[dalke]

I believe that is the point.

crazy_geek says apparent conflicting views in the Bible can be reconciled by sufficient study.

bwoj points out that there isn't a universal agreement of what the Bible says. (I'll add, compare the Catholic Church to Jehovah's Witnesses for an example of the differences.)

It would be easier to interpret the Bible if parts of it were labeled "the following is not meant to be read as an actual history." At the very least, this would reduce the number of people think there was a global flood, or think that the 1 million+ Jews were enslaved in Egypt then spent 40 years wandering in the desert.

There would still be misinterpretations, but they would only be of a religious nature, and not include the historical misinterpretations which, in the case of the Exodus, took over 2,000 years to correct.