The so-called Bible bill which Georgia Republican Congressman, Paul Broun is trying to make into law, is a wonderful idea…in theory. What’s wrong with a law which would declare 2010 the “year of the Bible”? Given that we already have days for secretaries, months for reading and have parsed the calendar for just about every other purpose and cause from artichokes to zebras, it’s almost silly that we have not already done this.
Would it really be so wrong to honor the most influential book, for better or worse, in America? Comfortable or not with that reality, that is the way it is. And for that reason alone, the year of the Bible should be a good idea.
Let’s face it, the bible is the 800 pound gorilla in American political, literary and cultural life and it needs to be addressed in ways that re-take the conversation from both the rabid secularists and the coercive religionists. And a year honoring the good book could do just that.
Enacting the Bible bill has the potential to move us from the two ways in which the Bible most often functions in public life now: either ignoring the Bible’s influence or using the bible as a club by some people, to beat up on those who read it differently than they do.
In fact, the year of the Bible should be a no-brainer, but because we are so divided as a nation and so stupid in our approach to religion, we can not even have an intelligent conversation about the bill itself, let alone about how to acknowledge the importance of the Bible in our culture and in our politics.
The language being used by politicians taking sides in this debate, demonstrates both why this idea should move forward and why it can not. Witness the language used by Rep. Barney Frank and Gerald Nadler who oppose the bill, and Rep. Broun who is leading the charge for its passage into law.
Congressman Frank commented, “Does that mean 2009 is not the year of the Bible? What is 2012 the year of? The Quran?” And what if it was Congressman? Would that be so bad? And if so, why? Do you have a problem with Islam in particular or is it all religion? Either way, Frank’s hostility violates not only his usual commitment to government protecting and endorsing the free exchange of all ideas, but marks him as remarkably foolish.
Given the place of Islam in the world today, I think that a serious engagement with its most sacred text is pretty important. It’s one of the reasons I am especially proud of my 15 year old daughter whose Arabic is now better than mine, thanks to both her hard work and the Orthodox Jewish high school she attends.
And Gerry Nadler, just doesn’t get it at all. He actually hates the idea of any religious expression by public officials, which is why he does not place a mezuzah on his office door even though he has one at home.
Congressman Nadler fails to realize that however much he bases his conclusion on the laudable fear of “making anyone uncomfortable”, his approach actually contributes to a culture in which people are ashamed of self-expression. He needs to figure out how to have a mezuzah on his door and still make people comfortable, whether they are mezuzah-hangers or not..
Then there is Congressman Broun. “This doesn’t have anything to do with Christianity,” he said in an interview with Politico. Rather, he says, “it seeks to recognize that the Bible played an integral role in the building of the United States, including providing the basis for our freedom of religion that allows Muslims, Hindus and even atheists to vocalize their own beliefs.” It’s the words beginning with Muslims, and continuing to the end of the sentence that worry me.
The first half of his statement is true and it’s why his bill is a good idea. But the second half, which indicates that those other groups (ital. mine) and “even atheists” should be free to express their beliefs, unmasks Broun as one who really does believe that there are two religious tracks in this country: legitimate faith (as a Jew, I probably make it in this world but not in the next) and tolerated beliefs. That’s so wrong, it’s not even wrong.
So rather than focus on whether or not this bill makes it into law, I would like to see us raise the bar on how we have the conversation about whether or not it should. Let’s see if the true believers on both sides of this issue can transcend their own triumphalist tendencies, and actually welcome the ideas and texts which shape our nation and its culture – all of them in all of their wonderful permutations.
I know that won’t help as many people get elected, but it’s better than beating each other up in the name of ideas that are supposed to serve all people, isn’t it?
Author, radio and TV talk show host, and President of CLAL-The National Jewish Center for Learning and Leadership, Brad Hirschfield is the author of 
posted May 22, 2009 at 2:24 pm
Whereas the “bible” is an instrument of a religion and technically this would be a “law”, Congress should not be involved with this in any way, shape or form. See Amendment 1 to the Constitution.
