Originally posted by Off_The_Street
If you're a History or English or Anthropology major, you must study the Bible, because it (and I'm talking the KJV here) is basic to
the study of those disciplines.
Not that the Bible is true history, of course; it isn't. But it does provide interesting correlations that can help us 'fill in the blanks'
of early history of nomadic tribes in that area.
As far as English -- from either a literaty or linguistic point of view -- all I can say is that, as an example of 16th century literature, the KJV
matches Shakespeare and Marlowe and surpasses anything else written in the English language during that time.
And from a linguistic point of view, the Bible's a wonderful textbook on the evolution (uh-oh!) of the English language; and, if enough people who
read and quoted the Bible actually knew a bit about the history of English language, it would get rid of that silly "but it says 'thou shalt not
kill'!" argument against wars, just or otherwise.
Anthropology? It is the most commonly-read and understood of the world's creation-myths, since it tends to subsume both the Jewisn and Muslim
accounts;and has a heck of a lot more relevance to everyday activities today that either Shinto's view of Amaterasu-o-mi-kami or the Mayan Popul
Vuh.
When we ignore the Bible -- even leaving religion out of it, if we may -- we end up impoverishing ourselves from a literary, historical,
anthropological and who-knows-else what aspect.
Actually, you're a bit off on that part. Much of what we understand of early Jewish history, as well as that of Babylon, Assyria, etc is taken from
the Bible. It has been an invaluable resource to historians, scholars, and archeologists.
Now, stories like that of Jonah are open to inerpretation, but most scholars will agree that these are merely stories.
But, back to the main question. I agree with what many of the others have said. There is nothing wrong with using the Bible as required reading in a
literature class.