Education
According to Scripture, education is and always will be the responsibility of the parents (Deut. 6:6-7, 11:18-19; Eph. 6:4). Does this mean that everything in which children are to be educated must come from their parents directly? In other words, while it is the responsibility of the parents to educate their children, do the parents have to be the ones doing the work of educating?
In some instances, yes! Deuteronomy specifically says that the parents are to be teaching the precepts of God to their children directly, and throughout every part of the day: "You [parents] shall teach them diligently to your children, and shall talk of them when you sit in your house, and when you walk by the way, and when you lie down, and when you rise" (Deut. 6:7). And Paul alludes to this very concept in Ephesians 6:4: "Fathers...bring them up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord" (cf. Gen. 18:19; Deut. 4:9, 6:6-7, 11:18-19; Ps. 78:4; Prv. 22:6). What else could Paul mean by bringing them up in "the instruction of the Lord." And when the child is older, it is his own responsibility to continue his education (Prv. 4:5-7, 18:15, 23:23).
But even in his younger years obviously not everything a child learns will come from his parents. Yet in that regard the child should still be directed by his parents in the pursuit of his education (Prv. 3:1-2, 13-18). We find in Scripture that in Paul's day, when parents could afford it, a large aspect of a child's education would be entrusted to a schoolmaster or guardian (Gal. 4:1-2). That's how they were to gain even more knowledge than what their parents knew concerning God's Word, as well as knowledge above and beyond that of their father's trade or business. Even Paul's own education was according to this tradition (Acts 22:3), which was very effective from an academic stand point (Gal. 1:14). Yet he still put the ultimate responsibility on the parents but then appropriated the due praise to the parents too (Eph. 6:4; cf. 2 Tim. 1:5, 3:14-15).
But that's what the Scripture has to say about education. It's the ultimate responsibility of the parents (especially the fathers), and the task is appropriately given to either the parents themselves (home schooling) or to willing and capable guardians entrusted by the parents in the free market of education (privately funded schooling).
Does this mean there is no Biblical justification for public schools?
If by "public schools" you mean "government-mandated, government-funded, government-run public schools," then yes. There is no Biblical justification whatsoever for government-mandated, government-funded, government-run public schools.
If by "public schools" you mean "non-compulsory, privately-funded, privately-run schools that are open to the public (i.e., the general population)," then no. In fact, in that regard there is very good Biblical justification for public schools. As part of the Christian mandate to "make disciples of all nations" (Mt. 28:18-20), there is a great need for Christian schools to be open to the public. Indeed, it's really a necessary part of the great commission; and something the early settlers of this nation knew for themselves.
But for the government to be involved in education at all (other than restraining civil evil or ensuring civil justice) is completely unbiblical and without Biblical or even rational justification. How is this so? Well let's look at it briefly on each point.
Government-mandated
There is no place in Scripture where the government is given the authority or responsibility to ensure (especially by compulsion) that all (or any) of its citizens receive a certain level of education. And to require it from any or all of their citizens (even through private means) is still overstepping its bounds. As stated before, the government has the very limited task of restraining civil evil, promoting civil good, and ensuring civil justice. And since education is not a civil right or benefit but a personal and social operation, the government has no right to be involved at all - let alone require it for any length of time.
Should all parents want to educate their children? Yes! But if lousy parents don't care or don't want to educate their children, does the government have the right to enforce that they do? By no means! It is then up to the church to change the minds of the parents through the power of the gospel and to help the parents educate (either by home or private means) their children.
Government-funded
Again there is no place in Scripture where the government is to have anything to do with the education of its citizens. But add to that a government that not only requires education but provides for its end out of its own pocket? Where is the government getting this money to provide such a service? It either pays for this education by not spending in other areas that it is tasked with overseeing (restraining civil evil, promoting civil good, and ensuring civil justice), or it makes up the difference by overstepping its bounds in the economy via exacting more taxes from private citizens (whether an increase in federal or state income tax, a property tax, a school-district income tax, or a plethora of other unbiblical means).
To put it simply: when a government funds education it does so by either neglecting duties it is actually assigned or by taxing heavier than what it is authorized to do.
"By justice a king builds up the land, but he who taxes heavily tears it down." (Prv. 29:4)
Government-run
Surely if a government has no business in education, it certainly has no authority to run public schools or dictate how they should be run. Education is the responsibility of parents; and how schools are run (provided they are not breaking any civil laws) should be dictated only by the free market via the parents who are paying private schools to educate their children.
What qualifies the government to run public educational programs? Why should any publicly available school need the government's stamp of approval in order to educate others? In a free market, with private citizens funding the education of their children at the schools of their own choice, the government has no need to give its approval to one institution and withhold it from another. The government's approval should not even be an option, as the government has no rightful role in public education.
