As an enthusiastic former student of your Bible as Literature class, I do not believe I quote a single class more in my day to day life. When my daughter was in Kindergarten, we lived in the Shenandoah Valley of Virginia and her school had an "opt in" program for Week Day Religious education (WRE). This meant that children whose parents gave permission, traveled off campus to learn about the Bible with an independent group. We are Christian and she was enthusiastic, so we agreed. Midway through the year, her WRE teacher taught the story of Jesus' first miracle at the wedding in Cana. It just so happens that her Sunday School teacher at church had also taught this lesson recently. She came home very upset because her WRE teacher had taught that the wine steward had come to Jesus to tell him they were out of wine. Our daughter raised her hand and said she thought it was Mary, Jesus' mom, who told him they were out of wine. The teacher told our daughter she was wrong. I pulled everything you taught me from that Bible as Literature course and employed it for my Kindergartener. I told her we would go to the text rather than relying on our memory. When we read John 2:3, we learned that indeed she had remembered her Sunday School teacher's lesson correctly and that Mary was the one who came to Jesus when the wine ran dry. We went on to talk about why it mattered and how we should look at the larger story being told about the beginning of Jesus' ministry. At the end of the year concert for WRE, I asked the teacher about this and she dismissed me saying that my daughter "must have misunderstood and that it didn't really matter who told Jesus anyway." This very story is why I have grave concerns about the Texas ruling. Thank you for your lessons that my daughter (and current William and Mary student!) continues to employ.

The same could be said about any other subject. I say this as a public school teacher. Who is teaching algebra? What training have they received? Do they have any mathematical knowledge? And so on. I mean, the vast majority of teachers aren’t really trained to teach their specific subject matter. A professional development, here and there, maybe. But these passages aren’t meant to be Sunday School lessons or seminary classes, so the highly specialized training and knowledge isn’t truly necessary, in my humble opinion. Also, Bible scriptures have already been required reading in many classes across America for decades. Lincoln’s Second Inaugural address is inundated with quotes and allusions to the Bible. So are many other American speeches and addresses from other presidents to abolitionists to civil rights activists to famous preachers and their sermons. I read “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God” by Jonathan Edwards in eleventh grade over twenty years ago. Teachers in public schools who would force their own beliefs on vulnerable students will use any material, no matter how neutral, to do so and are already doing it. Adding one passage from the Bible a year isn’t going to make a big difference.

I took your Bible as Literature class at William & Mary. Thirty-ish years later, I still have my notebook, and it's the one college class I still mention (in discussions about the Bible with my husband and sons). I still remember the final project -- to compare translations of a particular passage. That class did give me the foundation you mentioned for other English classes and, honestly, just life in a country that references the Bible regularly. But it also helped me read the Bible in a new light. If every student could take *that* class -- with Professor Bauer and as a 19 or 20 year old -- I would support it. As an aside, this is my chance to tell you how fun it was to stumble across your work when I started looking into homeschooling my kids during the pandemic. You were one of my favorite professors in college. I still remember you inviting us to your farm house to watch the Ten Commandments. I'm guessing you know you make a big difference with the work you've done in recent years, but I hope you know you made a big difference as a young professor, too.

I do agree about using it for cultural literacy (although also agree that it shouldn't get sandwiched into the elementary school curriculum). But even with that, I would not want to be using a simplified version, because that's just not how it gets referenced. For a small example, I was reading a book with a friend who is learning English (we read together in both our languages). A character was going to see their estranged mother, and mentioned that there would be no fatted calf. Although my friend did know the story in his language, he completely missed the reference that for many of us is immediately implied by the usage of "fatted" (the person who translated it to his language made the reference more explicit).

I don't think that the purpose of requiring specific Bible passages in Texas public schools is to help students understand allusions in literature. If that were the case, I think it would be high school English teachers making that demand and not religious zealots.

I’m a non-believer in agreement with all your logic, both in favor of biblical literacy and against doing it in public schools. It sure seems to me that it needs to be KJV or something similar. I sure wouldn’t want my kids instructed in Shakespeare in some modernized third grade version!

Teachers should watch Christine Hayes’s Introduction to the Hebrew Bible course to prepare. It’s fantastic. To be fair though, “Teachers might make a hash of it” is an objection that could be deployed against any change in curriculum. The guidelines provided by the state are the real problem, IMO.

I would also want these Biblical texts paired with other ancient texts, so students can be exposed to more than just the Judeo-Christian tradition. But as a retired public school teacher, I would not want to add anything to the curriculum without proper training and I don’t see that happening. 

