Is there an Arminian-based curriculum?

[2_girls_mommy]

I just called Memoria, and they are not specifically Catholic. She said the company is "Trinitarian Chirstian" ( Christians who believe in a Trinity), but they are not demonination specific. She also clarified that the Christian Studies is not designed to teach a certain denomination or doctrine, just to teach Bible. They made their materials to be usable to a wider audience.

 

You are awesome! Thanks! That was the impression I have gotten from previous questions I had asked about it. I called them last week about science, but didn't ask about Bible.

 

Although it may not help the OP in her quest to teach specific theology. I am ok with waiting on that until later on at the ages of my kids. We have a John Wesley biography that goes into some of it that will do when we get there in history. That should do for logic stage along with confirmation at church.

[coffeefreak]

Here's a one-page comparison of Calvinism vs Arminianism. You can google many more articles about both. From various readings I've done, yes, the Arminian view is that salvation can be lost if faith is lost.

 

http://the-highway.com/compare.html

 

 

Ah, that's why I don't see it as "losing" salvation. I think a lot of us in the, "Once Saved, Always Saved, Arminean" crowd look at it as, if you lose your faith, and walk away you never had it to begin with. We also believe we're not to judge another believer's salvation, because only God can know the heart. Only He knows if you truly had faith, and believed in Him. But this is also why most people are not really 100% Arminian, or 100% Calvanist. I classify myself as Arminian, but I don't believe in salvation by works and I know plenty of Arminiasts that do. Likewise, I have friends that are Calvanist, but believe that ALL are part of the elect.

 

That's why labels are dangerous. Sorry to derail, I'm just always up for theological discussions.:D

 

Blessings!

Dorinda

[Virg]

Well I was hoping not to have to make my own since all of my kids have special needs plus I run a full day care but I guess I will have to. :glare: I agree that there are many acceptable Bible curriculums that aren't offensive or that I can tweak. I just thought it would be nice for an open and go class. Plus as they get older I want to move into a secondary theology class along with Bible. I am looking early :)

 

My dad suggested using the Beacon Hill commentary and I found there is a new revised one coming out a couple of volumes at a time. I guess if i start now maybe I can afford them all by the time they are ready for theology :lol:

[2_girls_mommy]

Sorry to have hijacked your thread. I realize my kids are younger than yours. I thought I would stick a quick question in as this is the crowd (the one reading your thread) that would know what I meant and was looking for! I didn't mean for it to take over...

 

Thanks for posting and getting the conversation going. My kids are slightly behind yours, so in the future if you find something preplanned and affordable, please post it.

[Donna A.]

I consider myself an Arminian, have done a lot of research on Calvanist v/s Arminianist, and have never seen where Arminiasts believe that you can lose your salvation? Can you point me to an article discussing this?

 

 

 

From Wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arminianism

 

Point 5 of the Five Points of Remonstrance coined in 1610 says that "believers are able to resist sin but are not beyond the possibility of falling from grace. "

 

So to say that a believer is "not beyond the possibility of falling from grace" is to say that one can lose their salvation.... since grace is what saves us AND keeps us.

[Joyofsixreboot]

Not a Bible curriculum exactly but we're using this this. It's from Cokesbury.

[Virg]

Sorry to have hijacked your thread. I realize my kids are younger than yours. I thought I would stick a quick question in as this is the crowd (the one reading your thread) that would know what I meant and was looking for! I didn't mean for it to take over...

 

Thanks for posting and getting the conversation going. My kids are slightly behind yours, so in the future if you find something preplanned and affordable, please post it.

 

Oh I don't mind at all! I am glad there is any discussion going on. I was worried this would be a lost thread no one responded too :001_smile:

[HSMom2One]

With all sincerity, how about let's not debate theology on this thread and stay on topic? The op was interested in finding Christian curriculum that fits in with her family's Arminian beliefs. I think that this poses a very interesting question about which denominations are more "into" homeschooling, or at least producing homeschool curriculum. Wouldn't you agree? I also believe that we all as Christians need to watch out for labels that end up pulling away from unity within the church, but the intent of this thread is still very reasonable. I've already been encouraged a great deal by suggestions made. It makes me want to explore more before we finally get to high school level.

