Sonlight's homeschool experience is based on Core programs. These packages include History, Geography, and Literature (as well as Bible in the upper grades). To this you can add other subject options that fit your family: Math, Spelling...

Here's what I learned today: Sometimes customers swing by our site and want to purchase just our History... and they are so excited that they buy it without even reading the description of the package which alerts them to the fact that it's just a package of books and you need the Instructor's Guide for it to be a complete history program... and if you're going to shell out the money for that, a Core would be a great option for you!

They totally don't see any of that.

The same is true for our Literature packages as well.

So, lesson learned. Now we're working on making that clearer. And, honestly, I was super confused for a couple hours while I tried to sort all of this out. Thankfully, I work with great people who very patiently talked me through the steps and everything that goes into this. And, hopefully, I'll be able to do the same for you now too <smile>.

But it's going to take a little time. There's so much to be done.

And if you come across anything that is confusing to you, please let us know. I can't fix everything instantly--wish I could--but I'm always looking for ways to make it even easier to use Sonlight and our site. Thanks!

 ~Luke Holzmann
Filmmaker, Writer, Expectant Father

A subjective ramble
In my travels around the blogosphere this morning, I ran into a comment by "bob" about objective thinking. He states that "it is absolutely imperative that today’s children be exposed to as many different ideas as possible so they can again- learn how to be objective members of society," among other things.

"bob" is not alone in this thinking.

And, honestly, who of us would say, "Oh, please, may my children be subjective in their thinking so as to avoid all objective thought!"?

I see that hand.

Ignoring the person waving their hand in the third row, none of us want our thoughts to be purely subjective. We want to be based in reality, in truth, in how things really are. But can we get to pure objective thought merely by bombarding ourselves with every idea that is out there? Is mere exposure going to get us anywhere?

Nope.

I once talked with a guy who said he was very interested in religion now that he had taken a religious studies course at his college.

"Oh?" I asked. "What'd you like about it?"

"It was amazing to see how all religions are exactly the same," he replied. "Every religion teaches basically the same thing and there aren't any real differences between them. Isn't that incredible?"

Incredible may have been exactly the word to use. I tried to get more out of him, but he had been exposed to an "objective" position from a professor who had been exposed to the sun too long, or had spent so much time exposed to all the religious ideas in the world he could only look at them at a primitive surface level.

Just like we must not cling to the Bible as the only source of information in the world, we must not throw ourselves into the universe and scream: Teach me!

I don't think we can ever be free from our prejudices/presuppositions. But if we admit our bias to ourselves and then consider the other side, I think we have the highest chance of arriving at an understanding of reality.

Which brings me back to two quotes my dad shared with me back in the day:

The problem with an open mind is that all your brains fall out.

The purpose of an open mind is to close it again on something solid.

 ~Luke Holzmann
Filmmaker, Writer, Expectant Father

Sonlight's curriculum is based around stories. Fantastic literature. Wonderful books. Incredible tales.

On the flip side, I've seen several instances where people are calling us to return to the Bible--and the Bible only. One example would be the Boundless commenter who said:

why do you bother giving away books that keep poeple from concentrating on the only book that they need to read to answer every single problem they have: the Bible? [errors in original]

Jason

I think the Ted Slater does a good job of responding to this particular accusation. And while that individual went overboard, others are beating a similar drum.

On Friday, I read a post by Daniel Abbey about hip pastors who miss the point in their message: Scripture. He's not alone in his complaint. I know families who now refuse to attend church because they can't find a pastor who preaches "enough" from the Bible. And my dad just blogged about a particularly pathetic message we endured this Sunday. And I remember some illustrations but have forgotten the point as well. So, in that sense, Dan's right.

On the other hand, Dan goes on to ask: Why not just preach the Word of God?

Why try to spice up Sunday mornings with fleshly gimmicks and theatrical eye candy? [We don't need] clever devices or secular technique in reaching the lost and edifying believers. ...I can’t tell you how much I loathe the idea that we need some sort of program or technique to grab people’s attention.

