The following are excerpts from Alex Woehr’s first place essay titled “How Christian Theism Relates to Education”:

What is the nature of the coming age dawning on America's horizon?  The future cannot be known with certainty, yet the present carries strong hints of what will come.  Of these hints, the current condition of the youth presents the best indication, for most set their life course at an early age and remain subsequently committed to it.  This paints a bleak prospect, for those institutions that should be shaping the youth in the image of good are warping it instead.  A vicious cycle is quite evident: that which burdens the current civilization with iniquity, the woes of violence, of immorality and divorce, of incompetence and laziness and drug abuse, grips more tightly the children than those who reared them, and the future looks no better but rather worse.  This is no surprise in light of the institutions that rear the children, namely their families and especially their schools.  Purporting not to teach religion, schools have taught no religion, the belief in nothing; and, having been taught no unifying mission, the children are developing into unruly tempests of unrestrained desire.  Having no undergirding philosophy and no God impelling them to satisfy their desires in the times and places of His design, there is little brightness morally, and this is overshadowed by the darker midnight yet farther beyond.  This disaster exceeds what merely human prescriptions can remedy; only right theology can rectify it as the Holy Spirit empowers.  This paper, the fruit of analysis stimulated by the reading of Gordon Clark's A Christian Philosophy of Education, intends to cover many topics germane to education, and echoes of Clark's deep analysis resound throughout.  Education's methodology and institutions must be mended; this process can occur only as they are set again on the foundation of a scripturally Christian theism.
            Man needs a unifying structure, a comprehensive theme, but this is sadly lacking in today's society. . . . History is goal-oriented, but in the absence of God's Spirit, the goal is chaos; there is a tragic sense in which Hegel's idea was correct.  A society so plagued with want and wickedness is not the society that sculpts awe-inspiring cities or that yields brilliant treatises on life's mysteries.  Most importantly, it is not the society that produces God-fearing men of sterling character.
In stark contrast to this, the unshakable foundation of Christian theism is the God of the Bible, the God of unity and perfection. . . . The system of Christian theism has repelled the hammers and chisels of millennia unscathed, by virtue not so much of its adherents but of its subject, an incomparable, triune God. . . . This God represents the vital piece missing from the bedlam of unsuccessful philosophies espoused by decaying civilizations, whether positivism, pragmatism, or postmodernism.  To paraphrase Gordon Clark, godless philosophies are unified only by their antagonism to the True God of the Bible (17).  Yet He is the very one they need.
Although it cannot be proven, the existence of God is not a proposition about which there can be any doubt. . . . Facts by themselves do not prove the existence of God; as Clark says, “Archaeology . . . does not prove that the Bible is true, much less does it prove the existence of God” (26). If it could, God would not be the ultimate ground of being and the ultimate standard of value. . . . Only someone with an a priori agenda can reject the existence of God, for by its very nature there can never be proof that God does not exist.  Such a proof would dismantle by its thesis the very apparatus necessary for its execution, for there is no foundation for reason other than a God who constitutes the grounds of rational unity.  As Gordon Clark observes, it is very possible that God would “initial” His name in creation, but “it is entirely impossible that 'No-God' should initial things” (33).
A frequently adopted alternative to atheism is agnosticism.  Actually, analysis reveals that agnosticism is not an alternative to atheism at all but a disguise or rather an excuse for atheism.  Agnosticism is never truly practiced, if indeed actually possible.  Agnostics are overwhelmingly atheists. . . .
Another problem is that the agnostic is false to claim that he is merely suspending judgment.  First, he is wrong in his regard for himself as even having the right to make such a judgment.  He cannot expect God to postpone accountability indefinitely until the agnostic finally discovers Him. . . .
Art is impossible without God.  Gordon Clark observes, “Artists may inconsistently be Humanists, but a Humanistic, atheistic, purposeless universe provides no basis for art” (41).  By their example, humanist composers, artists, and authors may have done more to discredit humanism than its opponents. . . .
Unbelieving man is without excuse, for, as Paul states, man suppresses the truth because of his unrighteousness (Romans 1:18). . . . To be entirely consistent in denying God is to deny rationality itself; such men inhabit insane asylums. . . .
Christian theism makes education truly important.  To the man who fulfills his responsibilities mechanically and minimalistically, to the man who wants immediate gratification of his desires, who has no more dreams than a can opener does, education is of little value. . . . But for the man who possesses the understanding that God providentially directs all that happens, there is meaning in everything, for God is directing all things and placing His stamp on the workings of Providence. . . .
            However, without Christian theism, or rather the Christian's God, education can even be harmful, as Clark emphasizes.  Abortion would not be so widespread if there were not educated, relatively safe methods perfected for its execution.  Education is a kind of multiplier, and a greater multiplier on a negative number only renders the number yet more negative.  Truly, education is to be sought when used for the glory of God, but the same knowledge becomes a frightening thing when harnessed for destruction.  As Gordon Clark observes, “one of the most highly educated nations in the world” possesses the lion's share of blame for the worst war the world has ever seen; “instead of preventing war . . . it has made war more terrible” (42; 43). 
But what is education?  Education can be considered a thing possessed, the process or method of obtaining the same, or the institutional establishment that pursues the exercise of such processes and methods.  Considered as a thing possessed, education could be defined as a kind of knowledge, which exhibits great value as a perspective for viewing the world.  The possession of education may also be defined operationally and circularly as the ability to impart education to another. . . .
Since all education is comprehended in fuller realization of the glory of God, the nature of God determines the approach that the Christian should take to methods of education.  Because God is One and Three, the Christian must understand the unity of education in a diversity of subjects.  He should comprehend the intricate relationships between seemingly disparate phenomena, a goal only possible as he invests in a wide variety of subjects.  Concisely put, the study of nearly anything contributes to the study of nearly everything. . . .
. . . In truth, the government has no business teaching children any more than government has the right to run the churches.  Teaching is a part of childrearing, and the parent should either teach the child himself or make the decision as to who should educate the child.  Government education is a kind of usurpation of the parents' right and responsibility towards the child.
What, then, is the hope of our land, and what is the responsibility of parents toward their children?  Christians must realize that there is no middle ground between the systems of heaven and hell.  Parents must sacrifice, if need be, and take pains to ensure that their children are brought up in a proper environment if at all possible.  This policy, an application of Biblical separation to education, is only part of the separation which must be practiced by Christians if they are to present a clear message of purity and hope to the world.  If Christians appear no different from the world, the latter will continue in its ways of pain and wretchedness.  Only as the Christian salt keeps its savor is there hope that it will transform the world.  Although this is a necessary condition for reformation, it is not a sufficient condition.  The Holy Spirit's omnipotent influence alone can render effectual the testimony of Christ's Church.  May it be so!