Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

North Carolina bill would add Bible study at public schools


  • Please log in to reply
59 replies to this topic

#31 LongTriad

LongTriad

    Missunderstood

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,707 posts
  • LocationStokeridge

Posted 28 February 2013 - 10:09 AM

I've never met an "agressive" atheist in person only on the internet. However I think that term might need to be defined.



ag·gres·sive
1.
characterized by or tending toward unprovoked offensives, attacks, invasions, or the like; militantly forward or menacing: aggressive acts against a neighboring country.
2.
making an all-out effort to win or succeed; competitive: an aggressive basketball player.
3.
vigorously energetic, especially in the use of initiative and forcefulness: an aggressive salesperson.
4.
boldly assertive and forward; pushy: an aggressive driver.
5.
emphasizing maximum growth and capital gains over quality, security, and income: an aggressive mutual fund.

a·the·ist


noun
a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings.

#32 Jase

Jase

    Kuechold Fantasies

  • Administrators
  • 16,538 posts
  • LocationMatthews, NC

Posted 28 February 2013 - 10:09 AM

right... that's the rub... we aren't studying christianity as a religion amongst many, we're studying it as the truth... which is why we've left out the apocrypha and other rejected books. It's a subtle difference but it speaks volumes.


With what I said earlier about what I took in high school being said,

I took OT in college, too, and it was perhaps an even bigger step away from sunday school.

It was much more open about apocryphal and pseudepigraphal works, difference in transcriptions, scribes that seemed to add stuff on their own, and subtlelties in translation.

I remember one time, my professor even went out of her way to criticize Matthew for misinterpreting one of the prophet's writings (I think it was Jeremiah) about the coming of the Messiah.

#33 Jase

Jase

    Kuechold Fantasies

  • Administrators
  • 16,538 posts
  • LocationMatthews, NC

Posted 28 February 2013 - 10:12 AM

I've never met an "agressive" atheist in person only on the internet. However I think that term might need to be defined.


Well, mmmbeans was the one who introduced the term to the discussion, but anyone can be aggressive in promoting their beliefs, surely you can see this.

#34 stirs

stirs

    I Reckon So

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,187 posts

Posted 28 February 2013 - 10:12 AM

From my perspective, I would not want the bible taught in school except as an exploration of literature.

The church alone should be in charge of its teachings and precepts. Many who think prayer or bible teachings in school are a good thing should sit back for a moment, examine what they believe and ask themselves if they entrust some of their long held beliefs to be taught by the "state". Doubt it.

I hope that teachings are not anti Christian in schools but do not need the state to attempt to teach my kids about prayer or the bible. That is the parents and churches job. Schools have enough trouble trying to teach a kid to read.

#35 MadHatter

MadHatter

    The Only Voice of Reason

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,041 posts
  • LocationDark Side of the Moon

Posted 28 February 2013 - 10:14 AM

I would actually like to see a class in high schools that compare and contrast different religions.

Would provide an interesting perspective.....I took one in college and it was actually very interesting.

#36 Porn Shop Clerk

Porn Shop Clerk

    Honky

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,399 posts

Posted 28 February 2013 - 10:15 AM

i have no problem with this as long as it remains elective

then we'd have all the future child molesters and weirdo creeps in one class

#37 mmmbeans

mmmbeans

    FBI SURVEILLANCE VAN

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,000 posts

Posted 28 February 2013 - 10:19 AM

With what I said earlier about what I took in high school being said,

I took OT in college, too, and it was perhaps an even bigger step away from sunday school.

It was much more open about apocryphal and pseudepigraphal works, difference in transcriptions, scribes that seemed to add stuff on their own, and subtlelties in translation.

I remember one time, my professor even went out of her way to criticize Matthew for misinterpreting one of the prophet's writings (I think it was Jeremiah) about the coming of the Messiah.


right... really interesting stuff... i just don't see that level of subtlety being implemented in a high-school curriculum... when you start breaking down and discussing latitude in translation, the faithful often see it as breaking down of their belief systems... When you omit these things, you're being dishonest about the history of the source material.

TL;DR It's really hard to discuss these things honestly without hurting someone's feelings.

#38 The_Light_Brigade

The_Light_Brigade

    MEMBER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 495 posts
  • LocationCaddyshack

Posted 28 February 2013 - 10:21 AM

I don't have a problem with the studying of the bible as a text but why not study all religious texts. That way our children have an understanding of all religions. That way they can form their own opinions. I mean don't most of these texts teach the same things anyway?

#39 Niner National

Niner National

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,368 posts

Posted 28 February 2013 - 11:15 AM

I would actually like to see a class in high schools that compare and contrast different religions.

Would provide an interesting perspective.....I took one in college and it was actually very interesting.

I agree.

I tried taking one in college. Unfortunately it didn't go so well. I noticed about 1/3 of the class had bibles on their desk when I got to class the first day. On the second day, we started exploring the historical context of the religions and their similarities and the bible kids started arguing with the professor and quoting scripture.

Professor was like "uhh this isn't a theology class. We are not here to debate doctrine." He was respectful, but obviously annoyed. They continued doing this with pretty much every topic covered. I dropped it after the third class because it was obvious nobody was going to get anything meaningful out of the class.

Shame, I really thought it would be an interesting class to take.

