The general idea is that religious texts are large enough to have simple sections and complex sections, so the reader can choose the level of complexity, knowing that these translations have received a few centuries of bug reports and errata fixes.
One can certainly find more entertaining and less corrected texts :)
> Only if you learn ancient dead languages
You may be surprised by how much of modern communication is influenced by Latin and Hebrew. Mainstream lack of awareness of "old" languages only makes the mainstream more susceptible to influence, as that which cannot be named cannot be firewalled.
I don't think that the approach is viable for an atheist, or a follower of a non-Biblical religion.
You have to be someone who loves these scriptures to be motivated into using them this way.
Many people want to learn a living language: take part in conversation and learn how to say everyday things, and not how to summon locusts upon the land.
Also, judging by the archaic English that is used in English translations of the Bible, I would not recommend them to new speakers of English. You need a thoroughly modernized text which replaces usage like "thy" with "your" and so on.
There is likely a similar issue going to other languages using these texts.
Agreed that it's not a good way to learn English. It's a good way for an English speaker to learn classical Greek, Latin and Hebrew.
What are some old but non-religious texts which have received careful translations into many languages? Plutarchs Lives, Aesops Fables, folk tales ...?
One can certainly find more entertaining and less corrected texts :)
> Only if you learn ancient dead languages
You may be surprised by how much of modern communication is influenced by Latin and Hebrew. Mainstream lack of awareness of "old" languages only makes the mainstream more susceptible to influence, as that which cannot be named cannot be firewalled.