"Elective"

What the issue? No one HAS TO take the class. If no one does, then the class won't be offered.

Oh no. That's not the case at all. I really don't desire to go into some theological discussion about something I'd need to show you a LOT of background to make complete sense. But I'll try a little anyway.

First the old testament is around 70% historical record, so that's not affected in any way, just like some historical update because some archeological dig found some revolutionary data.

Then there are the 10% of the verses which are poetry - they're not effected except the verses that predicted Christ's coming were answered by his arrival.

Which brings up the prophetical verses which were, to us gentiles, fulfilled.

Lastly there were the verses that specifically dealt with the Jewish law. That accounted for around 1/2 of the book of Exodus and the retelling of the law in Deuteronomy. That is in essence a retelling of the law (there are reasons for it but it's not pertinent right now).

When Christ arrived, lived his life and was crucified, that ended a age called a dispensation. There have been a few such dispensations such as the dispensation of Law which was what the Jewish age was named. By definition a dispensation describes how God interacts with man. Under The law, Jewish man was justified before Gos by obeying all of the law. The law is also called the schoolmaster since it was supposed to teach mankind how to reach God and his sins against God were corrected, or covered by sacrifices.

The dispensation of Grace is what we live under today. Jesus, through his death on the cross paid the debt of sacrifice for believers for this dispensation of time. In short we say that the OT Law was fulfilled. There are no longer s need for all that because Jesus paid our debt for all time. All we need to do to have that debt of guilt covered is to just accept what he did for us. Sin debt paid in full. without our ever doing anything to earn it.

That's why it's called the age of grace. And that's why I say "the law" (and only the law portion) of the OT was fulfilled.

" I think you are saying that in 2014, around 2000 years after Christ walked on Earth, that we are incapable of having a proper translation of a very widely distributed text (for that time)."
I agree. With all our knowledge and ability, scholars ought to be able to come up with a reasonably good translation. It won't be 100% prefect, but clearly people read works in translation all the time.

"Just respect that I have as much right to it as you do to reject it."
I do not understand religion, but I don't like the way some atheists think it's okay to belittled and disrespect it. We should stick to refuting it when it ventures into scientific claims. I'm guilty of calling it talking to your imaginary friends, which isn't nice, but I feel that way when people of one religion think they're superior to people of another religion.

Did you just say the whole Old Testament was thrown out by the New Testament? That's a question probably best answered in theology class, not a short post.

Ok well now we are down to the specifics. I hear what you believe.

I do think there should be public schools. (not really the discussion here). Perhaps there is a good argument that there shouldn't be, or that there should be less/no interference from the USG. In my mind this Government influence and meddling pales in comparison to free healthcare, welfare, et al.

Unfortunately, none of these things you would be ok with can be supported by the Government. The NFL, NBA or Chick-fil-a and the media can do whatever they want. This is clear under the first amendment. Government support is a form of "Establishment" by precedent. Free Exercise is not inhibited by not using my taxes for someone else's Sunday school class.

In my opinion this is good, because the qu'ran, bible, witchcraft and human-induced climate change are all beliefs, not facts or science. Jefferson was wise to recognize the snowball of issues with zealotry.

Perhaps we are not as far apart as three comment iterations ago. If your issue is with USG intrusion, I sympathize with it and don't like it in general. However, just like government intrusion, I view religion as an unwanted intrusion and prefer to keep it at someone else's home or church, I prefer the precedents the USG has set and supported here.

They already DO classes "annotating all the (supposed) fundamental technical and historical failings of the Bible"... it's called every public school on the planet.

It's a freaking class taught by a public school teacher. Listen, I don't think they should have public schools. But if they DO, then, no, I could care less if they teach a class on the Koran if that's in demand, or a class on witchcraft if that's what's in demand. I mean, if I went to Dearborn, Michigan, I'd expect to hear an Islamic prayer at the football game, that's what the majority there believe. I wouldn't be comfortable, but it's their freaking school, not mine.

Free means you don't get to preach to me, or my kids while being paid by me. No one is prohibiting anyone's free exercise of religion by not offering this class in a publicly-funded educational institution.
Would you support a similar class on the qu'ran? Even better, how about a class annotating all the fundamental technical and historical failings of the bible? If not, argument over.
CLEARLY. Get it?

Seriously? "clearly unconstitutional"?

What part of "CONGRESS shall MAKE NO LAW respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" can't people get into their brain? It's clear as day. NO NATIONAL RELIGION SHALL BE REQUIRED. And the rest I don't think I need to explain to you.

