Anti-Christian Bible Curriculum?!

[tiffanieh]

http://anneelliott.com/blog/2011/03/bible-curriculum-that-is-anti-bible/

 

WOW! I just saw this on my friend's facebook status and went to the site. I'm shocked. Is this typical of Peace Hill Press classical approach to education???

 

If so, not sure this is the right model for us.

[Donna T.]

I'm not surprised. :glare:

 

This is exactly why I don't buy Bible curriculi. We just use the Bible. In my opinion, Christians don't need Bible curriculi at all. If we belong to the Father, we have the Holy Spirit and He and He alone will guide us into all Truth. The very idea that children shouldn't be taught about their sinful nature is a lie. I guess this product will be attractive to the "Bible as great literature" teachers, but not to the born-again believers who treasure it for what it really is, the very breath of God.

[mommaduck]

Oh good grief! It's not anti-bible. Different Christians have different views on how to interpret the Bible. Not everyone has to agree. This horse is dead and has been thoroughly beaten over and over this week already!

 

(btw, I don't agree with Enns' views, but at the same time, there is room in the homeschooling community for diversity of thought and ideas, as proven by this board. Maybe some people on here are thinking, "finally a Bible curricula we can agree with". Have a little grace.)

Edited March 24, 2011 by mommaduck

[JESSICAinMD]

Oh good grief! It's not anti-bible. Different Christians have different views on how to interpret the Bible. Not everyone has to agree. This horse is dead and has been thoroughly beaten over and over this week already!

 

(btw, I don't agree with Enns' views, but at the same time, there is room in the homeschooling community for diversity of thought and ideas, as proven by this board. Maybe some people on here are thinking, "finally a Bible curricula we can agree with". Have a little grace.)

 

:iagree:

[NoPlaceLikeHome]

Wow, just wow.

 

There does happen to be many different thoughts in Christianity just for the record. There does happen to be many different interpretations to the Bible. This does not mean they are anti-Christian:glare:

 

There are many Christians (even perhaps the majority) who do not interpret Genesis literally but rather metaphorically. They still believe that God created everything though. This does not make them lesser Christians though.

[Jen500]

http://anneelliott.com/blog/2011/03/bible-curriculum-that-is-anti-bible/

 

WOW! I just saw this on my friend's facebook status and went to the site. I'm shocked. Is this typical of Peace Hill Press classical approach to education???

 

If so, not sure this is the right model for us.

 

I'm not surprised. :glare:

 

This is exactly why I don't buy Bible curriculi. We just use the Bible. In my opinion, Christians don't need Bible curriculi at all. If we belong to the Father, we have the Holy Spirit and He and He alone will guide us into all Truth. The very idea that children shouldn't be taught about their sinful nature is a lie. I guess this product will be attractive to the "Bible as great literature" teachers, but not to the born-again believers who treasure it for what it really is, the very breath of God.

 

From the Board Rules/FAQs:

 

Do not assume that everyone on the boards shares a particular religious conviction

These boards are inclusive. You are welcome to ask theological questions, but don't post as though everyone who frequents the boards shares your ideology. Offending posts may be deleted. Don't use inquiries as an excuse to proselytize for anything. Answer questions that are posted but don't use these questions as an excuse to springboard into criticism. For example: If someone asks, "What are your kids dressing up as for Halloween?" don't launch into an explanation of how evil Halloween is. If someone asks, "Is Halloween evil?" have a ball. (Conversely: if someone posts, "We don't do Halloween; what can we substitute?" don't take this as an opportunity to prove to them that Halloween is really just fine.)

[WIS0320]

There does happen to be many different thoughts in Christianity just for the record. There does happen to be many different interpretations to the Bible. This does not mean they are anti-Christian:glare:

 

 

 

Yes, isn't there something like 30,000 different Christian denominations and sub-denominations in Protestant Christianity? That would mean there are a lot of very different ideas about Christianity in general and interpretation of the Bible floating around out there!

[tiffanieh]

Linda...thank you for the link. I completely looked over that thread above. However, I did not see anyone commenting on some of the actually parts that this women, who claims to have read the book personally, brings up.

 

I would be highly concerned over any bible curriculum that washes over a fallacy of young earth, or that sin shouldn't be discussed, or that God's laws are antiquated! BOY, is THAT a slippery slope not to go down!!!

