So when did reading a book straight forward start becoming reading something out of context. I didn't your comment's first sentence and then jump around the rest of your paragraph. If you think that jumping around a book outside the author's intent, which would be reading it straight from front to back, then you're reading the book wrong.
It's kind of like looking at a seeing all the evidence for a murderer who has been proven guilty, and then looking only at the evidence that the murderer gave for him not killing and saying that he did nothing wrong because the defendant had nothing to say.
I hear you Journey. But reading religious texts is not like reading a novel or history book. Take the bible for instance. The bible did not fall to the earth complete. It was cobbled together over time from many many different writings. The bible was put together to further the views of whichever group it was that put the version of that text you are now reading. There are more than one version of the bible, with each version being different. With the NT, for example, if one were to take the KJV and arrange it in chronological order, the first 'books' would be Paul's writings. The order of the synoptics would be Mark first, followed by Matt, Luke/Acts, then John. Reading in this order gives one a different picture of Jesus than reading ti in the traditional manner. There are many ways to tackle religious texts. But it still leads one to think it is still a fiction.