As it is, when the government does overstep its bounds and does try to run schools, how does it do this task? If the schools are being funded by everyone (through taxes), then how does the government ensure that everyone's kids are being educated in the way the parents want them educated (according to a Christian worldview, a Muslim worldview, a Hindu worldview, a secular humanist worldview, etc.)? The only way it could conceivably do this would be to separate the students according to their parents' stipulations on how they want their child educated. But even then it would still be wrong, because we have yet to see a Biblical or even rational reason that the government should be involved in education.
However, obviously that's not what the current situation is anyway. Anyone who knows anything about the current public (that is, government-public) school system knows that the only worldview that is taught or will be taught is the secular humanist worldview. Why? Because that's the only one that at the outset either outright denies God's existence or at best makes Him irrelevant. How wise indeed (Ps. 14:1; 1 Cor. 1:20)!
In some instances, yes! Deuteronomy specifically says that the parents are to be teaching the precepts of God to their children directly, and throughout every part of the day: "You [parents] shall teach them diligently to your children, and shall talk of them when you sit in your house, and when you walk by the way, and when you lie down, and when you rise" (Deut. 6:7). And Paul alludes to this very concept in Ephesians 6:4: "Fathers...bring them up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord" (cf. Gen. 18:19; Deut. 4:9, 6:6-7, 11:18-19; Ps. 78:4; Prv. 22:6). What else could Paul mean by bringing them up in "the instruction of the Lord." And when the child is older, it is his own responsibility to continue his education (Prv. 4:5-7, 18:15, 23:23).
But even in his younger years obviously not everything a child learns will come from his parents. Yet in that regard the child should still be directed by his parents in the pursuit of his education (Prv. 3:1-2, 13-18). We find in Scripture that in Paul's day, when parents could afford it, a large aspect of a child's education would be entrusted to a schoolmaster or guardian (Gal. 4:1-2). That's how they were to gain even more knowledge than what their parents knew concerning God's Word, as well as knowledge above and beyond that of their father's trade or business. Even Paul's own education was according to this tradition (Acts 22:3), which was very effective from an academic stand point (Gal. 1:14). Yet he still put the ultimate responsibility on the parents but then appropriated the due praise to the parents too (Eph. 6:4; cf. 2 Tim. 1:5, 3:14-15).
But that's what the Scripture has to say about education. It's the ultimate responsibility of the parents (especially the fathers), and the task is appropriately given to either the parents themselves (home schooling) or to willing and capable guardians entrusted by the parents in the free market of education (privately funded schooling).
Does this mean there is no Biblical justification for public schools?
If by "public schools" you mean "government-mandated, government-funded, government-run public schools," then yes. There is no Biblical justification whatsoever for government-mandated, government-funded, government-run public schools.
If by "public schools" you mean "non-compulsory, privately-funded, privately-run schools that are open to the public (i.e., the general population)," then no. In fact, in that regard there is very good Biblical justification for public schools. As part of the Christian mandate to "make disciples of all nations" (Mt. 28:18-20), there is a great need for Christian schools to be open to the public. Indeed, it's really a necessary part of the great commission; and something the early settlers of this nation knew for themselves.
But for the government to be involved in education at all (other than restraining civil evil or ensuring civil justice) is completely unbiblical and without Biblical or even rational justification. How is this so? Well let's look at it briefly on each point.
Government-mandated
There is no place in Scripture where the government is given the authority or responsibility to ensure (especially by compulsion) that all (or any) of its citizens receive a certain level of education. And to require it from any or all of their citizens (even through private means) is still overstepping its bounds. As stated before, the government has the very limited task of restraining civil evil, promoting civil good, and ensuring civil justice. And since education is not a civil right or benefit but a personal and social operation, the government has no right to be involved at all - let alone require it for any length of time.
Should all parents want to educate their children? Yes! But if lousy parents don't care or don't want to educate their children, does the government have the right to enforce that they do? By no means! It is then up to the church to change the minds of the parents through the power of the gospel and to help the parents educate (either by home or private means) their children.
Government-funded
Again there is no place in Scripture where the government is to have anything to do with the education of its citizens. But add to that a government that not only requires education but provides for its end out of its own pocket? Where is the government getting this money to provide such a service? It either pays for this education by not spending in other areas that it is tasked with overseeing (restraining civil evil, promoting civil good, and ensuring civil justice), or it makes up the difference by overstepping its bounds in the economy via exacting more taxes from private citizens (whether an increase in federal or state income tax, a property tax, a school-district income tax, or a plethora of other unbiblical means).
To put it simply: when a government funds education it does so by either neglecting duties it is actually assigned or by taxing heavier than what it is authorized to do.