 

Mommaduck...there is no need for you to get testy. I am new to this board, and not knowing that "this is an issue that has been beaten over and over", I would ask that you have a bit of grace for ME. I am not judging anyone's decision here who uses this book, but my original question was...if THIS theology is typical of what is found in a "classical approach" to education, then THIS is not for US. Not anyone else, but for US.

[tiffanieh]

From the Board Rules/FAQs:

 

Do not assume that everyone on the boards shares a particular religious conviction

These boards are inclusive. You are welcome to ask theological questions, but don't post as though everyone who frequents the boards shares your ideology. Offending posts may be deleted. Don't use inquiries as an excuse to proselytize for anything. Answer questions that are posted but don't use these questions as an excuse to springboard into criticism. For example: If someone asks, "What are your kids dressing up as for Halloween?" don't launch into an explanation of how evil Halloween is. If someone asks, "Is Halloween evil?" have a ball. (Conversely: if someone posts, "We don't do Halloween; what can we substitute?" don't take this as an opportunity to prove to them that Halloween is really just fine.)

 

I don't see how my post could be offensive? Again, I am new to classical education and I need to understand if the classical approach to education, particularly following TWTM, goes against MY personal theology.

 

Again, this is not slamming anyone else's theology, just trying to understand TWTM better.

[boscopup]

I would recommend you actually read the Well Trained Mind book. At that point, I think your concerns would be gone. SWB and JW, in that book, specifically leave religion (or lack thereof) up TO THE PARENT. So if you don't like Enns' Bible curriculum, don't use it. A classical education does not necessitate the use of that or any Bible curriculum. SWB and JW's materals are typically fairly religiously neutral.

 

I looked at Enns' Bible curriculum and decided that it wasn't for my family, but for my children's academic education, I give a lot of credence to SWB's and JW's recommendations and products. Everything I've used from them has been great (SOTW, FLL, WWE, and the WTM book itself).

 

Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater! :)

 

(and note that I'm YEC, believe the Bible is the word of God - the whole thing, and my children are taught about sin, grace, creation, the flood, and everything else from a very young age - this Bible curriculum doesn't threaten my use of WTM style classical education OR PHP products).

[NoPlaceLikeHome]

I don't see how my post could be offensive? Again, I am new to classical education and I need to understand if the classical approach to education, particularly following TWTM, goes against MY personal theology.

 

Again, this is not slamming anyone else's theology, just trying to understand TWTM better.

 

Calling this curriculum anti-Christian sure seems like slamming to me.

[ezrabean2005]

If you read TWTM book, you will find that education and religion are fairly seperate. No, one book about one religion does not sum up TWTM. It has very little to do with the approach / method.

 

For our family, this is what we have been looking for for a long time....thanks PHP!

[mommaduck]

My apologies. SWB has taken a public beating online this week because of this mess. Being accused of not being a Christian, shaking fists at God, etc. It's sickening. I don't think we want to see it continue here (there have already been several threads locked). Please also reread your post to see how it came out as an attack (perhaps shock) rather than simply asking a question as to the view of the book and if PHP agrees with the book.

 

Also, on the topic of "Classical Education". There are MANY, MANY resources and texts you can use. You don't have to use a Christian text, a Young Earth text, an Old Earth text, this particular curricula or that particular curricula. Most of us are eclectic...using what best suits us and eliminating what either doesn't suit us or even what offends us (there are some blatantly anti-Catholic or anti-Jewish texts out there...we also have families that are Atheist, Agnostic, or Pagan that educate using the Classical model). The Classical Model is not Christian in origin. It's an educational "model" or "form". This can be adjusted and you can add your own worldview and religious beliefs TO it. ;) Hope that helps. Classical may be right for your family, just not this particular text (I know it's not the right text for mine, but I don't hold anything against PHP for choosing to publish it, nor would it prevent me from buying other books that they publish that I DO like and can agree with).

[tiffanieh]

Calling this curriculum anti-Christian sure seems like slamming to me.

 

That was the title of the article I sighted. You will see that I put a question mark next to it in my title.

[Justin from WTM]

Hi Tiffanieh,

I helped to edit this Bible curriculum. I'm also a pastor who loves God's Word and would never publish anything that sought to lead people away from it. I strongly disagree with the opinion stated in the review you linked. The reviewer's assessment is not accurate.

The issue of "sin" in this curriculum was discussed previously on these boards, and as several people rightly noted, the FULL context of the quotation makes it clear that Dr. Enns certainly believes in teaching children about sin and their need for a Savior. I've pasted that at the bottom of my post.