 

Blessings,

Lucinda

[Virg]

With all sincerity, how about let's not debate theology on this thread and stay on topic? The op was interested in finding Christian curriculum that fits in with her family's Arminian beliefs. I think that this poses a very interesting question about which denominations are more "into" homeschooling, or at least producing homeschool curriculum. Wouldn't you agree? I also believe that we all as Christians need to watch out for labels that end up pulling away from unity within the church, but the intent of this thread is still very reasonable. I've already been encouraged a great deal by suggestions made. It makes me want to explore more before we finally get to high school level.

 

Blessings,

Lucinda

 

:001_smile: Thanks! I don't doubt Calvinists, Catholics or any other denominations' salvation at all. I just was hoping someone, anyone had heard of something that my horrible google skills couldn't uncover that would support our theology. :lol:

[Donna A.]

With all sincerity, how about let's not debate theology on this thread and stay on topic? The op was interested in finding Christian curriculum that fits in with her family's Arminian beliefs. I think that this poses a very interesting question about which denominations are more "into" homeschooling, or at least producing homeschool curriculum. Wouldn't you agree? I also believe that we all as Christians need to watch out for labels that end up pulling away from unity within the church, but the intent of this thread is still very reasonable. I've already been encouraged a great deal by suggestions made. It makes me want to explore more before we finally get to high school level.

 

Blessings,

Lucinda

 

Define "Arminian beliefs".

 

Labels help define what one actually believes. ;) How can one choose curriculum based on a specific belief if there are different opinions as to what that belief entails?

 

Really, I think the thread HAS stayed on topic and has remained beautifully civil thus far. The theology "debate" to which you refer has simply been in the form of explanation... IMO. :001_smile:

[Donna A.]

:001_smile: Thanks! I don't doubt Calvinists, Catholics or any other denominations' salvation at all. I just was hoping someone, anyone had heard of something that my horrible google skills couldn't uncover that would support our theology. :lol:

 

I was curious about something, though. Is there a reason -- other than theology -- that you don't want to stay with MFW? It should be a good fit for you theologically.

[Zoo Keeper]

You are awesome! Thanks! That was the impression I have gotten from previous questions I had asked about it.

 

 

You're welcome. :) I had been wondering that myself, and was glad to get it straight from the horse's mouth...

[Hunter]

I just called Memoria, and they are not specifically Catholic. She said the company is "Trinitarian Chirstian" ( Christians who believe in a Trinity), but they are not demonination specific. She also clarified that the Christian Studies is not designed to teach a certain denomination or doctrine, just to teach Bible. They made their materials to be usable to a wider audience.

 

Our world views and religious beliefs leak out, no matter what, and the more a publisher claims that it doesn't, the more biased they actually are. The bias infiltrates EVERYTHING. I'm not saying anything about Memoria, but am just making a general statement.

 

At times I have picked curriculum primarily because of religious beliefs, other times I have had a more forgiving attitude.

 

Lately I have been reading about the differences between a Hebrew and Greek worldview and...whew!

 

Bias goes further than HOW you teach and often even affects WHAT you teach and what the PRIORITIES are.

[HSMom2One]

Define "Arminian beliefs".

 

Labels help define what one actually believes. ;) How can one choose curriculum based on a specific belief if there are different opinions as to what that belief entails?

 

Really, I think the thread HAS stayed on topic and has remained beautifully civil thus far. The theology "debate" to which you refer has simply been in the form of explanation... IMO. :001_smile:

 

Sorry Donna. No offense intended. I just wanted to pull the discussion back before it went too far in pointing out the theological differences and distracting from the original topic. This is such an age old subject and can easily turn into a debate. To be quite honest, I think that the people that would most likely have the answers being sought would probably be people that have the same or similar beliefs and wouldn't need a definition.

 

I'm so thankful for this board and the diversity that's here. I've sure learned a lot over the years!

 

Blessings,

Lucinda

 

P.S. I love what you just said, Hunter. I agree!

[Zoo Keeper]

Our world views and religious beliefs leak out, no matter what, and the more a publisher claims that it doesn't, the more biased they actually are. The bias infiltrates EVERYTHING. I'm not saying anything about Memoria, but am just making a general statement.

