Georgia approves bible as textbook

[canadalaura 0]

Ahhh... Georgia. Home sweet home. sorta - I work here. Doesn't suprise me in the least.

[Reba 2]

A primary source is usually preferable to a secondary one, from an academic perspective.

If you're going to teach a class about, say, "The Great Gatsby", wouldn't "The Great Gatsby" be your central text?

except the Bible is not a primary source. The originals are long gone, and quite a few scholars have said that the current translations are so far from the original script as to be almost unrecognizable. Not only because of several generations of hand copying by people who not always had a firm grasp of the languages they were translating, but also for political reasons. And even different versions of the bible (Kjv, NIV, Catholic etc etc etc) were each translated from different versions themselves! Add to that each and every teacher who takes on this class is going to add their own particular interpretation of the version they're teaching from, and it will differ more still.

Personally if they want to teach The History of the Christian religion, fine, have at it. But any version of the Bible out now is not a good choice for primary core text. Secondary supplemental reading perhaps.

I'm sure Georgia schools are not the first to use the Bible as text. My husband's neice took "Religious History" in high school a few years ago (9th grade class IIRC), and when I asked her what the text was they're using she replied "New International Version" Her school actually somehow passed off a Religious history class with the Bible as the text. And no other Religion on the list Gotta love small town Bible Belt

[Saddle Bronc 124]

A primary source is usually preferable to a secondary one, from an academic perspective.

If you're going to teach a class about, say, "The Great Gatsby", wouldn't "The Great Gatsby" be your central text?

except the Bible is not a primary source. The originals are long gone, and quite a few scholars have said that the current translations are so far from the original script as to be almost unrecognizable. Not only because of several generations of hand copying by people who not always had a firm grasp of the languages they were translating, but also for political reasons. And even different versions of the bible (Kjv, NIV, Catholic etc etc etc) were each translated from different versions themselves! Add to that each and every teacher who takes on this class is going to add their own particular interpretation of the version they're teaching from, and it will differ more still.

Actually, a copy of Isaiah from the Dead Sea Scrolls was compared to the next oldest Hebrew copy (about 900 AD). Total differences: 16--fifteen typos and one style change.

Also, copiers and translators had to get uniformity then--meaning if you found one discrepancy after 200 pages, ALL 200 PAGES HAD TO BE DISCARDED AND THE TASK HAD TO START OVER FROM SCRATCH!

Two facts which bin completely your hypothesis above.

[pedroh 21]

Haysoos en la escuela?

[simone24 0]

IF it stays in the context of historical/literature then it might have some value. But I can absolutely guarantee you that it won't. Georgia is a republican state, very staunch conservatives pretty much have the majority here. This won't stay as a historical/literature course...the conservatives will find a way to promote their belief system.

Religious instruction has its place, but it isn't in the public schools...and I hope I haven't offended anyone with that statement.

I totally agree with your statements. One of my concerns is who will be teaching the course.

[faith 0]

IF it stays in the context of historical/literature then it might have some value. But I can absolutely guarantee you that it won't. Georgia is a republican state, very staunch conservatives pretty much have the majority here. This won't stay as a historical/literature course...the conservatives will find a way to promote their belief system.

Religious instruction has its place, but it isn't in the public schools...and I hope I haven't offended anyone with that statement.

I totally agree with your statements. One of my concerns is who will be teaching the course.

especially since the article stated that many teachers do not want to teach it because it will put them in a situation that they are not comfortable in.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Also, copiers and translators had to get uniformity then--meaning if you found one discrepancy after 200 pages, ALL 200 PAGES HAD TO BE DISCARDED AND THE TASK HAD TO START OVER FROM SCRATCH!

Isn't the uniformity requirement you mention contradicted by the existence of various versions of the same book? Or are there indeed different bibles based on different source documents? If so, how many of these did "God" write? And how many of those will be used as the basis for the class offerings in glorious GA?

[Saddle Bronc 124]

IF it stays in the context of historical/literature then it might have some value. But I can absolutely guarantee you that it won't. Georgia is a republican state, very staunch conservatives pretty much have the majority here. This won't stay as a historical/literature course...the conservatives will find a way to promote their belief system.

Religious instruction has its place, but it isn't in the public schools...and I hope I haven't offended anyone with that statement.

I totally agree with your statements. One of my concerns is who will be teaching the course.

If teaching ELECTIVE (meaning students can ELECT to take or leave this course) in Bible history amounts to religious instruction, then stating "the scriptures say..." as was done in Calgary public (no mistake, I did mean "public", not "Catholic"; Calgary has two separate school boards) elementary schools (as was done during "assembly" each week during the 1970's; they also passed those going from elementary to jr. high New Testaments) would be even more so--gee, I didn't even think about that till just now (and I was NOT a Christian until 1994).