 

Dr. Enns talks about sin throughout Grade 1. He talks about Jesus' crucifixion as the heart of God's plan to save the people from their sins.

We also discussed some of the other info (including the "creation/evolution" issue) on an earlier thread, which you can read here:

http://welltrainedmind.com/forums/showthread.php?t=236297

 

You can read more samples of the curriculum for yourself at olivebranchbooks.net. I encourage you to do so.

 

While Christians will disagree over issues of interpretation, this curriculum is about as far from "anti-Christian" as one could possibly get.

Thanks,

Justin M.

 

Here's part of the context, from "Telling God's Story: A Parents' Guide..." pages 32 and 33:

 

"If we can give our children a firm, age-appropriate grasp of Jesus and his ministry—where he came from, why he came, what he taught, where he went, where he is now—we will build for them a good foundation. This will allow them to begin to know him in a much more complex way as they move into the middle-school and high-school years and begin to understand the other parts of the story—the ones that flesh out the larger purpose of Jesus’ ministry, his bringing of the kingdom of God.

"An important dimension of this approach is a focus on the love Jesus has for children. Most Christian parents know the saying found in Matthew, Mark, and Luke: “Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these.” Jesus does not want his disciples trying to keep these annoying kids out of the messiah’s way, and his response should warm every parent’s heart.

"Although I don’t want to hang an entire Bible study method on this single verse, I do see in this story a general principle for teaching our children. We should not “hinder” children by plac¬ing obstacles in their path that they may not yet be prepared to understand. Let me speak plainly: children should be introduced to Jesus without parents feeling the pressure of downloading every important piece of biblical teaching into their young minds at the same time.

"Let me explain.

Jesus is described in full color in the Gospels. He weeps, laughs, becomes angry, has compassion, loves, has determination, pre¬fers times of isolation, grows tired. In the early grades, we should focus on bringing out this full portrait of Jesus. What should not be emphasized is the child’s miserable state of sin and the need for a savior.

"Please do not misunderstand me. I believe Jesus rescues us from our sin. But we cannot and should not expect adult comprehension of the depth of sin and the grace of God from our children. As parents, we can be so concerned that our very young children make a “profession of faith” that, without wanting in any way to harm the child, we wind up manipulating the child rather than teaching. The child knows that we want him to be baptized, or confirmed, or dedicated; and if the child loves you, he will do his best to comply.

But we must remember that our children’s salvation is not our work, it is the work of the Spirit.

Fuller lessons concerning sin and grace will come in time, and certainly parents and churches have the responsibility to teach the fullness of what the Bible has to offer. But most young children sim¬ply do not have the emotional or intellectual maturity to grasp the adult concepts in the Bible. Children need to be approached as chil¬dren, and Jesus approached children by blessing them, praying for them, and reassuring them of his love for them."

[tiffanieh]

I would recommend you actually read the Well Trained Mind book. At that point, I think your concerns would be gone. SWB and JW, in that book, specifically leave religion (or lack thereof) up TO THE PARENT. So if you don't like Enns' Bible curriculum, don't use it. A classical education does not necessitate the use of that or any Bible curriculum. SWB and JW's materals are typically fairly religiously neutral.

 

I looked at Enns' Bible curriculum and decided that it wasn't for my family, but for my children's academic education, I give a lot of credence to SWB's and JW's recommendations and products. Everything I've used from them has been great (SOTW, FLL, WWE, and the WTM book itself).

 

Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater! :)

 

(and note that I'm YEC, believe the Bible is the word of God - the whole thing, and my children are taught about sin, grace, creation, the flood, and everything else from a very young age - this Bible curriculum doesn't threaten my use of WTM style classical education OR PHP products).

 

Thank you!! Just what I needed to understand!!

[jewel7123]

I don't see how my post could be offensive? Again, I am new to classical education and I need to understand if the classical approach to education, particularly following TWTM, goes against MY personal theology.

 

Again, this is not slamming anyone else's theology, just trying to understand TWTM better.

 

I understand exactly where you're coming from. You're new here, and you see this Bible curriculum being sold on the Peace Hill Press website, and you wonder if that is the same belief system that SWB hold to herself, and will that be evident in The Well Trained Mind book? I completely get where you're coming from.

[sassenach]

I don't see how my post could be offensive? Again, I am new to classical education and I need to understand if the classical approach to education, particularly following TWTM, goes against MY personal theology.