My answer: The Bible shows us why we use these "gimmicks."

Jesus constantly uses stories deeply rooted in the culture and surrounding in which He was speaking. His messages were directly tied to parties going on, the locale, and the other events that had just happened. While, yes, we must not get so caught up in looking trendy and cool, there is nothing wrong with engaging our culture with the culture. In fact, Paul is very famous for using Athenian lore to preach the Gospel.

As we consider our options for teaching our children and raising them to be ambassadors for Christ in this world, I think great literature of all kinds--including the Bible--provide the best foundation.

But I think it is unwise, and counter to what we see in Scripture, to push for a new kind of sola scriptura that restricts our teaching aids to the Bible and a handful of "approved" Christian authors.

 ~Luke Holzmann
Filmmaker, Writer, Expectant Father

I know I've seen Godspell, but I don't remember it. I do recall a moment where the Jesus character appears in a fountain and then vanishes... I think.

Not exactly vivid memories.

Gospel.

Good News.

Don't we have good news to share with others? You can homeschool your children and find joy in it! There is more to this life than the here and now! There are a ton of great books just waiting for you to read! It's possible to have children in the comfort of your own home! Sonlight is the best homeschool curriculum in the world! <cough>

All cool stuff.

I got thinking about this because of what looks to be a great series that Robin has started on her blog. She mentions the analogy of telling people that their house is on fire, and that there is a similar urgency in our message as well.

And that's true.

But, as I thought about it, the fire analogy doesn't work for people who don't agree with us (no matter what the subject matter). Spreading this kind of good news is like trying to convince your neighbor that he needs to stop using his microwave because it is killing him and his family.

"But I like my microwave," your neighbor replies. "And I'm happy with it. And everyone else is using their microwaves just fine. I think you're a kook and just trying to disrupt my good life. Besides, there are plenty of medical studies that show your view to be wrong."

Similar responses arise when you try to share the good news of Christianity, homeschooling, home birthing, eating organic foods, going "off-grid", exercising, etc. It's good news--often, very good news with significant ramifications--but if people think you're a nut, your urgency just makes you look all the more batty.

So what do we do? One option would be to make a '70s movie with people vanishing from fountains--or some other more culturally applicable work.

But other than that, I think the best promotion is a life that has been positively changed by whatever it is. Sharing your story--your testimony--of how wonderful home birthing, homeschooling, eating healthy, Christianity, or whatever other bit of good news you have is the most powerful tool I can think of.

And that's one of the many reasons I absolutely love the Sonlight Moments forum. And that's one of the many reasons I pushed to make it so everyone can read it.

If you haven't glanced at the Sonlight Moments widget on the right there or visited the forum lately, I highly recommend it.

 ~Luke Holzmann
Filmmaker, Writer, Expectant Father

I still struggle with "media" as a plural, at least when it comes to saying things like "media are bad." <shudder> Almost like nails on a chalkboard...

Only worse.

"The media are evil." That's fine. But just saying "media are" without a definite article is painful. Almost like watching some "reporting" that's going on out there...

Only worse.

Again and again and again today, I kept seeing posts about how the media are skewing reality in favor of their own agenda. The most interesting--though highly biased in the other direction--video was this one which makes some pretty powerful claims. It's well worth the eight and a half minutes. I'll be here when you get back...

...here's the problem: Sure, some Leftist reporter did a shoddy job and should probably be fired or go back to school and learn how to report again, but isn't the other side in danger of falling off the tightrope the other way--at the very least?

"No," the reply will come. "No, see, we're not on a tightrope; we're next to a cliff, and they went over the cliff. We're on solid ground, even if we move farther Right."

Tightrope or Cliff?

...hmm...

I'm guessing the guys who made this eight and half minute video would say something rather similar.

It's at least something to consider.

 ~Luke Holzmann
Filmmaker, Writer, Expectant Father

Foment: agitate; try to stir up public opinion

Brought to you by Elisheva Hannah Levin