Cover Story in this week's Time Magazine

[OCUDad]

"Why We Should Teach The Bible In Public School"

Sound familiar, Homey? Time's short answer is "yes - it's the bedrock of Western culture."

Cue critics of the MSM in 1... 2... 3...

[usmc-sooner]

if you think MSM is promoting Christianity then not only are you clueless, you should be taken out and shot.

[OCUDad]

Thanks. Very Christian of you to say so. Didn't take very long for the first loon to chime in.

[usmc-sooner]

should have put a smiley on it. But seriously you can't think MSM promotes Christianity.

[OCUDad]

No, I don't think the MSM promotes Christianity. Which is why I stuck the "cue critics..." line in there.

[Frozen Sooner]

Better yet, that's only the cover of the U.S. version. In every other nation in the world, the cover story is a discussion of the resurgence of the Taliban in Afghanistan. 'Cause, you know, the US media do everything they can to undermine public support for the war. :rolleyes:

And I agree with them. Yes, the Bible should be taught as literature in schools. It is impossible to intelligently discuss western literature without a solid grounding in both Greek Myth and the Bible.

[JohnnyMack]

Didn't take very long for the first loon to chime in.

Eerie. I hadn't even posted yet.

[OCUDad]

Eerie. I hadn't even posted yet.I said "loon," not "goon."

[Scott D]

And I agree with them. Yes, the Bible should be taught as literature in schools. It is impossible to intelligently discuss western literature without a solid grounding in both Greek Myth and the Bible.

may as well, since the latter took elements of the prior and mixed them with Egyptian Myth, Nordic Myth, and Eastern Asian Myth. ;)

[soonerscuba]

I went Muslim in prison.

[Rogue]

Sheez, where can I find a good liberal magazine these days?

[usmc-sooner]

I went Muslim in prison.

hell I'd go scientology or OCU dad if meant not getting raped. :D

[Frozen Sooner]

may as well, since the latter took elements of the prior and mixed them with Egyptian Myth, Nordic Myth, and Eastern Asian Myth. ;)

Shush, you. It's the revealed word of God.

[usmc-sooner]

O yee of little faith

[Jeopardude]

Sheez, where can I find a good liberal magazine these days?

Harper's (http://www.harpers.org) is on the newsstand.

[Okla-homey]

"Why We Should Teach The Bible In Public School"

Sound familiar, Homey? Time's short answer is "yes - it's the bedrock of Western culture."

Cue critics of the MSM in 1... 2... 3...

Interesting. I got my copy yesterday. The issues were pretty much those we had discussed here last week. I agree that Bible literacy is an essential element of being an educated person.

[Okla-homey]

And I agree with them. Yes, the Bible should be taught as literature in schools. It is impossible to intelligently discuss western literature without a solid grounding in both Greek Myth and the Bible.

The article pointed out that the Bible is still the largest selling and most influential book in the history of the world. It is therefore completely appropriate to expose school kids to its content -- while carefully avoiding evangelizing them. In fact, it's patently irresponsible of public schools to avoid exposing kids to the Bible's content. That's also one of the reasons we opted out of public schools for our kid.

The article also points out that because public school administrators tend to be so litigation-averse nowadays, they often eschew anything that might lead to a complaint from some "aggrieved" parent. Thus the kids' educational experience suffers.

[picasso]

'Cause, you know, the US media do everything they can to undermine public support for the war. :rolleyes:


you seriously with a straight face believe this?

[crawfish]

The article pointed out that the Bible is still the largest selling and most influential book in the history of the world. It is therefore completely appropriate to expose school kids to its content -- while carefully avoiding evangelizing them. In fact, it's patently irresponsible of public schools to avoid exposing kids to the Bible's content. That's also one of the reasons we opted out of public schools for our kid.

The article also points out that because public school administrators tend to be so litigation-averse nowadays, they often eschew anything that might lead to a complaint from some "aggrieved" parent. Thus the kids' educational experience suffers.

Yeah, right. First thing, we teach kids what's in the bible, next thing, they're going door-to-door handing out Watchtower pamphlets.

We've gotta put the kibosh on that.

[picasso]

yeah because the current method is working so well. ;)
damn, those kids and schools are a finely tuned American machine.

[Fugue]

Yeah, right. First thing, we teach kids what's in the bible, next thing, they're going door-to-door handing out Watchtower pamphlets.

We've gotta put the kibosh on that.

I'm all along with that.

[StoopTroup]

Burn the historical documents ! ! !

BURN THEM ALL ! ! !

They are the root of all evil ! ! !

:pop:

[Frozen Sooner]

The article pointed out that the Bible is still the largest selling and most influential book in the history of the world. It is therefore completely appropriate to expose school kids to its content -- while carefully avoiding evangelizing them. In fact, it's patently irresponsible of public schools to avoid exposing kids to the Bible's content. That's also one of the reasons we opted out of public schools for our kid.

