Georgia schools shying away from Bible classes.

[Johnboy60]

MACON, Ga. - A growing number of Georgia public school systems are shying away from developing state approved Bible classes.

http://www.onenewsnow.com/2008/01/georgia_schools_shying_away_fr.php

 

[simplicity]

I personally don't feel that the state should be involved in Bible classes in any manner - unless there is a complaint pertaining to the expression of hatred or the infringement of rights.

I also feel that the place to have Bible classes isn't within a secular school system but perhaps as part of privately-funded school program. For instance if it were a college course where students voluntarily decide they wish to attend, that would be a great program. We need people there who want to be there and have a genuine interest in the course material.

I tried taking the watered-down secular version of a religious course in high school - "religious studies". Too much humanism. It was a pointless exercise in getting to know different religions around the world. If you're going to feed a hungry person, feed him real food and not junk food. Too many interests control the state agenda. That sort of program turns a person off religion because it almost seems purely anthropological rather than theological.

 

[uberd00b]

I wonder if they're talking about serious Biblical scholarship or just "read and believe".

 

[salida]

The Bible classes should be taught by someone who knows it - not by a humanist teacher. Otherwise, it would be a big waste of time.

 

[flicka]

I wonder why they can't just lift a couse from a local college and adjust it to the HS level. Most universities have comparitive religion courses that specialize in the bible. And you don't need to be a believer to teach or understand it. In fact I'd say it's better if your not, that way you don't inject your own personal interpretations into the classroom.

 

[clarksided]

I had a Bible class in high school; it was pretty tame. The teacher did a very admirable job of keeping his religious bias out of it, I must admit.

 

[JGL53]

I don't see the problem if the course is taught as literature and there is critical analysis presented, e.g. books by Bart D. Ehrman could be assigned to help students understand how the bible came to be in its present form.

 

[SpiritualAntiseptic]

The Bible classes should be taught by someone who knows it - not by a humanist teacher. Otherwise, it would be a big waste of time.

If these people took their faith seriously they wouldn't allow a secular school to teach theology. Christianity can not be learned simply by a systematic approach to the bible.

 

[SpiritualAntiseptic]

I don't see the problem if the course is taught as literature and there is critical analysis presented, e.g. books by Bart D. Ehrman could be assigned to help students understand how the bible came to be in its present form.

All they'd be learning is someone's theory used to sell books.

 

[JGL53]

All they'd be learning is someone's theory used to sell books.

- theory based on facts.

That's what is supposed to be taught in school.

 

[flicka]

If these people took their faith seriously they wouldn't allow a secular school to teach theology. Christianity can not be learned simply by a systematic approach to the bible.

I don't know the details but I don't think they want to "teach Christianity", that would be totally out of place in a public school. A scholarly approach to the Bible is the only thing they can hope for. Any teacher versed in literature and history could do it.

 

[Polycarp1]

I cannot see how you could possibly teach the Bible in public schools in a manner that would not infringe on people's religious rights.

If it is not taught as the inerrant, verbatim-inspired Word of God, you have gone against the beliefs of those who consider that it is just that -- a substantial part of the populace in some areas, according to surveys.

If you teach "the Bible as literature" you go against the beliefs of those who consider that it is something more.

And if you devise a curriculum that suits the groups whose beliefs militate against the approaches noted above, you both go against the rights of those who do not agree with inerrancy and verbatim inspiration, or some form of inspiration, and also run the risk of violating the Establishment Clause, since you are setting up their beliefs as what has to be learned to pass the course.

I cannot envision any Christian who is not inclined to use the secular law to force his beliefs on others who could support any approach to this, under the Golden Rule.

 

[Polycarp1]

I don't know the details but I don't think they want to "teach Christianity", that would be totally out of place in a public school. A scholarly approach to the Bible is the only thing they can hope for. Any teacher versed in literature and history could do it.

Won't work. Start with something simple -- the first ten chapters of Genesis. Do you teach this as divine revelation to Moses, recorded at the time of the Exodus and carefully preserved since, or do you teach the scholarly view that there are four strands of tradition, three of which contributed to the chapters in question, joined together by later editors and attributed to the Lawgiver? Either approach is sufficient to tick off a substantial proportion of the taxpaying and school-board-electing populace.

Note for Mods. to take to technical staff: Quick quote is broken again. I had to edit to manually add in the quote from Flicka that should have been displayed above my response by how quick quote is supposed to work.

 

[JGL53]

....I cannot envision any Christian who is not inclined to use the secular law to force his beliefs on others who could support any approach to this, under the Golden Rule.

There are plenty of Christians in the U.S. who would be perfectly happy to use government power to force their beliefs on all Americans.

That is the problem, friend.

 

[MrJim]

If these people took their faith seriously they wouldn't allow a secular school to teach theology. Christianity can not be learned simply by a systematic approach to the bible.

agreed!

Our high school had a "Comparative Religions" class that was pretty interesting but also farily tame. The teacher said on the first day he was a Christian but would be teaching from the book in as fair a manner as possible....that reminds me of my 7th grade science teacher that said the same thing about evolution-he was a Christian and didn't believe but would be teaching from the book in as fair a manner as possible...this was the late 70/s to early 80/s...wonder how Mr. Pendleton and Mr. Peck are doing these days(Go Houn' Dawgs!).

 

[flicka]

Won't work. Start with something simple -- the first ten chapters of Genesis. Do you teach this as divine revelation to Moses, recorded at the time of the Exodus and carefully preserved since, or do you teach the scholarly view that there are four strands of tradition, three of which contributed to the chapters in question, joined together by later editors and attributed to the Lawgiver? Either approach is sufficient to tick off a substantial proportion of the taxpaying and school-board-electing populace.

Note for Mods. to take to technical staff: Quick quote is broken again. I had to edit to manually add in the quote from Flicka that should have been displayed above my response by how quick quote is supposed to work.

Well I don't know what universities all over the country are teaching in their classes on the Bible but I'm sure they have that all figured out. What I don't get is why the same can't be done at the HS level. But if it can't I guess we just have to keep the Bible out of the classroom completely. And that's fine with me.

 

[fanatiquefou]

The Bible classes should be taught by someone who knows it - not by a humanist teacher. Otherwise, it would be a big waste of time.

Exactly. And the courses on the Qu'ran and the Bhagavad Gita likewise should be taught by devout Muslims and Hindus.

 

[fanatiquefou]

I don't know the details but I don't think they want to "teach Christianity", that would be totally out of place in a public school. A scholarly approach to the Bible is the only thing they can hope for. Any teacher versed in literature and history could do it.

This is Georgia we're talking about. I seriously doubt those teaching the Bible classes are going to be doing so from a scholarly, questioning viewpoint.

 

[Billnew]

I support a school offering religious facts or history in
public school. My daughter just finished a chapter on Islam and Christian history.
I think an elective for Bible study could be completed in a HS level. But not mandatory, but this would open up the school to forcing other religions the same elective in their religion.
Like any other elective there is benefits to learning religions, and a student with only religious electives could be a good foundation for a religous or philosophy
college education. Seminary or whatever.