Christian Education (Chicago: Moody,1968), p. 7.

20. Ibid., p. 23.21. Henry P. Van Dusen, God in Education (New York:

Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1951), p. 82.22. From George R. Knight, Philosophy and Education:

An Introduction in Christian Perspective, 4th ed. (BerrienSprings, Mich.: Andrews University Press, 2006), p. 227. Re-produced by permission.

23. Ibid. Reproduced by permission.24. Ibid., p. 228. Reproduced by permission.25. Richard J. Edlin, The Cause of Christian Education

(Northport, Ala.: Vision Press, 1994), pp. 63-66.26. See Harry Lee Poe, Christianity in the Academy:

Teaching at the Intersection of Faith and Learning (GrandRapids, Mich.: Baker, 2004), pp. 22, 23.

27. Ibid.28. Ibid., p. 22.29. Quoted in David K. Naugle, Worldview: The History

of a Concept (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 2002), p. xvii.30. Ibid.31. For a fuller treatment of the topic of literature in the Ad-

ventist curriculum, see Knight, Myths in Adventism, op cit., pp.153-174; _____________, Philosophy and Education: An Intro-duction in Christian Perspective, 4th ed. (Berrien Springs, Mich.:Andrews University Press, 2006), pp. 229-233.

32. John Steinbeck, East of Eden (New York: Bantam,1955), p. 355.

33. A helpful aid to reading in Christian perspective isJames W. Sire, How to Read Slowly: A Christian Guide to Read-ing With the Mind (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity, 1978).

34. T. S. Eliot, “Religion and Literature,” in LelandRyken, ed., The Christian Imagination (Grand Rapids, Mich.:Baker, 1981), pp. 148-150.

35. White, Education, pp. 125, 190.36. From George R. Knight, Philosophy and Education:

An Introduction in Christian Perspective, 4th ed., p. 232. Re-produced by permission.

37. Virginia Lowell Grabill, “English Literature,” inRobert W. Smith, ed., Christ and the Modern Mind (DownersGrove, Ill.: InterVarsity, 1972), p. 21.

38. Quoted in Frank E. Gaebelein, The Christian, theArts, and Truth: Regaining the Vision of Greatness (Portland,Ore.: Multnomah Press, 1985), pp. 91, 92.

39. Macroevolution is defined as “large scale change inorganisms resulting in new species, genera, families, etc.”(http://carm.org/evolution-terminology), occurring overlong time periods.

40. Gaebelein, “Toward a Philosophy of Christian Edu-cation,” op cit., pp. 47, 48.

41. For Gaebelein’s discussion of the integration ofChristianity and mathematics, see The Pattern of God’sTruth, op cit., pages 57-64.

42. For one of the more sophisticated treatments of thepractical aspects of the integration of the sciences, mathemat-ics, and other fields with Christianity, see Harold Heie andDavid L. Wolfe, The Reality of Christian Learning: Strategies forFaith-Discipline Integration (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans,1987).

43. Unless otherwise indicated, all Bible texts in this ar-ticle are quoted from the Revised Standard Version. Bibletexts credited to RSV are from the Revised Standard Versionof the Bible, copyright © 1946, 1952, 1971, by the Division

of Christian Education of the National Council of theChurches of Christ in the U.S.A. Used by permission.

44. White, Education, p. 13. Cf. __________, Christ’s Ob-ject Lessons (Washington, D.C.: Review and Herald Publ.Assn., 1941), p. 330; __________, Fundamentals of ChristianEducation (Nashville, Tenn.: Southern Publishing Assn.,1923), pp. 15, 42.

45. White, Fundamentals of Christian Education, p. 71;cf. p. 21.

46. Ibid., p. 36.47. Arthur F. Holmes, Shaping Character: Moral Educa-

tion in the Christian College (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerd-mans, 1991), p. vii.

48. Ronald H. Nash, The Closing of the American Heart:What’s Really Wrong With America’s Schools ([Dallas]:Probe Books, 1990), pp. 29, 30.

49. Robert W. Pazmiño, Foundational Issues in ChristianEducation: An Introduction in Evangelical Perspective, 2d ed.(Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker, 1997), p. 99.

