Giddy up! More on the Bible in public schools

[Regiomontanus]

Well religious wars always have an impact don't they?

Sigh. I expected better from you.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Oh boy.

https://www.cnn.com/2024/06/27/us/oklahoma-schools-bible-curriculum/index.html

How will the USSC decide on these proposals/laws?

Tune in next week, same bat time, same bat channel.

It depends on how you approach it. I have zero difficulty teaching from the Bible, just as I have zero difficulty teaching from Shakespeare, or Ibsen, or Arthur Miller, perhaps Harper Lee (okay, especially Harper Lee), or from the Iliad, Odyssey or Aeneid. In fact, throw in the Upanishads, Gilgamesh, Inanna and Huluppu Tree (or Inanna and Dumuzi -- a bit risque), or anything else you'd like.

C'mon, an absolutely immense number of references in our everyday lives have their origins in the Bible and Shakespeare, and all those other things I referenced, and far, far more. Most of us can barely get through our lives without quoting every single day from the Bible or any of the other literature from our cultural past.

But to teach the Bible (or anything else I referenced) as "history," has to be wrong. To teach it as "truth" would forever poison the very meaning of the word "truth."

I believe Oklahoma also insists on teaching the Ten Commandments. Fine -- if you teach them as part of instilling understanding in students how humans have constructed the rules and laws we live by. And in doing that, it should be mandatory to teach Solon and Hammurabi and Magna Carta.

In other words, you can either work towards making your students educated, or indoctrinated. It's all in how you teach it.

 

[Regiomontanus]

I assume English is not your first language?

Your assumption, like your 'arguments' (being generous in that characterization) are flawed to the point of irrelevancy. Have a nice day.

 

[Spice]

“It’s crystal clear to us that in the Oklahoma academic standards under Title 70 on multiple occasions, the Bible is a necessary historical document to teach our kids about the history of this country, to have a complete understanding of Western civilization, to have an understanding of the basis of our legal system,” Walters said."

Do you disagree as to the importance of the Christian faith in the development of western civilization?

(Constitutional issues aside)

Religious Freedom should be taught in all school curriculums and the Bible is not directly needed to teach that. The history of religious persecution suffices well. And that should include the Black Robe wave over the North American Natives!

If we were to teach the whole truth about Christianity and it's impact on our world, the decision to introduce the subject at all would be quickly reversed.

 

[Regiomontanus]

It depends on how you approach it. I have zero difficulty teaching from the Bible, just as I have zero difficulty teaching from Shakespeare, or Ibsen, or Arthur Miller, perhaps Harper Lee (okay, especially Harper Lee), or from the Iliad, Odyssey or Aeneid. In fact, throw in the Upanishads, Gilgamesh, Inanna and Huluppu Tree (or Inanna and Dumuzi -- a bit risque), or anything else you'd like.

C'mon, an absolutely immense number of references in our everyday lives have their origins in the Bible and Shakespeare, and all those other things I referenced, and far, far more. Most of us can barely get through our lives without quoting every single day from the Bible or any of the other literature from our cultural past.

But to teach the Bible (or anything else I referenced) as "history," has to be wrong. To teach it as "truth" would forever poison the very meaning of the word "truth."

I believe Oklahoma also insists on teaching the Ten Commandments. Fine -- if you teach them as part of instilling understanding in students how humans have constructed the rules and laws we live by. And in doing that, it should be mandatory to teach Solon and Hammurabi and Magna Carta.

In other words, you can either work towards making your students educated, or indoctrinated. It's all in how you teach it.

Thank you brother. Your reply is the first reasonable and honest one so far. You can see the truth despite your hate.

 

[Spice]

That's a good point and exactly what kind of Bible? A Catholic Bible? A Protestant Bible?


Now that would be fine in the charter/ parochial school, but in the public school?

I don't think it's going to work too well and all the attention will be focused on various Christian sects bickering over what kind of Bible needs to be in the schools, and good Lord!

