Study the Bible in public schools? OK, but pay attention to the translations.

I have been seeing information about a bill before our Iowa legislators that suggests that the Bible, a collection of literature unique to one religious practice, could be taught in our public schools. The implication is not written but seems obvious: the Bible should be taught in public schools.

When I taught William Shakespeare’s “Romeo and Juliet” in a public high school, I had the kids recite the Lord’s Prayer as our first activity.  Not because they needed divine help to survive the class, but because the Lord’s Prayer they had grown up with was from the King James Version of the Bible. Why? King James and Shakespeare were contemporaries. That King James is the King James who organized the translation of the Bible into everyday language.

The KJV was the everyday language of King James, the translators, Shakespeare, and of anyone paying a penny to watch a play. It was neither lofty, neither elegant, nor romantic. It was certainly not sacred. It was everyday language.  It was the language used at the market, in the tavern, in the home. The words of the Lord’s Prayer (KJV) and of Shakespeare’s plays are NOT our everyday language.

The thing about language is that it is fluid, i.e., it doesn’t stand still. It is like a river, always changing.  A river changes the sand, the stones; the movement of language changes the meaning of words.

When the meanings of the words change, our understanding changes the intention of the author.

Iowa Capital Dispatch published an article on Feb 13, 2025 about the “Bible bill,”  Senate File 138, introduced by Sen. Dennis Guth, Sen. Sandy Salmon, Sen. Doug Campbell, Sen. Lynn Evans.

Two paragraphs held my attention:

Sen. Sarah Trone Garriott, D-Waukee, said as an ordained Lutheran minister, she believes the study of Christian scripture is important for her faith community, but that “the task of the community of faith is very different than the task of our public schools.” Trone Garriott said she does not support the legislation as this instruction is already allowed, but that as some advocates for the measure have called for “encouragement” for public schools to teach this material and that the measure “advocates for the Bible,” which is promoting Christianity over other religions in a public school setting.

“By only featuring one religious community’s scriptures, this legislation is preferencing,” she said. “It’s making a claim that only one is relevant for culture and history, which, in and of itself, is moved to endorse and promote one religious community, which is not constitutional.”

Like Garriott, I am an ordained Lutheran minister. Like the senator, I have read a dozen translations of the original, have learned through my own language studies, that translation is a tricky business. Like the senator, I take those translated words seriously. So?

My concern is that a “Bible course” will be limited to one or two translations, with no reference to the nuances of the words first written down by the writers of Hebrew Scriptures, by the writers of the Gospels and the Scriptures.  The students will interpret first century words with 21st century meanings, not the original meanings.

And, just to be clear, there are other writings that reflect other cultures. The Bible, KJV or RSVUE, gives a limited view of the world. A really great course would be a study of the Bible and the Quran together. Christology aside, they are rooted in the same vision of a world loved by God.

A note: back in “my day,” 90% of the kids were “churched,” so it was easy to get a great response to my request for them to recite (not pray) the Lord’s Prayer. I wonder how many kids today have those seven petitions embedded in their memory.  To be clear — it’s not the school’s job to teach them.

I am not asking any senators to vote against SF 138. They have, for the most part, forsaken the privilege of voting independently. I am writing merely to alert those of us who honor the Bible and the United States of America to honor, in our own practice, both the tradition and and the law that have existed here for 238 years.