The labor union is an organization of laborers, not merely for the purpose of collective bargaining, but for the purpose of regulating the business or industry according to the will of the laborers.  The labor union enforces the will of the laborers by the strike.  This enforcement of the will of the laborers against the will of the employer, which is of the very essence of the union, is rebellion.  It is rebellion by force and violence, for the strike is the power to destroy the particular business and ruin the owner.

      Out of this fundamental evil of the union flows all the violence characteristic of labor unions.  The unions are committed to the class struggle propounded by Marx, and many constitutions say so.  Naturally, the strike, which is as such an act of violence, breaks out in destruction of property, threat and injury, hatred of “scabs,” and murder.

Corporate Responsibility

      Every member of the union, whether he participates in the violence or not, whether he wholeheartedly approves or is upset by the violence, is responsible—fully responsible before God—for the union’s violence, so that in the day of judgment he will have to account for it.  He willingly joined an organization committed to rebellion against God-ordained authority.  By his membership and dues, if not by walking the picket line, he supported an organization that forces the owner to submit to the will of the workers, that destroys property, and that injures and kills those who oppose it.

      When the enforcers of the strike crushed the head of the truck driver on I-80/94 east of South Holland, Illinois with chunks of concrete as part of the truckers’ strike, every member of the Teamsters Union became a murderer before God.  Every member of the Union was guilty of crushing the head of that driver as much as if he had hurled the chunks of concrete with his own hands.

      This is the principle, ordained of God, revealed in the Bible, and acknowledged widely in everyday life, of corporate responsibility.  “Have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them” (Eph. 5:11).   Let the labor union member professing Christianity try once to “reprove” the union and the other members sharply at a labor union meeting!  “Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues” (Rev. 18:4).  

Other Evils, Spiritual and Civil

      There are other biblical grounds for objecting to labor union membership.  I mention four.

      Scripture teaches that the human may swear unconditional allegiance only to God.  “It is written, thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve” (Matt. 4:10).   Unions require the member to pledge, or swear, unconditional allegiance and obedience to the union.  Typical is the oath required for membership by the International Typographical Union quoted by First Church’s “Testimony,” referred to in the first installment of this series of editorials:

I hereby solemnly and sincerely swear (or affirm) that I will not reveal any business or proceedings of any meeting of this or any subordinate union to which I may hereafter be attached, unless by order of the union, except to those whom I know to be in good standing thereof; that I will, without evasion or equivocation, and to the best of my ability abide by the Constitution, By-Laws and the adopted scale of prices of any union to which I may belong; that I will at all times support the laws, regulations and decisions of the International Typographical Union, and will carefully avoid giving aid or succor to its enemies, and use all honorable means within my power to procure employment for members of the International Typographical Union in preference to others; that my fidelity to the union and my duty to the members thereof shall in no sense be interfered with by any allegiance that I may now or hereafter owe to any other organization, social, political, or religious, secret or otherwise … that I will not wrong a member, or see him or her wronged, if in my power to prevent.  To all of which I pledge my most sacred honor (emphasis added).

      This is idolatry.

      Scripture calls the believer to brotherly communion only with fellow believers and forbids fellowship with the ungodly.  “Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers” (II Cor. 6:14).   The unions are “brotherhoods.”  Constitutionally, they are brotherhoods.  A Christian who is member of a union expresses that he views unbelieving, ungodly men and women as spiritual brothers and sisters (obviously the unions are not referring to physical brotherhood); that he shares their principles and goals regarding labor; and that he cooperates with them—is “yoked together” with them—in achieving their goals as member of their family.  This is flagrant breach of the antithesis.

      Scripture instructs the Christian to seek the kingdom of God first, and not earthly things.  “But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things [food, drink, clothing] shall be added unto you” (Matt. 6:33).   The labor union puts wages and benefits above all else.  This is materialism, naked materialism.  In its appeal to President Roosevelt in 1941, the synod of the Protestant Reformed Churches declared, “We refuse to become members of the Union because we condemn the principles of utter materialism of the Union.”