[simone24 0]

IF it stays in the context of historical/literature then it might have some value. But I can absolutely guarantee you that it won't. Georgia is a republican state, very staunch conservatives pretty much have the majority here. This won't stay as a historical/literature course...the conservatives will find a way to promote their belief system.

Religious instruction has its place, but it isn't in the public schools...and I hope I haven't offended anyone with that statement.

I totally agree with your statements. One of my concerns is who will be teaching the course.

especially since the article stated that many teachers do not want to teach it because it will put them in a situation that they are not comfortable in.

I don't want to teach it. It is hard enough teaching my subject area and trying to stay politically correct. I try hard not to give my religious view points on issues in the classroom. A few weeks ago a History teacher was put on probation and is now under investigation because he compared Bush to Hitler. He may lose his license because of he decided to compare and contrast two figure head in the classroom. If people in the country can't discuss being a democrat vs. a republican without getting upset what do they think will happen when religion is being compared and contrasted?

[Saddle Bronc 124]

I don't want to teach it. It is hard enough teaching my subject area and trying to stay politically correct. I try hard not to give my religious view points on issues in the classroom. A few weeks ago a History teacher was put on probation and is now under investigation because he compared Bush to Hitler. He may lose his license because of he decided to compare and contrast two figure head in the classroom. If people in the country can't discuss being a democrat vs. a republican without getting upset what do they think will happen when religion is being compared and contrasted?

That would depend on whether he used a legitimate (meaning "allowing check against outside sources, not just the media, and not just materials he made available in class") approach or the twisted approach of rural AB former teacher James Keegstra (who was known to FAIL those who consulted outside references); if the latter, he deserves to be sacked and delicenced.

Edited March 30, 2006 by sriniv

[honeyblonde 0]

I just took a law class on this last fall and we had some mighty intense discussions on this topic. Since I'm actually in Georgia I do wish that I'd have known about this then. Our professor is a Federal prosecutor that teaches at night as a hobby.

IF, and I stress IF, someone challenges the constitutionality of this law, it will not pass the test of separation of church and state for the simple reason that it specifies that the Bible must be used as the text. Many schools have offered these courses from a historical perspective and that is fine, but this restriction on the text makes it quite clear that it is really a religion class. The constitution and the precedent of the law in this country make it clear that my tax dollars can't be used to pay for anybody's Bible study. Even with a majority right-wing supreme court I doubt they'd find this law acceptable.

My second thought is, it can't be historical if it only uses the Bible as a text. When I took philosophy classes our professor stressed that any study of a philosophical work could only be done once the historical background in which it was written was understood. While today we might find the work of someone like John Jacque Rousseau to be pretty normal, in his day he was as drastically radical as Darwin. He was one of the first to suggest that man should not be governed by religion. Unless one understands the time in which he wrote, and what everyone else at the time believed, and has a grasp of the historical context, there is no way his writing can be fully appreciated as the unique work that it is.

The same is true about the Bible. When I asked my sister about who decided which books went in it, and other questions along the same line, she had no clue and didn't care. If we are truly going to teach the Bible as a historical text, then the teachers need to know a lot more about the background than what they learn in the Bible itself. I went to a Christian University when I was young and was required to take a 2 semester class called "Decide for Yourself". Unfortunately for them I guess, I decided that they were basing their entire religion on poorly translated pieces of text taken completely out of context. I also read the works of Flavius Josephus around that time and saw the discrepancies between his version of many things and the Bible version.

If they were to actually have the kids read historical works from the same time period it would probably actually undermine the goal they seem to want to accomplish. All I know is I'm glad it's only an elective, but I wonder how long it will be before they try to make it mandatory like school uniforms and other nonsense. Anything to try to control our kids and keep them from actually thinking!

[faith 0]

I just took a law class on this last fall and we had some mighty intense discussions on this topic. Since I'm actually in Georgia I do wish that I'd have known about this then. Our professor is a Federal prosecutor that teaches at night as a hobby.

IF, and I stress IF, someone challenges the constitutionality of this law, it will not pass the test of separation of church and state for the simple reason that it specifies that the Bible must be used as the text. Many schools have offered these courses from a historical perspective and that is fine, but this restriction on the text makes it quite clear that it is really a religion class. The constitution and the precedent of the law in this country make it clear that my tax dollars can't be used to pay for anybody's Bible study. Even with a majority right-wing supreme court I doubt they'd find this law acceptable.

My second thought is, it can't be historical if it only uses the Bible as a text. When I took philosophy classes our professor stressed that any study of a philosophical work could only be done once the historical background in which it was written was understood. While today we might find the work of someone like John Jacque Rousseau to be pretty normal, in his day he was as drastically radical as Darwin. He was one of the first to suggest that man should not be governed by religion. Unless one understands the time in which he wrote, and what everyone else at the time believed, and has a grasp of the historical context, there is no way his writing can be fully appreciated as the unique work that it is.

