An Argument for Bringing the Bible Back to Public Education
A prominent scholar argues that leaving the Bible out of public schools stunts the students’ educations.
Jace Gregory at Accuracy in Academia reports:
Bible and Prayer in Schools
Imagine an ancient record—by far the most published book in humanity—quoted by Shakespeare (1,200 times) and Abraham Lincoln—a book that has inspired political movements and religious reformations and has literally changed the world time and again; imagine that book being rejected and banished from schools across America. That book is the Bible.
The Bible and prayer in public schools were the topics of discussion at this week’s Family Research Council event. Dr. William Jeynes, a Senior Fellow at the Witherspoon Institute in Princeton and a Professor of Education at California State University in Long Beach, shared his research about the price that the U.S. has paid for removing the Bible and prayer from public schools and he explained ways in which they can be constitutionally reincorporated into public education.
Jeynes asked how a student can graduate without any knowledge of the most published book in the world, explaining that knowledge of the Bible will make one understand the history of all six inhabited continents, and it will enlighten the student of literature, culture, and religion. In a world so obsessed with tolerance, the least that Bible study in schools could do is enhance one’s understanding of people of faith and cultivate tolerance for religious practices.
Comments
This is excellent. The problem, as always, is that the loons on the left who know that knowledge of the Bible and its references in classic literature, its effect on Western society, its importance in world history want to repress those very things.
Thus, they will goe ape sh!t over the “separation of church and state” ad nauseam. And, as you well know, this revisionist history and anti-Christian movement has been in place, and grown, since the 1960’s.
We’ve heard it all before. It won’t stop till we get the upper hand, obtain and push the winning argument, and cut these “progressives” (REgressives, actually) off at the knees.
And, same as ever, the question is, “how”?