The negligence that would cause to the students, addressing the reason why they would be in the school in the first place, and that is to learn Reading Writing Arithmetic along with other things necessary to get a good start in society.

But what if it's decided to be a Trump Bible edition -- only $60. for thin pages, no index nor glossary, and American Flag embossed pleather binding.

 

[Balthazzar]

One area where many the left & the right have
common ground is that the Constitution is an
aged irrelevant body of law in our age.
The left loathes the 2nd Amendment.
The right loathes the 1st Amendment.
Each has advocated pursuing what is popular
among them, the Constitution be damned.

I view your sentiments very differently. The constitution exists to protect everyone in this nation, including the secular community, and the various cultures representing the many religions of the world. The compulsory institution of strict compliance to teaching the bible in every school district in Oklahoma is not even remotely in the same league as what's going on in Louisiana. The 1st amendment is our first line of defense, and when in the course of human events one people (state) decides that the laws of our government has become detrimental to their happiness and well being, it is our right and is expected that we utilize the 1st amendment to resolve our grievances.

I'm guessing that Louisiana will present a strong case in the SC if and when they get there. Oklahoma on the other hand, I'm not so sure about. The talk of dissolution from aspects of secular laws and our right to peaceably assemble and go through the appropriate channels according to our governing structures seem contrary to what's in play to some people, but I think this is possibly what is expected. If this happens, we know that Louisiana did this according to their voter base, and in that assembly the laws were employed, but secular bonds suggest that it's unconstitutional, so .... dissolution from those secular bonds in that specific state may play out and Louisiana and their majority assembly will have become their own governing force under constitutional law, specific to their faith based orientations.

This will also be difficult to achieve anywhere else, unless the right to assemble is pursued by large populations to settle, and if proper credence is given to our declaration of Independance, constitutional law, and bill of rights. Oklahoma has not done this. They have not petitioned nor addressed in the same manner as Governor Landry has done.

I disagree with Oklahoma's decision.

 

[Regiomontanus]

But what if it's decided to be a Trump Bible edition -- only $60. for thin pages, no index nor glossary, and American Flag embossed pleather binding.

Please, Lord, not a Trump bible! If anyone was unsure if Trump is a Christian or not (or knows anything about the faith), this sales pitch of his should end all debate. Talk about sacrilegious ...

 

[fantome profane]

It's one thing to display the 10 commandments as a historical document and as accepted laws that prevent jail time (No murder, no stealing specifically) and as a way to increase peaceful relations with our neighbors, and it's quite another to expect strict compliance to bible teaching in our schools. While I agree with Louisiana, I disagree with Oklahoma. The other attached with the 10 ensure us that if we don't murder, don't steal, don't screw around, don't tempt ourselves to theft, that it won't be in vain. They also, ensure us that we won't be required to create idols of worship, that we are guaranteed a day of rest, and that we shouldn't convert, because we uphold the premise that our upbringing should be honored, which means we should honor others upbringing also, given they deem their parents worthy of that honor. If not, I'm fairly sure the doors are open to learn our faith.

I can't help but notice that you referenced all of them except the first one. That is the problem. The problem is that is says you can't worship any other Gods. That is fine in your church, that is fine in your home. But in the public sphere it is the role of government to protect your right to worship anything anyone anyway you want. It is the job of the government to protect your right to violate the first commandment.

And the second and third as well.

 

[Balthazzar]

I can't help but notice that you referenced all of them except the first one. That is the problem. The problem is that is says you can't worship any other Gods. That is fine in your church, that is fine in your home. But in the public sphere it is the role of government to protect your right to worship anything anyone anyway you want. It is the job of the government to protect your right to violate the first commandment.

And the second and third as well.

Who is God to you? Do you know everything about your God? If you take the position of no God, then what governs the Universe?

 

[Viker]

What governs the universe? Itself.

 

[McBell]

Your assumption, like your 'arguments' (being generous in that characterization) are flawed to the point of irrelevancy. Have a nice day.

So then you did understand what I actually said and still you strawman what I said?
I assumed you did not understand what I said.