The article also points out that because public school administrators tend to be so litigation-averse nowadays, they often eschew anything that might lead to a complaint from some "aggrieved" parent. Thus the kids' educational experience suffers.

I agree.

As an illustrative point, a couple of parents at one of my friend's school demanded that she stop teaching Greek myth in language arts class, because they didn't think it was right to teach heathen religions.

[TUSooner]

I agree.

As an illustrative point, a couple of parents at one of my friend's school demanded that she stop teaching Greek myth in language arts class, because they didn't think it was right to teach heathen religions.
<sigh> The strongest arguments against Chistianity are often . . .

CHRISTIANS!


I'm absolutely in favor Biblical literacy. But I say again, teaching the "Bible as Literature" in a "nonevangelizing" way, will only stir up certain fundamentalists who are willing to slaughter the good in a vain effort obtain the perfect (which in their view would be teaching the Bible as God's literal word, to be applied literally.)
And before anybody flames away at me for being some heathen type: I ACTUALLY READ the Bible every *&%$#@* day and have done so for at least 10 years. (OK, I do miss now and again, but I read it 340-350 days a year anyway). So there. :pop:

[Scott D]

The article pointed out that the Bible is still the largest selling and most influential book in the history of the world.

Last I checked the Hotel Industry is still kicking much ***. ;)

Seriously, it wouldn't sell as many copies if folk didn't steal em from churches and hotels :D

[OklahomaTuba]

(OK, I do miss now and again, but I read it 340-350 days a year anyway)

There is a special place in hell for people like you. ;)

[OCUDad]

There is a special place in hell for people like you. ;)Where, fortunately, you will have lots of company. :P

[OklahomaTuba]

I agree.

As an illustrative point, a couple of parents at one of my friend's school demanded that she stop teaching Greek myth in language arts class, because they didn't think it was right to teach heathen religions.

I'm guessing they didn't have the ACLU around to sue anybody for them.

[OklahomaTuba]

Where, fortunately, you will have lots of company. :P
Hopefully he brings ice and cold beer then.

[Scott D]

Hopefully he brings ice and cold beer then.

party at your house? ;)

[crawfish]

I agree.

As an illustrative point, a couple of parents at one of my friend's school demanded that she stop teaching Greek myth in language arts class, because they didn't think it was right to teach heathen religions.

Well, of course. First thing, we teach kids Greek mythology, next thing, they're outside playing nude olympics.

We've gotta put the kibosh on that.

[reevie]

You have to teach and learn the Bible to have an understanding of Western history and social affairs. Just as much as you need to teach and learn about the Quran to have an understanding of Middle Eastern history and social affairs. They are both important documents that people need to have a basic understanding of.

Omitting religion in education does more harm that it does good.

[Frozen Sooner]

Well, of course. First thing, we teach kids Greek mythology, next thing, they're outside playing nude olympics.

We've gotta put the kibosh on that.

Pretty much.

The "compromise" worked out was that the kids sat outside the classroom diagramming sentences while the rest of the class got to learn about some of the underpinnings of our philosophy and literature.

I hate it when parents (both Christian and non-Christian) confuse being involved with the educational process with interfering with the educational process.

[usmc-sooner]

<sigh> The strongest arguments against Chistianity are often . . .

CHRISTIANS!




and the strongest arguments against Islam is often....

Muslims!!

[Cam]

The article pointed out that the Bible is still the largest selling and most influential book in the history of the world. It is therefore completely appropriate to expose school kids to its content -- while carefully avoiding evangelizing them. In fact, it's patently irresponsible of public schools to avoid exposing kids to the Bible's content. That's also one of the reasons we opted out of public schools for our kid.
It's been my experience that it's damn near impossible for folks to not evangelize, or criticize The Bible. If you teach it and discuss it, you are in fact evangelizing it. If a teacher doesn't agree with every word, they're considered to be criticizing it.

It would take a very special type of person to teach it as literature without exposing their own personal opinions. There aren't enough of that type of teachers in the world. But be careful, because if you say you're teaching it as literature, you'll have the hard line Christians saying you're debasing The Word.

It's a no-win situation for the teacher IMO.

[JohnnyMack]

It's been my experience that it's damn near impossible for folks to not evangelize, or criticize The Bible. If you teach it and discuss it, you are in fact evangelizing it. If a teacher doesn't agree with every word, they're considered to be criticizing it.

It would take a very special type of person to teach it as literature without exposing their own personal opinions. There aren't enough of that type of teachers in the world. But be careful, because if you say you're teaching it as literature, you'll have the hard line Christians saying you're debasing The Word.

It's a no-win situation for the teacher IMO.

Is the bible great literature? I mean through the many translations it's become more and more polished, but is it a great work of literature? Seems like there are so many versions out there that it's tough to say which one should be analyzed from that angle.

I'm not talking about the content, I'm talking about the way it's written.