The same is true about the Bible. When I asked my sister about who decided which books went in it, and other questions along the same line, she had no clue and didn't care. If we are truly going to teach the Bible as a historical text, then the teachers need to know a lot more about the background than what they learn in the Bible itself. I went to a Christian University when I was young and was required to take a 2 semester class called "Decide for Yourself". Unfortunately for them I guess, I decided that they were basing their entire religion on poorly translated pieces of text taken completely out of context. I also read the works of Flavius Josephus around that time and saw the discrepancies between his version of many things and the Bible version.

If they were to actually have the kids read historical works from the same time period it would probably actually undermine the goal they seem to want to accomplish. All I know is I'm glad it's only an elective, but I wonder how long it will be before they try to make it mandatory like school uniforms and other nonsense. Anything to try to control our kids and keep them from actually thinking!

you said what i've been trying to say (bold stuff) but said it much more eloquently!

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

I sometimes wonder whether the whole point of passing this kind of ####### as law is to have someone challenge it and the courts subsequently sack it. Makes for a good background for those that cry about alleged Christian persecution in the US, doesn't it?

[tenika 0]

The constitution and the precedent of the law in this country make it clear that my tax dollars can't be used to pay for anybody's Bible study...

... I decided that they were basing their entire religion on poorly translated pieces of text taken completely out of context. I also read the works of Flavius Josephus around that time and saw the discrepancies between his version of many things and the Bible version.

... Anything to try to control our kids and keep them from actually thinking!

So should my tax dollars be used to pay for the murder of children...or the transportation of school children across state lines to get an abortion without the permission of their parents. Their are many laws in this country that are warped. The bible is the most historically acurate book around. Those books you refer to..where did they get their information..and that source..where did they get their information..and that source etc. Many of the books we study are written by people who got info from people who got info from people. The bible on the other hand is not like that in the least. How do we know Columbus sailed this x time and land at point x. There was personal accounts and testimonies verifying this information, Kingdom records, Sailor testimony, Natvie American testimony etc. The bible is the most accurate book around and it can stand up in a court of law. Evidence demands a verdict. The most effective evidence is witnesses. What book has the most and more evidence confirming evidence. The bible. If every bible in the world it taken and burned, you will still have enough historical evidence in the form of ancient letters to put the bible together..such as someone writing someone and saying "Today Yeshua (Jesus) healed a blind man I know named Barteius" or " I was on the mountian today with x and heard Yeshua say Blessed are the meek..."

Thousands and thousand of evidence and accurate historical information.

I think it is great to have the bible taught in schools.

I think someone should check out the book Evidence demands A Verdict, by Joshua McDowell. This book was written by a scholar who traveled the world getting evidence to prove the bible was false becuase he couldn't stand Christianity and thought that it was for the weak. In all his travel and trying to disprove Christianity he becam a Christian and his book details many of the proofs he found

[faith 0]

The constitution and the precedent of the law in this country make it clear that my tax dollars can't be used to pay for anybody's Bible study...

... I decided that they were basing their entire religion on poorly translated pieces of text taken completely out of context. I also read the works of Flavius Josephus around that time and saw the discrepancies between his version of many things and the Bible version.

... Anything to try to control our kids and keep them from actually thinking!

So should my tax dollars be used to pay for the murder of children...or the transportation of school children across state lines to get an abortion without the permission of their parents. Their are many laws in this country that are warped. The bible is the most historically acurate book around. Those books you refer to..where did they get their information..and that source..where did they get their information..and that source etc. Many of the books we study are written by people who got info from people who got info from people. The bible on the other hand is not like that in the least. How do we know Columbus sailed this x time and land at point x. There was personal accounts and testimonies verifying this information, Kingdom records, Sailor testimony, Natvie American testimony etc. The bible is the most accurate book around and it can stand up in a court of law. Evidence demands a verdict. The most effective evidence is witnesses. What book has the most and more evidence confirming evidence. The bible. If every bible in the world it taken and burned, you will still have enough historical evidence in the form of ancient letters to put the bible together..such as someone writing someone and saying "Today Yeshua (Jesus) healed a blind man I know named Barteius" or " I was on the mountian today with x and heard Yeshua say Blessed are the meek..."

Thousands and thousand of evidence and accurate historical information.

I think it is great to have the bible taught in schools.

I think someone should check out the book Evidence demands A Verdict, by Joshua McDowell. This book was written by a scholar who traveled the world getting evidence to prove the bible was false becuase he couldn't stand Christianity and thought that it was for the weak. In all his travel and trying to disprove Christianity he becam a Christian and his book details many of the proofs he found

Just how are your tax dollars paying for abortions??? How are they busing people across state lines to have abortions?

You say the bible can stand up in a court of law? Prove to me the existance of your god. Mind you for every one of your arguments there is a scientific rebuttal. There is no solid proof that the bible isn't a complete work of fiction.