Of course, I am not the least bit interested in your goal moving strawman.

Now if that is the best you got, by all means, carry on with out me.

 

[Regiomontanus]

So then you did understand what I actually said and still you strawman what I said?
I assumed you did not understand what I said.

Of course, I am not the least bit interested in your goal moving strawman.

Now if that is the best you got, by all means, carry on with out me.

<yawn>

Cheers

 

[fantome profane]

Who is God to you? Do you know everything about your God? If you take the position of no God, then what governs the Universe?

Smooth, make this about my beliefs and how my beliefs are wrong because they are not like your beliefs.

But that is the point, I have the right, the absolute right to have what you think are wrong beliefs. You can't force people to put up a sign saying your beliefs are right and my beliefs (whatever they are) are wrong.

 

[Regiomontanus]

What governs the universe? Itself.

Law and chance govern the Universe. Basic, modern, physics. And God sustains it all. I find it a bit depressing that in 2024 people are still so ignorant of such things.

 

[Balthazzar]

Smooth, make this about my beliefs and how my beliefs are wrong because they are not like your beliefs.

But that is the point, I have the right, the absolute right to have what you think are wrong beliefs. You can't force people to put up a sign saying your beliefs are right and my beliefs (whatever they are) are wrong.

Maybe you missed the point or maybe I miss yours. I'm suggesting that a supreme governing force permeates the entirety of everything in and as the universe. If this doesn't equate to God to you, then no God before me would suggest that you have your own way of understanding that authority in your life. No big in my opinion. It's personal to you just as it's personal to me. I have my understanding and you have yours. That was my point. If I missed yours, feel free to clarify the intent.

 

[fantome profane]

Maybe you missed the point or maybe I miss yours. I'm suggesting that a supreme governing force permeates the entirety of everything in and as the universe. If this doesn't equate to God to you, then no God before me would suggest that you have your own way of understanding that authority in your life. No big in my opinion. It's personal to you just as it's personal to me. I have my understanding and you have yours. That was my point. If I missed yours, feel free to clarify the intent.

It is not personal, well actually it is personal, but I would be happy to discuss it. But in a different context. Not in this thread, not in this context.

The point, and I think it was clear, is that you can't force a public institution to put up a sign declaring that we are only allowed to worship one specific God.

You took that as in invitation to start a debate with me about the existence and nature of God. But the point is that everyone must have the freedom to make that decision for themselves without interference by the state.

 

[Balthazzar]

It is not personal, well actually it is personal, but I would be happy to discuss it. But in a different context. Not in this thread, not in this context.

The point, and I think it was clear, is that you can't force a public institution to put up a sign declaring that we are only allowed to worship one specific God.

You took that as in invitation to start a debate with me about the existence and nature of God. But the point is that everyone must have the freedom to make that decision for themselves without interference by the state.

You suggested that I listed all but the first one, which I gave you the best way I knew how, an understanding of the way I view the first one. (There shall be no God before me) It's personal to me, just as it is to you. I still agree with the display in Louisianna, but I'm not in favor of Oklahoma's Super Intendant expecting strict adherence to teaching the bible in their school districts. You are not required to accept that you're free to view God any way you like, but that is a right in America.

 

[fantome profane]

You suggested that I listed all but the first one, which I gave you the best way I knew how, an understanding of the way I view the first one. (There shall be no God before me) It's personal to me, just as it is to you. I still agree with the display in Louisianna, but I'm not in favor of Oklahoma's Super Intendant expecting strict adherence to teaching the bible in their school districts. You are not required to accept that you're free to view God any way you like, but that is a right in America.

So you are in favour of the government putting up a sign saying that you must worship one specific God.

 

[Balthazzar]

So you are in favour of the government putting up a sign saying that you must worship one specific God.

That's a loaded question.

I'll tell you this. When an Islamic highschooler comes up to me and asks me to tell them about my God my game plan is: 1. Is your mother and Father honorable? They reply: "Yes". 2. No, I cannot I teach you. I must respect my faith. Go and honor your mother and father.