Good points; however, I am still puzzled that you say one cannot "take the away the bits you like," and then just take away the bits about serving God out of Fear. The followers of Christ that I specifically cited served primarily out of love, and the Christological paradigm that they followed was the NT-dominated message of understanding, love, and support of one's fellow Man, predominantly taught by Christ.

Your entire second paragraph, concerning itself with "some Christians do x- Others do y" can be replaced by any paradigm, moral, spiritual, secular, or otherwise. Go ahead and try it- even those who are strictly secular, following the law of the State, think judgment on others who wrong. There are many who follow the law, not out of love for it, but out of fear of its consequences, lest they break its pact. There are many who believe our law of the State to be the best one in all the earth, shadowing all other, lesser State contracts, agreements, or social pacts. And so on. Why you take this away only from Christianity is still a conundrum; but ultimately, the goal is to curtail this "collective harm done by these reactions to the Bible," however you are somehow perceiving them to be. As you said, you can't quantify or measure this, but as for your perception of these "reactions which cause harm," I do not know.

On your third point, I do not know why it cannot be both. Why both serving out of your love of God as well as fellow Man is out of the picture for you, I do not know, but all the great Christian social movers did so out of both and not one exclusively. It is interesting to note that many of those, even staunchly secular psychologists (e.g., Freud) who believed the God image was created (See "The Future of an Illusion") also state we naturally create said totemic schemas for positive reasons. Ergo, regardless of belief in the divinity of God, or even whole portions of the Bible (or any other Holy Writ), it is no different than any other fashion you devise your moral or social compass.