[Lestat]

I don't have time now, but I'll try to come up with some examples and would love to have them explained (and I will honestly listen with good intention to the explanations).

<font color="blue">But if you are going to say a particular passage must mean X, and you define X and won't accept another definition and then insult someone who explains why your definition is wrong, then it hardly seems worth the effort. </font>

But just so you know, the main thrust of my point is this:

I know how to read. You know how to read. There are theologists who've dedicated the greater part of their lives to the study of the bible, who know how to read. Yet even they differ on what certain parts of the bible mean and how we're supposed to take them. Precisely because the bible in parts is so vague, it requires HUMAN interpretation to make sense of them. And again, not all humans (even theologists), can agree on them.

So what I'm claiming is that we are not left with the word of God (if there were one), but with human interpretation. At the very least, God couldn't have deemed it too important that we understand what he meant. This is especially true where science has rendered a part of the bible as clearly untrue as in the case of evolution (which even the pope has declared true). Now theologians have to hit the drawing board again, and come up with a new interpretation.