By Scott Beason, Alabama State Senator

(Originally posted on ChristianWorldViewNetwork - May 28, 2008)

Worldnetdaily recently published a commentary that outlines some of the concerns that I and many others have with the textbook, “The Bible and Its Influence”, published by the Bible Literacy Project (BLP).

The BLP response was a simplistic denial that failed to refute the criticisms.  As they do in their textbook, the Bible Literacy Project response craftily molds the English language to lead the reader to a conclusion, while not telling the “whole story”.   Both sides of this issue should give readers all the facts, and then the readers can decide the issue for themselves.

The BLP says in their latest article that “others criticize phrases that have long been removed from their textbook”.  This is not a true statement.  All of the phrases in the BLP textbook that were mentioned in my composition remain in both their original and revised versions. (The page numbers can be checked in my article archived on Worldnetdaily – April 10, 2008, titled “The deception of the Bible Literacy Project”).

The BLP states that their textbook “has never been supported or endorsed by the ACLU, the People for the American Way, or the Council On Islamic Education.’  This statement is correct, however, both articles by Worldnetdaily reporter Bob Unruh and me stated that The People for the American Way, and the Council On Islamic Education “endorsed the guidelines by which the Bible Literacy Project textbook was written.”  The BLP choice of wording regarding People for the American Way and the Council On Islamic Education is an example of how they set up a straw man and knock it down.   As for the ACLU, my opinion is that they are conspicuously absent when it comes to the Bible Literacy Project textbook in school. 

The information in my previous article is well documented, including the mention of the six members of the Bible Literacy Project Board of Directors and Advisory Board who are founding signatories to the Communitarian Platform, which both Joseph Farah, of Worldnetdaily, and General Ben Partin say is a communist platform.  In the BLP response they mention many of their endorsers, but they fail to mention Ted Haggard, who resigned in disgrace from his Colorado megachurch after being accused of homosexual activity, is also one of their endorsers.  They point out that Leith Anderson, President of the NAE, endorses the Bible Literacy Project, but they also fail to mention Mr. Anderson’s involvement with the questionable emergent church movement.  Lighthouse Trails editors state that “Anderson is saying that the Word of God is still being written, and that today’s experiences can dictate what that Word is.” (Faith Undone, p. 55, 56).  That is hardly a mainstream evangelical belief.

The “Bible and Its Influence” contains many “examples” of people who represent or possess a worldview the publishers obviously would like public school students to emulate.  They quote on page 65, “American writer and reporter Lincoln Steffen’s 1926 defense of Leninist (Communist) politics titled ‘Moses in red’.”  In a “unit feature” on page 132; socialist, farm worker’s rights advocate Cesar Chavez is compared to the Old Testament prophet Amos because both fought for “social justice”.  The response article by The Bible Literacy Project, stated that Fyodor Dostoyevsky was a “renowned Christian novelist.”  It is well known that Dostoyevsky was an existentialist.  Newsflash!  Christianity and existentialism are not synonymous.  Out of all the famous people The Bible Literacy Project could have chosen to use, why would they showcase a communist, a socialist, and an existentialist in a public school Bible curriculum? 

The Bible Literacy Project tried to single me out as what they term one of their “few critics,” but they did not mention the harsh critiques that the late Dr. D. James Kennedy and Dr. John Hagee had of their textbook.  Dr. D. James Kennedy wrote: "… It would be a tremendous mistake to impose such very anti-biblical material upon our children in public schools."  Similarly, Dr. John Hagee penned: "My overview of "The Bible and Its Influence" is that this is a masterful work of deception, distortion and outright falsehoods." 

The Bible Literacy Project says that Charles Haynes is not an “official” spokesperson.   No, he is only a reviewer, contributor, and promoter of their BLP textbook.  They do not mention that Mr. Haynes was a key speaker for them at their press conference at the National Press Club in April, 2005 in Washington, DC.  The video of the press conference is on their website.  Their website before being altered stated, “Today, I salute Charles Haynes of the Fist Amendment Center, our partner in this project…”  The BLP says “ The Bible Literacy Project does not endorse Charles Haynes’ personal views…” So why is Haynes so heavily involved in the guidelines by which their textbook was written, a contributor and reviewer of their textbook, a key speaker at their press conferences, and a promoter of their textbooks to local school districts?  Haynes’ works have been endorsed by The Gay Lesbian Straight Education Network.  He co-authors books with The Council On Islamic Education, and he used to work for Americans United for Separation of Church and State.  Mr. Haynes travels and speaks with former ACLU attorney, Oliver Thomas.  They spoke together at a meeting in Dallas in Spring 2006 for teachers and school administrators, where they promoted the “Bible and Its Influence”.  People and groups are known by the company they keep.

The textbook, "The Bible and Its Influence," incorporates the Hegelian dialectic process outlined in "Finding Common Ground: A First Amendment Guide to Religion and Public Education" written by Charles Haynes and his friend Oliver Thomas.  Thus, schoolchildren learn "about the Bible" through a pre-planned group process that twists the Bible into the evolving ideals of a global spirituality where absolute truths are sacrificed on the alter of common thought.  Haynes has been involved with The Bible Literacy Project since its inception, and for many years he has tried to stop the work of other Bible curricula, which do not use the dialectic process.

The Bible Literacy Project does not address in their response how the Hegelian Dialectic is used throughout their textbook.  Many who are not familiar with the term or process might be interested in reading an April 14, 2008, Op- Ed column in the New York Times, by William Kristol.  He states communist Karl Marx’s famous statement about religion in the introduction to his “contribution to the critique of Hegel’s philosophy of right” (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/14/opinion/14kristol.html?ex=1208836800&en=5173a14570ede927&ei=5070&emc=eta1).  “Religious suffering is at the same time an expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering.  Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the sentiment of a heartless world, and the soul of a soulless condition.  It is the opium of the people.”   Georg Hegel was an occultist whose philosophy laid the foundation for communist brainwashing. We need to grasp the basics of his dialectic process to equip our children to resist his fast-spreading "education" method. It is used in schools and public forums to shape people's thoughts and turn them from independent thinkers to group thinkers.  Liberty does not prosper in group thought societies.

The Bible Literacy Project attempts to capitalize on the fact that so many people around the world see the educational and, yes, social value of studying the Bible in public schools.  The problem is the BLP refuses to allow a straight forward study of the text.  They must take the opportunity to indoctrinate children into their philosophy, which undermines the traditional view of the scriptures.  An unbiased review of the text is not acceptable, but their slant is.

Read the entire article here: ChristiaWorldViewNetwork.com