[joenot443]

> Why is any "reading" of the bible more valid than the next? This guy is a pastor

If you're asking earnestly, I'd imagine the "validity" of a reading of the bible to be judged the same way we judge interpretations of other books or documents with levels of ambiguity.

There have been innumerable pastors over millennia who've preached their own perspective on the book; your intuition's correct that the more popular readings survive and the less popular ones do not. If Scott wanted to say his unique interpretation makes him a pastor, that seems reasonable to me. He wouldn't be the first, nor the last.