      A fourth reason for objecting to labor union membership is often overlooked.  The Word of God demands that we promote the kingdom of Christ with our money.  This is an aspect of our stewardship regarding all our life in the world, for which we shall also give account in the final judgment.  “A certain nobleman went into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom, and to return.  And he called his ten servants, and delivered them ten pounds, and said unto them, Occupy till I come….  Wherefore then gavest not thou my money into the bank, that at my coming I might have required mine own with usury?” (Luke 19:11-27).  

      As World magazine pointed out in the issue of November 30, 2002, the labor unions spend billions of dollars of the members’ union dues every year to support the most liberal political candidates and their anti-Christian agendas.  Thus, the unions aggressively, and effectively, promote abortion, the homosexual movement, the outlawing of capital punishment, and the like.  In fact, the labor unions, through their political lackeys, are one of the most powerful forces driving the liberal agenda in the United States.

Many [unions] have moved on to funding liberal causes such as abortion-on-demand and school-based sexual-health clinics, opposing conservative causes such as school choice and welfare reform, and strongly supporting liberal candidates (“Dues & Don’ts,” World, Nov. 30, 2002, pp. 17-19).

      By his voluntary membership, the member of a labor union contributes to and promotes the swelling tide of corruption in our country.  Knowingly and willingly, he pays for the coming of Antichrist.

      In addition to these biblical condemnations of labor union membership, labor unionism is un-American.  The demand that a worker join a union in order to have a job and the exclusion of a citizen from the workforce because he refuses to join a union are contrary to the Constitution of the United States.  Certainly one of the most precious aspects of the earthly freedom recognized and guaranteed by the Constitution is the right to work.  All those politicians who support big labor by working for the closed shop are enemies of freedom.

(to be concluded)

New Editor Sought

The editor of the Standard Bearer presented the following letter to the staff of the magazine (writers and managing editor) at their annual meeting this past June.

         I accept your appointment to be editor of the Standard Bearer for another year.

         I will not be available for reappointment next year.

         In 2004, I will have served as editor for sixteen years.  I desire to be relieved of the burden.

         Also, next year, if God gives me life, I will be sixty-five.  I think it good for the magazine and its witness that another, younger man assume the responsibility of editor.

         I advise the staff to appoint a committee at this meeting, to find a man who will take over the editorship of the Standard Bearer beginning October 1, 2004.

      In accordance with the advice of this letter, the staff is presently seeking a new editor.  He will take over as editor with the October 1, 2004 issue of the magazine.

      Following the proposals of their editorial committee, the staff decided on two changes of the content of the magazine in the next volume-year (beginning October 1, 2003).

      The rubric “Search the Scripture” will take the form of thorough exposition of entire books of the Bible.  Such exposition will help our readers in their systematic study of Scripture, perhaps in preparing for the Bible study classes in the congregations.  Eventually, some of these explanations of entire books may be published as commentaries in book form.  We begin with an exposition of Haggai by Rev. Ron Hanko.  Our thanks to Rev. Martin VanderWal for his past work with this rubric.

      We are dropping the rubric “Contending for the Faith.”  We thank Rev. Bernie Woudenberg for his contributions.

      The editorial committee has planned a special, Reformation issue on John Calvin.  It is high time that we feature the life and work of the Reformed Reformer.  This will be the October 15, 2003 issue.

      Although this has nothing to do with the staff meeting, I take this opportunity to thank Judi Doezema for the comprehensive index to volume 79 of the Standard Bearer that appeared in the September 15 issue.

      The issue of October 1, 2003 begins volume 80 of this magazine.  Eighty years of continuous publishing of the Standard Bearer!  Eighty years during which the message of the magazine has not changed!  In October 2003, as in October 1924, the message is the riches of the Reformed faith and life as set forth in the “Three Forms of Unity” on the basis of inspired Scripture.

