The verses I cited to you were not written to be funny. Unlike a Farley Brothers movie, the intent was not necessarily to make someone laugh. But these events happened. That, however, should not stop one from gaining some humor from it. Compare it to the right context, not a comedy of errors or the next Will Farrell movie. Divine revelation need not be serious all the time- that is to say, un-humorous.

" **It is no different than reading the AP summer reading list."

"The difference is that people don't build a theology out of the AP summer reading list. People don't try to iron out the contradictions. Most importantly, people don't act on the counter-humanist parts of the AP summer reading list."

Theology is simply a belief. People do- and have- made whole mindsets, doctrines, governing treatises, and belief around these works, and I disagree wholeheartedly that people have not tried to work out the contradictions in said works. I'm not sure what the "act on the counter-humanist parts" part, but the point is theology, like any belief, is formed around a plethora of different things. To single out the Bible in this way is rather spurious.

"People don't feel compelled by the AP summer reading list to ostracize gays, discourage the remarriage of divorced couples, attempt demon-exorcisms instead of seeking medical help, and pressure children to tell their playmates that if they don't convert, they'll go to Hell."

Yes, they are. You'd be hard pressed to argue someone isn't affected to modify/ solidify views on rape, murder, adultery, homosexuals, the (lack) of medical help, or forgiveness and differing views between from reading anything from 'The Prince' to 'Anna Karenina.' Reading Camus angers many at the lack of character shown by the protagonist in 'The Stranger,' and so on. The Bible has also been on the AP reading list. Its characters embody every moral and social dilemma articulated in any modern day work. Simply singling out the Bible simply because it is a faith-based product is not correct or truthful.

Plotz loves the Book of Job, and makes us love it, as well. Not because the answers or outcomes are clear. Hardly. One of the mottos from the 122nd comes to mind: "We do these things not because they are easy, but because they are hard." His discussion does answer much, but does not answer nearly as much as he would like. You continue to seek this overawing sense of direction form the Bible and Christianity- that applies to everyone. I don't see why you do this, or why, since you are understandably not able to, you think and embrace the negative, the downsides to the faith / doctrine / attitudes which may or may not stem from them.