 

Again, this is not slamming anyone else's theology, just trying to understand TWTM better.

 

You are on a Classical board, surrounded by women who are teaching their kids to use sound research, logic and reasoning to approach the world, followed by cohesive and logical conclusions that they can back up with their research. You have done none of the above, which is inherently offensive to us. It's ok to take issue with Dr.Enn's books (I, myself, have some concerns that I am still researching), you are just doing a really bad job of it.

[Justin from WTM]

Sorry Tiffanieh, I replied to you but it crossed paths with your post as you were posting. See my post at #17

[Gooblink]

I don't see how my post could be offensive? Again, I am new to classical education and I need to understand if the classical approach to education, particularly following TWTM, goes against MY personal theology.

 

Again, this is not slamming anyone else's theology, just trying to understand TWTM better.

 

You didn't mean this to be offensive? Or at least a little controversial?

 

Have you read the WTM? If so, then you would know if classical education is for your family or not. It doesn't dictate how YOU teach YOUR family religion.

 

But, to come onto SWB's board JUST to tell everyone that if this is what she's selling, you're not buying...c'mon, you could have left that at the door.

 

I haven't read Telling God's Story, I don't know if I'd agree with it or not, but I don't consider any one publication a litmus test of the validity of classical education.

[mommaduck]

Thank you for the quote, Justin. It does make things much clearer to have in context. Basically, I'm getting that it's an incremental approach rather than knocking a child over the head (thus creating a healthy context for the child).

[shanvan]

I am not judging anyone's decision here who uses this book, but my original question was...if THIS theology is typical of what is found in a "classical approach" to education, then THIS is not for US. Not anyone else, but for US.

 

I will attempt to comment on your question. I have not read all the threads about this particular curriculum b/c I tend to stay away from threads that are extremely controversial. We believe what we believe and I don't want to argue about it, or try to convince everyone else to adopt my beliefs.

 

I also have not looked at the curriculum in question, though I am pretty sure it goes against our beliefs and I just don't have spare time to look over all the curriculum that is not a good fit for us. AND, I agree with the poster who is not fond of Bible curriculum. While we occasionally use R&S for maps and historical background, the Bible is our curriculum

There are many things in PHP curriculum that I do not agree with. I still use some PHP curriculum as part of our total approach to education. There are just some really great ideas and approaches in their materials. I especially appreciate WWE and the SOTW activity books. I either skip the things we don't agree with, or discuss them with DC--BUT, I do that with almost every curriculum we use. I will say that I completely skip SOTW 1 in preference to TOG 1. I know there are those who modify it.

 

We have found there are very few publishers out there who will be a perfect match to our beliefs. I think this will be true no matter what a family's particular beliefs might be. When a curriculum is such a bad fit that it just goes against most of what you believe, of course, you shouldn't use it. I just wouldn't write off all of PHP just because one publication isn't a good fit for your family.

 

 

Shannon

 

ETA: In light of posts I just read, I may have to take a closer look at the curriculum in question just to see for myself. It seems there may be some misrepresentation going on.

Edited March 24, 2011 by shanvan

[nmoira]

 

if THIS theology is typical of what is found in a "classical approach" to education, then THIS is not for US. Not anyone else, but for US.

I'm atheist. There are Buddists, Jews, Pagans and Neo-pagans, Hindus, Muslims, you name it here on these boards, along with Christians of various denominations (and also of none), many of whom follow WTM, though to varying degrees. The extent the Well Trained Mind is representative of classical education is debatable, and has been well debated here. However, it is a popular method or framework. Read the book and you will find that curriculum choice is up to YOU; there is no one recommended math program, much less religion. The chapters on religion say little else other than touting the essential nature of a spiritual education. Read the boards and you will see that some people put their conception of religion in the forefront in every subject, while others of faith choose mostly secular materials. It's up to you. If you are uncomfortable being exposed to views and opinions other than your own, these boards are probably not for you, but you could still use WTM.

[tiffanieh]

I understand exactly where you're coming from. You're new here, and you see this Bible curriculum being sold on the Peace Hill Press website, and you wonder if that is the same belief system that SWB hold to herself, and will that be evident in The Well Trained Mind book? I completely get where you're coming from.

