The Transforming Vision: Shaping a Christian Worldview (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1984), 95-96.

My intention was not to claim that all home schooling proliferates a misunderstanding of the Christian’s responsibility to their children, but that those who already have the “separationist” mindset proliferate the misunderstanding. I repeatedly used words such as “occasionally” to limit these statements to a small subset of [in this example] home schooling people. Certainly there are other groups of Christians that can fall prey to a separatist worldview.

As far as what the proper understanding of raising children should be, I would [briefly] say the parent’s responsibility is to teach their children God’s precepts and to help apply Biblical truth [primarily] in the child’s life situations. For example, if a child is caught shoplifting a pack of gum, the parent’s responsibility would be to [along with punish] show the child how shoplifting dishonors God and to offer the child God’s love and forgiveness in order to help him/her understand his/her sin and the possibility of redemption through Jesus Christ. Parents should teach their children how to be salt and light in the world, not just to teach them to stay away from the world. I believe a Christian parent has a certain amount of freedom deciding how they want to do this – whether that involves home schooling or not is up to the parent.

You wrote:

Further, not all behind what these Baptist-types are doing and saying is wrong. Much of the separationist movement is motivated by a genuine desire to be holy (which is certainly a valid biblical mandate). I think to give a fair argument you need to do some more work evaluating both sides of the coin. I’m not sure that quoting 1 Cor 9:19-21 is enough support. Texts especially like Romans 14 need to be wrestled with deeply before making such claims regarding separation.

I appreciate this point and will develop an exegetical case for a potential future post. There is something to be learned by the separationist movement. Many of us need to seek to live as a “holy nation, a royal priesthood.” (1 Pet. 2:9) This involves consecration. Perhaps we should strive to be “consecrationists” instead of “separationists.” As Christians seeking to be salt and light, we need to be in the world, but not of the world. Separationists do well at not being of the world, but [perhaps] fall short on the being in the world part. As Christ’s Church I suggest we be set apart for a purpose [consecrated], but not separated from the world thereby defeating that very purpose [evangelization].

And continuing:

In Christian painting, what does it mean to paint “in a way that honors the Creator.” Isn’t all truth and beauty God’s in that He is the source of both and the ultimate interpreter of both? If so, then wouldn’t any painting that follows God-ordained principles of natural law in aesthetics (i.e. proper shape, proportion, angles, coloring, etc.) honor God just as much as a painting that directly reveals a biblical theme, such as a portrait of Moses?

I absolutely agree with you on this point. I had written: “art in all its forms should be created to the glory of God. For the painter, this does not necessarily mean painting depictions of the atonement or the resurrection, but painting any theme in a way that honors the Creator”. The point here was to encourage Christians to not limit themselves to explicitly religious themes.

There can be significant pressure on Christian painters and musicians to produce explicitly Christian art. Artists should not feel they have to work with explicitly religious themes, but should understand “any painting that follows God-ordained principles of natural law in aesthetics” honors God. Christians should understand that whatever art they produce is “Christian” [but not perfect or sinless] because it came from a Christian. Part of being salt and light in the world involves demonstrating to unbelievers how a Christian should respond in different situations. I explained:

Can a Christian man write and perform a song about a girl he is romantically interested in? Absolutely - in fact, it should not only be permissible, but encouraged. How are we to reach the world if we do not provide the Biblical point of view with regard to situations such as these?

Art can be used to communicate the Christian worldview to unbelievers. The world must know that Christians do experience romantic love, but that romantic love is not the ultimate love. We must demonstrate the love of Christ and show how the love [and lust] the world offers falls short. Art not only glorifies God, but can be used for evangelism and teaching.

For example, the “home schooling” section is unfairly narrow. Home schoolers are not the only ones who can be caricatured as those to whome “[s]eparation becomes a means to the end of raising children biblically.”

In the fundamentalist Baptist world, almost the whole movement operates in this separation = holiness manner. Whole churches and schools (i.e. Bob Jones University, Pensacola Christian College, Ambassador Bible College, etc.) teach this radical dichotomy, not just a few home schoolers.

Also, it seems unfair to claim that home schooling “proliferates a misunderstanding of the Christian’s responsibility to their children,” and then to not provide what you think is a proper understanding of how a Christian should raise children. Are we to assume that you think all Christians should force their children to attend government schools, private Christian schools, Catholic schools, magnet schools. . . ?

Further, not all behind what these Baptist-types are doing and saying is wrong. Much of the separationist movement is motivated by a genuine desire to be holy (which is certainly a valid biblical mandate). I think to give a fair argument you need to do some more work evaluating both sides of the coin. I’m not sure that quoting 1 Cor 9:19-21 is enough support. Texts especially like Romans 14 need to be wrestled with deeply before making such claims regarding separation.

Also, your conclusion seems to reflect Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount exhortation for Christians to be salt and light. This is a good thing. But maybe you could clarify what you mean by your specific examples.

In Christian painting, what does it mean to paint “in a way that honors the Creator.” Isn’t all truth and beauty God’s in that He is the source of both and the ultimate interpretator of both? If so, then wouldn’t any painting that follows God-ordained principles of natural law in aesthetics (i.e. proper shape, proportion, angles, coloring, etc.) honor God just as much as a painting that directly reveals a biblical theme, such as a portrait of Moses? If you don’t clarify this point, you may end up sounding like the very separationist dichotomists on this point.

For music, what is “a Biblical understanding of these situations in light of our culture-forming responsibilities”?

I think you may have some more work ahead of you with regard to backing-up some of the assertions made on both home-schooling and theonomy.