Richard Dawkins in his book, "The God Delusion,"
tell us that, "The King James Bible of 1611 -
the Authorised Version - includes passages of
outstanding literary merit in its own right,
for example the Song of Songs, and the sublime
Ecclesiastes... But the main reason the English
Bible needs to be part of our education is that
it is a major source book for literary culture..."

Dawkins cites that there is overwhelming agreement by
teachers of English Literature that biblical literacy
is essential to full appreciation of their subject.
He points out that "doubtless the equivalent is true
of French, German, Russian, Italian, Spanish and other
great European literatures."

"And for speakers of Arabic and Indian languages, knowledge
of the Qur'an or the Bhagavad Gita is presumably just as
essential for full appreciation of their literary
heritage." Dawkins tells us that you can't for example
appreciate the music of Wagner without knowing your way
around the Norse Gods.

What I found interesting was the list of biblical, or
Bible-inspired, phrases and sentences that occur in
literary or even conversational English, from cliches,
proverbs, to gossip. For example:

"Be fruitful and multiply: Am I my brother's keeper?
As old as Methuselah: The fat of the land: A land flowing
with milk and honey: Let my people go: A man after his own
heart: How are the Mighty fallen? : The wolf shall dwell
with the lamb: To everything there is a season, and a
time for every purpose: No peace for the wicked: Can the
leopard change its spots? ..." And many more.

The point that Dawkins is making is that "we can retain
a sentimental loyalty to the cultural and literary
traditions of, say, Judaism, Anglicanism, or Islam, and
even participate in religious rituals such as marriages
and funerals, without buying into the supernatural beliefs
that historically went along with those traiditons."

That we can give up belief in God (or not)
while not losing touch with our treasured heritage.

I'd be interested in poster's views on the subject.

Most interesting self revelation foxy :)

Your explanation was quite telling about why you tend to 'cocoon' youself from people who argue from the perspective of actual faith rather than, to quote you quoting Dawkins

"we can retain
a sentimental loyalty to the cultural and literary
traditions....
without buying into the supernatural beliefs
that historically went along with those traditions."

Quite true Foxy.. quite true.
"we can"..... but should we ?

Only if we accept the ultimate legitimacy of the secular world view which regards true faith in God and the Miraculous as mythical, unscientific nonsense.

This is the point where the Gospel changes hearts and minds...when the human heart is challenged with the words "Come..follow me/repent and believe in the Gospel".. it must make a descision. 'for'...or 'against'.

There is no fence sitting.. no one foot in each camp...it's either following..or not following. 'Coming...or going'.

When Jesus said "I am the light of the world" or.. to lean a bit towards the secular view "Jesus reported words -I am" etc.
-it's quite possible to keep all that within the secular framework, by deciding that it is just a bunch of words invented by the greedy power hungry Church or some similar scenario.

But the person of true faith actually takes those words to heart, and they form part of his/her relationship with the real person "Jesus, Lord of lords and King of kings" crucified for our sins and raised from the dead, according to the scriptures.

As Paul puts it "I am crucified with Christ, it is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me"

They are 'my thoughts' and are basically in agreement in that we not only can, but should, retain a knowledge of our rich heritage.

You have brilliantly illustrated the power of 'the myth' :)

The words of Jesus Christ are a 10000 times more impressive than a man bound by his own ego.

Dear AG,

Do try to read the titles of threads.
From your post - you're obviously on
the wrong one.

The title of this thread is
"Religious Education As a Part of
Literary Culture." Kindly stick to
the topic. This thread is not about
anyone's religious beliefs, and certainly
not mine.

Here are some more biblical or Bible-inspired
phrases and sentences that occur commonly in
literary or conversational English:

"A Daniel in the lions' den: They have sown the
wind, and they shall reap the whirlwind: Hide your
light under a bushel; Turn the other cheek;
Cast your pearl before swine..."

As Richard Dawkins tells us:

"Every one of these idioms, phrases or cliches
comes directly fro the King James Authorized
Version of the Bible. Surely ignorance of
the Bible is bound to impoverish one's appreciation of
English Literature? And not just solemn and serious
literature. The following rhyme by Lord Justice
Bowen is ingeniously witty:

"The rain it raineth on the just
And also on the unjust fella,
But chiefly on the just, because
The unjust hath the just's umbrella."

Dear runner,

Richard Dawkins is making precisely
that point. For example, did you know
that there are thirteen hundred
biblical references in Shakespeare's
works? I certainly didn't, until I
read Dawkins' book!

P.G. Woodhouse, considered one of
the greatest writers of light comedy
in English has so many allusions to
biblical phrases within his pages.
Again Dawkins tells us that.

And, the fine point of Eliza Dolittle's
fantasy in "My Fair Lady," would escape
anybody ignorant of John The Baptist's
end:

"Thanks a lot,King," says I in a manner well bred,
"But all I want is 'Enry 'Iggins' 'ead."

This may clear things up for you.

Cast your pearl before swine...

Scripture is indeed a great source of culture, but including a subject in the official school-program is a receipe for making children hate it and likely to resent it for the rest of their lives, what a pity!
(you can see this happen for example in Israel, where bible-study is a compulsory subject in years 2-12 and matriculation)

If you truly want young people to rejoice in knowledge, then ideally all formal education should be scrapped. It's unlikely to happen though, because the government is too invested in the education-bug as part of their desire to produce our future "work-force".