50. Ibid., p. 101.51. White, Education, p. 17.52. Ibid., p. 288.53. Ibid., p. 287.54. Erich Fromm, The Art of Loving (New York: Harper

and Brothers, 1956), p. 44.55. John Dewey, Democracy and Education (New York:

Free Press, 1966), p. 129.56. White, Counsels to Parents, Teachers, and Students,

p. 222.57. White, Education, p. 289.58. Arthur W. Combs, Myths in Education: Beliefs That

Hinder Progress and Their Alternatives (Boston: Allyn andBacon, 1979), pp. 139, 140.

59. White, Education, p. 292.60. Ibid., pp. 287-297.61. Ibid., pp. 289-291.62. Ibid., p. 291.63. Ibid., p. 294.64. Jim Roy, Soul Shapers: A Better Plan for Parents and

Educators (Hagerstown, Md.: Review and Herald Publ.Assn., 2005).

65. From George R. Knight, Philosophy and Education:An Introduction in Christian Perspective, 4th ed., p. 247. Re-produced by permission.

66. A. S. De Jong, “The Discipline of the ChristianSchool,” in Cornelius Jaarsma, ed. Fundamentals in ChristianEducation (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1953), p. 397.

67. Roger Dudley, Why Teenagers Reject Religion andWhat to Do About It (Washington, D.C.: Review and HeraldPubl. Assn., 1978), p. 89.

68. Harro Van Brummelen, Walking With God in the Class-room (Burlington, Ontario: Welch Publishing, 1988), p. 34.

69. Nicholas Wolterstorff, Educating for Responsible Ac-tion (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1980), pp. 15, 14.

70. Donald Oppewal, Biblical Knowing and Teaching.Calvin College Monograph Series (Grand Rapids, Mich.:Calvin College, 1985), pp. 13-17.

71. White, Education, p. 83.72. See, e.g., White, Counsels to Parents, Teachers, and

Students, pp. 259-263; __________, Fundamentals of Chris-tian Education, pp. 47-49; 236-241; __________, Education,pp. 73-83.

73. Roy B. Zuck, Teaching as Jesus Taught (GrandRapids, Mich.: Baker, 1995), p. 158. See also Zuck’s Teach-



ing as Paul Taught (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker, 1998).74. J. M. Price, Jesus the Teacher (Nashville: The Sunday

School Board of the Southern Baptist Convention, 1946), p. 101.75. White, Fundamentals of Christian Education, p. 236.76. John A. Marquis, Learning to Teach From the Master

Teacher (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1916), p. 29.77. White, Counsels to Parents, Teachers, and Students,

p. 261.78. Ibid., p. 180.79. White, Fundamentals of Christian Education, p. 237.80. J. Crosby Chapman and George S. Counts, Principles

of Education (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1924), pp. 601, 602.81. See George S. Counts, The Soviet Challenge to Amer-

ica (New York: John Day, 1931), pp. 66, 67.82. White, Education, p. 271.83. E. A. Sutherland, Studies in Christian Education

(Leominster, Mass.: The Eusey Press, n. d.), p. 72.84. White, Fundamentals of Christian Education, p. 192.


85. Ibid.86. See George R. Knight, A Search for Identity: The De-

velopment of Seventh-day Adventist Beliefs (Hagerstown, Md.:Review and Herald Publ. Assn., 2000); _____________, TheApocalyptic Vision and the Neutering of Adventism, rev. ed.(Hagerstown, Md.: Review and Herald Publ. Assn, 2009).

87. See George R. Knight, “The Dynamics of EducationalExpansion: A Lesson From Adventist History,” The Journal ofAdventist Education 52:4 (April/May 1990), pp.13-19, 44, 45.

88. See Knight, Apocalyptic Vision, for an extendedtreatment of that threat.

89. George R. Knight, “Adventist Education and theApocalyptic Vision” (two parts), The Journal of AdventistEducation 69:4 (April/May 2007), pp. 4-10; 69:5 (Summer2007), pp. 4-9.

90. Shane Anderson, How to Kill Adventist Education(and How to Give It a Fighting Chance!) (Hagerstown, Md.:Review and Herald Publ. Assn., 2009), pp. 22, 56; cf. p. 30.