"By justice a king builds up the land, but he who taxes heavily tears it down." (Prv. 29:4)
Government-run
Surely if a government has no business in education, it certainly has no authority to run public schools or dictate how they should be run. Education is the responsibility of parents; and how schools are run (provided they are not breaking any civil laws) should be dictated only by the free market via the parents who are paying private schools to educate their children.
What qualifies the government to run public educational programs? Why should any publicly available school need the government's stamp of approval in order to educate others? In a free market, with private citizens funding the education of their children at the schools of their own choice, the government has no need to give its approval to one institution and withhold it from another. The government's approval should not even be an option, as the government has no rightful role in public education.
As it is, when the government does overstep its bounds and does try to run schools, how does it do this task? If the schools are being funded by everyone (through taxes), then how does the government ensure that everyone's kids are being educated in the way the parents want them educated (according to a Christian worldview, a Muslim worldview, a Hindu worldview, a secular humanist worldview, etc.)? The only way it could conceivably do this would be to separate the students according to their parents' stipulations on how they want their child educated. But even then it would still be wrong, because we have yet to see a Biblical or even rational reason that the government should be involved in education.
However, obviously that's not what the current situation is anyway. Anyone who knows anything about the current public (that is, government-public) school system knows that the only worldview that is taught or will be taught is the secular humanist worldview. Why? Because that's the only one that at the outset either outright denies God's existence or at best makes Him irrelevant. How wise indeed (Ps. 14:1; 1 Cor. 1:20)!
So not only is government-mandated, government-funded, government-run public education unbiblical and irrational in its approach, it's wholly and completely anti-Christian by nature. When the Scriptures state emphatically that the fear of the Lord is the very beginning of wisdom and knowledge (Prv. 1:7, 9:10) and that all knowledge and wisdom are bound up in the person of Jesus Christ (Col. 2:3), and the government public schools promote that it's irrelevant or even foolish to acknowledge Jesus Christ as Lord when it comes to education, clearly they aren't anything but anti-Christian through and through.(1)
Therefore, I would maintain without hesitation that since government public schools have no Biblical justification and are even by nature against the Christian worldview, they should be abolished and closed down as soon as possible (obviously by legal means).
What are the objections to this? Usually it runs something like this:
And so again, I have to maintain without hesitation that since government public schools have no Biblical justification and are even by nature against the Christian worldview, they should be abolished and closed down as soon as possible. Education is the responsibility of the parents and should be provided by them either themselves (home school) or through privately-funded means (private schools, which certainly could - and should - be open to the public). And for those who can't afford either of these (even with the excessive taxes being taken out of the way since the government has no right to tax people for public education), the church should obviously step up to help (Mt. 28:18-20; Col. 2:3).
Therefore, I would maintain without hesitation that since government public schools have no Biblical justification and are even by nature against the Christian worldview, they should be abolished and closed down as soon as possible (obviously by legal means).
What are the objections to this? Usually it runs something like this:
- "How can you not want free education for all?"
Public government education is anything but free. It's only supported by taxes that are way above and beyond what is authorized for a government to collect. If the government was not taking any money for education purposes (which means that income is now at the disposal of its original recipients), the parents would then have the choice (and their own funds) to send their children to a private school that would be run better and more efficiently than any government-run school as well as a school that is in line with their own worldview. - "Doesn't government-public education help the poor?"
Not in the least. If you notice anything about government public schools, it's generally the case that the schools in the rich suburbs have the biggest budgets, the more advanced facilities, and the best teachers, while the schools in the inner cities have the smallest budgets, the more broken facilities, and the worst teachers (obviously there are some brave and noteworthy exceptions). But by and large, government-public education only helps keep the poor poor by providing to them the lowest quality of education available.
If education was offered only by the free market, there would be much more ability (especially given the excessive tax burden lifted from citizens) for people to make scholarships available to poorer communities and even for schools in poorer neighborhoods to compete, which would give them incentive to run more efficiently and hire better teachers. That would help the poor much more than the government just keeping them poor by providing them the lowest quality education in the worst facilities.
And so again, I have to maintain without hesitation that since government public schools have no Biblical justification and are even by nature against the Christian worldview, they should be abolished and closed down as soon as possible. Education is the responsibility of the parents and should be provided by them either themselves (home school) or through privately-funded means (private schools, which certainly could - and should - be open to the public). And for those who can't afford either of these (even with the excessive taxes being taken out of the way since the government has no right to tax people for public education), the church should obviously step up to help (Mt. 28:18-20; Col. 2:3).
(1) I am by no means saying that everyone involved in government public education is anti-Christian. Please read my note to the contrary here.