I see many talking about biblical literacy. How do you all feel about equal time for ALL religious/spiritual literacy in public school? Maybe a course in all mythological teachings, weighted equally?

How do you think we can improve biblical literacy in public education?

I completely agree with the concerns you mentioned. To me, there’s a huge difference between teaching the Bible from a theological standpoint versus from a lens of, say, critical biblical scholarship. Is it a reverend teaching the class, or a scholar? I’d sign my kids up to learn from Daniel O. McClellan in a heartbeat, for example, even though we’re not believers.

Are you ok with school teachers (not specialized in ancient history or lit) overseeing other works of ancient literature, or whatever era they are not specialized in? Or ancient history?

I will be very interested to read your post on reading lists, and I'd also live to hear more about the specific skills necessary for understanding ancient stories, if it's possible to give an overview. I remember reading Ruth and maybe a smattering of other Bible passages in 10th grade English class at my Texas public high school. My teacher approached it as poetry.

Agreed. As a tangent, when I hear people on a national stage talk about wanting the Bible in schools, I always wonder if they have been to more than one Christian church. Moving around between Ohio and NC we tried a number of different Protestant churches. One Christian church can have a vastly different approach to the Bible from another. Frankly, the rural churches with lay pastors who did not go to college for theology have wild takes on many parts of the Bible and cherry-pick passages to back their own personal beliefs. If you want your kids to learn a certain flavor of Christianity, you're going to have to do it at home or church, because thinking it's going to be taught in school the same way you would at home is wild. I don't think the people who want this know what they are asking for.

I took a semester of Bible as literature in a public school. Would you propose that only teachers with MDiv teach the Bible as lit? Teachers aren’t expected to have a masters to teach in any other subject. Perfection can be the enemy of progress. Let’s let kids read one of the foundational pieces of Western literature. When I was in school, we read the KJV, as that was the version from Shakespeare’s era. Sadly, most public school kids today would be unable to focus and work through that translation. Third grade level lets the kids concentrate on content. Like any translation it will be weak if it is on 3rd grade level, but I know ESL teachers who use that version you mentioned for those learning English as a second language. And these are ministries that are committed to a doctrine of inerrancy. I would also support kids reading other religious texts in school for history or intro to religion. But the Bible outranks the other texts like you mentioned — whether or not you believe in it religiously, it is foundational to all of Western classic literature.

Precisely my concern. I am a HUGE proponent of the Bible as literature; when I majored in English as an undergraduate, I was so dismayed by my peers' lack of Biblical knowledge that I wrote my undergraduate thesis on why the English major should require a Bible as literature class. I went on to get my M.Div. I have no faith that the folks who will be teaching these Bible passages have the background to do it well, and I am deeply concerned about both the set literature required and also what they're taking out. I think in an ideal world, high school students would learn about the Bible as literature and also have a world religions class, but it simply takes far more training than the education course I took to get my teaching license grants you to do this well, especially under such fraught political background.

As a curmudgeonly conservative Christian, every time I hear some lawmaker wants public schools to teach the Bible, I always wonder if they’ve thought about how that would play out.

Sorry if this is redundant (haven’t read all the comments). What about parents who teach their kids the Bible? Must they have degrees in ancient sacred literature?

This is also my opinion. Bible literacy for all of us is foundational to a better understanding of Western Civilization, literature, culture, ancient history, etc, but should be carefully taught by Bible scholars.

Your words and insight never cease to amaze me. Your writings were first introduced to me in a very well known Christian homeschool group we’ve belonged to for years. The Story of the World series sparked in my son, a deep love for history. We are a secular family. But love classical education - and follow the curriculum *very* loosely. We will forever be thankful we found you!