 

YES! :) Thank you for understanding! :)

[Satori]

You are on a Classical board, surrounded by women who are teaching their kids to use sound research, logic and reasoning to approach the world, followed by cohesive and logical conclusions that they can back up with their research. You have done none of the above, which is inherently offensive to us. It's ok to take issue with Dr.Enn's books (I, myself, have some concerns that I am still researching), you are just doing a really bad job of it.

 

:iagree: I think the way this thread was started is offensive, especially on a board filled with people who love WTM.

Edited March 24, 2011 by Satori

[tiffanieh]

You are on a Classical board, surrounded by women who are teaching their kids to use sound research, logic and reasoning to approach the world, followed by cohesive and logical conclusions that they can back up with their research. You have done none of the above, which is inherently offensive to us. It's ok to take issue with Dr.Enn's books (I, myself, have some concerns that I am still researching), you are just doing a really bad job of it.

 

Really Shannon? A really bad job of what? Purely asking a question?

 

I am truly sorry for ruffling tail feathers around here. I am NOT condemning anyone here or trying to be rude whatsoever.

 

From other posters, who have been KIND in their guidance, have shown me that the TWTM is really VOID of religion or a type of theology, and I can choose exactly WHAT I want my kids to study when it comes to the bible.

 

Now I understand better.

[Satori]

I'm atheist. There are Buddists, Jews, Pagans and Neo-pagans, Hindus, Muslims, you name it here on these boards, along with Christians of various denominations (and also of none), many of whom follow WTM, though to varying degrees. The extent the Well Trained Mind is representative of classical education is debatable, and has been well debated here. However, it is a popular method or framework. Read the book and you will find that curriculum choice is up to YOU; there is no one recommended math program, much less religion. The chapters on religion say little else other than touting the essential nature of a spiritual education. Read the boards and you will see that some people put their conception of religion in the forefront in every subject, while others of faith choose mostly secular materials. It's up to you. If you are uncomfortable being exposed to views and opinions other than your own, these boards are probably not for you, but you could still use WTM.

:iagree: I think this was well-worded.

[simka2]

Tiffane, I get what your concern is. I will not use R and S for bible as I don't agree with them theologically, but I do use them for grammar and math.

 

Just because I don't agree with them on their bible teachings doesn't mean they do not have some great grammar materials.

That is why your OP is confusing, I don't see the connection you are attempting to make.

 

Justin has been very gracious in his response to you, I can not image any other group of homeschoolers where you would get such prompt, courteous treatment.

 

I hope you have gotten your original question answered, and I hope you will return Justin's courtsey in kind :D.

 

:grouphug:'s and welcome to the board! (It's a bit stressed right now, but that will pass)

[tiffanieh]

:iagree: I think the way this thread was started is offensive, especially on a board filled with people who love WTM. I actually reported it for a mod to look at and decide whether to lock/delete.

 

I'm sorry you view my original thread as offensive. Again, I have a particular theology, and simply wanted to understand if TWTM jived with that theology.

 

Since TWTM can be used by ANY theology, then that answers my original question regardless if anyone likes or dislikes the book.

[tiffanieh]

You didn't mean this to be offensive? Or at least a little controversial?

 

Have you read the WTM? If so, then you would know if classical education is for your family or not. It doesn't dictate how YOU teach YOUR family religion.

 

But, to come onto SWB's board JUST to tell everyone that if this is what she's selling, you're not buying...c'mon, you could have left that at the door.

 

I haven't read Telling God's Story, I don't know if I'd agree with it or not, but I don't consider any one publication a litmus test of the validity of classical education.

 

To be honest, I got the book, and am only on page 75...it's a BIG book and we are in the midst of a move. In between packing boxes and homeschooling, the book has been pushed aside for reading after we get moved and unpacked.

 

Again, I apologize if this was offensive. In the future I need to understand that this board is full of various people and religions and I need to pose my questions better. My apologies.

[sassenach]

Really Shannon? A really bad job of what? Purely asking a question?

 

I am truly sorry for ruffling tail feathers around here. I am NOT condemning anyone here or trying to be rude whatsoever.

 

From other posters, who have been KIND in their guidance, have shown me that the TWTM is really VOID of religion or a type of theology, and I can choose exactly WHAT I want my kids to study when it comes to the bible.

 

Now I understand better.

 

Yes, it's offensive to make sweeping assumptions in the form of questions without the basic step of actually reading the material for yourself. Example: "I've never seen a copy, but is it true that Time Magazine says that we should all steal books from the library and burn them in our backyards? If it is, I am never buying their magazine." Do you see? In my house we call that intellectual laziness and dd13 gets in BIG trouble for such nonsense.

