• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Missouri bill would allow bible to be taught in school

dianaiad

Well-Known Member
A couple of things: why is there such a kerfufle about this in the first place? any prohibition against teaching the bible as literature and influences on society is very much the state messing with religion. A class on 'the bible as literature' is a whole different critter than a class on 'the bible as TRUTH, by George"

the Bible has been a huge influence on human history, To pretend it wasn't, to pretend it doesn't exist...to be afraid of it...seems to be a really counter-productive move. As well, the bill says that it would be an 'elective' course. As in, those who are utterly opposed to the idea simply don't have to take the course.

As for me, I had 'seminary' classes...that is, I had religious classes held in my own church building in the mornings before I went to high school. So did my kids. I highly recommend that approach for those who want their children 'raised in the faith,' whatever faith. I'm also very much FOR teaching the Bible as literature, as well as the Quran and the Vedas and any other thing that has affected human history as much as these works have. I do think that they should be High School AP electives, mind you. If a freshman can't read at the fourth grade level, he needs to take other things first.
 

We Never Know

No Slack
A couple of things: why is there such a kerfufle about this in the first place? any prohibition against teaching the bible as literature and influences on society is very much the state messing with religion. A class on 'the bible as literature' is a whole different critter than a class on 'the bible as TRUTH, by George"

the Bible has been a huge influence on human history, To pretend it wasn't, to pretend it doesn't exist...to be afraid of it...seems to be a really counter-productive move. As well, the bill says that it would be an 'elective' course. As in, those who are utterly opposed to the idea simply don't have to take the course.

As for me, I had 'seminary' classes...that is, I had religious classes held in my own church building in the mornings before I went to high school. So did my kids. I highly recommend that approach for those who want their children 'raised in the faith,' whatever faith. I'm also very much FOR teaching the Bible as literature, as well as the Quran and the Vedas and any other thing that has affected human history as much as these works have. I do think that they should be High School AP electives, mind you. If a freshman can't read at the fourth grade level, he needs to take other things first.

Here's a good reason.

Rep. Shamed Dogan, R-St. Louis, proposed an amendment that would include other religions in the bill. It was shot down.

Missouri bill would allow Bible classes in schools
 

dfnj

Well-Known Member
Looks like Missouri is following Arkansas

The classes would include the contents of the Bible, its history, the literary style and structure and the book’s influences on society.

Some sources say it will be taught as social studies.

Missouri bill would allow Bible classes in schools

It used to bother me. Now it doesn't bother me. Teaching anything that is different than the standardized testing is probably a good thing.
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber
A couple of things: why is there such a kerfufle about this in the first place? any prohibition against teaching the bible as literature and influences on society is very much the state messing with religion. A class on 'the bible as literature' is a whole different critter than a class on 'the bible as TRUTH, by George"
To that extent, a public school is not for religious education. And it's a given they wouldn't support the same thing with other religions. And very typically these things come with lies and distortions, such as claiming Noah Webster as a Founding Father (he wasn't) and placing a huge Biblical emphasis on the Bill of Rights, even though the 10 Commandments and Bill of Rights only have the number 10 in common (and indeed the Bill of Rights allows for freedoms that are explicitly prohibited under Biblical law).
 

whirlingmerc

Well-Known Member
Looks like Missouri is following Arkansas

The classes would include the contents of the Bible, its history, the literary style and structure and the book’s influences on society.

Some sources say it will be taught as social studies.

Missouri bill would allow Bible classes in schools


We always were allowed to have "Bible as literature' taught in High school in Illinois
in Chicago suburbs

what's the problem
 

InChrist

Free4ever
The Bible doesn't even have a proper history. There's no original and nobody even knows where it came from or who even wrote it.

What possibly is there to even learn from it, other than a small sect existed that was hardly even on the radar in those days.
Have you actually done any research on the origin of the Bible, it's history, where it came from, who wrote it, or the transmission of the biblical text? Or are you simply repeating things you've heard or making things up about the Bible?

Do you know that at present, there survives more some 25,000 partial and complete, ancient handwritten manuscript copies of the New Testament, as well as thousands of copies of the Old Testament, many predating the time of Christ. There are handwritten copies of the Old Testament, copied by scribes prior to Jesus’ birth, that have survived to this day.

Have you heard of the Dead Sea Scrolls?

In 1947 a shepherd boy tending his family's livestock in Qumran, northwest of the Dead Sea in Israel, made an amazing discovery while looking for a lost goat. In a hillside cave that had laid untouched for nearly two thousand years, this Muslim boy discovered a collection of large clay jars containing carefully wrapped leather manuscripts. This was an ancient collection of handwritten copies of the Old Testament that dated as far back as the third century before Christ. An amazing discovery!

Archaeologists spent years searching the surrounding caves and by the time they were done, copies of every book of the Old Testament had been discovered, except Esther. In some cases there were multiple copies of the same book. For example, there were nineteen copies of the Book of Isaiah, twenty-five copies of Deuteronomy and thirty copies of the Psalms.