R E Q U E S T F O R M

TEST REQUEST FOR

R E D E M P T I V E E D U C A T I O NPlease send the following tests (check as many as desired):

Redemptive Education, Part I

Redemptive Education, Part II

Redemptive Education, Part III �Send this form with your check or money order to:

Lolita Davidson Campbell, Ed.D., NAD/PAC PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITY CREDIT,

26249 MISSION ROAD, LOMA LINDA, CA 92354 U.S.A.(909) 583-3661; e-mail: [email protected]

Name _________________________________________________________________________

Address _______________________________________________________________________

City ___________________________________________________________________________

State/Province _______________________________________ Zip _______________________

Phone _________________________________ E-mail _________________________________

Payment Information: Fee is U.S. $30.00 for each test.Make checks payable to La Sierra University.To pay by credit card:

Card Type: (circle one) Visa MasterCard Discover

Name on Card _________________________________________________________________

Number __________________________________ Exp. Date ___________________________

Signature _______________________________________________ Date: _________________

How to Get Continuing Education Credit for Your Study of This Article

To receive 0.5 Continuing Education Units Credit (5 contact hours) to meet NAD alternate teaching certification requirements for your study of Parts I, II, and III of “Redemptive

Education,” complete the request form, and mail it to the address below.


percentage of Seventh-day Advent -ist teachers who work in the sys-tem. We plan to:a. Encourage induction and de-

velopment of all teachers in thearea of faith and learning;b. Increase access to the JOURNAL;c. Strengthen the role of religion

and theology teachers;d. Add to the Handbook series

for teachers;e. Offer regional conferences

about faith and learning, assess-ment of spiritual master plans, Ad-ventist philosophy of education, etc.f. Promote education as a call-

ing, and the practice of credential-ing and commissioning of teachers. The fourth goal is to nurture Sev-

enth-day Adventist students in non-Adventist higher education andpartner with other GC departments(Chaplaincy, Children’s Ministries,

Youth, Family Ministries) tostrengthen, through the divisions,the ministry of churches to all Sev-enth-day Adventist students. To ac-complish this, we plan to:a. Increase access to Dialogue;b. Monitor the preparation of fu-

ture teachers and recruit teachersand other personnel needed for Ad-ventist higher education (in linewith our third goal); andc. Expand membership in the

Adventist Professionals’ Network(http://apn.adventist.org).d. Address access barriers so as

to increase the percentage of Sev-enth-day Adventist students in de-nominational schools.There you have it: the Team and

Game Plan. What are your thoughtson how to strengthen Adventist mis-sion and identity? What are somepractical ways the JOURNAL mightsupport school leadership and effec-

tive decision-making by schoolboards? How can we be better part-ners with teachers to achieve theredemptive purposes of Adventisteducation? And how should we ex-tend Adventist education outside ofits formal educational structures tohave an impact where the majorityof Adventist students are? We’re notin this alone—we want to hear fromyou. It’s more than a game—we aimto score for eternity.

Lisa M. Beardsley, Ph.D., M.P.H., M.B.A., DirectorEditor in Chief, DialogueLiaison to North American Division (NAD)

Hudson E. Kibuuka, D.Ed., Associate DirectorLiaison to the following divisions: Southern

Africa-Indian Ocean (SID), Southern Asia-Pacific(SSD), Southern Asia (SUD)

Mike Mile Lekic, Ph.D., M.P.H., M.Div., AssociateDirector Executive Secretary, Accrediting Association of Sev-

enth-day Adventist Schools, Colleges, and UniversitiesLiaison to the following divisions: East-Central

Africa (ECD), Euro-Asia (ESD), Northern Asia-Pacific(NSD), Trans-European (TED)

Luis A. Schulz, Ed.D., Associate DirectorAssociate Editor, The Journal of Adventist Educa-

tion (International Edition)Liaison to the following divisions: Euro-Africa

(EUD), South American (SAD)

John Wesley Taylor V, Ph.D., Ed.D., Associate Director Editor, DialogueAdvisory Board Chair, The Journal of Adventist Ed-

ucationLiaison to the following divisions: Inter-American

(IAD), South Pacific (SPD), West-Central Africa (WAD)

Beverly J. Robinson-Rumble, M.A.Editor, The Journal of Adventist Education

Susana Schulz, M.A.Editorial Assistant, Dialogue

To date, the following division directors of educa-tion have been elected:

ESD: Branislav Mirilov, Ph.D.EUD: Barna Magyarosi, Th.D. IAD: Gamaliel Flórez, D.Min.NSD: Chek Yat Phoon, Ph.D. SAD: Edgard Leonel Luz, M.A.SID: Ellah Kamwendo, Ph.D. SPD: Barry Hill, Ph.D. until December 15, 2010,

thereafter Malcolm T. Coulson, Ph.D.SSD: Lawrence L. Domingo, Ed.D.TED: Daniel Duda, D.Min.