      Long may this witness to the glory of our sovereign God and to the comfort of His covenant people continue in the Standard Bearer!

A New Work on New Testament History

The Protestant Reformed Sunday School Teachers Association has just published a complete explanation of the history of the New Testament in three hardcover volumes.  The set is titled Upon This Rock.  Volume one treats “Jesus Christ:  His Earthly Ministry”; volume two, “Jesus Christ:  His Death and Resurrection”; and volume three, “Jesus Christ:  His Acts Through the Apostles.” 

      The author is long-time writer of the “Our Guide” Sunday School materials, Don Doezema.  The three volumes publish in book form articles Mr. Doezema wrote some years ago for parents to use in teaching their older children.

      The books arrange the history of the New Testament in chronological order.  They relate the history in simple, lively, engaging fashion.  But they do more than tell the story.  The books explain the history, bringing out the doctrinal and practical meaning of the historical events.  In treating the history of Simon the Sorcerer, in Acts 8:9-24, Mr. Doezema writes:

We do better, before we leave the story or Simon, to consider for a moment how the inclusion of that bit of history in the biblical record can be profitable for us.  It is a warning, certainly, against the sin of simony—a sin that might seem a bit far removed from us.  We do well, however, to consider carefully the nature and purpose of spiritual gifts.  Notice first of all that they are gifts of the Spirit, conferred by the grace of God.  Note further that they are to be used, not for personal gain (other than spiritual, that is) but for the edification of the church.  Simon wished to use the gifts of the Spirit for mercenary reasons.  We do the same today if in our use of spiritual gifts we are motivated by a desire to put ourselves on the foreground or to win the esteem of men.  Think on what Calvin says concerning the purpose of gifts of the Spirit:  “. . . that each one may unassumingly apply the gift, that he has received, for the common benefit of the Church; and that the superiority of no individual may prevent Christ alone standing out above them all” (vol. 3, pp. 96, 97).

      As the quotation shows, one of the valuable features of the work throughout is Doezema’s apt citation of good, solid biblical scholars, including Calvin, Edersheim, Lenski, Herman Hoeksema, Ophoff, and Herman Hanko.  The quotations are always brief, never tedious.  In this way, the reader benefits from the insights of worthy scholars without the trouble of looking up the passages in their books or articles.

      This treatment of New Testament is succinct.  Each chapter, explaining a particular event or a number of related events, runs from six to eight pages.

      Helpful, and interesting, is the light shed on events from the history of the Old Testament and from extra-biblical sources.  The explanation of the appearance of the angel to Zacharias in the temple informs the reader concerning the ceremony of burning incense (vol. 1, pp. 2-5).  The treatment of Paul’s work in Corinth indicates the notorious depravity of that city—the San Francisco or Amsterdam of its day (vol. 3, pp. 266, 267).

      Doezema does not avoid the difficulties.  Where there are legitimate differences of opinion, he gives both possibilities and leaves the issue an open question (although often stating his own judgment on the matter).  An instance is the question whether the Ethiopian eunuch was literally a eunuch.  Lenski says he was; Calvin says he was not.  Doezema leaves “the question undecided,” but not before expressing his preference for the view of Lenski (vol. 3, pp. 101, 102).

      The account of Paul’s mission labors recorded in Acts, in volume 3 of the set, refers to corresponding teachings in the epistles.  The treatment of the Jerusalem Council, for example, as recorded in Acts 15, calls attention to Paul’s epistle to the Galatians and the doctrinal issues in this epistle.

      Parents, Sunday School teachers, Christian school teachers, and even ministers will find this work useful in teaching children the history of the New Testament.  All will find it instructive and edifying for themselves.

      Each volume contains a complete textual index with passages on which chapters are based in bold print.  There is also an index of subjects. 

      The covers show the attractive design we are coming to expect from Jeff Steenholdt.