To prove your accusations against the Bible you would have to prove there are no original manuscripts or point to ancient copies of the Bible and show that what they used to say is different from modern Bibles. But that cannot be done because when you look at the ancient manuscript copies of the Bible, you find that the modern copies of the Bible say what the ancient manuscripts say because modern Bibles are translated directly from ancient manuscript copies of the Bible.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Have you actually done any research on the origin of the Bible, it's history, where it came from, who wrote it, or the transmission of the biblical text? Or are you simply repeating things you've heard or making things up about the Bible?

Do you know that at present, there survives more some 25,000 partial and complete, ancient handwritten manuscript copies of the New Testament, as well as thousands of copies of the Old Testament, many predating the time of Christ. There are handwritten copies of the Old Testament, copied by scribes prior to Jesus’ birth, that have survived to this day.

Have you heard of the Dead Sea Scrolls?

In 1947 a shepherd boy tending his family's livestock in Qumran, northwest of the Dead Sea in Israel, made an amazing discovery while looking for a lost goat. In a hillside cave that had laid untouched for nearly two thousand years, this Muslim boy discovered a collection of large clay jars containing carefully wrapped leather manuscripts. This was an ancient collection of handwritten copies of the Old Testament that dated as far back as the third century before Christ. An amazing discovery!

Archaeologists spent years searching the surrounding caves and by the time they were done, copies of every book of the Old Testament had been discovered, except Esther. In some cases there were multiple copies of the same book. For example, there were nineteen copies of the Book of Isaiah, twenty-five copies of Deuteronomy and thirty copies of the Psalms.

To prove your accusations against the Bible you would have to prove there are no original manuscripts or point to ancient copies of the Bible and show that what they used to say is different from modern Bibles. But that cannot be done because when you look at the ancient manuscript copies of the Bible, you find that the modern copies of the Bible say what the ancient manuscripts say because modern Bibles are translated directly from ancient manuscript copies of the Bible.
Nope, everything that he posted was correct. And why do you put so much stock in the Dead Sea scrolls? They only show that once the stories were written down they did not change much. The problem is that most of the Old Testament is dated to just after the Babylonian captivity. Including the parts written by "Moses".
 

whirlingmerc

Well-Known Member
I am willing to provide the evidence, but you have a lot to learn. You have already demonstrated almost complete ignorance about the topic. That is why I am starting at the beginning.

And you forgot already that you failed in our previous encounter. Until you learn the basics you won't be able.to.understand the evidence.


Teaching the Bible is fine in schools if done well.
Teaching it badly... well... that's not great
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Have you actually done any research on the origin of the Bible, it's history, where it came from, who wrote it, or the transmission of the biblical text? Or are you simply repeating things you've heard or making things up about the Bible?

Do you know that at present, there survives more some 25,000 partial and complete, ancient handwritten manuscript copies of the New Testament, as well as thousands of copies of the Old Testament, many predating the time of Christ. There are handwritten copies of the Old Testament, copied by scribes prior to Jesus’ birth, that have survived to this day.

Have you heard of the Dead Sea Scrolls?

In 1947 a shepherd boy tending his family's livestock in Qumran, northwest of the Dead Sea in Israel, made an amazing discovery while looking for a lost goat. In a hillside cave that had laid untouched for nearly two thousand years, this Muslim boy discovered a collection of large clay jars containing carefully wrapped leather manuscripts. This was an ancient collection of handwritten copies of the Old Testament that dated as far back as the third century before Christ. An amazing discovery!

Archaeologists spent years searching the surrounding caves and by the time they were done, copies of every book of the Old Testament had been discovered, except Esther. In some cases there were multiple copies of the same book. For example, there were nineteen copies of the Book of Isaiah, twenty-five copies of Deuteronomy and thirty copies of the Psalms.

To prove your accusations against the Bible you would have to prove there are no original manuscripts or point to ancient copies of the Bible and show that what they used to say is different from modern Bibles. But that cannot be done because when you look at the ancient manuscript copies of the Bible, you find that the modern copies of the Bible say what the ancient manuscripts say because modern Bibles are translated directly from ancient manuscript copies of the Bible.
You know it. I know it.

One sticking point however is how in the world did people in medieval days and earlier know it if those fragments weren't discovered till much later on?

Chronologically it makes no sense, and when earlier finds are compared with later finds, there was a notable and significant variation in wording and context detected, leading me to surmise that the Bible people read today is vastly, if not entirely and completely different from its very first original template. Unfortunately many people believe the original template doesn't exist anymore and I have no reason to doubt it.

The fact remains you only have fragments. This leads me to wonder how those gaps of information were filled in.

The fact remains nobody knows who even wrote it. The authorship of each and every book and testament of the Bible is all conjecture.

As far as I'm concerned at this point, it's a medieval invention introduced by the Catholic Church for the greater part, to which some had suggested the Coptic Church as well contributed to the narrative. What the Catholic and Coptic churches had themselves is a complete mystery leaving me to think the Bible was essentially invented within the Catholic church and the Coptic churches walls by their own scribes.
 

whirlingmerc

Well-Known Member
It appears to be an attempt to proselytize rather than to educate.


Maybe as part of a history course they can add that:

The Supreme Court that ruled in 1963 that school-sanctioned prayer violated the Constitution also declared, “Nothing we have said here indicates that such study of the Bible … when presented objectively as part of a secular program of education, may not be effected consistently with the First Amendment.”
 
Top