A couple weeks ago I asked a question on another blog about what the readers thought about the issue of Biblical integration in academia - particularly in history courses. I was mildly disappointed by the lack of response - and those who did respond seemed either not to understand what I meant by Biblical (or Christian) Integration in the subjects we teach. Those who did understand what I said were skeptical of any approach that could do this principle justice - at least from what they had seen, the application of Biblical integration was sloppy at best, and dishonest at worst.
At its worst, it seems to take this approach:
Lesson on math
A verse from the Bible that a teacher digs out that has some sort of reference to a math issue
End of lesson
Is there another answer to this or are we hopelessly incapable of demonstrating that Jesus is indeed Lord of all of knowledge? Here is part of my reply on that blog:
A couple months ago I finished a history (published just last year) of the rise of the animal rights movement in England in the late 18th century, a battle in which many evangelicals participated. Their defense of the created order under God is certainly one that any teacher, Christian or not, could use in a science or history classroom (I used it today to illustrate the strands of reform that accompanied the movement against the English slave trade). The scriptural principles these defenders employed in moving anti-cruelty legislation were sound. The book’s examples became an opportunity for me to ask my 9th graders the question “how would you defend against animal cruelty on the basis of Scripture?” (I teach in a Christian school). I wasn’t surprised that none of them really could but was encouraged as they tried.This, I think, is one example of what I meant by “Christian” (or biblical) integration. It’s asking how people have lived (and are living) their lives, pursuing their callings, and changing their worlds while living out the Faith.In Government, I have used ML King, Jr.’s Letter from the Birmingham Jail to discuss the basis of the non-violent wing of the Civil Rights movement from the perspective of Dr. King’s theology. You would be amazed how many teachers believe and teach that Dr. King’s original inspiration was primarily Gandhi’s nonviolent resistance against British rule. Without ignoring that valuable evidence, I want students to understand the consequences of applying (or failing to apply) biblical truth to the situations of history in which the actors find themselves. Hopefully, these students will enter college with an appreciation of the role that theology has played in history at a time when that discipline has been marginalized.I certainly understand the reticence of many who have seen a poor “patchwork” effort in both curriculum and instruction. I hope that our continued dialogue on this issue both here and on my own blog can help us improve our ability to recognize every area of knowledge as under the Lordship of Christ.
What do you think? What are the limitations of this approach to learning and scholarship?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
Chief -- I applaud your efforts to integrate the Bible and the other disciplines! Of course, as you allude to in your math example, there are limits here. Perhaps a more difficult example would be the intersection between the Bible and science, given these realities:
ReplyDelete- The Bible is true
- The Bible is not a science book
- Science, as an exploration of the natural world, should lead us to the true God of the Bible, as we recognize that God is revealed in nature ("general" or "natural revelation")
- Miracles, which the Bible records as fact, are by definition "supernatural"--they defy scientific examination. Of course, God Himself cannot be scientifically examined, as he is not created but is the Creator.
Therefore both science and the Bible are limited (heresy!) insofar as neither leads us to a complete understanding of all things, but both are useful for many things: science for understanding God's created order, and the Bible for "teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness" (2 Tim 3:16).
To head off any misunderstanding, I do not mean to imply by saying the Bible is "limited" that it is insufficient--merely that it doesn't answer every question about everything. For example, there is nothing in Scripture to indicate whether there was ever a creature such as the stegosaurus, or whether the Arizona Cardinals will be able to come to terms with Kurt Warner to be their starting quarterback next year. Yet, whatever the facts surrounding either proposition, both must be resolved in a way that is entirely consistent with Scripture and rational thought.
ReplyDeleteFor example, the actual facts behind dinosaurs, whatever they are, cannot contradict the Biblical account of Creation. On the other hand, the Biblical account of Creation is not a scientific one, but rather a theological-historical one. (I will not here attempt to resolve young-earth vs. old-earth Creationism).
Of course, the classic example of the limits of misapplying (or over-literalizing)Scripture may be found in the church's reaction to Galileo's defense of Copernical cosmology. The church misapplied certain literary forms in Scripture that, taken literally, appeared to argue for a geocentric solar system.
I think I'll leave the future of the Arizona Cardinals to another blog and wiser prophets. Perhaps let it only be said that to argue that Kurt Warner is, in fact, a potted plant would be inconsistent with rational thought.
This comment has now "jumped the shark".