#40 Inimicus

Inimicus

    Life is better in a kayak

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,003 posts

Posted 28 February 2013 - 11:20 AM

Did you not read the part that said they would only be "electives"? Only way it would be ramming down anyone's throat is to make it a required course.

As a required course....hell no.

As an elective....meh.



If a law was passed to put vegetarian foods on every restaurant menu it wouldn't matter that no one ate it a certain establishments.

Or

If the state passed a law allowing statues of Ganesh at rest areas it wouldn't matter that no one was forced to genuflect before using the facilities.

The fact that its optional doesn't change the fact that this is a line the state has no business crossing.

Religion has NO place in public schools period. Its not good for the state to be seen to be endorsing a given religious belief, and Its not good for the kids who should have those lessons taught to them by representatives of their specific church.


As a Christian, I find it completely and utterly offensive.

#41 MadHatter

MadHatter

    The Only Voice of Reason

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,041 posts
  • LocationDark Side of the Moon

Posted 28 February 2013 - 11:44 AM

If a law was passed to put vegetarian foods on every restaurant menu it wouldn't matter that no one ate it a certain establishments.

Or

If the state passed a law allowing statues of Ganesh at rest areas it wouldn't matter that no one was forced to genuflect before using the facilities.

The fact that its optional doesn't change the fact that this is a line the state has no business crossing.

Religion has NO place in public schools period. Its not good for the state to be seen to be endorsing a given religious belief, and Its not good for the kids who should have those lessons taught to them by representatives of their specific church.


As a Christian, I find it completely and utterly offensive.


First, your understanding of what the article said is wrong. The proposed law would not mandate anything. It would only ALLOW local school boards the ability to establish a religion class as an elective.

Your analogy above about the vegetarian foods is also wrong (imagine that). Using this proposal as the example, it would be like a state passing a law that ALLOWS restaurants to put vegetarian foods on their menu. It does not REQUIRE that they do it....nor does it REQUIRE anyone to eat it.

I respect your opinion that you don't want it in public schools. But, your analogies are way off.

#42 g5jamz

g5jamz

    Is back

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,138 posts

Posted 28 February 2013 - 11:57 AM

This bill is ridiculous if it's as simple as people are saying.

#43 Inimicus

Inimicus

    Life is better in a kayak

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,003 posts

Posted 28 February 2013 - 12:02 PM

First, your understanding of what the article said is wrong. The proposed law would not mandate anything. It would only ALLOW local school boards the ability to establish a religion class as an elective.

Your analogy above about the vegetarian foods is also wrong (imagine that). Using this proposal as the example, it would be like a state passing a law that ALLOWS restaurants to put vegetarian foods on their menu. It does not REQUIRE that they do it....nor does it REQUIRE anyone to eat it.

I respect your opinion that you don't want it in public schools. But, your analogies are way off.



Its a reach, Ill give you that. I was going more for the state overstepping than forcing people to do something. I added the second analogy because I suspected that although I see a similarity that most wouldn't like it due to the requirement aspect.



And I get that it would be an elective but that doesn't make it any better. I'm sure you and your friends in high school showed up on the first day only to find that some elective you chose last year isn't being offered and you just got dumped in some other class you didn't pick. Hell in my high school there was always a line at the main office for the first few days as people worked those things out. Invariably there were some number of kids who just went with what the system picked for them because they were too lazy or because in some cases all the options were taken. The day the system puts some kid in a class on the Old Testament that he didn't sign up for there will be a race to the lawyers offices.


Beyond my personal beliefs its simply a recipe for disaster

#44 Cat

Cat

    Terminally bored

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,065 posts

Posted 28 February 2013 - 12:49 PM

With what I said earlier about what I took in high school being said,

I took OT in college, too, and it was perhaps an even bigger step away from sunday school.

It was much more open about apocryphal and pseudepigraphal works, difference in transcriptions, scribes that seemed to add stuff on their own, and subtlelties in translation.

I remember one time, my professor even went out of her way to criticize Matthew for misinterpreting one of the prophet's writings (I think it was Jeremiah) about the coming of the Messiah.


Went out of their way? Matthew did that often (mostly mistranslating the OT). He attempted to make it seem as Jesus fulfilled several OT "phrophecys" but in the end he ended up with egg on his face. That's taught in most college biblical studies of the old and new testament.

BTW Yale has classes online you can take for free (they don't count toward credit) they have both Old and New Testament classes. I'm taking the NT one right now. It's pretty good.

#45 Jase

Jase

    Kuechold Fantasies

  • Administrators
  • 16,538 posts
  • LocationMatthews, NC

Posted 28 February 2013 - 01:02 PM

Went out of their way? Matthew did that often (mostly mistranslating the OT). He attempted to make it seem as Jesus fulfilled several OT "phrophecys" but in the end he ended up with egg on his face. That's taught in most college biblical studies of the old and new testament.

BTW Yale has classes online you can take for free (they don't count toward credit) they have both Old and New Testament classes. I'm taking the NT one right now. It's pretty good.


She went out of her way in that it was an Old Testament/hebrew bible class in which Jesus was never brought up organically. (I know Matthew was generally guilty of this throughout his work. My point was being that the lens viewed from this class was sans kid gloves)




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com - IP Content Design by Joshua Tree / TitansReport.