 

At times I have picked curriculum primarily because of religious beliefs, other times I have had a more forgiving attitude.

 

Lately I have been reading about the differences between a Hebrew and Greek worldview and...whew!

 

Bias goes further than HOW you teach and often even affects WHAT you teach and what the PRIORITIES are.

 

:iagree: I DO agree that NO program out there is 100% neutral (hey, just look at our "neutral" public education system...); your words above in red are spot on. We as parents are responsible to teach our faith to our children, regardless of what materials we do (or don't) use. How we live our lives, our daily priorities, is what really does a lot of the teaching of our faith.

[Hunter]

Labels can sometimes be so helpful. Reading about Hebrew vs Greek world views recently was an aha moment for me. It spelled out for me EXACTLY where I was struggling with most classical curricula. I realize now that I have a Hebrew worldview with some Greek ideas pasted onto it.

 

If someone is Arminian, it will describe EXACTLY where they are struggling with Calvanistic curricula that claims to be neutral. If someone is Arminian enough to know they are Arminian, then it's a BIG deal.

 

When I was intensely studying the Plain faiths, I felt it necessary to use a lot of Plain curricula. It wasn't as simple as a little Plain frosting pasted on a public school scope and sequence. The Plain faith was at the CORE of deciding WHAT was taught. Plain faiths have their own scope and sequences and priorities.

 

To an outsider of any faith or method, all they see is the frosting, and fail to see the underlying core. With Waldorf, all people see is the pretty paintings and drawings, but really there is a whole different scope and sequence built on their views on child development.

 

It is obvious this is a neglected area in the homeschooling community and deserves some serious attention. For now, because there is little prepared curricula, can you figure out where your beliefs change the CORE of a child's education, How it affects PRIORITIES and where maybe even a SCOPE AND SEQUENCE would be different?

 

A little Calvanistic or secular frosting won't be as much of a problem, if your CORE is presented as Arminian, if you know what I mean. If you have the bull by the horns.

 

Sometimes it will mean gleaning a page here and a page there to create your own textbook. In these days of ebooks and copy and paste, it is easier than ever to create custom textbooks, where YOU decide the table of contents.

 

How will the Arminian TABLE of CONTENTS look different? Where will the actual list of SUBJECTS and COURSES be different?

[Donna A.]

Sorry Donna. No offense intended.

 

No worries. I wasn't offended at all... I just wanted to make a couple of clarifications, especially since I saw a wrong definition of what Calvinists believe right on page 1. ;)

 

To be quite honest, I think that the people that would most likely have the answers being sought would probably be people that have the same or similar beliefs and wouldn't need a definition.

If this is an implication that a Calvinist shouldn't have responded simply because they're Calvinist, I don't think that's very fair. It assumes that a responding Calvinist has never been in an Arminian church, was never Arminian themselves, has never studied the differences, and don't know what to look for in Arminian curriculum.

 

Fact is, there ARE theological differences, both among those within the "Calvinistic" camp AND among those within the "Arminian" camp. There seems to be a general definition of the two camps, but then many variations within each, and that's what I saw coming out already on page 1. As I then read the rest of the thread, that was confirmed. Honestly, I'm surprised that so many Arminians are saying there isn't "enough" Arminian curriculum out there when in fact MOST of the Christian curriculum on the market leans Arminian. That's why further definition seemed to be needed.

 

 

I'm so thankful for this board and the diversity that's here. I've sure learned a lot over the years!

Absolutely! :001_smile:

[coffeefreak]

Define "Arminian beliefs".

 

Labels help define what one actually believes. ;) How can one choose curriculum based on a specific belief if there are different opinions as to what that belief entails?

 

Really, I think the thread HAS stayed on topic and has remained beautifully civil thus far. The theology "debate" to which you refer has simply been in the form of explanation... IMO. :001_smile:

 

No worries. I wasn't offended at all... I just wanted to make a couple of clarifications, especially since I saw a wrong definition of what Calvinists believe right on page 1. ;)

 

If this is an implication that a Calvinist shouldn't have responded simply because they're Calvinist, I don't think that's very fair. It assumes that a responding Calvinist has never been in an Arminian church, was never Arminian themselves, has never studied the differences, and don't know what to look for in Arminian curriculum.