Elections to be held for appointment of divisioneducation directors later this year:

ECD (vacated by Hudson E. Kibuuka, D.Ed.)NAD (incumbent Larry D. Blackmer, M.A.)SUD (incumbent Nageshwar Rao, Ph.D.)WAD (incumbent Chiemela Ikonne, Ph.D)

Lisa M. Beardsleyis world Directorof Education forthe Seventh-dayAdventist Churchin Silver Spring,Maryland, U.S.A.

T H E W O R L D E D U C A T I O N T E A M

Editorial continued from page 3


E D I T O R I A L

Here’s How to Order Copies ofThis Issue to Use for In-ServiceEducation/Seminars

� Special 2005-2010 Report onAdventi st Education Around theWorld� School Boards I � School Boards II� School Boards III� Nature� Higher Education� Service Learning� Fine Arts� Religion � English as a Second Language� Writing

� Mathematics� Science � Reading � Early Childhood Education � School Libraries� Administration and Leadership � Quality Schools� CD of ALL articles (English,French, Spanish, and Por-tuguese) from 2005-2009 in PDFformat, plus School Boards Is-sues—ONLY $3.00!

Name ______________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________

Address _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

City _______________________________________State/Province ___________________ Zip ________________ Country ____________________

Yes! Here’s my check or moneyorder. Please send me the following:� One-year subscription (5 issues). $18.25U.S. (Add $3.00 outside the U.S.)� Two-year subscription (10 issues). $35.00U.S. until December 31, 2010 (Add $6.00 out-side the U.S.)

Theme issues—please indicate how many copies.Each copy costs $3.00 (includes shipping andhandling in the U.S. Outside the U.S., add $1.50for single copies). Contact the JOURNAL office forinformation on discounts for bulk orders.

ADVENTIST EDUCATION12501 Old Columbia PikeSilver Spring, MD 20904 U.S.A.Credit card orders (MasterCard and Visaonly): (301) 680-5069http://jae.adventist.org

THE JOURNAL OF

In addition to their use for continuing education credit, the Philosophy of Adventist Education study materials in this issue are an excellent re-source for teacher conferences, school board training sessions, and small group study. The materials will immediately be available on theJOURNAL’S Website (http://jae.adventist.org), and the October/Nov - ember 2010 issue can be purchased in bulk at a discounted price by contacting the JOURNAL’S office assistant, Chandra Goff, at (301) 680-5069. E-mail: [email protected].

Richard Rice’s two-part continuing education articles on “Bible Doctrines” have been recently updated, and are also available in PDF format for easy download at the JOURNAL’S Website: http://jae.adventist.org/.Be sure to also check out the list of other Continuing Edu-

cation materials available at the Website.To subscribe to THE JOURNAL OF ADVENTIST EDUCATION (or

obtain back issues), using a credit card, call the number below. Or fill out and mail the coupon with a check or money order.


visíte-nos!¡visítenos!

visit us!

visitez-nous

Editorial Universitária Iberoamericana Éditions Universitaires Internationales

International University Publishers Editorial Universitaria Iberoamericana


The Andrews Study Bible is an innovative and practical presentation of the Scriptures. It is designed for both the new believer and the experienced Bible student. In the Andrews Study Bible you will find Light, Depth, and Truth. You will be inspired to follow the Bible in a deep study in the things of God. You will be led to a life of service for Christ and the hope of His soon return.

AndrewsStudyBible.comuniversitypress.andrews.edu

• New King James Version

• 12,000 original study notes

• A unique reference system illuminating great themes of the Bible

• Prepared by an international team of scholars from the General Conference and Adventist colleges and universities

• 65,000 cross references, plus maps, charts, articles, and concordance

The only full-feature, formal study Bible

ever produced by an Adventist publishing house

George Knight’s Philosophy and Education: An Introduction in Christian Perspective has been a classic in its field for more than a quarter of a century. New features of this revised and updated fourth edition make it of even greater usefulness in the educational philosophy classrooms of a new century.

“Knight’s excellent survey of the relation of education and philosophy deserves serious consideration as a textbook in educational philosophy.” — Christianity Today

Ideal for the school setting!

s pecial c ontinuing e ducation i ssue

Documents