[Haiku]

I think the short answer to your question would be, Susan Wise Bauer is a pastor's wife. Would she really publish something that is anti-Christian?

 

In regards to the tone of your post, coming to SWB's own website and stating that you are "shocked" by a blog post you read that defames a curriculum published by SWB and that you are therefore questioning her entire framework of education is a bit in poor taste, kwim?

 

I think there were more diplomatic ways of phrasing your OP.

 

And I am not Christian, btw.

 

Tara

[tiffanieh]

I will attempt to comment on your question. I have not read all the threads about this particular curriculum b/c I tend to stay away from threads that are extremely controversial. We believe what we believe and I don't want to argue about it, or try to convince everyone else to adopt my beliefs.

 

I also have not looked at the curriculum in question, though I am pretty sure it goes against our beliefs and I just don't have spare time to look over all the curriculum that is not a good fit for us. AND, I agree with the poster who is not fond of Bible curriculum. While we occasionally use R&S for maps and historical background, the Bible is our curriculum

There are many things in PHP curriculum that I do not agree with. I still use some PHP curriculum as part of our total approach to education. There are just some really great ideas and approaches in their materials. I especially appreciate WWE and the SOTW activity books. I either skip the things we don't agree with, or discuss them with DC--BUT, I do that with almost every curriculum we use. I will say that I completely skip SOTW 1 in preference to TOG 1. I know there are those who modify it.

 

We have found there are very few publishers out there who will be a perfect match to our beliefs. I think this will be true no matter what a family's particular beliefs might be. When a curriculum is such a bad fit that it just goes against most of what you believe, of course, you shouldn't use it. I just wouldn't write off all of PHP just because one publication isn't a good fit for your family.

 

 

Shannon

 

ETA: In light of posts I just read, I may have to take a closer look at the curriculum in question just to see for myself. It seems there may be some misrepresentation going on.

 

Thank you very much Shannon for your thorough comment. This is what I have taken away from this thread. I very much like what little I have been exposed to TWTM. For example WWE has been a Godsend for us!!!

[justamouse]

I'm sorry you view my original thread as offensive. Again, I have a particular theology, and simply wanted to understand if TWTM jived with that theology.

 

Since TWTM can be used by ANY theology, then that answers my original question regardless if anyone likes or dislikes the book.

 

The best way to find out about it is to pick it up and read it for yourself.

 

I'm sorry I clicked on that link-I don't want to give her any sort of stat jump.

[tiffanieh]

Sorry Tiffanieh, I replied to you but it crossed paths with your post as you were posting. See my post at #17

 

Thank you Justin for your long response. I did not mean to start such a storm around here and I appreciate you taking the time to respond personally.

[ktgrok]

Linda...thank you for the link. I completely looked over that thread above. However, I did not see anyone commenting on some of the actually parts that this women, who claims to have read the book personally, brings up.

 

I would be highly concerned over any bible curriculum that washes over a fallacy of young earth, or that sin shouldn't be discussed, or that God's laws are antiquated! BOY, is THAT a slippery slope not to go down!!!

 

Mommaduck...there is no need for you to get testy. I am new to this board, and not knowing that "this is an issue that has been beaten over and over", I would ask that you have a bit of grace for ME. I am not judging anyone's decision here who uses this book, but my original question was...if THIS theology is typical of what is found in a "classical approach" to education, then THIS is not for US. Not anyone else, but for US.

 

You can read sample chapters for yourself on the website. Her interpretations are not very accurate. And no, it is NOT unBiblical. It just doesn't agree with certain Christian's views on the Bible and how it should be interpreted. Fundamentalists do not own the word Bible. Probably the majority of Chritians believe that the Bible is made of of different genre's, each meant to be read in a particular way. We don't believe that Genesis is allegory because we don't like what it says. We believe it is Allegory because we believe that is how it was written, and how we are supposed to read it.

 

sigh.

[shanvan]

I can see why some may find the OP offensive, but really isn't this board one of the best places to go to find out the other side of the issue? I took it as a way to get some different takes on a hot issue in homeschool publishing.

 

It is gracious of SWB to allow these discussions on this board.

[Princess Peach]

I'm sorry I clicked on that link-I don't want to give her any sort of stat jump.

 

Ugh, I didn't even think about that. I clicked, too.