 

Fact is, there ARE theological differences, both among those within the "Calvinistic" camp AND among those within the "Arminian" camp. There seems to be a general definition of the two camps, but then many variations within each, and that's what I saw coming out already on page 1. As I then read the rest of the thread, that was confirmed. Honestly, I'm surprised that so many Arminians are saying there isn't "enough" Arminian curriculum out there when in fact MOST of the Christian curriculum on the market leans Arminian. That's why further definition seemed to be needed.

 

 

Absolutely! :001_smile:

 

:iagree:

Especially since Donna and I had differing opinions on whether certain curriculum would/could be defined as Armenian or not. :lol: I guess just like most Calvinists I know don't profess to be 5 point Tulip Calvinists, many Armenians (including myself) out there don't profess to agree on all the points of Armenianism. It kind of did need to be clarified so the OP would know where the suggestions were coming from.

 

Which brings me back to the OP question, I actually think A Beka and other curriculum like them ARE Aremeniast (does anyone know if I'm spelling that right?) even though they are part of the OSAS crowd. Simply because they are not AT ALL Calvinist. And I do think a Calvinist responding on this thread is very helpful. Who better to know what ISN'T Calvinist?:001_smile:

 

Blessings!

Dorinda

[Heathermomster]

Well I was hoping not to have to make my own since all of my kids have special needs plus I run a full day care but I guess I will have to. :glare: I agree that there are many acceptable Bible curriculums that aren't offensive or that I can tweak. I just thought it would be nice for an open and go class. Plus as they get older I want to move into a secondary theology class along with Bible. I am looking early :)

 

My dad suggested using the Beacon Hill commentary and I found there is a new revised one coming out a couple of volumes at a time. I guess if i start now maybe I can afford them all by the time they are ready for theology :lol:

 

Can't you borrow them, one at a time, from your Pastor? Also, performing map work and looking at all the missionaries your Church supports would be fun. Have the kids keep a notebook and a list to pray for your missionaries.

[Maverick_Mom]

I actually think A Beka and other curriculum like them ARE Aremeniast (does anyone know if I'm spelling that right?)

 

Arminianism gets its name from Jacobus Arminius, a Dutch theologian. The similarity of his name to the country of Armenia is pure coincidence. ;)

[sassenach]

My Father's World is not reformed, but I'm not sure how Armenian it is. It's subtle.

[Donna A.]

My Father's World is not reformed, but I'm not sure how Armenian it is. It's subtle.

 

Yes, definitely Arminian. :) Some people assume it's Reformed because they happen to use a few books from Christian Liberty Press, but.... they also use books from Usborne (secular) and SOTW (so-called "neutral") and AIG (literal 6-day Creation, of which both many Arminians and Calvinists agree), and Dispensational (the study of Daniel in 9th grade). Marie's author notes are key, as she emphasizes over and over again throughout the curriculum that doctrinal specifics are between you (parents) and your pastor.

Edited March 12, 2012 by Donna A.

[coffeefreak]

Arminianism gets its name from Jacobus Arminius, a Dutch theologian. The similarity of his name to the country of Armenia is pure coincidence. ;)

 

:smilielol5::smilielol5:

[historymatters]

:lol: about our "type"! Do you have a reference you use for yourself to help you teach it? I am now looking for an adult-aimed theology book to give myself a firmer foundation to teach from.

 

May I suggest listening to the sermons of or reading directly from the writings of John Wesley himself? He was quite prolific.

 

Also, here's a link to the Wesleyan Center online. Did you know that William Wilburforce was a Methodist and that Wesley's last letter was to him?

