Unless you're reading ancient aramaic and greek, you're interpreting an interpretation of words whose original meanings and connotations are speculative anyway. You're speculating on speculation, even assuming the original text was authoritative.
Of course, the canonical texts of the New Testament were chosen by some guy named Athanasius who lived 300 years after Jesus, and you probably didn't know of until reading this. If you did, you'd be an exception. And why are there four gospels? Because of such amazing logic as: "since there are four-quarters of the earth in which we live, and four universal winds, while the church is scattered throughout all the world, and the 'pillar and ground' of the church is the gospel and the spirit of life, it is fitting that she should have four pillars breathing out immortality on every side, and vivifying men afresh⦠Therefore the gospels are in accord with these things⦠For the living creatures are quadriform and the gospel is quadriform⦠These things being so, all who destroy the form of the gospel are vain, unlearned, and also audacious; those [I mean] who represent the aspects of the gospel as being either more in number than as aforesaid, or, on the other hand, fewer." By that logic, the Bible should exhibit bilateral symmetry and be capable of reproduction.
But I guess that doesn't matter, as long as we get the "jist" of the Bible. Even though not one word can be added or removed, sayeth the Lord, dontchaknow.
Meanwhile, science is testable and repeatable, not "trust me, it happened because someone wrote it down and then some other people voted on it."