Great comments, Jailer. Thanks! I understand exactly what you are getting at insofar as the design of the scriptures to change our lives rather than to merely explain our existence.
ReplyDeleteIn my reading through the Bible, I am amazed at how many examples I've been seeing just in Deuteronomy that are applicable to environmental science (preservation of species - don't take the eggs and the mother!)
I wonder how many laissez-faire economists would reject the social and economic implications of Deuteronomy Chapter 24! (pay your workers what you owe them when it's due - without delay;
don't take advantage of foreigners living in your midst just because you don't like them -remember how you used to be a foreigner in Egypt?
be personally responsible for the poor, widows, and orphans in your midst
And, perhaps, even Cardinals who are potted plants who jump sharks:)
Eh' Bradah! You wen and had me all confused like wit tha first kine 'Aloha' you lef for me at my place. I wen and thoght "eh who dis bugga acking so familia and all li'dat". But den I saw you for who you iz and we jump up and down all excited like. You so sneeky da' kine you know.
ReplyDeleteOk seriously, it is so great to hear from you. So you have entered the world of blogging? Watch out for it can be a pretty addictive place my friend. I am looking forward to seeing how you are lead to shape things. It took me a while to get the knack of what I wanted for my own place and I still fall off da truck every now and again.
ReplyDeleteSo, Wow! Reading this first post of yours and following the comments...already my head is swimming with knowledge and conviction. So, if I am following right?.....I hope.....the basic question is one of the separation of educational knowledge and theology and why it is so. For me, as I understand history, there wasn't that separation really until maybe a little over a hundred years ago. There was a time when everything was measured by the Bible and what the scriptures had to say about any given subject was valued as precious gold. Then along came the open thinking of all the "isms" and society began to focus more on self this and self that.
Having bible and education in the same subject of conversation is definitely a challenging thing these days. It is something I struggled with while teaching the high schoolers last year. They knew their scripture....as simple head knowledge. They couldn't take that knowledge and apply it to modern concepts. They couldn't do it because no one had taught them and no one had taught them because...........oh no here I go on a dangerous soap box......... by and large I believe that the atmosphere of churches had been watered down. For a fair number of years many were playing church instead of living a relationship. Now though, the tides are turning. Everywhere I look I see people that are tired of pretend and want what is real and tangible. I am seeing young people everywhere with a craving for more and they are lighting a fire under the 'older' folks. Could it be that possibly that old time semetry between education and spiritual growth could take a swing back for the better?
(Okay so that felt strangly like lobbing over a few hand grenades with my eyes closed. I hope I was understanding the dialog between you and jailer okay and not opening my own can from left field.)
Blessings to you my friend and give our love to that precious wife.
Great to hear from you Jules! Lots of great memories back there. Loved the pic of you and hubby. Thanks for your excellent thoughts. You confirm much of what I myself have seen over the past 9 years. I have to constantly remember that my first priority for these teens is to show them Jesus first and Clio second. Cause if I don't, bimeby everyting come hemajang, dasswhy!
ReplyDeleteNot sure if you check coments on old posts but here goes...
ReplyDeleteI'm just starting out in Christian education. As a teacher of 8 years in the secular British education system I know work for a Christian Mission School and for the first time am confronted with Biblical Integration in teaching. My subject is High School Math and I have found two things:
- a constant statement from Christian educators that Biblical Integration is imperative to all subjects
- a distinct lack of direction on what honest, coherent biblical integration looks like in Math education. There are a number of places that say what it isn't but really very little on what it is.
I am left thinking that there is pressure to 'tick the box' in ways that is entirely inappropriate because we feel we have to do it rather than acknowledge that it should be done as appropriate. I don't want to keep going on EVERY lesson about how Math is consistent because God is consistent etc... because it will have the opposite effect to the one desired.
Anyway I'll stop - not sure if anyone will read this now anyway.
Welcome to the blog, Farrells! I think you are correct in your observation that we are tempted to just "check the box." Your subject is admittedly the most difficult to integrate. I attended a workshop on this a couple years ago. If you are interested, I could send you separately via email the practical insights and tips we gained. These may help you. Just let me know, OK?
ReplyDeleteIf you could that would be great. I have gotten a little further but am still unsure how to have intentional, frequent integration that isn't repetitious and dull.
ReplyDeleteYou could send it to math_a_t_thefarrells.org.uk
Thanks