The Chisum Trail
Wed, 04/04/2007 - 8:49am
In biblical news, State Representative Warren Chisum has proposed legislation which would require classes based on the Bible to be offered as electives in Texas high schools.
To be fair, the classes are on the literature and the history of the Bible's Old and New Testament eras, and the bill includes language which would require the course to be non-devotional. The obvious first question is an educational value comparison: how about the Qur'an along with Gilgamesh, or writings from Ur? How about the Hindu Rigveda, which is probably the oldest religious text and arguably has been the basis for a great deal of human society since? Or if we want to rock the Old Testament proper, why not the Tanakh?
The other question is: does anyone think that a course on the Bible can be taught non-devotionally in a public school setting? Can the historical context of a religious text be taught without allowing or denying some credence to the historical accuracy of events within the literature? Does teaching a religious text as a history in turn make it a devotional study?
I know I've been in college literature courses in which the Bible was taught, and even among young adults in college, the discussion almost always became divisive, or the professor, making a comment on the literary merits of the work, was told she was wrong or non-believing. I happen to know that professor was a good Catholic, but her attempt to teach the Bible as a non-devotional subject created discord.
I feel like the aim of this bill, especially considering it comes from Representative Chisum, is to expose students to Christianity, and to make sure they get some state-mandated Bibling, in case they aren't getting it on Sunday. I already mentioned this today and I'll say it again: the GOP has become the party which expands the role of government (and government mandates) in the daily lives of citizens, and anyone who says otherwise is not paying attention.
Facebook
Twitter
Digg
Reddit
What about its influence?
By Betsy Parchem
Wed, 04/04/2007 - 8:31pm
I can't claim to know Representative Chisum's motivation behind the bill, but if you're talking about the scholastic purpose of studying the Bible, consider everything the Bible has influenced.
The Church was so much apart of everyday life in historic Europe, heavily influencing art, music, literature... and everything in between. And not to mention many of the first colonizers here in the States were Puritan. There's too much history there to dismiss its influence altogether.
This is true.
By Josh Berthume
Thu, 04/05/2007 - 7:39am
I don't deny that the Bible has had an extraordinary influence on American life, and as you point, even farther than that, back to our roots in Europe. My argument is more about the process of trying to teach it, and whether or not you can separate that as an objective, er, subject, from people's emotions and beliefs about religion. For some people, questioning whether the bible received much of its basis from Gilgamesh or the historical accuracy of Noah's age and location is like questioning whether gravity exists.
I think it is difficult to teach it in an objective way, and I think it is an educational problem that schools may have difficulty dealing with.
Puhleeze
By D K Wilkerson
Thu, 04/05/2007 - 11:40am
Having just finished reading Chris Hedges' book, American Fascists: The Christian Right and the War On America, I'm in no frame of mind to agree that public school students need Bible studies. If our current testing protocol is not stupefaction enough, these kids would hardly benefit from coursework in magical thinking and simple answers to the problems facing the world today. A bill to require coursework in philosophy and logic, however, would get my approval.