Comedian Emo Philips tells of walking across a bridge and seeing a man standing on the edge, ready to jump off. He ran over and said, “Stop! Don’t do it!”

“Why shouldn’t I?” he said.

“Well, there’s so much to live for.”

“Like what?”

“Well, are you religious?”

He said, “Yes.”

I said, “Me too! Are you Christian or Buddhist?”

“Christian.”

“Me too! Are you Catholic or Protestant?”

“Protestant.”

“Me too! Are you Episcopalian or Baptist?”

“Baptist.”

“Wow, me too! Are you Baptist Church of God or Baptist Church of the Lord?”

“Baptist Church of God!”

“Me too! Are you original Baptist Church of God or Reformed Baptist Church of God?”

“Reformed Baptist Church of God!”

“Me too! Are you Reformed Baptist Church of God, reformation of 1879, or Reformed Baptist Church of God, reformation of 1915?”

His new friend replied, “Reformed Baptist Church of God, reformation of 1915.”

To which Philips replied, “Die, heretic!,” and he pushed him off.

Source: https://www.crosswalk.com/headlines/contributors/dr-james-em...

Emo Philips tours with Weird Al, and did this joke at the last Weird Al concert. Thrilled to hear it live.

To be fair.

They said teach the Bible NOT Christianity.

We should most definitely teach the Bible in its historical context starting with:

- the genocide of indigenous peoples particularly the California Genocide from 1846-1873

- slavery and corporate interests (160?-1865)

- manifest destiny

- lynching in a Christian country (1860-1950)

- the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki

- civil rights movement (1950-1968)

- the Catholic Church sex abuse scandals

- Christian Zionism, corporate interests and apartheid in the Middle East

Some of what you listed might be appropriate if the class were a Christianity focused social studies class. By teaching the bible, they would be meaning the teaching of the text of the bible. I'd assume this would be more like a literature class where only the overall text and passages are evaluated, not the influence of the text on other people.

That said, this is very arguably a violation of the establishment clause.

They’re not actually interested in teaching the text of the Bible, too much incest and rape and incestuous rape for the young minds to bear.

If you really want to be fair, they said "teach from the Bible," not teach about the Bible.

This is a good list, but why start there? We should start with the genocides in the Bible itself. There are so many, it's hard to pick just one, but I think my favorite is where David, a man after God's own heart, killed all the males in Edom. Who said that feminism has no place in the church? /s

Good point.

Seems like a good place to start to answer…

“How did genocide and murder in the Bible influence government and church sanctioned violence in the so called New World?”

I believe this line of thought was one of the drivers of the original separation of church and state premise.

The solution to this is obvious. We need to ask each denomination supply gladiators\W\W\W\W\Wmissionaries who will debate the finer points of doctrine with warhammers. Once everyone agrees there's a winner then the winner gets to decide what is taught in schools. To register disagreement, more gladiators\W\W\W\W\Wmartyrs have to step up. It'll provide a safe outlet for that overpowering martyrdom complex, it'll be entertaining, and it'll never get resolved.

Vote for me in 2024.

Bible !== christianity, or any of those things you listed. It's the best-preserved-most-ancient library of texts that have been continually read daily by at least someone ever since they were produced, and have had a huge impact on western thought and civilization, conceptions of morality, justice, duty, separation between authority and religion within society, etc. And it does all of that while being shared between many religions.

> And it does all of that while being shared between many religions.

And also while being a collection of mythology, hearsay, internally inconsistent if not mutually contradictory moral codes, and objectively bad poetry!