      The price of the three volumes is $30 ($10 per volume) plus shipping.  Each volume is more than four hundred pages.  Orders should be sent to the Protestant Reformed Seminary, 4949 Ivanrest Ave., SW, Grandville, MI  49418.

      Members of the Protestant Reformed Churches are advised that these books will be made available to them within their own congregations through the local Sunday School association.

Letters:

Excess Introspection

    _Your editorial on Jean Taffin’s little book [The Marks of God’s Children, Baker, 2003] in the August 2003 Standard Bearer was a blessing.  Especially I was heartened to find another who so well described my feelings about excess introspection combined with a deficit of trust, joy, assurance, and praise.  I have put the editorial in my assurance file.  It should also guide me away from some “Reformed” preachers and groups.

Lewis Price

Batesville, AR

Lying

    _Please allow me to make a few remarks on the matter of lying, addressed in SB of April 15, 2003, p. 322, and SB of July 2003, p. 415.

      We should be weary of applying our Western, static notion of truth and falsehood to God’s Word.  We always expect the word “truth” to be used as a predicative attribute or adjective as in “this is the truth.”  However, the Bible uses expressions such as “ to walk in the truth” (I  Kings 2:4; 3:6; Ps. 26:3; II  John 4; III  John 3, 4), “to obey the truth” (Gal. 3:1; 5:7; I  Peter 1:22), and “to do (work, perform) the truth” (II  Chron. 31:20, Micah 7:20, John 3:21, Rom. 2:8, I  John 1:6).   This indicates that the truth is not an abstract entity that can be easily judged externally but that it pertains to a lifestyle that is desirous to have a good conscience toward God, accompanied with actual deeds, yielding completely to Him, who is the Way, the Truth, and the Life.

      That some instances of lying in the Bible seem to be condoned cannot be satisfactorily explained because personal motives would have been pure or that there were compelling circumstances, but it can be explained because there was a conflict between a lower command and a higher command, between an earthly treasure and a spiritual treasure.  Jacob’s priority was to have the covenantal blessing of Isaac, whereas Esau despised his birthright.  Mary’s priority was to sit at Jesus’ feet, whereas Martha could not set the household needs aside ( Luke 10).   Jesus deals with this priority theme in the parable of the Unjust Steward ( Luke 16).   For the midwives there was a conflict between the command of lower pharaoh to kill and the command of almighty God not to kill.  For Rahab there was a choice between perishing with the Canaanites and finding protection with the people of God.  The key to understand the condoning of the lying is found in the fact that they feared God more than men.  Concerning the midwives it says emphatically in Exodus 1:17 and in 1:21 that they feared God.  In Joshua 2:9-11, trembling Rahab expresses her fear because of the terror and the mighty acts of God.

      When there is a conflict between obeying God and obeying men, Christians should have no problem making a choice (Acts 5:29).   It is my conviction that those who lied against the Nazis in WW II did so because they feared God, who commands not to kill, more than Hitler, whose intent was to annihilate the Jews.  Let us, who live sixty years away from WW II, stand in awe of the heroic deeds of faith whereby these “liars” risked, and many times paid with, their lives.

      Nevertheless, the point of your article is well made.  We are prone to lie because of selfish, earthly reasons.  Then our heart will condemn us (I John 3:20, 21).   We must certainly be critical of our own motives and see whether they are genuinely rooted in the fear of God.  But I am sure that betrayal of a Jew would have gnawed more at the conscience than speaking a lie to a Nazi.

      May God continue to bless your beautiful magazine!

J. L. Reckman

Aylmer, Ontario

Canada

Marking the Bulwarks of Zion:

Prof. Herman C. Hanko

Prof. Hanko is professor emeritus of Church History and New Testament in the Protestant Reformed Seminary.

Jacobus Arminius and Arminianism (3)

The Synod of Dordt

It is not our purpose to give a history of the Synod of Dordt in this article, but we do wish to sum up the work of the synod, particularly its composition and adoption of the Canons, and the significance of this synod for the history of the Reformed faith.

