And I could say that Einstein's paper on the Theory of Relativity is JUST a theory and lacks proof needed to be considered "real science". That wouldn't make it true, but I suspect that I'm as much an authority on "The General Theory of Relativity" as you may be on "The Bible".

But maybe not.

The difference is that local school districts are the primary controllers of our schools. What federal authority there is in our schools is highly contested and may soon end. I'd agree that there is no need for intervention by federal authorities. With local control there is immediate action if there is a problem.

Yes that's true. I had a mental meltdown for a moment. Sorry all, see below.

Which text are you quoting? I suspect it's the Vaticanius which poor quality suffered further by the translation work by Westcot and Hortt and their translation dated around the mid 1800's IIRC. Certainly Mill would be the chosen path for somebody looking for inconsistency, He and Bengal spent their entire lives chasing for fragments and trash digs that contained samples that were noted by their inconsistencies and omissions. This is one reason that their texts failed to correspond with the KJB translators. Mill and Bengal set out to disprove the voracity of the KJB by searching for these inconsistencies that were errors generated by bad copies and which were inadequately destroyed by the copiers. Very poor science.

In addition to Josh McDowell's "Evidence that Demands a Verdict"

and/or

David Otis Fuller's "Which Bible?"

Many question's on this subject will be answered by this book which goes examines the lives of the translators in great depth. The principal texts used and the quantity of agreeing evidence. Fans of Mill may want to look elsewhere.

The bible is mostly anecdotal, and therefor not necessarily accurate on history.

If schools were not funded by the governments, then there would be no problem; but they are so (unfortunately) so there must be a separation of the state and religion.
You need to understand the intent of the amendment, as the courts have interpreted it.

Uh, I think that is Lot's daughters, not Noah's. One of Noah's sons accidentally walked in on him passed out and drunk and his other two sons covered him up. Lot's daughters (not that I condone their behavior) thought that they and their father were the last ones alive in civilization, so they took some rather "unorthodox" steps...

So the underlying assertion you are making is that translations made by the unaided man are going to be inherently flawed. I certainly agree. The question then which begs to be asked is this: what about translations made by the _aided_ man - the inspired man?

No, like the assertion of human induced climate change, the burden of proof lies with the assertion.
Reread what I asked for (reputable evidence) and what was asserted ("...the Bible is the most accurate and attested to document in all of ancient history").
Is Jesus saying in John 8:7 "Let any of you who is without sin cast the first stone" an example of the bible's unfailing accuracy, because this "scripture" was added by scribes and is not present in earlier versions of the scripture.
John Mills 1707 study of the earliest copies of the scripture available then found some 30,000 disparities between various accounts in the new testament alone. The earliest versions were from the second century, over one hundred years after the events described, hand copied many times over.
I don't oppose the "evil bible". It has great lessons, just like the qu'ran, the books of Confucius, the kangyur and Mark Twain for that matter. However, like Jefferson, I oppose teachers paid by me purveying to children that it is the truth.
Furthermore, I am not fooled for a minute by the narrow intentions of those pressing for its study as a historical text.

No, this is a discussion forum for people to discuss anything, as long as they remain civil and use their brains to form their arguments instead of the talking points from the talking heads.

The whole mentality of Objectivism is that it is a PHILOSOPHY. It is going to have obvious differences with other religions and philosophies. That's okay. That's where we use our gray matter, powers of reasoning, and common civility to discuss all the possibilities, from which we all choose.

Thank you Peter. Do you see anyplace where the bible can't be studied in school? I see where the federal government was to stay out of religion, but not the inverse.

Congress shall make no law - that pretty much blows up any notion of "separation of church and state". State and church, oh yeah, keep your fingers out King George, but not ANY injunction about the church and it's members being involved in government.

Certainly the founding fathers would have found the notion that the study of the bible in school controversial at all. Almost every one of them had attended a religious college for their education.

"Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion", not where churches are built, not religious schools, not religion in the schools, certainly not the history book that is the bible.

Yet we see Libraries where the bible has been removed on the absurd notion that the so called separation of church and state demands it be removed. hogwash! There is no such fiction as the separation of church and state.

Amen. One of the worst things to happen in this country was for the government to assume the role of educator.

I would like to go back to having all education be paid for by the parents, with it being their choice where to have their children attend and what curriculum they were going to learn! No Common Core. No false standards. Religion or not according to your choice.

I don't know why I said Noah, except I was thinking of error by people who don't know the bible and this is one.

I forgot to commit about Lot's daughters. Lot was the spiritual leader of his family in those days and while he, like any father was troubled about his daughters chances for marriage after the cities were overturned.

The daughters, outside of their father's knowledge got him drunk and proceeded as you outlined. All of this including the daughters conversation and collusion between themselves was OUTSIDE of God's path for them or Lot. They had no secret orders from God or their father. They acted alone.

