Should the Bible be taught in our public schools? Should our schools also teach students about the Quran, the Book of Mormon, the Vedas and other sacred texts? When it comes to teaching public school students about religion, what is appropriate and what is not?

It is clearly evident that as a nation there is a moral crisis that is eating at the basic fabric of our society. This is, in part, a sad consequence of the removal of virtually all references to religious and moral values from our public schools. There is a compelling need to be pro-active in finding solutions to reverse this trend. There has been increased progress to make available within the public schools various curriculum options, which provide constitutionally compliant elective instruction about the Bible. Likewise, a similar effort should also be embraced to provide constitutionally compliant instruction regarding various religions and their sacred texts as well.

As a result of a series of Supreme Court decisions culminating in the 1963 Abington Township School District v. Schempp, which removed prayer and devotion from the classroom, there has been a continuous stream of court challenges to remove “religion” from the public arena. However, in the Schempp case the court stated: “it certainly may be said that the Bible is worthy of study for its literary and historic qualities. Nothing we have said here indicates that such study of the bible or of religion, when presented objectively as part of a secular program of education, may not be effected consistently with the First Amendment.”

The key is not to teach religion, but to teach about religion. In doing so we provide the student and future voting citizen the opportunity to better understand the moral foundations of our Judeo-Christian heritage, as well as the impact of other faith traditions throughout the world.

Marc Stern, general counsel for the American Jewish Congress, has stated: “It is beyond question that it is possible to teach a course about the Bible that is constitutional.” He further states “that of the many legal challenges to school Bible courses that they have focused not on the general principle but on whether the course in question was sufficiently neutral in its approach.”

On March 25, the Arkansas House passed a bill that does not require, but would allow public schools the option of offering an elective Bible course. The bill states in part: “An academic study of the Bible course offered by a public school district shall: be taught in an objective and non-devotional manner with no attempt made to indoctrinate students as to either the truth or falsity of the biblical materials or texts from other religious or cultural traditions; … not disparage or encourage a commitment to a set of religious beliefs.”

Dallin H. Oaks, of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and former Utah Supreme Court Justice has stated: “The relationship in the world between church and state… should be respectful and distant, as befits two parties who need one another but share the realization that a relationship too close can deprive a pluralistic government of its legitimacy and a divine church of its spiritual mission. Despite that desirable distance, government need not be hostile to religion or pretend to ignore God.”

I agree and thus believe that teaching about the influence of religion in the history of our nation and the world should be universally allowed in our public schools, and that as elective courses the Bible and/or other sacred texts should also be taught. Let us pray that we may achieve a more “perfect union” and embrace with understanding the words “that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights…”

Should the Bible be taught in our public schools? Should our schools also teach students about the Quran, the Book of Mormon, the Vedas and other sacred texts? When it comes to teaching public school students about religion, what is appropriate and what is not?

If lawmakers in the Arkansas Senate follow their peers in the House of Representatives, then the State of Arkansas will join 38 other states and 563 school districts in voting in favor of allowing the Bible to be taught as a history course in public schools.

Many people are probably not aware that public schools in Chattanooga have offered 5 elective Bible courses for many years – and have received very few complaints. So, why shouldn’t the Bible be taught in public schools in Arkansas and anyplace else where students have been bombarded for years with curricula that undermines and challenges the ethical, moral and spiritual foundations that Christian families have taught in their homes?

In many Biology classes, for example, children are routinely taught that human beings evolved from apes (the theory of evolution). In many schools, children can receive contraceptives without their parents consent.  For years, the Christian community has complained but no one has been listening. Shouldn’t the Bible carry at least as much weight as a theory which really has never been conclusively proven?  How many half-apes have any of us seen?  Where is the verifiable evidence of any stage of evolution in progress?  The Word of God has been around for more than 2,000 years and the theory of evolution – well, you get the point.

The National Council on Bible Curriculum in Public Schools has approved curriculum which has already been offered to over 360,000 students without major complaint.  So, the answer to this question seems obvious. Absolutely, the Bible should be taught in public schools in any form possible.  We must give our public school systems and our teachers as much ammunition as possible to address the needs and concerns of the youth of today.  Our schools need more than just the three-Rs.

If this is all that schools can do, then our children might as well stay home and surf the Internet where they will be much more enlightened and informed.  The Bible is God’s word and if children can only be exposed to it in an elective history course, I say, so be it.  At least, they have some exposure where prior to this – they had none. God’s word will never return void.

Should the Bible be taught in our public schools? Should our schools also teach students about the Quran, the Book of Mormon, the Vedas and other sacred texts? When it comes to teaching public school students about religion, what is appropriate and what is not?