      Over the years a debate has been carried on between defenders of the Westminster Confessions and people loyal to Dordt over the question of whether the Synod of Dordt or the Westminster Assembly is the greatest assembly of divines in post-Reformation times.  I am not interested in entering the debate.  Nor is there any answer to the question that will satisfy.  The meetings were for different purposes.  They were brought about by different circumstances.  They produced different types of documents.  And they are of significance for different parts of the Calvinistic church world.

      Nevertheless, the Synod of Dordt was one of the great ecclesiastical assemblies of all time.  To note a few reasons why this is true would be worth our while.

      First of all, the Arminian controversy itself is instructive and enlightening, because it gives us an insight into the way heretics usually operate in the church.  Heretics attempt to clothe their erroneous positions in ambiguous and outwardly orthodox language.  Their motive is deception.  They attempt to present aberrations from the faith as genuine Reformed doctrine.  They plead that they are simply stating old truths in new and fresh ways, or that they are giving the people of God fresh and innovative insights into long-cherished doctrines.  But they lie.

      A noted Presbyterian theologian of the last century, Samuel Miller, writes thus of Arminius:

         This is a painful narrative.  It betrays a want of candour and integrity on the part of a man [Arminius] otherwise respectable, which it affords no gratification even to an adversary to record.  It may be truly said, however, to be the stereotyped history of the commencement of every heresy which has arisen in the Christian church.  When heresy arises in an evangelical body, it is never frank and open.  It always begins by skulking, and assuming a disguise.  Its advocates, when together, boast of great improvements, and congratulate one another on having gone greatly beyond the “old dead orthodoxy,” and having left behind many of its antiquated errors, as they “differ from it only in words.”  This has been the standing course of errorists ever since the apostolic age.  They are almost never honest and candid as a party, until they gain strength enough to be sure of some degree of popularity.

      As heretics spread their views in the church and attempt to persuade others, they plead for toleration, but toleration only so long as they are in the minority.  As soon as they detect that their views are ready to be received into the church, they become, towards those who oppose them, the most intolerant of people.  One author writes: “The toleration which these men [the Arminians] pleaded for, was precisely like that which Papists demand as emancipation – that is, power and full liberty to draw over others to their party by every artful means, till they become strong enough to refuse toleration to all other men.”

      The Canons arose out of controversy in which the truth of God Himself was at stake.

      Secondly, the significance of the synod lies in the fact that it was international in character.  Delegates from every Reformed country and province in Europe were present, with the exception of delegates from France, who were refused passage out of their country.  The intellectual and spiritual gifts of the delegates are astounding.  The list of delegates reads like a “Who’s Who” of Europe’s outstanding theologians.  They were all devoted to the Reformed faith — though some to a greater degree than others.  The only real sympathizers of the Arminian position were the delegates from Bremen and two of the delegates from England.  The Canons are an expression of what Europe, one hundred years after the beginning of the Reformation, considered to be the truth of Scripture, of the Reformed confessions, and of the Reformed churches of Europe.

      Thirdly, the Canons are a sharp and unambiguous condemnation of all forms of Arminianism.  It would be difficult to improve on the Canons in any respect, for their negative refutation and positive statement of the truth are unexcelled in the history of the church.  One will not find a clearer statement of the error of Arminianism than there is in the declarations of the synod that met in Dordrecht.

      This implies several other truths concerning the Canons.  In the first place, the Canons connect unmistakably the error of Arminianism with the error of Pelagianism, and, indeed, call Arminianism the old Pelagian heresy resurrected out of hell. 

      In the second place, the Canons repudiate all the implications of the Arminian error, even a conditional salvation.  Dr. Fred Klooster, long-time professor of theology in Calvin Theological Seminary, could say:  the Canons refute an “Arminianism [which] is characterized by conditionalism.”  The very word  “condition,” when it appears at all, is found in the mouth of the Arminian.