[OCUDad]

Is the bible great literature? ... Seems like there are so many versions out there that it's tough to say which one should be analyzed from that angle. I'm not talking about the content, I'm talking about the way it's written.King James. End of argument.

[JohnnyMack]

King James. End of argument.

OK, so is the King James version a great piece of literature?

[OCUDad]

I think it is. So, given that everyone can define "great" and "literature" as he/she sees fit, you cannot argue with me. :P

[Cam]

Is the bible great literature? I mean through the many translations it's become more and more polished, but is it a great work of literature? Seems like there are so many versions out there that it's tough to say which one should be analyzed from that angle.

I'm not talking about the content, I'm talking about the way it's written.
Beats the hell outta me. I wouldn't consider it as such for the reasons you gave. I was just throwing out how it would be used without being evangelized.

I'm honestly not sure it can be done.

[OklahomaTuba]

The important thing is that young people are exposed to the written word of God, and hopefully it inspires them to learn more about the Gospels and the plan God has for them, eventually accepting Jesus into their hearts.

[JohnnyMack]

Beats the hell outta me. I wouldn't consider it as such for the reasons you gave. I was just throwing out how it would be used without being evangelized.

I'm honestly not sure it can be done.

I don't know either. I took two English classes in college and that was it.

It's a piece of literature that has been so massaged and so fine-tuned over the centuries to fit the current needs of those who use its message to either profit from it or gain power by using it that in my opinion it's hard to know what the original text looked like.

I think the Bible has TONS of historical significance, and based on that alone I can see referencing it in history or philosophy classes as acceptable, but I think it's a slippery slope that the public school systems will shy away from. I also think the push to use the Bible and study it for its historical content and how the Bible affected U.S. history is a carefully calculated effort by the Christian PACs at showing how put upon they are.

[soonerscuba]

Which is the responsibility of public schools?

[JohnnyMack]

Scube, I needs to play me some CS: Source.

[OklahomaTuba]

I
It's a piece of literature that has been so massaged and so fine-tuned over the centuries to fit the current needs of those who use its message to either profit from it or gain power by using it that in my opinion it's hard to know what the original text looked like.
Actually, is hasn't been, but nice try anyway.

[Soonrboy]

The important thing is that young people are exposed to the written word of God, and hopefully it inspires them to learn more about the Gospels and the plan God has for them, eventually accepting Jesus into their hearts.


I could have sworn that this is a responsibility of the church and not the school.

I just don't understand why something so personal as religion should be left up to chance. When a new kid enrolls at school, say in 3rd grade, they go to what ever 3rd grade teacher has the lowest numbers. It is completely random.

[OklahomaTuba]

I could have sworn that this is a responsibility of the church and not the school.

I just don't understand why something so personal as religion should be left up to chance. When a new kid enrolls at school, say in 3rd grade, they go to what ever 3rd grade teacher has the lowest numbers. It is completely random.

Not talking about religion, I am talking about teaching history & literature. The Bible is both, as well as the most important collection of documents in the world, and the bedrock of our culture, society, country, etc.

To NOT teach it is more of a crime than anything. All I am saying is that if someone is exposed to the word of God, then there isn't anything wrong with that either. Sounds like the schools could use God's help more than ever these days.

[Octavian]

http://img206.imageshack.us/img206/339/icon27qd3.gif (http://imageshack.us)


The important thing is that young people are exposed to the written word of God, and hopefully it inspires them to learn more about the Gospels and the plan God has for them, eventually accepting Jesus into their hearts.


and that's why this idea is like the Jump to Conclusions Mat

[Vaevictis]

To NOT teach it is more of a crime than anything. All I am saying is that if someone is exposed to the word of God, then there isn't anything wrong with that either. Sounds like the schools could use God's help more than ever these days.

So, which God(s) shall we expose them to then?

[OklahomaTuba]

http://img206.imageshack.us/img206/339/icon27qd3.gif (http://imageshack.us)




and that's why this idea is like the Jump to Conclusions Mat

Of course, cause anything that doesn't agree with your hatred of Christians must be bad. :rolleyes:

[OklahomaTuba]

So, which God(s) shall we expose them to then?
Well, since it is a Bible class...

[SCOUT]

I just don't understand why something so personal as religion should be left up to chance. When a new kid enrolls at school, say in 3rd grade, they go to what ever 3rd grade teacher has the lowest numbers. It is completely random.

I think the idea is to give context to the history of western civilization. For example, how do you answer a question about, "that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights" without referencing God.

Religion is indeed a very powerful and personal thing. It also influenced many significant events throughout history. Ignoring them because you are afraid of discussing the subject in a public setting is a cop out IMO.

[Soonrboy]

The thing is that there is a big difference in the intended curriculum is very different than the delivered curriculum. The delivered curriculum takes into account a teacher's own prior kowledge, feelings about a subject, and what is left in and out of the delivery to get across a message or whatever.

There is a received curriculum. This is what the learner takes away from the delivered curriculum. Sometimes it matches both the intended curriculum and the delivered curriculum, but not always.