I had a friend in high school (first generation American, Hindu Faith). She was so frustrated at no knowing the biblical references in our honors English classes. Back then I recommended she get a children’s book of Bible stories or The Bible for Dummies and read it to get an overview of the basic stories. It wouldn’t prepare her for paradise lost but at least she would know who David and Goliath were. As a 16 year old it was the best I could think of. I don’t think a regular ed teacher should be teaching biblical texts. And I definitely don’t believe it should be integrated in to elementary school. At the same time I’m not sure that a MDiv alone is the correct teacher. I’ve known some who aren’t quite aware of how many religious presuppositions they are reading back into the text and taking as biblical in origin. In either situation what begins as a basic Biblical literacy lesson can become a doctrinal minefield as the different religious convictions of the students come into conflict with each other and the instructor. As a parent and a deeply religious person I would trust the school to teach my child anything in this realm and would be furious if they taught what I would consider false doctrine using the Bible. If the state is looking to increase Biblical literacy so that students can engage with English literature (in my opinion a valid goal) I think they only have two realistic options. One is to simply integrate a single lesson into high school curriculum pointing out different texts that require biblical knowledge to understand and encourage students who intend to pursue a college degree that would require such texts to have a knowledge of the Bible. Then let Students pursue it on their own. The second option would be to produce a series of video lessons (so they can be standardized and you aren’t dependent on any one random teacher) that dive into 1) why biblical knowledge is important to understanding english lit and western history, 2) what goes into biblical scholarship, 3) examples of how a common Biblical story can have multiple layers and conflicting interpretations, 4) a list of the most influential (the most commonly referenced) Biblical accounts. This sort of production should be produced using input from Biblical, literary, and historical scholars from a wide range of religious backgrounds (Jewish, Catholic, Orthodox, Protestant, Agnostic, etc). This would keep the focus off doctrine and on giving the students an understanding of the importance and the complexity of understanding biblically infused literature. It would still leave the bulk of achieving Biblical literacy on the student, but i think do the best job at sparking the student’s interest

While I understand your view, why not let the literature speak for itself? The reading itself will provide some context. When reading Shakespeare, most people read it in some edited state that is less than the original, but still valuable in literature. It seems valuable simply as literature to me.

Yes, this. And the fascinating stage of development in our language and the English society and Protestantism and so much that lead to the language of the KJV being intentionally constructed to create a sense of majesty and beauty for public reading. Also King James’ rules for the translation that made so many factions come together. It is a fascinating work and it influenced so much. If the goal is to understand the influence it seems essential to look at this translation. And yes it started long before KJV. It is fascinating to start with St Patrick and take two full years to work through major works alongside British history and the development of the language. It definitely gives a basis for better understanding our own culture.

Very well reasoned objections. I attended York County School of the Arts in high school in the 90s, and we use the text The Bible As In Literature, which was excellent. We really couldn't have understood what we were reading in that course without the Biblical context, but it was presented in a scholarly way. I have yet to meet any other teachers who I think could have found the balance they pulled off in that program, but I think, in general, honors level or AP high school English is probably the appropriate place for the public schools to be tackling Biblical context. Otherwise, at home and in Sunday School are where I prefer my growing kids to interact with scripture.

You raise good points, however your points can be applied to every text and every subject. When I was teaching in a high achieving public school, I was shocked when my colleague confided in me she’d never read Hamlet and was basically reading it one night ahead of her students. To compound matters, she’d never taken a Shakespeare class when majoring in English and had only read Midsummer when she was in middle school. Teachers teaching things they know nothing about is quite common. I’ve finally landed at the place where I’d rather students be exposed to a text than not at all.

I think there are two different issues getting mixed together here. First, I agree that the federal government shouldn’t be enforcing a single historical narrative. The executive branch isn’t a historical authority, and when political institutions pick a preferred lens, history starts to function more like messaging than study. Second, I don’t think American history should be sanitized. Slavery, Jim Crow, and racial injustice are central parts of it, and I don’t support removing any exhibits or historical figures from public view, be it Frederick Douglas or Robert E. Lee. Even in other countries, like China with Mao, many different figures stay part of the public record rather than being erased. Where I start to disagree is how this history gets used in present-day interpretation. The argument here is that we need to emphasize racial injustice more to understand who we are as a nation, and that not doing so risks erasing history. My concern is what happens when that becomes the main lens for interpreting modern events. At what point does that shift from teaching history to filtering everything through it? Because what I see is that a lot of current events get quickly framed through race, sometimes before we even know what happened. The recent track meet case is an example. A situation that would normally be judged on the facts gets pulled into racial interpretation. It became national news because the potential for racism was sensational. Even without evidence of racial motivation, people start assigning it anyway. I think the internet makes that worse because it rewards the most charged interpretation. That raises a bigger question. Are we seeing more division because race is actually more central now, or because we constantly reinforce it in how we talk about events? Either way, it becomes a feedback loop. I’m not denying there are real racial injustices that still exist and need to be addressed. That’s not my point. My point is that using history as the default explanation for present behavior can become a shortcut that crowds out other explanations. Not because history doesn’t matter, but because it can be over-applied. I don’t support removing any monuments or historical displays, and I mean ANY. I think Robert E. Lee shouldn’t have been torn down either. So my question is this: How would you approach leading a country where division is already increasing, and one of the major fault lines is how we interpret and present racial history, without making that division worse?