Amendment 1 – Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression. Ratified 12/15/1791.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
posted May 22, 2009 at 3:19 pm
Amen BayState Barncat!
posted May 22, 2009 at 3:42 pm
Don’t we have enough Bible in society already? How about 2010 as the year of the Holy Koran? Or 2011 as the year of the Kama Sutra?
posted May 22, 2009 at 4:16 pm
Ditto BayState Barncat and New Age Cowboy.
posted May 22, 2009 at 4:25 pm
Which Bible? Would this include the Apocrypha? Should we open the canon to all of the gnostic books as well? Should we not also include the Quran (Jesus has a big role in the Quran)? Could it be The Year of Holy Writ, including all religious people?
A simplistic gesture like this is usually a misdirection for something that someone would rather not have seen. Who is he trying to appease or what is he trying to cover? Or does his family simply own a chain of religious bookstores or a bible publishing company?
posted May 22, 2009 at 4:26 pm
Something tells me the COngrsssman fromGeaorgia isn’t talking about the Pre-Reformatin Catholic version of the Bible.
posted May 22, 2009 at 4:28 pm
Wouldn’t it be nice if instead of memorizing the Bible and regurgitating the words, more people actually comprehended what they were reading?
posted May 22, 2009 at 6:15 pm
Year of the bible? Really? What gets accomplished with this ‘year of the bible’? Awareness? LOL
I think it’s a waste of time – the law should be working on the law – not some bill with basically nothing behind it.
posted May 22, 2009 at 10:45 pm
“Wouldn’t it be nice if instead of memorizing the Bible and regurgitating the words, more people actually comprehended what they were reading?”
Heck, I’d be happy just to know people WERE reading it! It’s amazing what people–even people who call themselves biblical literalists–think the Bible says. Including a lot of stuff actually said by Ben Franklin, Will Shakespeare, and Abe Lincoln. Back when I was an English teacher, I finally told my students I would flunk them without reading further, for any composition including the phrase “the Bible says” and not including chapter and verse. I got a few very well done papers after that, mostly from Jehovah’s Witnesses (who have wonderful study habits–I love having them in my classes.)
posted May 22, 2009 at 10:54 pm
I’m opposed to the Year of the Bible as well. In addition to church/state issues, I feel the proposed bill lacks religious tolerance because it asks all Americans to “rediscover and apply” Biblical Teachings: http://tinyurl.com/ol9x99.
I think that is an unreasonable request for atheists, Buddhists, Taoists, Pagans, and other people who don’t currently follow the Bible.
posted May 23, 2009 at 11:08 am
the good rabbi has avoided dealing with the real issue.
Which BIBLE are we talking about here: one encompassing both the “OLD” and New Testaments- i.e, the “Christian” Bible ?
WHICH Christian Bible: the Protestant (39 bks.), the Catholic
(46 bks, since the Apocrypha is added) or the Eastern Orthodox (51 books, since some pseudopigrapha is included)?
What about the Mormon Bible (with its added volumes) ?
Once again, the shaitan is in the details.
A similar predicament bedevils calls for the posting of the “10 Commandments” in various public venues: which version, that in Exodus or Deuteronomy? Is it “that shalt not murder” (correct translation) or “thou shalt not kill (wrong, but more common, and more Christian translation)?
posted May 23, 2009 at 11:12 am
Every year should be “The Year of the Bible”, but not as a law imposed by certain politicians. The Bible, the Holy Scriptures, is the manifestation of God´s Law, (His divine moral law) to His people and the whole world; therefore, it is not to be read only, but truly understood, loved, and lived.
It should be imprinted in our hearts to guide our lives and bring them to fulfilment. Then each one of us could work with each other, as children of God, to make of this world a place of beauty, peace, happiness, and joy. A place for all to share, just as God created it in the beginning. +
posted May 23, 2009 at 1:46 pm
Here’s a “workable compromise” Why not call it the year of the “Wisdom Book(s)” this would cover all faiths and people of no faith.
Rememeber IT’S ALWAYS ABOUT THE WISDOM.
posted May 23, 2009 at 5:03 pm
Why are these people wasting man hours and tax dollars on “year Ofs” ,”Month of” Day of. They should be spending all of therir time on fixing the economy, fighting terrorism, and health care!
posted May 23, 2009 at 8:15 pm
The gentleman from Georgia needs to re-read our Constitution, especially the First Amendment! And just which Bible would it be the year of?? There’s more than one. Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Mormon……And what about those who don’t consider the ‘Bible’ their religious document….Buddhist, Shinto, Taoist….Sure some people consider it the Word of G_d. But there are others who don’t. Laws concerning religion are against all that this country stands for.