There have been a lot of messed up people who have delivered parts of the bible with alot of their own feelings and thoughts. It is tough to separate. I just wouldn't want to chance that with my own kids. That's just me, though.

[OklahomaTuba]

I think Vae just proved the point of why these classes are sorely needed.

[Vaevictis]

Well, since it is a Bible class...

Well, if you're going to teach the Bible because it was influential on certain cultures, you're going to need to start teaching other religious texts also. Considering that the Middle East is having quite an effect on us these days, it won't be too far of a stretch to say that teaching the Koran is going to be warranted under the same logic.

You gonna feel the same way about teaching religious texts in school if, hypothetically, your kid converts to Islam because he was taught the Koran in school?

[Vaevictis]

I think Vae just proved the point of why these classes are sorely needed.

No, you don't think. That's the problem.

[OklahomaTuba]

There have been a lot of messed up people who have delivered parts of the bible with alot of their own feelings and thoughts. It is tough to separate. I just wouldn't want to chance that with my own kids. That's just me, though.

Thats what you get with ANY subject at a school though.

Fear shouldn't be the reason we decide to censor things.

[SCOUT]

Well, if you're going to teach the Bible because it was influential on certain cultures, you're going to need to start teaching other religious texts also. Considering that the Middle East is having quite an effect on us these days, it won't be too far of a stretch to say that teaching the Koran is going to be warranted under the same logic.

You gonna feel the same way about teaching religious texts in school if, hypothetically, your kid converts to Islam because he was taught the Koran in school?

My daughter spent last week learning about the Islamic New Year. I don't have a problem with her being exposed to it at all.

In fact, I couldn't agree more about the current influence of Islam. I think it is terribly neglectful to ignore Islamic influence in the 20th century.

[Soonrboy]

I think the idea is to give context to the history of western civilization. For example, how do you answer a question about, "that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights" without referencing God.

Religion is indeed a very powerful and personal thing. It also influenced many significant events throughout history. Ignoring them because you are afraid of discussing the subject in a public setting is a cop out IMO.


A teacher doesn't have to ignore it. However, in this case, Creator does mean God, however you believe in God...then we discussed that was a family decision.

[OklahomaTuba]

Well, if you're going to teach the Bible because it was influential on certain cultures, you're going to need to start teaching other religious texts also.
Well, when this country gets re-founded under other types of cultures, by people who are non-Christians, by states that weren't Christian states, then we can. In fact, we should anyways.

I always love how you seem to just ignore history at a whim thought.

Maybe we shouldn't teach our classes in English, since other people speak other languages? This isn't an english speaking nation afterall.

[Soonrboy]

Thats what you get with ANY subject at a school though.

Fear shouldn't be the reason we decide to censor things.


Big difference to me of having someone teach their version of subjects and verbs than how they interpret the word God.

[SCOUT]

A teacher doesn't have to ignore it. However, in this case, Creator does mean God, however you believe in God...then we discussed that was a family decision.

I apologize, but I don't follow you. If you are saying that believing in God is a personal/family decision then I am on board.

If you are saying the Declaration of Independence is up for debate then I disagree :D

[Vaevictis]

My daughter spent last week learning about the Islamic New Year. I don't have a problem with her being exposed to it at all.

I don't have a problem with kids being taught about a religion, especially with respect to various influential individuals application of what they got out of the religion, but I do think you're treading a thin line and dangerous line when you actually start having them read the texts and discussing them in classes.

[OklahomaTuba]

Big difference to me of having someone teach their version of subjects and verbs than how they interpret the word God.

I agree.

I would still rather it be taught than not.

[Vaevictis]

Well, when this country gets re-founded under other types of cultures, by people who are non-Christians, by states that weren't Christian states, then we can. In fact, we should anyways.

I always love how you seem to just ignore history at a whim thought.

The United States and Europe ain't all that gets taught about in school, you know. Well, not at any decent school, anyway.

[OklahomaTuba]

but I do think you're treading a thin line and dangerous line when you actually start having them read the texts and discussing them in classes.

Yes, we wouldn't that. Next thing you know, we will have a bunch of teen thugs running around reading and discussing banned topics that don't fit within the liberal-group think.

Bad news I tell ya.

[Vaevictis]

Yes, we wouldn't that. Next thing you know, we will have a bunch of teen thugs running around reading and discussing banned topics that don't fit within the liberal-group think.

No, the next thing you know, you've got a teacher teaching doctrine to your kids that you may disagree with. Like say, Jews will burn in hell because they "murdered our Lord and Saviour."

[OklahomaTuba]

The United States and Europe ain't all that gets taught about in school, you know. Well, not at any decent school, anyway.

Never said it was.

Nevertheless, it is OUR history, no matter how much you want to hide it, deny it and ignore it.