Please do one for the founding of our country, 1776. And please produce a critique, and speak out against the administration that pushed the 1619 project, and the people removing our history in favor or their version, like this piece. That would be equally helpful.

As a so called "historian" who has published books to 'prove it', you need to be shown the simple basic facts as it relates to race and conservatives (Republicans) in this country. The 1854 Party of Lincoln, fought a Civil War and over 360.000 Union Soldiers lost their lives, abolishing slavery in this country. That includes granting blacks the right to vote and later on after a 55 year fight with democrats, who opposed it every step of the way, Republicans also won women the right to vote. Insofar as the KKK, Jim Crow Lawa, lynchings and segrigation, that was all democrats. Insofar as the 1960 and '64 Civil Rights Act, that was all Republicans. Democrats of the south whose white slave ownership and racist society are pointed to by modern day democratsto be the behavior of the entire overall caucasian race. Painting all white people as racists instead of just those Dixiecrats who still fight the Civil war, is now mainstream democrat narrative and ideology. The Norman Lear, All In The Family view of history is on display here, there being a great portion of the democrat Party who have obtained their entire knowledge of history and civics from these TV reruns. Television being America;s great political and historic rewrite brainwash...

Ask your average teen to tell you one FACT about president Thomas Jefferson, OTHER than he had sex with a slave named Sally. Their responses will be instructive about how history is taught today.

Do you know what's happening in South Africa now?

This makes me think about Turkey, where a majority of the population doesn’t believe the Armenian, Greek, and Assyrian Genocide ever happened, because it has been erased from their history by their government. Woe to us if we allow the horrors of slavery to be forgotten!

You mischaracterize Washington's views on slavery. Why should we think you are the one neutral and objective historian? Everyone should read Washington's own will and understand the context. He inherited slaves and could not at the time legally free them, nor his wife's slaves from her first marriage. One scholar has quoted great quantities of Washington's actual correspondence and other writing on this and other topics, rooted in 20+ years of research at the LOC. Dr. Catherine Millard. All, go to Millard's primary sources and don't rely on these half baked interpretations. Also see the facts and historical context at mountvernon.org www.mountvernon.org/george-washington/slavery/george-washingtons-will

I think to say that the “US has never had such a reckoning” is honestly unfair.. As one example, I’ve been to the beautiful Smithsonian National Museum of African American History and Culture located on the National Mall in Washington, D.C and it is very well done.

Absolutely. You are correct. Confession and repentance are means of grace. Pride and denial fool only ourselves.

(1) Have you spoken elsewhere to a tendency for homeschool curricula to do the same sort of whitewashing? I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts on that or reading a fuller treatment elsewhere. It would be great to have a sort of annotated bibliography of textbooks and curricula that do this well (or maybe a list of the egregious ones). Thanks for the Juneteenth resource you have provided! (2) I think of this administration as capitalizing on a sort of grievance over people feeling constantly shamed or perhaps overstatements of racism (or sometimes talking past each other on what even someone means by accusations of "racism"). So I think of this as a pendulum swing. If you agree with that characterization at all, how do we avoid a pendulum that overstates or paints with too broad a brush? I'm not looking to excuse anything, nor am I implying that white Americans are close to perfectly appreciating past wrongs. I am simply interested in how to press toward greater education, maintaining accuracy and avoiding the pendulum swing.

Thank you, Dr. Bauer. I continue to be grateful for your great gifts as a historian and writer.

Wow! I had no idea that memorials were being taken down by the Trump administration. I knew it was happening under Democratic control. It’s a good reminder that we need to remain in the balanced center —no side is perfect. And America’s history isn’t perfect either —but it is the greatest nation that we know of who has provided more rights and more opportunity than any other formation of government before . Slavery has been part of the history of the world. There have always been evil men and good men too. No history is perfect —and no one party is perfect either. We won’t get that until Christ returns to the earth some day.

Thank you for speaking up and gifting us this resource.

Thanks so much for making this free! I’ve been looking for a resource to share with my kids.

Thank you for offering the educational materials about Juneteenth for free!❤️

Thank you for speaking to this.

Thank you for posting and thank you for the packet!

Thank you.

Thank you for this fantastic resource! Vince is about to dig into the high school packet!

Thank you for passing knowledge and truth on.

Thank you for sharing this!

Thank you for offering this resource for free! It is greatly appreciated!

Thank you for posting this

He can try to hide it all he wants. We still know the truth.