 

This whole thing (not this thread, per se, but the whole "issue" with Ken Ham) is a disgrace to Christianity. And I say that as a Christian that is YE, although I tend to focus more on the born-again aspect of my faith. ;)

[mommaduck]

I can see why some may find the OP offensive, but really isn't this board one of the best places to go to find out the other side of the issue? I took it as a way to get some different takes on a hot issue in homeschool publishing.

 

It is gracious of SWB to allow these discussions on this board.

 

After this week, I think some of us are a bit sensitive and even a bit protective...of SWB and this board. Given the wording of the OP, I believe the reaction is somewhat understandable. It's was a spark near dried wood...basically, bad wording combined with bad timing.

 

OP, please stick around and get to know people here. There are amazing sources here for EVERYONE.

[shanvan]

After this week, I think some of us are a bit sensitive and even a bit protective...of SWB and this board. Given the wording of the OP, I believe the reaction is somewhat understandable. It's was a spark near dried wood...basically, bad wording combined with bad timing.

 

OP, please stick around and get to know people here. There are amazing sources here for EVERYONE.:iagree:

 

 

 

Yes, I can see what you're saying. I tried to stay out of this particular issue as much as possible, so I have very little idea of what has been said.

[NicA]

The best way to find out about it is to pick it up and read it for yourself.

 

I'm sorry I clicked on that link-I don't want to give her any sort of stat jump.

 

:iagree: I need to stop reading about this! It makes me so frustrated. I have read Peter Enns book, and I don't see how anyone could say it is unchristian. SWB and Peter Enns are not the only ones being attacked by the same community of people for teaching that the most important thing about Jesus is that he loves us. That's it! I don't know how the earth was formed, how many days it took, or if Adam was an actual man. And btw, neither does Ken Ham. Everyone has theories and everyone interprets the Bible differently. When are people going to realize that they are blatantly attacking other people about something that probably doesn't really matter, and doesn't affect anyone's salvation. It just feels like they are saying that "if you don't believe exactly the way I believe, then you are not saved." God made us diverse, and I believe he wants us to have diverse opinions. He made us to think for ourselves, which is why a classical education is so appealing. He could have made us so that we had no choice in the matter, but he gave us free will to decide what we believe for ourselves. We have the choice to believe in God and follow Jesus, which I believe is the only thing that really matters. I guess maybe that is what this argument is really about. It seems like some Christian communities are so afraid of people thinking for themselves. It's sad.

[Just Robyn]

I can see why some may find the OP offensive, but really isn't this board one of the best places to go to find out the other side of the issue? I took it as a way to get some different takes on a hot issue in homeschool publishing.

 

It is gracious of SWB to allow these discussions on this board.

 

:iagree: I thought the post was offensive, but I disagree with the statements being made that you should read a book before posting a question about it. These boards and other homeschool related websites serve us by allowing us to ask questions BEFORE we buy something. They keep us from buying things, finding out they don't suit our religious beliefs, and then having to resell them, give them away, burn them or whatever.

[~blessedmom~]

You are on a Classical board, surrounded by women who are teaching their kids to use sound research, logic and reasoning to approach the world, followed by cohesive and logical conclusions that they can back up with their research. You have done none of the above, which is inherently offensive to us. It's ok to take issue with Dr.Enn's books (I, myself, have some concerns that I am still researching), you are just doing a really bad job of it.

 

Yes, it's offensive to make sweeping assumptions in the form of questions without the basic step of actually reading the material for yourself. Example: "I've never seen a copy, but is it true that Time Magazine says that we should all steal books from the library and burn them in our backyards? If it is, I am never buying their magazine." Do you see? In my house we call that intellectual laziness and dd13 gets in BIG trouble for such nonsense.

 

Way to judge a book by it's cover! You know nothing of the OP except that her question offended you--and you insult her. I guess it's OK to judge people but not books without knowing them.

[Mommyfaithe]

I am much more concerned with walking in love, peacefulness and kindness, than I am in being right.

 

Grace and peace to all sides of the equation.....

 

Divide and Conquer is the way of the evil one...NOT that Christ followers.

 

Faithe

[sassenach]

Way to judge a book by it's cover! You know nothing of the OP except that her question offended you--and you insult her. I guess it's OK to judge people but not books without knowing them.

 

You're right, I'm in a mood. I stand by the first statement, but the second one was a little ugly. Sorry.