[soonerscuba]

If these threads have taught me one thing, it's that not enough people have read The Rights of Man by Paine. Carry on with your baseless arguments for the idea that this country couldn't be founded without the Bible. So to say, in the idea of Western culture, then the Bible should be taught, in terms of American government, it has as much place as ID in science class.

[OklahomaTuba]

No, the next thing you know, you've got a teacher teaching doctrine to your kids that you disagree with.

So it will be like college then huh???

Where is Ward Churchill when you need him?

[Vaevictis]

Never said it was.

Nevertheless, it is OUR history, no matter how much you want to hide it, deny it and ignore it.

Yeah, keep breaking out that straw man there Tuba. It's working out real well for you.

[OklahomaTuba]

So to say, in the idea of Western culture, then the Bible should be taught, in terms of American government, it has as much place as ID in science class.

Its statements like yours that tell me your lacking in your American and Western History.

I suggest taking a look at some of the states constitutions, and the history of them.

[OklahomaTuba]

Yeah, keep breaking out that straw man there Tuba. It's working out real well for you.

The strawman of history????

[Vaevictis]

The strawman of history????

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

[OklahomaTuba]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
That is a nice link and all, but it really doesn't prove I made a strawman out of anything.

[Octavian]

Of course, cause anything that doesn't agree with your hatred of Christians must be bad. :rolleyes:


hatred of Christians? Not even close. But emplyoing a religious scripture in publicly funded schools as a way to indoctrinate the spiritual beliefs and worldviews of society's youth?


That's for Iran...not America.


Besides, the different sects Christianity wouldn't even agree on which parts of the Bible to teach and emphasize....and which not to emphasize.


Should we emphasize how Jesus railed against capitalism and the concept of hierarchal organized religion? Should we teach them how Jesus was a radical who rebelled against his society's traditional way of life....and that they should too? WWJD? Rebel.


Should we emphasize how the existence of a savior is proof that God changed his/its mind from the days of the Old Testament...and hence is not infallible?


No. Because that is how I interpret different aspects of Christianity and I couldn't care less if you agreed or not.


Religion is all about interpretation. And you can't teach that to kids as fact in public schools supported by taxpayers because we don't all agree.


I'm not saying kids should just get their morality lessons from MTV VJ's...but teaching the Bible in public schools is equally spooky.


Men wrote the Bible as an allegory....men thousands of years later took it literally. God's a prankster like that.


See....you don't want me teachin' your kids about the Bible....do ya?? :D

[Vaevictis]

That is a nice link and all, but it really doesn't prove I made a strawman out of anything.



Nevertheless, it is OUR history, no matter how much you want to hide it, deny it and ignore it.

In which statement did I do this?

[soonerscuba]

Its statements like yours that tell me your lacking in your American and Western History.

I suggest taking a look at some of the states constitutions, and the history of them.

Heh. You are aware that state constitutions range from quirky antiquities to down right racist? And you want me to base a historical view of the foundation of America based on the fact that it is technically illegal for Muslims to hold office in North Caroline?

[Vaevictis]

It's fair to say that this nation was informed by Christianity -- given that the majority of the population has been Christian.

As far as it being founded on it, I'll just refer everyone to Article 11 the Treaty of Tripoli, and ask why it is that the people today who claim that this nation was founded on Christianity know better than the people who were actually there.


Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Mussulmen; and, as the said States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties, that no pretext arising from religious opinions, shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.

Unanimously ratified by the Senate in 1797, signed by John Adams.

[OklahomaTuba]

I'm not saying kids should just get their morality lessons from MTV VJ's...but teaching the Bible in public schools is equally spooky.

Hah, gotta love it. The Bible = MTV now. This just gets better and better.

Maybe we should stop teaching everything in schools that you think is "spooky"???

[OklahomaTuba]

Heh. You are aware that state constitutions range from quirky antiquities to down right racist?

So, more history we should just sweep under the rug then? Cause it doesn't agree with you??

Liberalism is grand!

[Vaevictis]

Hah, gotta love it. The Bible = MTV now. This just gets better and better.

Another straw man.

[OklahomaTuba]

It's fair to say that this nation was informed by Christianity -- given that the majority of the population has been Christian.

As far as it being founded on it, I'll just refer everyone to Article 11 the Treaty of Tripoli, and ask why it is that the people today who claim that this nation was founded on Christianity know better than the people who were actually there.



Unanimously ratified by the Senate in 1797, signed by John Adams.

I love how some obscure treaty written to keep the mean ol Musselman from destroying our merchant trade fleet somehow is proof that Christianity had no bearing on this nation's founding, when 11 of the 13 colonies mentioned Jesus IN THEIR CONSTITUTIONS!!!!!

Again, I love how you ignore your history on a whim. Typical liberal way of thinking though.

[Vaevictis]

I love how some obscure treaty written to keep the mean ol Musselman from destroying our merchant trade fleet somehow is proof that Christianity had no bearing on this nation's founding, when 11 of the 13 colonies mentioned Jesus IN THEIR CONSTITUTIONS!!!!!