      Thirdly, the Canons repudiate every effort to smuggle into the church Arminianism under the guise of a grace common to all men and a general desire on God’s part to save all men.  But, while the Canons are devastating in their repudiation of the Arminianism implied in these doctrines, the Canons do not become hyper-Calvinist or radically one-sided.  They insist that the gospel must be preached to all to whom God is pleased to send it.  They teach clearly that in the gospel is both the promise of salvation to all who believe and the command of God that men turn from their sins and believe in Christ.  And when dealing with predestination, the Canons are careful to point out that election and reprobation are one decree, that that one decree is absolutely sovereign, but that the conclusion may not be drawn that as election is the fountain and cause of faith, reprobation is “in the same manner” the cause of unbelief.

      Fourthly, the Canons are solid in their discussion of the extent of the atonement.  In their statement concerning this doctrine, they specifically state that the extent of the atonement, also in the purpose of God, is limited to the elect “and to them only.”  This is stronger than the Westminster Confessions.  While limiting the extent of the atonement to the elect, Westminster, in full awareness of what Dordt had decided, deliberately dropped the exclusionary phrase, “and for them only.”  At least in part this was done because of serious objections to it by the Amyraldians who were present on the Assembly.

      All these characteristics of the Canons make them an insurmountable barrier against Arminianism.  The Canons served that purpose in the seventeenth century; they continue to serve that purpose today.  The only way to introduce Arminianism into the church is to bypass the Canons.  And so it happens.

      The significance of the Canons lies further in the fact that the Canons are explanations of some points of doctrine found in the Confession of Faith and the Heidelberg Catechism.  The Arminians wanted the confessions to be revised so as to make them more congenial to their heresies.  The Reformed churches at Dordt insisted that these confessions were the truth of the Scriptures and that the Canons only made explicit what was implicit in them. 

      Yet, the Canons appeal as proof of their statements to Scripture alone.  The synod was forced to do this.  The Arminians insisted on it and the government laid this down as the one restriction that the synod was to observe.  And so the Canons prove their teachings from Scripture alone.  But this does not mean that they wanted to separate the Canons from the other two creeds.  Nor did it mean that the fathers at Dordt conceded the point that doctrine had to be proved from Scripture alone.  They specifically, in the Formula of Subscription, which Dordt drew up, stated that all officebearers must agree with the Confession of Faith and the Heidelberg Catechism “together with the explanation of some points of the aforesaid doctrine made by the National Synod of Dordrecht, 1618-‘19.”

      Finally, the Canons are eminently pastoral.  Much has been written about this, and we need not develop this idea beyond stating it.  But in this respect too the Canons are more appealing than the Westminster Confession of Faith.  The latter is objective in its doctrinal statements; the Canons are intended for pastoral use in the churches and for demonstrating to the faithful the remarkable comfort that is to be derived from a firm commitment to the truths of God’s sovereign grace as they apply to all areas of our life.  So pastoral are they that I have frequently used them myself in pastoral work, and I am sure other pastors have done the same.  Although all the Canons speak to the heart of the believer as well as to his mind, the last chapter on the perseverance of the saints is so alive with the warmth of God’s great faithfulness to us in all our unworthiness that I find it strengthening and encouraging to read for personal devotions at times of great temptation.  They have brought solace to the hearts of many troubled, doubting, anxious souls.

      God used the great errors of Arminius to give to the church this remarkable document.

      I began these articles by saying that though Dordt was a mighty victory in the battle for the truths of God’s sovereign and particular grace, Arminius won the war.  So it would seem.  Nevertheless, there is now and there always will be, until the Lord returns, faithful people of God who love and cherish the Canons.  

That They May Teach Them to Their Children:

Prof. Russell J. Dykstra

Prof. Dykstra is professor of Church History and New Testament in the Protestant Reformed Seminary.