I think our elected officials have much more important things to deal with than naming years of anything. What about health care, education, JOBS, senior citizen issues and on and on and on.
posted May 23, 2009 at 8:18 pm
I am all for the year of the Bible, as long as it includes the story of the Bible, of how it came to be, under which conditions were the different books written and under which views were some left out, as well as an inclusion of comparative religions and mythology and the historical and scientifical facts around some of the Biblical tales, both from religious and secular scholars. I think it would be very interesting for Christians to learn, for example, that Jesus was not the first one to be called Son of God; that the Egyptian Book of the Dead, written long before the Jews came appeared in history, contain virtual copies of the ten commandments; that Paul’s letteres were written before any of the Gospels, and learn how many ancient historians mention Jesus (not his followers, but the person) and how many do not.
posted May 23, 2009 at 9:27 pm
It appears we need a year of the Constitution, with the goal of making every year one of re-dedication to the principles of liberalism as enunciated by our founders, who were Deist and not Bible thumpers. While we are at it, The “Age of Reason” and “The Rights of Man” by Thomas Paine should also be celebrated every year. We need to reclaim the legacy of Paine, who was treated badly by the Christians of his time.
posted May 23, 2009 at 9:27 pm
It appears we need a year of the Constitution, with the goal of making every year one of re-dedication to the principles of liberalism as enunciated by our founders, who were Deist and not Bible thumpers. While we are at it, The “Age of Reason” and “The Rights of Man” by Thomas Paine should also be celebrated every year. We need to reclaim the legacy of Paine, who was treated badly by the Christians of his time.
posted May 23, 2009 at 10:08 pm
WHEN IT COMES TO BLESSING GOD BY GIVING A BIBLE DAY CELEBRATION,HE DESSERVE ALL THE GLORY AND HONOR.WHEN GOD SWEARS ABOUT ANYTHING,HE SWEAR THAT UPON HIMSELF,NOT TO ANYTHING HIGHER THAN HIM BECAUSE HE IS THE HIGHEST,THE BIBLE IS THE SOURCE OF ALL WISDOM,KNOWLEDGE AND
UNDERSTANDING.LET THOSE WHO HAVE EAR LET THEM HEAR AND THOSE CANNOT HEAR LET THEM REMAIN IGNORANT OF THE LAW OF GOD.ONE DAY WHEN THERE IS AN ACT FROM GOD OF SEPARATING GOAT FROM THE SHEEP.ASK YOURSELF TO WHAT
GROUP YO BELONG?THIS IS THE SAME SITUATION ABOVE,THE ISSUE OF GRANTING
BIBLE DAY AS A HOLIDAY OF ANY OF THAT EVENT,WITH ALL THE BELIEFS AND
RACES,EACH ONE IS COMPELLED TO MAKE A DECISION.EVEN PRESIDENT OBAMA
ONCE SPOKE FROM ONE OF HIS SOCIO POLITICAL ENGAGEMENT IN THE PAST,HE SAID THAT “THERE IS NO LIBERAL OR CONSERVATIVE AMERICA,THERE IS ONLY
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.”THE BIBLE CAN DO NO HARM TO ANYONE’S BELIEFS,IT IS LIKE A HARMLESS DOVE.I CANNOT SEE ANY REASON WHY WE
REFUSE ENLIGTENMENT,IF PEOPLE STILL HARDHEADED,THEN I THINK,GOD IS
CONTROL OF ALL SITUATIONS,IN FACT,THE WORLD ACCORDING TO THE BIBLE
IS JUST HIS FOOTSTOOL,WE ARE JUST ONE SMALL PORTION OF HIS MAJESTY,
EVERYONE IS RESPONSIBLE OF HIS OWN CANDLE LIGHT FROM GETTING OFF ONCE
THE WILD WIND BLOWS,RIGHT?
posted May 24, 2009 at 12:55 am
Your Name, thank you for expressing the views of Congressman Broun’s supporters so….characteristically. I have no doubt there are many people like you in his district.
posted May 24, 2009 at 11:38 am
Bob S, you’ve got it right! Let’s start be committing to learn about the constitution – let’s face it, most of us could probably use a refresher – then look back at how it was influenced by the Bible.
