Getting back to my first point (that the schools do not need a course on the Bible); well, this is the beauty of the whole thing. Faith in God as a Christian is not a bunch of “words” or “teaching” that makes you become something new. Craming the bible down someones throat or giving them a “list of do and don’ts” is just a bunch of religious works. Christianity is a heart change that is supernatural. It is a relationship with our creator. The Bible says that unbelievers can not understand or recieve spirital truths (you are not understanding me – right!) because they are spiritually understood and until one becomes born again by the spirit of Christ they can not recieve what the Bible says. In John 3 Jesus talked to an educated leader Nicodemus who did not get it and Jesus explined this.

Anyway, I accepted Christ ( meaning believed that he died for my sins and rose from the dead and put my faith in him as my Lord and Savior) at age 25 and I am now 53 and JESUS has given me life. Real life! I hope you all will at least pray “God if what this lady believes is true then show me”. We all want truth right? So why not ask GOD with a humble heart that if all this “Bible stuff” and Christianity is true and then ask for him to show you if it is true. I pray that you will ask this question with an open heart. By the way, Grace Church behind Lowes is a great church in Chapel Hill where the truth is explained without a bunch of religious stuff.

Linda

I agree that my personal opinion that the Bible isn’t a good read is not a reason why it shouldn’t be taught in schools. Separation of state and church is a more compelling reason. If somebody wants to study the Bible, what’s to stop them from taking a Bible study course at their church? Or in college?

Also, I feel that a course in a public school that focuses on any religious text should focus on MULTIPLE religious texts. If they’re going to teach religious texts in schools, they shouldn’t focus on just one.

The organizations I’ve linked to in the post say that their goal is not to indoctrinate students, or to focus on religion. If that’s the case, why not include texts from other religions? I suppose my major beef with the issue is that it seems like another manipulative way in which Christians are trying to push their beliefs on others. And, quite frankly, there is enough government spending on that.

campmatteo said,
2 April 2006

ok.

i agree: the bible is a text originally written by virtually nameless middle easterner’s renamed by english 17th century aristocrats with protestant anglo-names with protestant anglo-feudalist motives of enslavement and submisson. its simple, “turn the other cheek” essentially means “let your controller control you.” but to say that a] the bible isn’t rich and compelling literature and b] the iliad and the odyssey are less “preachy” are both pretty half-baked suppositions.

concentrate real hard and place yourself in thebes in bc650.

give it a second.

now imagine you and heather are walking to the beach: wooden sandals, braids, leg hair and togas. and you’re about 12 years old. she tells you a story about a woman who stepped too far out into the water and the waves got harsh and the god of the sea pulled her down into his realm to be his wife, or as we would call it today, eternal rape victim.

explain, in detail, how this isn’t religiously preachy.

besides that, sit down sometime with a glass of nice wine and read the story of job, or revelations, or hell- anything in the old testament. its some of the most vile, gripping, horrific literature ever. i’d rather read that than the aeneid any day.

given, the odyssey is pretty cartoony and great, but c’mon the first three books of both the aeneid and the iliad are basically the book of matthew over and over again, and such negativity everywhere. christians are so dark.

for a good read, sit down sometime when you have 2 months to spare and read the maha’ abaratha. you’ll wish to hell you were hindi.

in judeo-christianity, moses asks to see god and gets his back.
in ancient greek polytheism, semele asked to see zeus and was incinerated.
in buddhism, siddhartha asked for enlightenment and ended up under a tree for something like 30 years.
in hindu, arjuna asks to see the world of the gods, and krishna’s response?

yes.

and he shows arjuna the land of the gods.

It’s futile, really, to argue against Christianity in … well, in just about anything in the US. They are the majority, and majorities usually get their way; and, sadly, they can make a valid claim that “good Christian values are what this country was founded on,” regardless of the so-called “melting pot” we’re supposed to be — you have freedom of religion as long as the religion you choose is Christianity.

Anywho, I risk getting off-topic here. I agree with you wholeheartedly, and I further agree from the legal standpoint. Public resources should not be spent to further a particular religion. Now, if it were a class on “sacred texts as literature” or somesuch and if it also included the Qu’ran, the Vedas, the Tao-Te-Ching, and others, then I wouldn’t have a problem with it.

Christianity doesn’t need additional teaching in US classrooms. I say ‘additional’ because it already gets plenty of coverage from existing Western literature.

just my ¢2