Christians and atheists: Would you support the Bible being required reading in high school literature classes?

Question

Or rather, parts of it, because it's rather long to be requiring high schoolers to read the whole thing. Maybe just Genesis? It would, of course, be taught as literature, in the same way as Homer's Odyssey. But there are so many things embedded in our culture that ultimately come from the Bible, it seems a shame that so few people actually read it. (It's also a shame that so few people actually read Homer's works, and so few people actually read Dante's Inferno, and so few people actually read Shakespeare.)

Answer 1

Not the whole thing! My class couldn't make it through Les Mis! lol

But excerpts, yes. I think parts of all religious texts should be read, if not in literature, then at least in world history. It is an important historical piece with plenty of material for study.



The only problem is that the teachers may have issue with distinguishing teaching the text from teaching the believes outlined in the text. It's easy to separate your personal feelings from the Odyssey, but if the teacher is a devout Christian or obstinate Atheist, thinks could get tricky.



And then there would be the complaints from all the parents thinking that the schools would be pushing Christiany on the students. These are the same wackos who think that teaching Catcher in the Rye will make kids into deliquents and teaching Lolita will advocate pedophilia.



I had a world history teacher who, during the unit on the Roman empire, read a brief passage from the bible about the census to show us how it is useful as a historical text. I think that was a great idea.

Answer 2

I as an Atheist would suggest a mandatory world religions class for high schools. Even if its just for one year. Up here in Canada, the province of Quebec has this already!



I think it's important to learn about the religions of the world. But the Bible as a book of literature? Don't think so. They should add it into public libraries, and even school libraries. In the fiction section.



Genesis is full of absurdities and evil. I'd rather you teach the NT than the OT, if it were a matter of choice.



Homers Odyssey is accepted as (what someone on YA called) a "Faction". A fictional story, written in a factual time and place. The Odyssey has some factual, historical places as does the Bible, however both are quite fictitious.



Even major Christian scholars accept that A LOT of the Bible was edited and rewritten, much after the time of Jesus.



All in all, it shouldn't be taught in a literature or english class. Perhaps in a world religions class (which I stated should be mandatory), or in the fiction section of libraries.



That's my take.

Answer 3

Only parts of it -- given that there are so many genres in the Bible: the Law, prophecy, narratives, history, poetry...to read even complete books would go way beyond a school year. Better to have a high school lit class called the bible as Literature -- after the regular stuff is mastered: writing, punctuation and all of that stuff. Oh, and in Catholic High Schools the Bible as Literature is taught!

Answer 4

The way the law works now, making any religious text required reading would open up all other "bibles" (even Satanic ones) to "equal time". I would think that putting the Bible on a supplementary reading list would work as far as comparing literature to the text that inspired it. It might also work in conjunction with World History courses to establish a time line of ancient rulers.

Answer 5

No.





There are so many other books that are much better Eng. Lit. that should be required reading.





Shakespeare, Orwell, Hemingway, Steinbeck, and so many others deserve to be read before the bible.







Sure, the texts in the bible have had a lot of influence over Western societies: Crusades, Earth centric astronomy, persecution of heretics, witch burning, sectarian violence, pro-slavery attitudes, anti-gay attitudes, etc.



On that basis you could argue that WWII, the holocaust, etc. has had a massive influence on world societies over the last 100 years - so Mein Kampf should be required reading.

Answer 6

I'm an atheist but I think an objective bible college course could be useful if taught from a historical standpoint. It affected so much in history and is still a powerful tool in driving people's beliefs and motivations so it could be kind of interesting to identify how it does this and how it managed to survive hundred of years...



Not required though, it doesn't interest everyone. I could see it being useful for psychologists and historians and history teachers but it should definitely not be a requirement.

Answer 7

Yes,if more people turned back to God,the world would not be in the shape its in now.It was a big mistake to take Christianity out of schools.The Bible is very important,especially the New Testament.

Answer 8

I'm Catholic, and I don't think that would be a good idea because there are many ways to interpret the Bible. I know there is also many ways to interpret Romeo and Juliet, but no one will get offended by different interpretations of Shakespeare. If you want your kid to learn about God, them send him to a private school.

