Why the "There are so many interpretations of the Bible" claim is confused

[Mudhammam]

Putting aside the fact that for every gem of wisdom the Bible contains there is an abundance of shoddily written folk lore one must be even wiser to ignore, the OP's rebuttal of the claim that "'There are so many interpretations of the Bible' claim is confused" is what I actually find confusing here. There's a simple explanation really: Human beings wrote, read, and interpret the Bible. And they tend to disagree. Now, if you must insist that God "inspired" men in the same way that rocks and grassy fields might inspire a painter, the onus still lies on humans to understand the divine inspiration correctly, and given the nature of subjectivity, disagreements are bound to ensue. One only runs into a communication problem on God's part if they insist on the incoherent notion that somehow, the eternal, immutable, immaterial mind entered into time and dictated the words through people's thoughts in the particular language they spoke. On its face, that's just silly. When one reads the Bible, which is so obviously a product of ancient man, it then comes to appear immensely moronic.