If one were to believe that the bible is both a scientific study, and a religous study, pulled into one book, where would you draw the line? I think that is the problem shared by many people who believe in modern science mixed with the bible, and those who only take bits and peices of the book as truth. The more one blurs the lines, the more uncertain things become. Which of course degrades the bible and it's authority over time, which eventually, it will not be regarded as anything resembling truth at all. However, this is not to say that the YEC base has problems of it's own, as scripture can still be interpreted differently, even while taking things literally.

In the end, we all have to realize that there will always be some major and some minor changes to the bibles meanings, based on how we want it. I think it's best though, to minimize this whenever possible, as if you dont, whats the point of believing the bible in the first place? Of course, if you dont agree with the bible, and believe it needs major changes, the next step would be to write your own version of the bible, and this, i'm sure, will become more common as time goes on.

On a lighter note, ahem, which bible should we follow?

The bible for...

A) The fighting Irish?
B) Jcl's Science Extravaganza?
C) Bible Evolved, by Matt?
D) The eMoxPH?
F) My guide to the universe and stuff, by Tom Cruise