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

[drfuzzy]

Well, this is bullshit.

So-called "sceptics" are plenty happy to accept textual accounts in other cases. 

It's only skepticism because they have a problem with theism. At least have the integrity to admit that much.

maybe they have a problem with a 2000+ year old book of stories that look a lot like other myth stories throughout history you have a half God half human creature :jesus that concept came from greek mythology where gods had human wives and sons half human half God and took . you have to take into account the cultures of the times what evidence is there that    of it is all mythology creative writing and  rumor and manipulation and politics ! nevermind that the catholic church you are relying on their honesty really havent recent events shown them to be manipulative liars ? there are several interpretations and additions long after jesus died the synoptic gospels were not even collected for several generations after his death all things are subject to the society the myths the attitudes of the people , the catholic church as it became more powerful had every reason to try and keep that power mixed with politics anything produced by 2000-6000 year old politics we have crappy corrupt politicians and we live in a modern secular society so be skeptical for that reason alone

Wow, did Delicate REALLY say that?  Wow.  

We reject the Bible as evidence, Delicate, because we have spent years reading it and puzzling over how any human being revere and follow a flawed, internally-contradictory, unscientific book of offensive fables.    

A text that I would consider worth using as a source would not be based upon myth.  It would be consistent within itself.  If it described historical events, it would source earlier respected historical texts that told the exact same story.  Better evidence would be any scientific study that has been replicated.  (But your previous posts prove that you have no respect for scientific knowledge.)   
     There is no scientific evidence for god's existence that I am aware of.  When you present that evidence, I will probably change my mind.  The burden of proving the existence of something falls on the person who asserts its' existence.  Until then, atheists will say "not enough data".  

You probably know of the BibViz project: the website of bible analysis never ceases to amaze me.  http://bibviz.com/  It provides an enormous amount of information and demonstrates conclusively many of the reasons I reject the bible as source material.

If you don't want to explore hundreds of comparisons, here are 5 from the gospels: