The bible is a crucial piece of literature reference. Pretty much every literary piece written before the middle of the 20th century assumed that their reader was also intimately familiar with the bible.

For example, a writer could call a woman a "Jezebel" without any expository context, assuming that the reader would know what that meant.

Thus the bible should be in every high school and higher education library.

▲

graemep 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

It should be commonly taught as a work of literature. Ideally the KJV which has largely fallen out of favour (except with certain groups) as a religious translation because more recent translations are so much better (advances in scholarship, more discoveries of early manuscripts...) but which is beautiful as a work.

	▲	gorgoiler 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		It’s a sign of the times that the powers that be might make KJV, a labour of love and the apple of the author’s eye, come forth to fight the good fight and rake in some filthy lucre! By the skin of their teeth, these wolves in sheep’s clothing’s days must be numbered, but if they keep on the straight and narrow, live by the sword, and go the extra mile, then lo and behold the first shall be last and every salt of the earth will be made a scapegoat from here to the ends of the earth! after KJV, possibly with thanks to Bill (Shakespeare) also.

▲

nemomarx 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

any Western literary piece. for translated novels from China you might want some other foundational texts on hand, or the Quran to complement Persian literature, or etc

But I don't see any reason a library can't have various books from antiquity, for reference at least. Probably multiple editions or translations of each too.

▲

jeroenhd 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

TIL "Jezebel" is a reference to the bible.

Without the bible, people still have dictionaries if they don't understand words or references. Or they could use Google. I don't see why some books would be "too crucial" not to ban in a law banning books intended to protect kids.

If anything, I find it easier to defend a ban on religious books in (public) schools.

	▲	bryanlarsen 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		Typically biblical references are references to parables or lessons, not single words that can be easily looked up in a dictionary.

▲

tomrod 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

> The bible is a crucial piece of literature reference.

We no longer live in the middle of the 20th century. Based on your bandwagon logic, we should also require the Quran, Torah, Shruti, Smriti, The Book of Mormon and associated volumes, the apocrypha, Watchhouse volumes from JWs, NIV, NRSV-CE, The Good Book [0], Buddhist texts, Holy Piby.

No. We don't need that. This is a misapplication of Chesteron's Fence to the late 18th century US culture. We all survived the 1950s to now and culture has, dramatically and mostly for the better, evolved.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Good_Book_(book)

▲

rmah 3 days ago | parent [-]

The other religious texts you mentioned are not part of the western civilization canon and did not have much effect on western literature. Thus, while I think they should certainly be available in school libraries as they are important works, they need not be required reading.

On the other hand, in different areas with different cultural traditions, each of those books should be required reading as they were central to their literary tradition. And, one assumes, are.

To deny that contemporary American culture has its roots in European culture (i.e. western culture) is to deny reality. And honestly, it mystifies me why so many seem to want to be ignorant of their own cultural roots.

▲

tomrod 3 days ago | parent [-]

> The other religious texts you mentioned are not part of the western civilization canon and did not have much effect on western literature.

Incorrect.

> To deny that contemporary American culture has its roots in European culture (i.e. western culture) is to deny [my] reality

FTFY, otherwise an ignorant and frankly naive take. There are dozens to hundreds of cultures that have influenced and rooted American culture, and you'd do kindly to remember that:

- The American Southwest is __heavily__ influenced by Spain and Mexican culture

- Louisiana is __heavily__ influenced by French and African culture

- Oklahoma, Alaska, Hawaii, the Dakotas, much of New England, and many others are __heavily__ influenced by Native American culture (Way down on the Chatahoochee, anyone?)

- The Black belt and most of cities are __heavily__ influenced and rooted in the reformation of Black culture after being ripped out of their homelands by slavery

- Blues, Rock, and Jazz all stem from African

- What you call "European" is probably English (so, wrong) or a confusing and tangled mess of different cultures that get grouped as "European/Western" and assumed to be one strand of "Christian" or another (I note you missed the Torah being listed, Catholic scripture being listed, etc.).

I strongly, strongly recommend that, if you are a citizen of the US, that you take pride in your own culture and learn where it _actually_ sources from -- of which you clearly care, given that you have chosen to make it _the_ supporting argument for why book bannings are okay and why an irrelevant text should be standard, non-optional reading in high school. The roots matter much less than what the culture currently is.

▲

rmah 3 days ago | parent [-]

This is exactly what I meant when I said I was mystified.

	▲	tomrod 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		Ah! I didn't realize that was said in you comment as a self-reference. I understand you now I think, though your phrasing was quite confusing.