This also led to the birth son's who become two nations which were big thorns in Israel's side since the event, Ammon and Moab. Take a look at what nations these two become. The biblical lesson is that by acting outside of God's plan, you bring on shame and ruin. Again you might need to know these two in a thousand years AND today. Yes they are still around and still making problems for Israel.

I do not see that "..., thus granting that denomination a place of special privilege above other sects." follows.
Why is it necessary "... for the material ..."?
A statement is a statement. One one may agree with it or not.

I would have put it this way:
There is absolutely no way to have a Bible class what will not be slanted to one side or another, Even in a setting that views all sides as ignorant primitives ("SECULAR" included)..

in-oklahoma#vy1UfhC2vI5ptRl1.99

Read the first Amendment:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Thanks Jan, Time is no problem. Sorry about my error with dragging the king, I thought you were linking that to the other biblical references, and THAT would not be a new one on me.

If it's the case with Solomon that I know of, it's a historical problem. The camel MAY be about the level of domesticity. Many would argue that they are not domesticated today - a view my personal experience would have no problem with. :) But they were used as beasts of burden far longer ago than even 7,00BC.

I await. (I so appreciate respectful discourse. Thank you)

What? You want me to prove a negative does not exist??? You really don't want to be THAT illogical, do you?

Basic law of debate, it's impossible to prove a negative. It's also seen as a lame attempt that causes the other side to forfeit the match - do you really want to go there?

Actually, the body dragging I was referring to was Achilles dragging Hector's body around Troy behind his chariot. (My point being that one should not take the Iliad - or any ancient text - as 'gospel' any more than the bible should be taken as such.) In my non-religious mind, the drunken sex is as capable of being interpreted as a 'direction to be followed' as the burning of poisoners and maledictors (translated as 'witches'). I do not condone such behavior myself...but when I read it in the bible, it seemed to me that the author thought that it was justified so as to 'preserve the tribe'.

I will be delighted to look up the Solomons of the bible and the puzzle of the camel and send you the links or info...but please give me a bit of time to do this. And thank you, this is the type of discussion I enjoy.

Jan

So you oppose history? A lot of modern western civilization finds it roots both good and bad in the pages of that book. Of which about 60% is historical in nature.

As sacrosanct as you may find the separation of Church and State, it really is not in the constitution or the bill of rights. What IS there is the 1st amendment that establishes my right to the free exercise of my religion - and does not exclude it's presence or study of the bible within those sacred halls of learning - Learning anything except about religion??? I don't think that's what it says, do you??? Take another look and read it this time.

Points are limited to one. There should be exceptions for extraordinary truth.

Hi Jan. Just a couple points of clarification please. I'm farly well apprised of typical biblical challenges (and no, we don't need to go there) but I'm courious if you would care to send me your listings of the different King Solomon's, most of these are errors in understanding the bible's structure, but I'd like to see them. According to http://archaeology.about.com/od/cterms/g... N. Africian camels were fully domesticated by 7,000BC and there are Archaeological findings of them in clearly domesticated setting in Arabia at that time http://archaeology.about.com/gi/o.htm

I'd just like to make a note that Noah's daughter's were committing a huge sin and a violation when they acted as they did. In no place are there any scriptural orders "that you should get your father drunk and have sex with him". This was a historical event that took place and is a key representation of where some error by not understanding the areas of the bible that are historical, poetic or prophetic in nature. A common error, just as the order to drag the body of the Philistine King around that city you referred to. History, not a commandment of some religious act.

I recall that there were some horrific acts carried out on both side in our "Indian Wars" that are historical facts but are not standing orders for the US Army. Correct?

The Bible is the most influential book in the history of Western civilization. One cannot understand Western civilization, history, art and literature without a knowledge of the Bible. One can teach about the Bible without teaching religion. One can teach about religion without teaching religion. Any student who has not been taught about both is not educated.

I, an agnostic, have no trouble with the Bible being taught as an ancient text, like the Iliad and the Odyssey. One would not read the former and conclude that you should drag the body of your enemy around the city behind your chariot any more than you should read the Bible and conclude that you should get your father drunk and have sex with him.

Like other ancient texts, the Bible is full of data that can be of use for archeologists. (Both the Bible and the Viking Sagas have pointed to places where excavations have been rewarding, for example.) Like other ancient texts, the Bible is full of inaccuracies and is not scientifically true - for instance, there were apparently a series of 4 or 5 'King Solomons'...the last of the set was given a camel (which had not yet been domesticated when the first of the set reigned).

I do not worship Odin because of the Sagas nor Zeus because of the Iliad; I do not worship Yahweh because of the Bible. But it is an interesting ancient text and I am enthused about it being taught as such.

Jan