Before considering whether it is appropriate to teach courses on the Bible in public schools, it is necessary first to consider whether it is legal to do so. The good news is that the courts have weighed in clearly and consistently. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971) that courses which serve academic purposes, which do not advance or inhibit religion, and which do not foster “excessive government entanglement” with religion are permissible. Closer to home, in a case involving the Chattanooga Board of Education, a U.S. District Court ruled in Wiley v. Franklin (1979) that Bible instruction in public schools passes constitutional muster provided that it seeks “[neither] to disparage or encourage a commitment to a set of religious beliefs.”

So it’s perfectly legal. But is it desirable? On purely academic grounds, absolutely. For the last 2000 years, in good ways and in bad the course of western civilization has been decisively shaped by cultures that, in turn, have been shaped by the Bible. Love it or hate it, we don’t know where we’ve been, where we are now, or where we are headed if we don’t have a basic understanding of what the Bible says and how people have tried to make sense of it. Those who have no familiarity with the Bible will have a difficult time understanding the history, politics, literature, art, and popular culture they encounter in school and later in life. And unless we understand our own traditions, we can’t truly appreciate the similarities and differences with others.

To say that it’s legal and even desirable, however, is not to say that it will be easy to do in a way that satisfies all parties. The devil, as they say, is in the details. Who will teach it? What curriculum should they use? As with any subject, teachers of Bible courses should be qualified and properly trained. On this and other aspects, there will surely be considerable debate at the local and state levels. Some object that teachers will not be able to remain neutral when thorny questions arise and that the subject matter is inherently controversial and is thus best left outside the classroom. These are valid points. But they are not peculiar to religion. Politics, history, economics, the sciences—these and other subjects deal with controversial issues that frequently provoke responses every bit as passionate as those related to religion, yet no one suggests that we stop teaching them. Dealing with controversy is part and parcel of a good education.

Cultural literacy is not the only benefit of teaching the Bible in public schools. Greater familiarity with the Bible and other classic religious texts such as the Qur’an and the Bhagavad Gita promises to increase our ability to listen sympathetically to those who regard them as holy. But we are in for an unpleasant surprise if we assume that greater familiarity will solve all our problems. Yes, the world’s religions have more in common than we sometimes think, but sometimes the differences are also much deeper than we realize. A true appreciation of diversity means celebrating the good while recognizing the inconvenient truth that we may not always get along.

Should the Bible be taught in our public schools? Should our schools also teach students about the Quran, the Book of Mormon, the Vedas and other sacred texts? When it comes to teaching public school students about religion, what is appropriate and what is not?

Often “the separation of church and state” is invoked in a discussion like this to justify denying such teaching a place in the public school curriculum. However, since the original intent was to separate the freedom to worship God from the control of the state, I’m hard put to see how it bars courses on the Bible and other sacred texts from being included.

The issue, then, for me is not Should but How — How are the Bible and other sacred texts to be taught? The answer comes when I’m reminded that there’s a big difference between how a public school teacher and a religious teacher function. The former takes an objective approach whereas the latter teaches with conviction.

In the public school system, it would be as inappropriate for a teacher of religion to teach a sacred text convincingly as it would be for a teacher of science to defend theories with religious dogmatism.


Should the Bible be taught in our public schools? Should our schools also teach students about the Quran, the Book of Mormon, the Vedas and other sacred texts? When it comes to teaching public school students about religion, what is appropriate and what is not?

I think the idea of teaching a variety of sacred texts is interesting and – potentially – something very good. I’m skeptical about the implementation. What students DON’T need is a literalist approach to sacred writing. The problem, I think, is that some (well-meaning) instructors will stumble into inappropriate use of text. My suspicion is that some over-zealous “get (our fundamentalist Christian) God back into the schools” agenda is hiding behind this new desire to teach this range of sacred texts.

In skilled hands, teaching sacred literature would be a marvelous way to broaden our students’ cultural and spiritual horizons. I must admit that I’m doubtful about the motivations of our legislators, as well as the ability of our public schools to deliver.


Should the Bible be taught in our public schools? Should our schools also teach students about the Quran, the Book of Mormon, the Vedas and other sacred texts? When it comes to teaching public school students about religion, what is appropriate and what is not?
Because I am an ethicist, questions that begin with the word “should” always pique my interest.  Inevitably, such questions engage our most heartfelt values.  We care deeply about our children and are taught to be uncompromising when it comes to our religious commitments.  This is a formula for conflict rather than curriculum debates. The unspoken fear is that under the guise of “education” our children will be indoctrinated and persuaded by belief systems alien to our own.

I am suggesting that we defer the “should” question for a moment and consider whether or not the courses will enhance or hinder future generations.  Do we want to prepare our children for the world that was, the world that is now, or the world that will be theirs? Is it appropriate for the next generation to have more or less knowledge about their global neighbors and their religious beliefs?

I believe that religion is as important a subject of study as math or science.  If we are to understand one another, it seems important to learn spiritual as well as natural history, religious practices and precepts as well as languages and culture.  Any religious text taught with openness, integrity, and respect will foster wisdom and keep the hope of radical relationality (love of neighbor) within the realm of possibility.