To appreciate the intent of our founding fathers where it comes to how we should view religion, read the letter that George Washington wrote in response to a member of Touro Synagogue (the oldest synagogue in the US, and still standing and active in Newport, Rhode Island) on August 17, 1790. I’ve added the URL to this communication, and the specific quote I refer to is:
“It is now no more that toleration is spoken of, as if it was by the indulgence of one class of people, that another enjoyed the exercise of their inherent national gifts. For happily the Government of the United States, which gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance requires only that they who live under its protection should demean themselves as good citizens, in giving it on all occasions their effectual support.”
By this approach, Nadler would proudly put up his mezzuzah and his constituents would simply accept it. No one’s religion is to be “tolerated,” but it just “is.” I am sure Congressman Broun has no idea that he sounds this way, but I hear one class of people indulging the “Muslims, Hindus, and even athiests” by “allowing” them to vocalize their beliefs. He should refresh his understanding of the constitution.
posted May 24, 2009 at 12:39 pm
I am curious. Why does there seem to be this incessant need by certain Christian groups and political leaders to try to hang the banner of their religion OVER the very same place where the Constitution for the United States of America Hangs??
Why do they incessantly ‘interpret’ what the founding fathers ‘meant’ by hunting down every vague reference to Christianity in their writings and then try to ‘Force’ every subsequent event and law in America through the filter of of these ‘references’ in order to prove that America is/was ‘Christian’ through and through?
As far as the Bible is concerned…giving it special honor?? well that seems contrary to what it purportedly teaches. Basically you are taking it and making it an ‘idol’ as something to be worshipped…
At any rate…it is not a good idea to ‘endorse’ it from the same ground wherein the Constitution for the United states stands
posted May 24, 2009 at 6:10 pm
Dear Rabbi,
You wrote:
“Frank’s hostility violates not only his usual commitment to government protecting and endorsing the free exchange of all ideas…”
but I think you are over generous about Frank’s character. Have you heard him “speak” about those of us who believe that a marriage is between a man and a woman?
posted May 24, 2009 at 6:40 pm
The Bible as it is used by too many groups is the cause of too many divisions, the basis for separation, the tool of hate mongers, and the crutch of literalists. As an American Baptist pastor, I think it more important to, as one writer suggests, read and study the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, particularly the Bill of Rights and use this as a process to focus on our country’s “reason d’etre.” It would make wonderful fodder for community study groups to focus on why the U.S.A. a exists and these documents can help us think and work together in better and more productive ways.
posted May 25, 2009 at 11:35 am
Bible, Bible, Bible, all written by man and each one has a different meaning. Whether you use the Torah, the King James Versoin, the American Edition, any Bible has it’s good points in it, so why not use it? Have a National Bible Year? Why not? It is the most read book in the world. I wonder how many homes have a Bible in it and is it read?? There are groups out there trying to ban the Bible from Public Places. This country of ours has to start from scratch, when it comes to religion. Acceptance is a hard pill to swallow today with some people. The word “Bible” means “Good News” and we sure need good news today. Sure we have all these great wonders but have people ever wondered where they came from and how they were supposed to be used. Let’s go to the Book of Directions ………. the Bible and see!
posted May 26, 2009 at 1:54 pm
You have a fundamental misunderstanding of the U. S. Constitution that is borne on the long assault on it by those who have no regard for others rights. You engage in the passive aggressive FALLACY that if you are unable to use government authority and resources to practice and display your religion, you are being deprived. That is hogwash. You have no right to take anyone’s tax dollars and resources to promote any religion that others do not practice or believe in. You are free to spend your own money and to worship as you wish and that should be preserved and defended, but you do not have the right to infringe on others and take their resources. It is an arrogant disregard and disrespect of others that you need to hijack their government for your agenda. Why can’t you live and let live? Why can’t you follow the rule of not doing to others what you wouldn’t have done to you. I don’t want to attend government events and listen to religious views from any religion – it is just that type of arrogance and disregard that leads to discrimination and persecution – you are being very short sighted. Just because you are not allowed to hijack the government and public resources to promote religion does not infringe your freedom, but when you or others do it, you violate the principle of separation of church and state that men far wiser than you put in place to avoid the strife that eventually and inevitably follows. Leave others alone.
posted November 6, 2010 at 5:57 am
http://www.enikeairmax.com
I have been readed you blog. For me, it is so luck. Because of your excellent article remind me a lot of memories. Thank you so much.
posted December 31, 2010 at 1:09 am
Frankly speaking,I love your blog’s style.