 

http://wesley.nnu.edu/john-wesley/

 

Lastly, a blog with other blogs and recommended reading: http://arminiantoday.com/recommended-reading-on-arminianism/

 

HTH,

Rachel

[mommaduck]

We are heavily Arminian with *ahem* pretty strong opinions. I was especially looking for Bible and History slanted our way. Everything I find is either neutral or Reformed. Obviously it isn't killing me but it would be nice to find to give our children a stronger foundation in our theology. :001_smile:

 

I have googled Wesleyan and Arminian, Methodist and Nazarene homeschool curriculum. I have looked through a bazillion pages of results. The closest I have gotten is Sunday School curricula and college textbooks. I will admit to being a horrible google searcher. I am not sure why I don't get the miraculous results everyone else does. :glare:

 

Anyway, anyone? :bigear:

Rod and Staff

Abeka

Bob Jones University

[Embassy]

Finding a Bible curriculum for children that matches our beliefs has been next to impossible. We don't fit in the Arminian or Calvinist camp. What I have done is find materials written for adults that match our beliefs and adapt those if necessary. I've also put some of my own things together.

 

I'm surprised you haven't found much Arminian curriculum. Most things I've found written for kids seem to fit with that viewpoint. Rod and Staff would fit with that. I'm not sure what an Arminian-based history curriculum would look like....Are you referring to providential history?

[Momof2littles]

I would look into Heart of Dakota. I don't know if it's specifically Arminian but I personally feel it's definitely NOT Calvanist.

 

As someone else also mentioned Abeka or BJU would probably not conflict with your views either. I'm Arminian myself and feel that HOD falls in line with my beliefs the most closely.

 

HTH!

 

HOD is very reformed.

 

Ah, that's why I don't see it as "losing" salvation. I think a lot of us in the, "Once Saved, Always Saved, Arminean" crowd look at it as, if you lose your faith, and walk away you never had it to begin with. We also believe we're not to judge another believer's salvation, because only God can know the heart. Only He knows if you truly had faith, and believed in Him. But this is also why most people are not really 100% Arminian, or 100% Calvanist. I classify myself as Arminian, but I don't believe in salvation by works and I know plenty of Arminiasts that do. Likewise, I have friends that are Calvanist, but believe that ALL are part of the elect.

 

That's why labels are dangerous. Sorry to derail, I'm just always up for theological discussions.:D

 

Blessings!

Dorinda

 

I am a former Arminean, now mostly Cavinistic/reformed thinking. I appreciated this discussion. :)

(and thinking about the mix of curriculum I'm using makes me laugh a little...SL, Waldorf, HOD...kind of all over the place

[Stellalarella]

:lurk5: Just saying I'm listening in.

 

I just appreciate you all so much--that you can ask questions, ask for guidance and that folks can answer back.

 

I'm interested in this topic as well.

[Amy M]

No worries. I wasn't offended at all... I just wanted to make a couple of clarifications, especially since I saw a wrong definition of what Calvinists believe right on page 1. ;)

 

If this is an implication that a Calvinist shouldn't have responded simply because they're Calvinist, I don't think that's very fair. It assumes that a responding Calvinist has never been in an Arminian church, was never Arminian themselves, has never studied the differences, and don't know what to look for in Arminian curriculum.

 

Fact is, there ARE theological differences, both among those within the "Calvinistic" camp AND among those within the "Arminian" camp. There seems to be a general definition of the two camps, but then many variations within each, and that's what I saw coming out already on page 1. As I then read the rest of the thread, that was confirmed. Honestly, I'm surprised that so many Arminians are saying there isn't "enough" Arminian curriculum out there when in fact MOST of the Christian curriculum on the market leans Arminian. That's why further definition seemed to be needed.

 

 

Absolutely! :001_smile:

 

 

:iagree: Just want to start off with correct spellings :D... Calvinism is based on John Calvin's name--2 i's, 1 a. And Arminianism, as has been corrected, is based on another guy's name, whom Calvin responded to, addressing his 5 points, which has come to be known as TULIP, the 5 points of Calvinism--but the 5 (opposite) points originated with Arminius actually.

 

Also wanted to mention two common fallacial presuppositions in this debate that have popped up here on this thread: 1--Most Arminians actually do not believe a person can lose his salvation. 2--Many Calvinists do evangelize.

 

Maybe both groups are inconsistent in their beliefs here, but those are the extremes of both sides that most people talk about the other side holding, but most of the "other side" actually doesn't believe that extreme. We would consider ourselves "Reformed Baptist," and we are missionaries. :D So we definitely do evangelize. However, by "reformed," we would mean the doctrines of grace (aka Calvinism, aka TULIP, aka 5 Solas), not covenant theology. So many Baptists can believe in 4-5 points of TULIP, but still be dispensational eschatologically, and baptize believers only. This is a growing movement among Baptists.

