Politiks

Ulyanov · Sun May 06, 2007 1:30 am Bible classes

This is slightly old and I can't find any new news about it, but the article is here. Basically, there's a bill in Texas that would require a high school to offer a course on the Bible as an elective.

Learning about religion is something I think makes perfect sense, like it or not religion is a major force in the world, students should learn about it. Though there is always a risk it will become a class in which religion is preached instead of teached (taught, whatever, but taught didn't rhyme), training could help reduce these issues and it's worth it. I have a few issues with the bill though:

A) It's just the Bible, it doesn't teach about Judaism or Islam or Hinduism, etc., all of which are influential in world affairs as well and therefore should be learned about as well.

B) Specifically, the course should really be about Christianity, not the Bible.

C) The Bible would be used as the textbook, the reasoning behind this apparently being that it makes sense to learn about the Bible directly from the Bible. At first this seems to make sense, but if you think about it it doesn't. When we covered the Communist Manifesto, sure we read excerpts (I read the whole thing in 8th grade, but that's not important), but mainly we learned about historians' views on it and the various effects of communism in reality.

So in the end, I don't think there should be a Bible course, it should be a religion course, which would go more in depth into religion than world history or other social studies courses do.

(-S-) · Sun May 06, 2007 1:53 am

Oh, absolutely. If you leave school at 16 with merely a Bible in your pocket then you went to the wrong school.

Maximus Vigilus · Sun May 06, 2007 3:29 am

My school offered Comparative Religion which I believe is a better idea than simply Bible class.

Houndstooth · Sun May 06, 2007 5:53 pm

I agree with the previous points, but I could also see just a Bible-focused class being necessary. The sole reason is that when students study British/English Literature in the later grades of high school, much of the allusions and metaphors are Biblically based. That's why we studied the Bible in 10th grade at my school. Lots and lots of literature (at least that students will study in school) has Biblical references and allusions. Not to mention poetry.

Just studying the tenets of Christianity wouldn't prepare one for such topics.

And I actually am curious about the other religions (mostly Islam) - I've been reading a bit of the Quran (spl) online.

Ulyanov · Sun May 06, 2007 11:14 pm

The literature classes should also though, IMO, be teaching about Chinese, Middle Eastern, etc. writing, there's no reason for them to focus on British literature the way they do.

Houndstooth · Mon May 07, 2007 1:18 am

Ulyanov wrote: The literature classes should also though, IMO, be teaching about Chinese, Middle Eastern, etc. writing, there's no reason for them to focus on British literature the way they do. Ok, but that's neither here nor there. Most people in my culture are more exposed to British literature than Middle Eastern or Oriental.

Roy's Our Boy · Mon May 07, 2007 2:42 am Re: Bible classes

Ulyanov wrote: A) It's just the Bible, it doesn't teach about Judaism or Islam or Hinduism, etc., all of which are influential in world affairs as well and therefore should be learned about as well.

I take it you have never compared such religions?

Ulyanov wrote: B) Specifically, the course should really be about Christianity, not the Bible.

That is rather vague.

Ulyanov wrote: C) The Bible would be used as the textbook, the reasoning behind this apparently being that it makes sense to learn about the Bible directly from the Bible. At first this seems to make sense, but if you think about it it doesn't. When we covered the Communist Manifesto, sure we read excerpts (I read the whole thing in 8th grade, but that's not important), but mainly we learned about historians' views on it and the various effects of communism in reality.

But in order to understand historians' views on it, you must first understand the material itself.

Bob Frankenberry · Mon May 07, 2007 3:22 am

When I was in high school, there was a class called "Biblical Literature", which simply took the Bible--Old and New Testament [They make the Bible!] and reviewed as though it were a piece of simple literature.

The class was an elective. And there was, in a manner of speaking, no religion with it. We read the Bible, and we did review questions about it. "What are the Ten Commandments?" and we answered based upon our study guides and what our particular translation of the Bible told us.

It was no different than if we spent a whole semester talking about The Oddessy or another large text.

I'm perfectly okay with a class like that.

Ulyanov · Mon May 07, 2007 10:33 am Re: Bible classes

Roy's Our Boy wrote: Ulyanov wrote: A) It's just the Bible, it doesn't teach about Judaism or Islam or Hinduism, etc., all of which are influential in world affairs as well and therefore should be learned about as well.

I take it you have never compared such religions?
I've never taken a course specifically aimed at comparing them, no, but certainly I've considered their similarities and differences. I'm not really sure what your question was.

Roy's Our Boy wrote: Ulyanov wrote: B) Specifically, the course should really be about Christianity, not the Bible.

That is rather vague.
No, it's like saying we should learn about communism instead of the communist manifesto.

Quote: Ulyanov wrote: C) The Bible would be used as the textbook, the reasoning behind this apparently being that it makes sense to learn about the Bible directly from the Bible. At first this seems to make sense, but if you think about it it doesn't. When we covered the Communist Manifesto, sure we read excerpts (I read the whole thing in 8th grade, but that's not important), but mainly we learned about historians' views on it and the various effects of communism in reality.

But in order to understand historians' views on it, you must first understand the material itself.
To 100% understand anything (assuming you can), you'd have to read the whole thing, there doesn't need to be a whole high school course devoted to that.

Bob Frankenberry · Mon May 07, 2007 5:51 pm Re: Bible classes

Ulyanov wrote: Roy's Our Boy wrote: Ulyanov wrote: A) It's just the Bible, it doesn't teach about Judaism or Islam or Hinduism, etc., all of which are influential in world affairs as well and therefore should be learned about as well.

I take it you have never compared such religions?
I've never taken a course specifically aimed at comparing them, no, but certainly I've considered their similarities and differences. I'm not really sure what your question was.

Well, if we are to study the Bible, we're going to learn about Judaism. As the Old Testament is the Hebrew Bible.

I believe that's what he was hinting at.

Roy's Our Boy · Tue May 08, 2007 1:45 am Re: Bible classes

Ulyanov wrote: I've never taken a course specifically aimed at comparing them, no, but certainly I've considered their similarities and differences. I'm not really sure what your question was.

Bob Frankenberry wrote:
Well, if we are to study the Bible, we're going to learn about Judaism. As the Old Testament is the Hebrew Bible.

I believe that's what he was hinting at.

Ulyanov wrote: No, it's like saying we should learn about communism instead of the communist manifesto.

Sure, if you want such a generalized course.

Ulyanov wrote: To 100% understand anything (assuming you can), you'd have to read the whole thing, there doesn't need to be a whole high school course devoted to that.

Any response I could give to that would only spark an "Is God Real" debate.