"Bible Class" in public schools?

[Calantorntain]

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050109/ap_on_re_us/bible_battle_1

A yearlong dispute over whether to add a religious group's Bible class at small-town Frankenmuth High School in rural Michigan comes to a head at Monday's school board meeting.

One year ago, hundreds of Frankenmuth parents and students asked their Board of Education to offer a Bible course based on materials from the National Council on Bible Curriculum in Public Schools.

National council lawyer Mike Johnson vigorously defended his group's course outline.

"It's completely defensible. The approach is objective, certainly nondenominational," Johnson said from Shreveport, La. "It presents the Bible as history and literature, but it does not proselytize."

The curriculum, based on the King James Bible, includes topics ranging from "Periods of Hebrew History in the Old Testament" to "The Parables of Jesus — Literary Genre."

In a letter to Frankenmuth school officials, Schaeffer said the course material teaches the Bible from a Protestant Christian perspective, rather than objectively, and teaches the creation story, Noah's flood, Tower of Babel and resurrection of Jesus as history.

Johnson said 288 schools in 35 states have adopted its course outline

(Emphasis mine)

Ye gods, this is rather horrible. Although, I sort of wish somebody at my school tried that- I would have so much fun fighting it :devil1:

[EverLastingGodStopper]

Even better idea: let's stay on the topic of teaching the bible that we have in the public schools that we have.




EDITED to add: the discussion about private versus public schools has been split from this thread and moved to PD:

http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?t=111688

[ELECTROGOD]

Ahhh, Frankenmuth. Just for everyone's information, this town is also known as the year-around Christmas town. People go there (the middle of nowhere) all year around to buy their Christmas trappings and marvel at the huge amount of Christmas crap that there is to choose from.

[SLD]

The link at the bottom of the article provides an important clue. It goes to the National Council on Bible Curriculum in Public Schools. That site indicates that it is in league with the American Family Association and the Center for Reclaiming America. It then goes on to assert that the Bible was the foundation of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. :rolleyes: It pleads with the visitor to help restore or religious and civil liberties in the nation.

IOW, this is religious indoctrination masquerading as education. Teaching that Jesus Christ rose from the dead is a true fact is religious indoctrination. Without teaching alternative points of view, without teaching that many scholars view Christianity as nothing more than one of a myriad of mystery religion.

The outline for their lesson plan is here:

http://www.bibleinschools.net/pdf/CurrTOB904.pdf

Interestingly enough there is a strange chapter entitled "Science and the Bible" and another under that entitled "The Hyrdrological Cycle of Weather & the Complexity of Weather Patterns".

Does anyone know if these are Creationist claims? What else might they have to do with the Bible?

SLD

[enemigo]

Interestingly enough there is a strange chapter entitled "Science and the Bible" and another under that entitled "The Hyrdrological Cycle of Weather & the Complexity of Weather Patterns".

Does anyone know if these are Creationist claims? What else might they have to do with the Bible?

SLD
The hydrological cycle section doesn't appear to be a creationist claim... I googled the phrases "hydrological cycle of weather" and "complexity of weather patterns," and came up with this:

With the history of the ancients, they had no technology of who the weather system worked.

But within the books of Job, Amos, Ecclesiastes, we discover scripture about the complexity of the weather system. The complete hydrological cycle governing evaporation, cloud formation, thunder, lighting and rain are all broke down in the ancient science of the Bible.
more here (http://www.secta7.com/forums/index.php?act=Print&client=printer&f=1&t=52). scroll about halfway down the page.

That particular page does make claims that the only way they could come across this scientific knowlege, is "by the divine ruler God."

[newtype_alpha]

I for one am all for some sort of in-school Bible class. I think it's a wonderful idea. Opening the door for a Bible class in school then makes it permissable for a Quran class, a Veda class, an I Ching class, and then as students become more curious, a comparative religion class. (My high school had one and it was the single most popular elective in the school for three years running). And since the context of this is a PUBLIC school, this puts the Bible under a microscope. It sets the stage for a brushfire of theological/philosphical debate not unlike the type we see on this very message board, students pointing out contradictions in scripture, curiosities, strange things that most people don't understand.

I doubt the end result would a great turning of students to Christianity, although it might simply accelerate the process for kids who would have eventually converted anyway. It WOULD create an environment for study about some of the more controversial themes that have shaped human history, and maybe provide a glimpse into the book that has had such an impact (and in many cases, damage) to Western thought.

