The rest of this article examines what this decision means for teaching the Bible in our schools. His conclusion?
The principal purpose of taking a secular approach to the Bible is to avoid crossing the legal line between church and state. But in the process, that approach also avoids engaging the Book at its deepest and most intimate level: the holy.
That's the great obstacle facing all efforts like this textbook. And why in the end they must fall short, and settle for kissing the bride through the veil. Yet that is better than not kissing her at all.
I appreciate Greenberg admitting the difficulty of treating the Bible as a secular textbook (even though I am concerned about some of his piece which seems to flirt with open theism).
Nevertheless, I believe there is a deeper issue involved here--the secular/sacred dichotomy. Nancy Pearcey notes the problem with this view: "It concedes the 'theories, concepts, and other subject matter' in our field to nonbelievers" (Total Truth, 37). Ultimately, this dichotomy or separation is a false one. How do we correct this error? "Through a new understanding of the cosmic scope of Creation, Fall, and Redemption" (83). In other words, by understanding and living in light of redemptive history.
Therefore, when someone asks, "Can the Bible be used as a secular textbook?" The correct response is to show them the faultiness of dividing secular and sacred in their thinking.