Should Public Schools Teach the Bible?
A new push to bring biblical instruction into public classrooms revives a debate over cultural literacy, religious liberty, and where the line between teaching and preaching really
By Cassius "Broadside" Quill
A fresh wave of state-level pushes to put the Bible back into public school classrooms — as literature, as history, as a required or recommended text — has reignited one of America's oldest cultural fights: what role, if any, should the country's founding religious text play in a public, pluralistic education system? The debate isn't about whether the Bible has shaped American law, language, and letters — nearly everyone agrees it has. The argument is over what follows from that fact, and it is playing out again in classrooms, statehouses, and op-ed pages this summer.
The case for teaching the Bible in school
Proponents argue that ignorance of the Bible is a form of cultural illiteracy. From Shakespeare to the Civil Rights Movement, from the Declaration of Independence's appeals to a Creator to the cadences of Martin Luther King Jr.'s sermons, American and Western literature, art, law, and political rhetoric are saturated with biblical language and allusion. A student who has never encountered the stories of Exodus, the parables of the Gospels, or the Psalms is, on this view, simply less equipped to understand huge swaths of the art and argument that built the world around them — regardless of whether they personally believe a word of it.
Advocates are careful to distinguish this from religious indoctrination. Teaching the Bible as history and literature, they say, is no different in kind from teaching Greek mythology, Confucian texts, or the Quran in a comparative religion or world literature course — it's an academic exercise, not a devotional one. Done well, supporters argue, such instruction can actually inoculate students against shallow readings and culture-war weaponization of scripture by giving them real, grounded knowledge of the text itself. They also point out that many students already arrive at school having never opened a Bible at home, in a country where religious practice has declined sharply — making the classroom, for some, the only realistic place they'll ever engage with a book that so profoundly shaped their civilization.
The case against teaching the Bible in school
Opponents counter that the line between "teaching about" the Bible and promoting it is far thinner in practice than in theory — especially in a country with no shortage of examples of public schools using "academic" Bible courses as a backdoor to devotional instruction. They point to the Constitution's establishment clause and to Supreme Court precedent limiting government endorsement of religion, arguing that public schools serving religiously diverse student bodies — Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, and nonreligious alike — have no business elevating one faith's scripture to required or quasi-required status, however it's framed.
There's also a fairness argument: if the Bible earns a place in the curriculum because of its outsized cultural influence, why not the Quran, or the Torah on its own terms, or other sacred and secular texts with comparable claims on American life? Critics worry that in practice, "Bible literacy" initiatives rarely extend that same curricular generosity to other traditions, revealing that cultural-literacy language is sometimes a convenient framing for what is, underneath, a preference for privileging Christianity specifically. They also raise a practical concern: who writes the curriculum, who trains the teachers, and who decides which translations, which stories, and which interpretive lens gets used — decisions that are rarely neutral and can easily tilt toward one denomination's reading of a text that different faiths and even different Christian traditions interpret very differently.
The unresolved tension
Both sides can agree the Bible has been an immense force in shaping Western civilization, and that a citizen ignorant of it is missing something real. Where they part ways is on whether a public school system — bound by law and custom to serve families of every faith and none — can teach that text without, in effect, elevating it above the rest. Supporters trust that a well-designed academic curriculum can hold that line; skeptics doubt any public institution can fully separate "teaching about" scripture from "teaching" it, especially amid America's ongoing political battles over religion's proper place in public life. The open question isn't whether the Bible matters to American culture — it's whether a religiously diverse public square can study it together without someone's neutrality, or someone's faith, ending up shortchanged.
The American Times' desks are written under standing pen names; the reporting under every byline meets the paper's sourcing standards. See "About Our Bylines."