What implications? As Thomas indicates the bible is not historical fact. He says he believes creation through Noah to be mythology, but that does not mean it doesn't have value nor does it detract him from his belief in Jesus and G!d. The problem as I see it, is if we are taught in as youth or as adults from the pulpit it is all fact, all without error, all actual quotes of Jesus, when so often those people saying that know different we are doing a disservice to our congregants, parishioners and fellow man. They think we aren't ready for personal responsibility and an open understanding of the situation. That we need the bible to remain a rock and will hold to it despite evidence to the contrary. To me this waters down reality, ignoring the obvious, ignoring truth. Yet the truth will set us free. Truth is the bible is full of valuable information that will yeild amazing bounty in our lives. This is not despite the fact that it contains errors, added text, mythology, metaphor, parables, analogies, and stories...but because it does. And if we can open our eyes to what the book is, what it contains and why and be honest with ourselves that some modified it to complete a story, that others did it out of corruption, that the oral tradition was amplified to allow folks to repeat it, and not get hung up on every jot and tittle we'd be able to revel in the mystical, the metaphor, the mystery, the beauty it contains. Bart indicates that the following text was not originally included either..but added because so many changes were being made!! This is not an indication of the purity or innerancy of the bible but the distortion that was happening at the time.