6/14    If the Bible wasn't a religious text followed by a billion or so
        people do you think it would still be printed and read by anyone
        today?  As a work of fiction, story telling quality, etc, would anyone
        buy it?
        \_ They'd buy the stuff left on the scribe room floor that the council
           of Nicea left out.
        \_ How could it not be "a religious text"?  It's the word of God.
           \_ Why not?  I've read plenty of Greek mythology without slaying
              any goats or tossing virgins off cliffs into the roaring ocean.
              It's only the word of God if you take it as a religious text. -op
              \_ Sorry folks, I'll troll harder next time.
                 \_ Oh, sorry.  I didn't realise you were trolling.  Next time
                    if you'll let me know in advance I'll get all hot n
                    bothered for you.
        \_ it needs a good editor, but the story telling is top notch.
        \_ Since similar mythology from that era is still read, yes.  -tom
        \_ What tom said, but it would obviously be read less often and
           by fewer people.
        \_ You mean if it hadn't existed and someone wrote up the whole shebang
           today as a fantasy? I think the sheer quantity of stuff in there
           would create a buzz at least, but as literature it's pretty lacking
           in terms of fleshing out the characters. Some old testament stuff
           could be re-written to make a dramatic story, leaving out the
           tedious rules and lists and other dull parts. But such a creation
           wouldn't be the Bible as it is. It's not very inviting reading,
           what with the constant preaching and punishment. The meat of the
           Jesus stuff is pretty short and not overly exciting. A lot of the
           new testament is the dry "letters to whoever" and then the bizarre
           Revelation stuff. There are a some literature-worthy themes
           in there but mostly the writing itself is dull.
           \_ Job, Ecclesiastes, Exodus are all pretty good stories.
           \_ The Bible is not about characters, but archetypes.  I think it's
              very good for what it is -- archetypal literature.  Kind of like
              Shakespeare, actually. -- ilyas
        \_ Some chapters would make great novellas on their own (and have,
           actually, when recast with different characters).  Some of it
           would only ever get read in Classics classes.  Cf. the Greek
           Theogeny vs. the Iliad.
           \_the random greek myths are read as stories but something like
             the iliad is obviously a deep work of literature now more than
             a story. the kjv bible is certainly considered a work of
             literature and i suppose parts of it could be a good story.
             the book of job certainly is raises interesting
             questions outside a narrow xtain context, there is plenty
             of poetry. i think the english depts at berkeley/'fraud/harvard
             /michigan/UVa/yale will all of "bible as literature" classes.
             you may want to see the somewhat recent book "good's secretaries"
             you may want to see the somewhat recent book "god's secretaries"
             on the KJV and other english bibles. the book of mormon on the
             other hand ... --psb
             \_ A hackneyed concept borrowed from Dr. Dee and transplanted to
                America.  A much better basis for religion is anything by
                William Blake.  More fun to read, too.