STRAW MAN.

I did NOT say it had no bearing. That it is not founded upon Christianity is not the same as it having no bearing.

[OklahomaTuba]

STRAW MAN.

I did NOT say it had no bearing. That it is not founded upon Christianity is not the same as it having no bearing.
Then explain why a majority of a confederacy of states would all mention Jesus in their primary governmental documents?

[OklahomaTuba]

I wonder, does anyone know what Congress's first act was????

The Continental Congress that is.

Continental Congress September 6, 1774, made their first official act a call for prayer, as recorded in the Journals of the Continental Congress, after just receiving the news that the British troops had attacked Boston



Plead my cause, Oh, Lord, with them that strive with me, fight against them that fight against me. Take hold of buckler and shield, and rise up for my help. Draw also the spear and the battle-axe to meet those who pursue me; Say to my soul, 'I am your salvation.' Let those be ashamed and dishonored who seek my life; Let those be turned back and humiliated who devise evil against me." - September 7, 1774, Rev. Mr. Duche' reading Psalm 35.

[Vaevictis]

Then explain why a majority of a confederacy of states would all mention Jesus in their primary governmental documents?

That the NATION was not founded upon Christianity does not necessarily imply that the member states were not.

[OklahomaTuba]

That the NATION was not founded upon Christianity does not necessarily imply that the member states were not.

So, I guess you have been arguing about that part of the nation that had no member states then, huh??

Well, thanks for playing anyhow.

[Octavian]

Hah, gotta love it. The Bible = MTV now. This just gets better and better.


no, wise one...I was contrasting the hedonist postmodern culture represented on youth-pandering tv stations like MTV with the traditional moralistic approach of ancient monotheistic religious texts.


...as, ya know...a way of complimenting the morality lessons of Christianity....and saying we shouldn't go overboard in the other direction.



Maybe we should stop teaching everything in schools that you think is "spooky"???


If you're teaching falsehoods like America was founded on the dedication to religion -and not on the fear of its influence- then....that's not spooky. It's just incorrect.

[Vaevictis]

So, I guess you have been arguing about that part of the nation that had no member states then, huh??

Straw man, again. As I said -- working out well for you, eh?

[Vaevictis]

I wonder, does anyone know what Congress's first act was????

The Continental Congress that is.

Continental Congress September 6, 1774, made their first official act a call for prayer, as recorded in the Journals of the Continental Congress, after just receiving the news that the British troops had attacked Boston

Still nothing here to refute my statement that the US was informed by Christianity, not founded upon it.

[OklahomaTuba]

“ The general principles upon which the Fathers achieved independence were the general principals of Christianity… I will avow that I believed and now believe that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God.”

“[July 4th] ought to be commemorated as the day of deliverance by solemn acts of devotion to God Almighty.”

A couple of a my favs

[OklahomaTuba]

If you're teaching falsehoods like America was founded on the dedication to religion -and not on the fear of its influence- then....that's not spooky. It's just incorrect.

Of course, no one ever mentioned teaching that, just the historical facts of the Bible and the effect of Christianity on our culture and history.

[Vaevictis]

A couple of a my favs

That would be evidence for being informed by. It still doesn't rise to the level of being founded on.

[OklahomaTuba]

Still nothing here to refute my statement that the US was informed by Christianity, not founded upon it.

Well, except for the parts about nearly all the states being offically Christian, the founders nearly all being Christian and members of Englands offical church, the swearing in on Bibles, the prayers, and of course the fact that a super majority of the population is Christian, I guess you are correct.

So, I guess if you exclude all those facts, your right!

[Vaevictis]

I'm not denying that many of the Founders were Christian. Being Christians, their philosophies would be INFORMED by Christianity. They were also informed by other things, like say, John Locke, or Rousseau.

Founded upon is something else. To illustrate the difference:

Iraq is INFORMED by Islam.
Iran is FOUNDED on Islam.

Do you get the difference now?

Being a Christian nation is not quite the same thing as being a nation of Christians, just like being an Islamic nation is not quite the same thing as being a nation of Muslims.

[OklahomaTuba]

That would be evidence for being informed by. It still doesn't rise to the level of being founded on.

So, you still saying that the member states of the country didn't mean anything??? Cause you might want to look at the articles of confederation one more time.

[OklahomaTuba]

I'm not denying that many of the Founders were Christian. Being Christians, their philosophies would be INFORMED by Christianity. They were also informed by other things, like say, John Locke, or Rousseau.

Founded upon is something else. To illustrate the difference:

Iraq is INFORMED by Islam.
Iran is FOUNDED on Islam.

Do you get the difference now?

Ok, so where did I say this country is a Christian Republic like Iran is an Islamic Republic???

[Octavian]

Where the preamble declares, that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed by inserting "Jesus Christ," so that it would read "A departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion;" the insertion was rejected by the great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mohammedan, the Hindoo and Infidel of every denomination.

