Active RNS subscribers and members can view this content at the RNS Archives website.

(RNS) I do not doubt that Steve Green wants to produce a non-sectarian Bible textbook. I am skeptical, however, that the scholars that Green has assembled for this job are capable of producing a textbook beholden to facts rather than faith.


  1. Do you have to ask the question? Of course not.

    It would serve no purpose for Steve Green for it to be so. It is taught from a perspective of forwarding and reinforcing belief.

    Green is merely trying to buy school districts to push his religious beliefs in violation of the law. Everything about Green screams, “self-righteous wealthy jerk who thinks he can buy people”. What is ridiculous is how fundamentalist Christians are stupid enough to follow along with him because he pretends to speak their language.

  2. I agree with Larry. I also think that you knew the answer when you wrote the title. Cannot imagine anyone who would say yes. This is a slippery slope that we are traversing.

  3. We really need an elective high school course on the Bibles from a fact based standpoint.

    This would include:

  4. …looks like it sent before it was complete. Continued…..

    Some information to include:

    I. History
    A. Diversity of Early Christianity (Gnostics, Paulites, Ebionites, etc.)
    B. Different scripture of different early Chistianties
    C. Choosing which books to include (never settled, not settled today)
    D. Changes to texts over time (never settled, not settled today)
    E. The many known forgeries (I & II Peter, II Thess, Ephesians, Daniel, etc.)

    II. Impact
    A. Scripture related Christian conflict & War before 1000 CE (docetists, anti-semitism, Reconquista, etc.)
    B. Scripture related conflict 1000-1500 CE (Crusades, Albigensian, etc.)
    C. Scripture related conflict 1500-today (European wars of religion, Mein Kampf, etc.)

    III. Content
    A. Scriptural approval of social ills (slavery – curse of Ham, treament of women, children, non-Christians, etc.)
    B. Scriptural science mistakes (the flood story disproven by Geology, the fact that Gen 1 describes a flat, immobile earth under a clear hard dome of the sky, the whole Exodus story disproven by archeology, etc.)
    C. Scriptural genocide (mythical conquest of Canaan, Luke 19, etc.)

    IV. Current Harm
    A. continued oppresion of women
    B. treatment of LBGT/ same-sex marriage
    C. Ongoing apocalyptacism
    D. climate-change denial

    I’m sure others could add quite a bit to this rough draft.

    • It was kinda funny the first time. Even if a little unintentional. A fact based study of the Bible being about ….nothing.

    • @Jon,

      Yes. Teach the Bible and other religions from Kindergarten through 4th grade.

      Include Michael Shermer’s explanation of why we believe in Gods. It all comes down to infantile urges to find Mommy and Daddy. We would outgrow it like we outgrow baby teeth – but there is this sick industry CASHING IN ON IT to prevent us from pulling out our baby teeth!

      Religion is a national disease. The problems it is cause across the democracy are KALEIDOSCOPIC!!

      • The problems religion is causing across our democracy are obvious.
        Just look at what SCOTUS has been up to lately.

        I keep hearing how the non-religous are becoming more powerful – but it isn’t true. Atheists need to speak up.

    • Sandra Streifel

      It would have to include the interpretations, and the reason and science behind them, that mainline and progressive denominations have of the Bible, and how that does and did inform their mission.

      There are many ways to read the Bible, and the literal way most Evangelical, Fundamentalist, and other Conservative Christians have been reading it for about 150 years is only one. Atheists tend to read/interpret it the same way.But the historical/metaphorical way of looking at the texts, which this course never addresses, is one that sees the Bible as a collection of books, written by many people, in many places and times, in different literary styles, about their experiences of the Holy. I take the Bible too seriously to take it literally.

      • Which means this is a handful for a college course, way over the level of a high school elective.

        That is if the intention is an honest objective view of the Bible. Nothing about the proposed course appears honest or objective. It is simply Steve Green trying to amuse himself by seeing how much money it would take to get a school district to violate the law.

  5. The Great God Pan

    “I do not doubt that Green’s team sincerely wants to produce a non-sectarian textbook.”

    I do.