Answer 9

I would support it. The King James Version is just like reading Shakespeare, and the plots are similar.

It's been a best selling book for over a hundred years...

Answer 10

As long as students are exposed to other religious texts from other cultures, like the Popul Vuh and the Vedas.

Just to expand the horizon of perspective and promote open mindedness and acceptance of different cultures/realities.

Answer 11

No. It fails as literature. The style is awful in any translation, the plot is nonexistent, the themes depressing. The only reason it's still around is its association with religion.



Perhaps in a comparative religion class, but only if it shared equal time with Islam, Satanism, Buddhism, Taoism, Discordianism, Shinto and at least two neopagan traditions. And then only if the comp religion class was paired with a formal logic class.

Answer 12

Yes

Answer 13

I'm nonreligious but I honestly would not mind. I think we should all learn about religion, and it's up to us whether we want to believe or not. It's awfully ignorant of some people to bash Christians when they don't even know much of the religion, I think this might be beneficial; at least they would have something to go on when they want to prove why God doesn't exist.

Answer 14

I would support it if these other religious texts would also be required to be read : the Analects, the Koran, the Talmud, the Veda, the Upanishads, the Tao-te-ching, and the Bhagavad Gita.

Answer 15

Naah, it's not really high quality literature.



I would however support the bible (or sections of it), along with other religious texts, being required reading in high school religion classes.

Answer 16

well, I don't see why Genesis would be in a literature class. The only section I see being in a literature class is Psalms because of it being poetic. It shouldn't be required but an elective course.

Answer 17

if people would study early american history they would find that the bible was taught in our public schools for years and a warning given that when it was removed we would lose the youth and then the nation

Answer 18

Sure.



Or in an elective Religious Studies course.

Answer 19

Homer or The Bible? Well, I'm a big fan of stories featuring giants, bickering deities, holy wars, talking animals and huge mythical creatures destroying cities... so obviously I'll go for The Bible.

Answer 20

i do not have an issues with that at all honestly. as long as the teachers are not attempting to use it to teach the religion, rather teach about literature.

Answer 21

As long as its being taught as literature, with possibly other religious texts getting equal treatments and not being taught as the direct word of the Almighty.

Answer 22

The bible is necessary to be studied at home first because you cannot trust in just anyone to teach God's word. It' must be taught in truth and not by personal opinion.

Answer 23

well, yeah, but not just the bible. the quran, the baghavegheta, the tao te ching... they should all be taught and with no bias. i had all of that in college, but i think it might be valuable sooner.

Answer 24

In a Comparative Religion class, sure. As part of the general curriculum, no.

Answer 25

To be honest , NOPE, I don't think it should be taught any other way than how God intended it to be taught or read.... You can NOT teach it in the *spiritual* in a non-spiritual setting.....That simple.... go in peace.... God bless

Answer 26

Of course not. There are millions of people all over the world who would not appreciate being forced to read it. I wish people would keep their religions to themselves.

Answer 27

I'm an atheist and I do. I think that if more people actually read the bible then there would be many more atheists.

Answer 28

No, I would not. Even taught as "literature."

Once it's fully accepted as "myth" like the Odyssey is, then fine. Until then, with so many nutcases running around claiming it's "god's word," it has no business in public schools, period.



Peace.

Answer 29

It is a bit violent for kids.



But if you are going to read it, read the whole damn thing. Especially Leviticus and Deuteronomy.

Answer 30

It already is at my old high school.

Answer 31

yes

Answer 32

Sure, in a mythology class.

Answer 33

I'm against teaching religion in public schools.

Answer 34

How about we keep Religion in church and have schools teach stuff that's actually useful?

Answer 35

Yes and they are doing it at my school. All the ffaaggsss have to stand in the hall because they are not allowed which is understandable.

Answer 36

No, I'm against indoctrination in any form.

Answer 37

I think that would be great because if people actually read it, they would realize how stupid it actually is.

Answer 38

that is when this world went to sh-- when they took it out