 

A helpful determining (major!) factor in the question of whether you are Arminian or Calvinist is what you believe about election. Did you choose God, or did He choose you? (ultimately)

 

All that to say: ABeka (and BJ, but not as much as ABeka) is definitely Arminian. I agree with Donna that many curricula are Arminian. If you read ABeka's Flash-A-Card Series (which I translate for our church, but tweak when their Arminian soteriology shows itself too much) on Creation, they talk about how God didn't make little "robots" who just do what He says, but He gave them a free will, etc. I also went to PCC, and I don't know too many other colleges attacking Calvinism as vehemently as they do. They had seminary modules specifically to address the "heretical" or "dangerous" doctrines of Calvinism/Lordship salvation.

 

In summary, I believe that most curricula are written from a fairly "neutral" standpoint on soteriology for elementary levels, and can be tweaked easily. ABeka would absolutely be open and go for you. And I think their Bible is comprehensive--nice pictures. Their doctrinal drill would fit nicely with Arminianism--and I don't know of too many Arminians writing catechisms! :001_smile: I personally chose MFW. I was highly interested in TOG, heard that they are more Reformed--but even with them, I'm kind of like :confused:, because I've heard about how they can fit so well with Catholicism that they even have a specific Yahoo group just for Catholic users of TOG, so how "reformed" is that? :) So really, you could use many curricula, but I'm saying this huge long post just to agree with others that ABeka or R&S would be a great fit for you.

[mommaduck]

adding to Amy:

 

BJU does attack Calvinism pretty vehemently. And I believe Bob Jones was a Wesleyan.

[Guest TRoz]

Yes there is! The Church of the Nazarene (break off of Methodist) has a curriculum on thediscipleshipplace.org

 

On the menu to the left side there is a section for homeschool. It takes you to the lessons!  :laugh:  Hope this helps! :laugh:

[...................]

Interesting thread. As a Calvinist, I'm not too excited to use lots of BJU, Abeka, or R&S especially for Bible.  On the other hand, I think that if I could make them work, you could make them work because they are closer to your camp.  IOW it doesn't come up all that much in most subjects.  History and obviously, Bible, would be the big ones.  

 

PS I really thought the author of HOD was Calvinist.  ? Not sure why I got that impression.

[Quiver0f10]

Is Bedell Arminian? http://www.bedellcurriculum.com/

 

I'm using it, but don't know if it is. I've always been pretty neutral about this, so don't even notice.

 

If you e-mail him, I'm pretty sure he knows whether he is Arminian or not, though :-)

 

ok, how come I never heard of this until now?  :D I am curious if anyone has used this as their main curriculum, adding only reading/spelling, grammar/writing and math?

[TGHEALTHYMOM]

:lurk5:

[Hunter]

I'm seeing some of the same names popping up in multiple threads.

 

Bedell combined with the Amish 3R curricula might be a good complete curriculum for some of you. Rainbow Resource is selling all the Amish curricula now including the arithmetic.

[Donna A.]

 

PS I really thought the author of HOD was Calvinist.  ? Not sure why I got that impression.

 

Yes, I believe she's Dutch Reformed.

[dewycole]

I'm so glad I found this discussion. We are Arminian and I'm having trouble finding curriculum as well. We had apologia worldview but it is definitely Calvinistic! We will not be finishing the book.

 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

[FO4UR]

Bias goes further than HOW you teach and often even affects WHAT you teach and what the PRIORITIES are.

 

 

:iagree: I DO agree that NO program out there is 100% neutral (hey, just look at our "neutral" public education system...); your words above in red are spot on. We as parents are responsible to teach our faith to our children, regardless of what materials we do (or don't) use. How we live our lives, our daily priorities, is what really does a lot of the teaching of our faith.

 

Quoting these two posts b/c they make a vital point.

 

My opinion, fwiw, is do not spend too much energy searching for a curriculum to teach everything from your theological pov.  Passing on theology requires discussion between parent and child, nothing will replace that.  No curriculum can provide that. And, tbh, sometimes a curric can be a big distraction, and give a false sense of security about having ticked Bible off of our chart today.

