Randman's call for nonSecular education...

What about the worlds other holy books and ideologies? I'm sure you agree that if the argument (should teach the bible) is to hold water then all the holy books of the world should be taught fully, wholly without bias from any particular theological stand point.But not after you have taught the bible to them, but at the same time. Make it an exercise in comparative analysis and study. Anything else is simply a call to promote one ideology over another.

That's what I wrote already, but after they have learned the Bible and the various Christian theologies that have shaped Western history.

Why after? The vedas, Greek mythology and a lot of other influential religious texts came before the bible and influenced history...some also influenced the bible. That you want the bible to be taught first indicates you have some other agenda having nothing to do with improving students history education.

I believe that American and Western history should be emphasized first because we live in America. Understand yourself and then your neighbor. There's no evil agenda, but in typical fashion, you resort to personal character attacks, sort of like cults do, when your paradigm is challenged.Once students have a clear understanding of how Christianity, the Bible and various Christian theologies in particular, shaped Western and American history, then it is important to understand how religions in other cultures have shaped those cultures.

Well, if it is an interest in history that is based on geographical location and historical timeline, students should begin with the long and complex history of native American religions that predated western influence since it is American history we are supposedly interested in teaching and not giving preferential treatment to the bible

It has to do with the culture and ideas that formed this nation, and shaped it. What the Indians believed has not played as large a role, but it is certainly worthwhile to learn what they believed and do believe for any Indian traditionalists.

Note that I have a post addressed to you which still requires a reply. Some of your latter replies have included points I have addressed. That said... But this makes no sense. If it is history you are interested in, then you would have to begin with other books from other religions.If it is the history of this nation, then you would have to begin with native american belief systems.If it is the culture and ideas that formed this nation... then where does the Bible fit in at all? Why would a Chinese kid whose ancestors helped build the railroad system of this nation, have to learn that Xianity is the culture that formed this nation? Why would an Irish or Italian Child have to learn a Protestant version of Xianity as having formed the nation? Why would a Deist have to learn an evangelical version of Xianity as having formed this nation? Why would an agnostic/atheist have to learn that a religion formed this culture or nation?Although there was a large percentage of Xians, that does not mean that others played a lesser part in forming and shaping this nation. If anything it is the great diversity which set us apart and shaped our future different from other nations.We welcomed and tolerated views not welcomed and tolerated elsewhere (if not always immediately then eventually).To teach that any theological interpretation was the basis for the formation, or somehow shaped this nation is almost patently false. This nation was a product of the enlightenment which was a rejection of many traditional Xian beliefs, and a rediscovery of preXian writings on science and politics.And I want to add one other point. Why would children need school to introduce them to the culture they are already living in? Your objective is pretty obvious, to produce a culture that in fact does not exist.If it did, then you wouldn't have to ask for it to be taught. Because it doesn't, it is errant to teach it as if it is.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

Yawn. Get over it. The simple fact is Christianity played an extremely crucial role in Western history and the formation of the colonies and this nation, and in the 1800s.As far as Catholicism, we should teach what that theology is.The idea that Indian theological beliefs played a significant role in the development of the USA is wrong, but that doesn't mean they should be ignored entirely. It's just you teach US history first, and others second.For example, it is more important to understand the US government and Constitution, for American kids than to understand Japan's. It's not that Japan's history and religion should be ignored, but our own history should be taught first.As far as current history, I agree there is less need to talk about current events, but at the same time, it's often good to discuss current events and views.

quote:

---

For example, it is more important to understand the US government and Constitution, for American kids than to understand Japan's.

---

I don't know about that. World War II, including the Pacific Theater, is an important part of US history; probably the most important event in the 20th century. How does one understand WWII without understanding why the Japanese were expanding in East Asia, or why they attacked the naval base in Hawaii? And how does one understand this without spending significant time studying historical Japanese culture?

---

"Intellectually, scientifically, even artistically, fundamentalism -- biblical literalism -- is a road to nowhere, because it insists on fidelity to revealed truths that are not true." -- Katha Pollitt

that's a lot to devote to bible study, rand.why 4-5 years about the bible, and then cram tao te ching, the vedas and upanishads, the koran, confucious, buddha, and native american narratives into the last year? i think they put mroe stress on it than you might think. greek mythology is particularly influential on not only western civilization, but christianity as well. gilgamesh is influential on jewish biblical traditions. if the bible's important -- those are just as important.

---

אָרַח

well, with that i disagree. i think it is important as literature -- just like any other ancient book or set of books. there was a course at one of the colleges i went to that covered the bible. they used an academic translation, published by a normal secular publishing company. it was complete with apocrypha. because reading other ancient literature is damaging to belief in the bible. no, really. one of my friends in college came in as a clean-cut jesus-boy type. i checked in on him recently. he's got dreadlocks and a beard now, listens to secular music, and doesn't really know what he believes. i found out why, too. he said that he always thought there was something special about the bible that set it apart from other books. when he took a course in ancient literature, he realized that it ALL really sounded like that. i agree that they shouldn't spend a lot of time on it. but reading some bits might be a good thing -- just like reading bits of the iliad or beowulf might be good too. yes. how does that make it NOT literature?

quote:

---

Main Entry: lit·er·a·ture
Pronunciation: 'li-t&-r&-"chur, 'li-tr&-"chur, 'li-t&(r)-"chur, -ch&r, -"tyur, -"tur
Function: noun

​

3 a (1) : writings in prose or verse; especially : writings having excellence of form or expression and expressing ideas of permanent or universal interest (2) : an example of such writings b : the body of written works produced in a particular language, country, or age c : the body of writings on a particular subject d : printed matter (as leaflets or circulars)

---

it's not so much "a collection" as it is a library. not a big one, but a library nonetheless. put all those books on a shelf as separate scrolls, and see how much room it takes up. it is the collection of all the important literature from one culture, all of their traditions, for the better part of a 1000 years. tack on the end are the traditions of the early christian church.being a collection doesn't make it not literature -- it makes it a collection of literature. prose and verse together doesn't make it not literature. think macbeth or hamlet -- some characters speak in prose. having genealogies doesn't make it not literature, it just makes it BORING literature. ever read the king james bible? it was quite influential on the shape of modern english. it's studied in english for the same reason shakespeare is. shakespeare and the kjv are the first two key works written in modern english. yes, that's fine. i think we need better science education too. so many people here seem to be mixed up about what science is and what it does. it's good to understand things like calvinism, the anglican church, and how those lead to the ideas for separation of church and state. right. like i said, school is not the place for bible study. hahah. that's ok, i don't have a problem with it.

---

אָרַח

the philosophy of not owning property sure played a strong role.

---

אָרַח

In addition, the political organization of the various tribal groups, particularly the Iroquois Confederacy and the earlier Mid-Atlantic Confederacy that went into the concept of balance of powers and a means of extending membership beyond the individual tribal configuration.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Such as? What current subject(s) do you think could be left out of a high school curriculum, for example?

I strongly disagree.Catholic theology, as taught by a catholic, is likely to have a very different tone an emphasis than catholic theology as taught by an evangelical.Any significant teaching of theology in the public schools will only generate ill will and dissent. The public schools should stay out of theology.