If the government let you keep your property ($$$) you could decide where to purchase education for you children. Taxing me, to pay for the neighbors reprobate is not fair by any measure. Taxing every property owner to pay for school for the ones of school age is a money spending scheme for the county and school board employees.

Well you presented a lot of beliefs and a cute little summer reading list...however, no facts among them.
Would you like to revise the subject of your original assertion, which was "...the bible is the most accurate..." to be:
1. the bible (and which one if so)
2. the new testament
3. the gospel of Luke of the new testament
No longer busy working Friday, and happy to point out the widest possible errors in your original assertion you are willing to stand by, further illustrating how you are seeking to manipulate children with others money to support your beliefs. The original subject is 1) clearly unconstitutional, and 2) no more founded in fact than people that asserting climate change from humans, or altruism is good and should therefore be institutionalized. All of these are precisely why Ayn was an atheist, and I wonder why there are so many religious arguments in her Galt's Gulch.

That they do. I only let it bother me when they want to force me to believe as they do.
Past tense of the verb "fahren" (to travel) as I recall. And it does sound funny -- chuckle.

Mike, I have a few, but I'd never even ask anyone to let me tell those answers to them. If you ever really want to know, drop me a PM with a phone number (I type too slow for this mode of communication).

Always keep in mind "Deep Thought" my friend :) That's me with these questions - The answer is "4".

Be Well!

As long as he doesn't mess with the establishment clause! :)

As their names appear at the top of a selection,,,,vote for the next guy - as long as it's not a green (please!)

OK. I gave you a Thumbs Up for that and pointed Down my own post above. My statement ended in a polemic claim that was not helpful. I am a materialist and a rationalist; so, I am atheist. Nonetheless, I grant that ultimately we do not know a lot about "ultimately." The problem I have is that once I grant "I dunno..." someone wants me to accept that Jesus or Mohammed or Mary or Jacob ascended directly into heaven without dying... and not being abducted by aliens from another planet (which is a whole other set of claims). The Assumption of Mary into Heaven in German is called "Marien Himmelfahrt." It sounds funny in English....

I have no answer, Geezer. You are free to believe whatever you want. You certainly have enough intelligence and experience that you do not need my guidance for your life. I trust that you grant me the same. I accept that no one owns the Revealed Word of God... whatever that "God" thing might be....

My personal incontrovertible heartfelt faith is that each of us comes to know Truth once before we die - if we are lucky (or blessed). Short of that, I am an atheist.

We certainly are on the same page as far as the liberals are concerned. Are you aware that Harry (the weasel) Reid is trying to amend the first amendment so that the government decides what you can say?? Fortunately so far he doesn’t have a chance, but the problem is they keep on pushing their radical and socialistic program. Vote them out in 2014 and 2016.

Thanks, Dr. Z! I thought that the oldest existing Jewish scrolls only go back to the 700s CE in Spain. When the Code of Hammurabi was excavated and translated a bare 100 years ago, scholars were pleasantly surprised to find the laws of the Jews from the Old Testament therein.

Bart Ehrman's Misquoting Jesus. Extremely thorough. Who, like me someone who has held christian, agnostic and atheist views through their life, examined a variety of options, opinions and evidence (he far more than I), and made a decision.
Not that it is a real argument, but there a many people that have held religious views, objectively studied them, and discarded them. Few have not held such views, studied objectively and then adopted them (this does not mean adopting the views after recovering from X). However, many hold such views and study hard to prove that they can continue to hold them, ignoring anything contrary, which is fine. I only object to attempting to purvey these views to children (or anyone for that matter) using my money.

By the way it is not impossible (or a debate issue) to prove a negative. 1+0 does not equal 2, may be proved many ways. One way is proving that 1+0 does equal 1, which is inconsistent with it also equaling 2; therefore, 1+0 does not equal 2. What you are referring to is a negative proof or appeal to ignorance. This assertion is that X is true because there is no proof that X is false. This is where the Flying Spaghetti Monster and Invisible Pink Unicorn come in.

Now there's some information we can agree completely on. Those libs are going to ruin this country. Well said.

You are free to believe whatever you want to believe. This is a free world (at least for now) and I respect your right to do so. Just as you have the right to believe what you want to believe in, so I do as well. We both live in a country that allows us to do so (unless the far left progressives get their way to outlaw anything they don’t agree to).

All nicely done! Pardon my interjections, I started to dig out some data and saw you were already past where I was headed.

Good job!
.