 

For Bible, I like to read the Bible.  For littles, The Big Picture Bible Timeline is a nice way to structure the readings.  Read the passage, color the page, discuss, review all of our previously colored pages.  For bigger kids, I like the Greenleaf Guide to the OT.  The Greenleaf Guide simply takes you through a chronological reading of the OT so that it flows in story form, and provides the parent with ample discussion questions. Both of these things provide a framework, but leave the real work of teaching up to the parent.

 

I've not tried the MP Bible materials, but it sounds like they would be a good backbone upon which to build.

 

I prefer school materials that do not come from a specific religous ideal.  But, Hunter makes an important point, in that all authors come at history, science, literature from their own worldview.  Still, I prefer a history curric written by a history fanatic, a science curric written by a scientist...SOTW and BFSU are good examples.  A history fanatic will focus more on the principles that govern the study of history rather than a religous/political agenda.  A scientist will focus more on the principles that guide good science rather than a religous/political agenda.

 

 

There is a GLUT of materials that do more to promote a religous/political agenda rather than actually teach history or science.  I avoid those whether or not they happen to line up with my theology or not.  I won't name names here, I have tried to use a few things...and it's evident that they are teaching a THEOLOGY with some sciency language as dressing...or they are teaching THEOLOGY with some historical stories creatively juxtaposed to prove a point.  And, when you try to teach theology this way it's not only deceptive, but very bad practice in the actual theology. 

 

The age old, "Teach them how to think, not what to think." 

[Hunter]

 

I prefer school materials that do not come from a specific religous ideal.  But, Hunter makes an important point, in that all authors come at history, science, literature from their own worldview.  Still, I prefer a history curric written by a history fanatic, a science curric written by a scientist...SOTW and BFSU are good examples.  A history fanatic will focus more on the principles that govern the study of history rather than a religous/political agenda.  A scientist will focus more on the principles that guide good science rather than a religous/political agenda.

 

 

I think it is important to know which you want to do. Do you want "experts" on subjects to choose the topics and methods, or do you want your own to wade through the topics and pick those that are relevant to YOUR way of life?

 

I personally have never prioritized "experts" as authors. Just like a home school mom usually isn't an expert really on anything but her kid. I'm completely comfortable with authors that share my worldview but are far from experts.

 

This is a choice that each family will need to make. Choosing between experts and your own.

[HS Mom in NC]

Are you asking about their views on election?  Replacement theology? Calvinist and Arminian are broad terms that come with a cluster of theological issues, so you need to specify which teachings you're looking for and which you want to avoid.  For example, I'm Calvinist on election, but I don't hold Calvinist views on replacement theology when it comes to Israel and The Church. The former really only comes up in religious studies, but the latter could pop up in history and civics. 

[...................]

As bamax would say "Oh-No"

[...................]

"We jumped out a thre-aad!"

[AnnaM]

I grew up on Abeka. They are definitely not Calvinist, but they also aren't strictly Arminian. Frankly, they were so vague and taught practically no deep theology at all so by the time I graduated and started studying other theological view points I kind of had to study and figure out what the Bible actually said myself. Anyways, my point being that you could probably get away with Abeka if you really wanted to. I think it's a dreadful curriculum in terms of academics though. We are I guess described best as right in the middle of Arminian and Calvanist (anything that attempts to explain God and how his sovereignty works is probably going to be at least a little off) and I use a mix from Memoria Press, Apologia, CLP, R&S and many others. I just make sure my kids and I talk about theological differences as they arise. I don't find it's ever a good idea to rely strictly on a curriculum to teach world view.

[mpenny]

On 3/8/2012 at 11:47 PM, AnointedHsMom said:

I would look into Heart of Dakota. I don't know if it's specifically Arminian but I personally feel it's definitely NOT Calvanist.

 

As someone else also mentioned Abeka or BJU would probably not conflict with your views either. I'm Arminian myself and feel that HOD falls in line with my beliefs the most closely.

 

HTH!

Heart of Dakota is definitely Reformed.  

 

[ScoutTN]

Zombie thread!