-Autobiography, in reference to the Virginia Act for Religious Freedom



In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own.

-letter to Horatio G. Spafford, March 17, 1814


not exactly the rantings of a theocrat

[OklahomaTuba]

not exactly the rantings of a theocrat

Never said our form of government was a theocracy either.

Talk about a strawman!

Of course, that quote does prove my point to some degree. Oh well, as long as the libz control our public school system, the founding document of our civilation will continue to be hidden and censored, the war on our Christian heritage will contine and our educational system will continue to collapse. God help us.

[Vaevictis]

Ok, so where did I say this country is a Christian Republic like Iran is an Islamic Republic???

Well, if that's not what you were saying, then why argue with me when I am saying that it is NOT a Christian Republic?

(ie, that it is not founded on Christianity)

[Vaevictis]

Never said our form of government was a theocracy either.

Whether you intended it or not, that is the essentially meaning that is understood when someone says that a nation is founded on a certain religion.

[Octavian]

Never said our form of government was a theocracy either.

eh...


in reference to the debate on the Bible being taught in public schools...


The important thing is that young people are exposed to the written word of God, and hopefully it inspires them to learn more about the Gospels and the plan God has for them, eventually accepting Jesus into their hearts.


that sounds an awful lot like someone who endorses a state-funded theocratic approach to education

[OklahomaTuba]

Well, if that's not what you were saying, then why argue with me when I am saying that it is NOT a Christian Republic?

(ie, that it is not founded on Christianity)

Its kind of like saying this isn't an English speaking nation.

We all know it is.

[OklahomaTuba]

that sounds an awful lot like someone who endorses a state-funded theocratic approach to education

So studying the Bible in a class is a "thocratic approach to education"???

I guess most colleges would be considered "thecratic" then, since they have classes on the Bible?

[Vaevictis]

Its kind of like saying this isn't an English speaking nation.

It's not the same thing. A more appropriate statement would be "This nation was founded on speaking English." There's a huge difference in the implications of that statement compared to, "This nation was founded by speakers of English."

[Octavian]

I guess most colleges would be considered "thecratic" then, since they have classes on the Bible?


those academic courses in public universites aren't designed to "expose them to the written word of God, and hopefully inspire them to learn more about the Gospels and the plan God has for them, eventually accepting Jesus into their hearts."


Those courses are taught in the "profane," as an academic examination of the role of religion on society or something like the field of comparative world religions...they are taught by scholars who have earned PhDs in their fields and they're not pushing religion on their students...I'm afraid that wouldn't be the case at your local Bulldog High...much less at the elementary level.


I'm not saying the morality tales in Christianity are a bad thing...I think they're good.


And I'm not saying that the history of America isn't bound to the historical trajectory of the Christian faith....


but I don't think the Bible should be taught to young kids in public schools...and I don't think our populi can agree on what the "facts" of Christianity are to teach it in an objective, non-religious manner....particularly the Bible Belt, where faculty members already organize and run FCA events, private Bible study groups, etc.

Just not gonna happen.

[Okla-homey]

Here's a simple question. Does anyone here think an avowed atheist or agnostic could be elected to a the White House or other national office? If the answer to that question is no, then what does that say about American culture and the relative importance most folks put on public acknowledgement and faith in God?

If it's that significant to so many voters, shouldn't kids become "Bible literate" in order to understand how the great issues of our day are cast by most of us?

[crawfish]

Should we emphasize how Jesus railed against capitalism and the concept of hierarchal organized religion? Should we teach them how Jesus was a radical who rebelled against his society's traditional way of life....and that they should too? WWJD? Rebel.


Should we emphasize how the existence of a savior is proof that God changed his/its mind from the days of the Old Testament...and hence is not infallible?


No. Because that is how I interpret different aspects of Christianity and I couldn't care less if you agreed or not.

Sounds like somebody needs to read his Bible more. ;)


Men wrote the Bible as an allegory....men thousands of years later took it literally. God's a prankster like that. :D

Most credible Bible scholars will tell you it wasn't originally written as allegory. It was written literally from a "culturally relevant" point of view - with "literal" not having the meaning we have today. Most of it was written in a way that would be easily understood back then; we fail to understand what it meant when we disregard the cultural contexts.

As I have stated before, I would have no problem teaching the Bible as it relates to American/World history. The quest for religious freedom - which was far and away primarily Christian freedom - was a prime factor in the early colonization of the US and its basis in law. To study our Constitution, or our early history, when leaving the Bible's influence out gives an incomplete view of the subject.

[JohnnyMack]

Here's a simple question. Does anyone here think an avowed atheist or agnostic could be elected to a the White House or other national office? If the answer to that question is no, then what does that say about American culture and the relative importance most folks put on public acknowledgement and faith in God?

If it's that significant to so many voters, shouldn't kids become "Bible literate" in order to understand how the great issues of our day are cast by most of us?

I'll say that I think people say what they need to say and do what they need to do to get elected.