Humanism vs. Protestant Reformed Teachers:  No R&R (3)

    The Christian school teacher is engaged in an unceasing battle with humanism.  The battles are fierce and the foe relentless because the stakes are high.  All of secular education has been won over to the philosophy that man is the measure of all things.  The one true God has been banned from the classroom, and many false gods have been set up in His place.  Even in the realm of Christian education, humanism has made powerful inroads into the curriculum and instruction.  Only in the faithful Christian school is God honored in all the Christ-centered instruction.  The Christian school teacher is duty bound to reject humanism in all its forms and set forth God and His law, not man, as the standard.  Hence, Satan uses every means to wear down these teachers in order to influence their thinking and their instruction.

      In the face of the unrelenting attacks that come from every side and the powerful tools used to promote humanism, teachers might well wonder what weapons are available for the battle.  They are not to wonder — God has provided a powerful arsenal for both the Christian school teacher and the students.

      First, God gives the subjective weapon of faith.  Faith in Christ is the subjective principle that distinguished the Reformation from the Renaissance.  The Renaissance placed its hope in Man.  The Reformation, on the other hand, hoped in God alone.

      Faith is not a blind belief in that which cannot be proved.  It is rather a firm belief in the God who has clearly revealed Himself in Christ.  And Jehovah God is so obviously real as to be beyond proof.  Must Christians prove to the ungodly humanist that God exists?  The believer replies — “Look about you, man.  The creation testifies in innumerable ways that God is, and must be served.  It is His handiwork.  He governs the creation and history.”

      The point is that God’s existence is so obvious that it is beyond proof.  One might just as well ask a man to prove to his companion that it is raining, as they run into a building dripping wet from a torrential downpour.  The evidence is all there.  What could be added to prove it?

      Faith is also the victory that overcomes the world.  That, because faith is in Christ.  In and through the cross, He has overcome Satan, the world of the ungodly, death, and hell.  The gates of hell cannot prevail against the church.  The victory is Christ’s, and therefore it is ours.  Christian school teachers, know this:  You fight not for the victory, but in victory.  So, likewise, do your students.

      Faith is the subjective weapon or armor of the believer.  And because it is God’s work in us, it cannot be destroyed.

      God gives more for the battle.  The primary objective weapon is Scripture.  The Bible is the believer’s “source material” and standard of truth.  Humanism draws from a different fountain.  Humanism looks to the Greeks, to Darwin, to science falsely so called as perverted by unbelief, and to various philosophers.

      Believers go back to the source, the infallibly inspired Word of God.  With Jesus we confess:  Thy word is truth.  And with Him we add:  Sanctify us, and our students, by thy truth.

      A significant goal of all covenant instruction is to teach the students to think biblically!  Every trend, every attitude, every advertisement, every outstanding man or woman set up by the world as admirable, must be evaluated in the light of the Bible.  You as teachers must not in any way neglect your study of the Bible for your own personal spiritual growth.  You must think biblically!

      We do well to remember that the Bible is a spiritual weapon.  It is not a mere book of rules.  Scripture is the revelation of God and His will.  And God uses the Bible to impress upon teachers and students alike His will and way.

      Of course, teachers must use logic to show how the Word of God applies, that is, how Scripture exposes and condemns all humanism!  However, good logic is not ultimately what will equip the students to condemn the evil and forsake it.  Rather, the Holy Spirit applies the Word to the hearts of believing students, opens their understanding, and gives them a love for God and His truth and a corresponding loathing of humanism.  That fact gives teachers every reason to hope!

      Teachers do not face the battle defenseless, nor in the hope of their own strength.  They are equipped.

      And yet, they must know more.  God has given to Christian school teachers the perfect gift to enable them to be proactive, not merely defensive in the battle.  It is what might be called the biblical alternative, or even, the antidote to humanism.  That antidote is the covenant of grace that God establishes with His people in Christ.

      That the covenant can play this role is easily apparent.  Humanism is a way of life.  So also is the covenant.  Humanism and the covenant are at antipodes in every area of life.

      <