No one who quotes the bible can admit this, but everyone who does it plays the pick and choose game with it. You can tell me that the whole damn thing is the inspired product of the holy spirit, but it contradicts itself to death and don't tell me it doesn't. Some Christians try to explain this away by adding qualifiers such as: this part is metaphorical and this part is literal. this part is historical and this part applies always. Who says? It's not in there. Were you suposed to figure it out? What are your criteria? I persoanlly admit I'm cherry picking when I quote the bible. I take the parts I like, I throw out the others. I make no secret of this. You cannot in the same breath tell me 'a man shall not lie with another man' is literal and aplies always but 'stone your daughter to death if she disobeys you' is historical and is not meant to be relevant today. Who says? You can't say 'love your neighbor as yourself' is literal but 'cut off your hand if it causes you to sin' is metaphorical. How can you know? Do you have some sort of mainline to a translator I can't see? Do you think it's common sense? Even the council that chose out the books to be canon was playing this game. They threw out the books they didn't like and they voted to see which ones they accepted. What kind of a deal is that? Now Christians have to accept the books they picked? Who gave them the authority? Why accept it, you don't even know these assholes. Your own text tries to warn you not to take it all seriously: "The simple believeth every word: but the prudent man looketh well to his going." (Proverbs 14:15). Of course that gets contradicted when Paul says to "believe all things." (1 Corinthians 13:7). Don't even try to make sense of it all. It's nonsense, because they're just stories and thier relevance is long past. Take what you like, make use of it, just don't try to accept it all.