And no, I don't think this country would elect someone who was an open athiest.

[Scott D]

Not talking about religion, I am talking about teaching history & literature. The Bible is both, as well as the most important collection of documents in the world, and the bedrock of our culture, society, country, etc.

To NOT teach it is more of a crime than anything. All I am saying is that if someone is exposed to the word of God, then there isn't anything wrong with that either. Sounds like the schools could use God's help more than ever these days.

Abraham is as much of a myth as Hercules.
Moses is as much of a myth as Odin.

[crawfish]

I had no idea there was a real Odin. ;)

[Scott D]

Well someone had to sleep with a frost giant to create Thor ;)

[Vaevictis]

If it's that significant to so many voters, shouldn't kids become "Bible literate" in order to understand how the great issues of our day are cast by most of us?

It seems to me that the sticking point here isn't that kids shouldn't learn it. It's that you can't trust the public school system to do it right.

[Frozen Sooner]

Here's a simple question. Does anyone here think an avowed atheist or agnostic could be elected to a the White House or other national office? If the answer to that question is no, then what does that say about American culture and the relative importance most folks put on public acknowledgement and faith in God?

No way in hell, at least right now. Polls show that only like 17% of the American public would be willing to vote for an "admitted" (as if atheism was something to be ashamed of :rolleyes:) atheist. And what it says is that if you want people to like you, you better at least rub some sort of blue mud in your navel when everyone else is doing it.


If it's that significant to so many voters, shouldn't kids become "Bible literate" in order to understand how the great issues of our day are cast by most of us?

You've made somewhat of a logical leap here. The same polls I referenced above show that the public would be much more likely to elect a Muslim or a Jew than an atheist.

Considering that many people who believe in the Bible don't all vote the same way, your point doesn't seem to hold a lot of water. Christian does not automatically mean Republican or Democrat.

[Frozen Sooner]

I had no idea there was a real Odin. ;)

It's quite likely that there was a historical Odin. I mean, I'm sure he didn't create the earth out of Ymir's bones or the clouds out of his brains, but there probably was some tribal chief who was pretty powerful who went by that name that legends grew up around.

[crawfish]

It's quite likely that there was a historical Odin. I mean, I'm sure he didn't create the earth out of Ymir's bones or the clouds out of his brains, but there probably was some tribal chief who was pretty powerful who went by that name that legends grew up around.

Yep. There is usually some "truth" hidden behind all myth. In fact, "mythology" does not mean "fiction" - it refers to a body of beliefs tied to a particular group. For example, the United States has its own "mythology", which would include the modern perception of events in the old West like gunfighting. Although we can be very sure that old West gunfights are nothing like the ones we typically see on screen, we know that they are based in a real occurrence.

[Scott D]

Yep. There is usually some "truth" hidden behind all myth. In fact, "mythology" does not mean "fiction" - it refers to a body of beliefs tied to a particular group. For example, the United States has its own "mythology", which would include the modern perception of events in the old West like gunfighting. Although we can be very sure that old West gunfights are nothing like the ones we typically see on screen, we know that they are based in a real occurrence.

tis muh point exactly :D

[Hamhock]

you can't trust the public school system to do it right.


true dat

[Octavian]

Sounds like somebody needs to read his Bible more. ;)


and therein lies the entire problem ;)


we don't interpret the same words in the same way...this isn't earth shattering news

[crawfish]

and therein lies the entire problem ;)


we don't interpret the same words in the same way...this isn't earth shattering news

(psst...it was a joke) ;)

[Octavian]

:les: NO JOKING ON THE SO!! :mad:



:D

[Cam]

Actually, is hasn't been, but nice try anyway.
So you've seen the original, non-English text version and translated it yourself?

You're talking about a text that has been translated and re-translated 100's of times over 100's of years. Even the English language versions differ slightly here and there. You honestly think something couldn't have been translated incorrectly 2000 years ago?

Bring on the "you're a Christian hater" rhetoric now. You wouldn't be further from the truth, but feel free to do so anyway.

[Cam]

those academic courses in public universites aren't designed to "expose them to the written word of God, and hopefully inspire them to learn more about the Gospels and the plan God has for them, eventually accepting Jesus into their hearts."


Those courses are taught in the "profane," as an academic examination of the role of religion on society or something like the field of comparative world religions...they are taught by scholars who have earned PhDs in their fields and they're not pushing religion on their students...I'm afraid that wouldn't be the case at your local Bulldog High...much less at the elementary level.


I'm not saying the morality tales in Christianity are a bad thing...I think they're good.


And I'm not saying that the history of America isn't bound to the historical trajectory of the Christian faith....


but I don't think the Bible should be taught to young kids in public schools...and I don't think our populi can agree on what the "facts" of Christianity are to teach it in an objective, non-religious manner....particularly the Bible Belt, where faculty members already organize and run FCA events, private Bible study groups, etc.

Just not gonna happen.
Exactly.