Think about it, this would happen in a public school. How many of you would have signed up for a Bible class in your school had it been offered? Personally I would, and I know alot of atheists and pagans who would have as well. :devil3:

[SLD]

The hydrological cycle section doesn't appear to be a creationist claim... I googled the phrases "hydrological cycle of weather" and "complexity of weather patterns," and came up with this:

more here (http://www.secta7.com/forums/index.php?act=Print&client=printer&f=1&t=52). scroll about halfway down the page.

That particular page does make claims that the only way they could come across this scientific knowlege, is "by the divine ruler God."

Interesting enemigo. This also though seals their fate. This is an assertion of the bible as true fact. That brings it out of the realm of academic study and into the realm of proselytization. Big time violation of C-S.

SLD

[PatrickHays]

Introduction to World Religions; Judaism; Christianity; Islam; Hinduism; Buddhism; Sikhism; Jainism; Confucianism; Shinto; Taoism; Ancient Religions; Atheism; Agnosticism; Humanism; Baha'i; Deism; Hare Krishna; New Age; Paganism; Santeria; Satanism; Scientology; Spirit Religions; Vodun (Voodoo); The Parsis/Zoroastrianism, etc. . . . along with critical analysis of all texts and laws involved I might agree with a proposal for schools . . . but, this proposal is just another way to indoctrinate a set system and belief mindset. "Let's get'em before they have a chance to think for themselves"

[Anat]

I wouldn't mind a class about the Bible, even if it didn't include all religions and religious texts, as long as it included a variety of approaches to the Bible, including information from archaeology, text criticism and comparison with Middle Eastern myths and legal texts.

[Anat]

Is it possible under current legislation to include excerpts from the Bible in other classes? For example, selected Psalms and other biblical poetry in a poetry class? Or a story like the scroll of Ruth in a literature class (with some other folk tales and love stories)?

[maddog]

Is it possible under current legislation to include excerpts from the Bible in other classes? For example, selected Psalms and other biblical poetry in a poetry class? Or a story like the scroll of Ruth in a literature class (with some other folk tales and love stories)?
Yes, of course. The Establishment Clause does not forbid all reference to all religious texts. The pertinent point is whether there is a valid secular purpose. Studying the Bible, or portions of it, as literature is well within the permitted secular purposes. The test should be fairly simple. What is being taught? Spelling or religion? History or religion? Literature or religion? Textual criticism or religion? Sociology or religion?

A public school, as an institution of government of ALL the people, of ALL religious backgrounds, has no business teaching the "truth" of any religion. It can hardly ignore the influence of the existence of actual religions, however, upon such universal subjects as history, literature, psychology, geography, and so forth.

[enemigo]

UPDATE:

Bible Class Idea Ditched in Mich. District (http://news.findlaw.com/ap_stories/other/1110/1-11-2005/20050111090008_13.html)

A rural school district will not offer a religious group's Bible class as an elective high school course, ending a yearlong debate.

The school board in Frankenmuth, about 75 miles north of Detroit, decided with one dissenting vote Monday to not offer the "Bible As Literature and History" class at Frankenmuth High School, following the recommendation of school Superintendent Michael Murphy.

[...]

"It goes beyond talking about religion and becomes faith-based," Murphy said.

I do think the dissenting member made a strong case though: "Why is it that students can't read the Bible in school when prisoners can in prison? Why do I have to swear on a Bible in court, when the Ten Commandments cannot be displayed on federal grounds? Our society is messed up." :rolleyes:

[Anat]

I don't think anything prevents students from reading the Bible during any form of free reading time.

[Corwin]

I do think the dissenting member made a strong case though: "Why is it that students can't read the Bible in school when prisoners can in prison?

Simple answer to a common strawman: They can. What can't happen is for a teacher to lead a bible study class during publically funded schooling.

Why do I have to swear on a Bible in court, when the Ten Commandments cannot be displayed on federal grounds?

Another simple answer to another common strawman: You don't have to swear on a Bible in court or anywhere else in our secular government.

Swearing on a Bible is an option, but is only an option. You have, and always have had, the option to 'affirm' instead. (Secular version. Rather than swear an oath before a God you may or may not believe in, you have the option to affirm that your testimony is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.)

Our society is messed up.

Yes it is. It will be less so when these all too common lies from the Christian Right are more commonly recognized for the propaganda they are.

[Buffman]

Yes it is. It will be less so when these all too common lies from the Christian Right are more commonly recognized for the propaganda they are.

Hear! Hear!

Apparently we could use a few more accurate, adult, World and American, history courses taught by qualified instructors. It might also help if there were more courses available that taught critical reasoning methodology.