As Christians, we recognise that the Bible is the sole and sufficient authority in Christianity. If the Bible says something is true, it is true. If the Bible says something is false, it is false. If the Bible doesn't say much either way, it's on us to figure it out.
Unfortunately, many within the Church don't see it this way. Explicit statements are set aside for allegedly implicit statements. Rather than drawing good theology out of the text, bad theology is read into it.
To give an excellent example, there is the World Mission Society Church of God. WMS believes there is God the Mother, and that she actually lives on the earth today. In a propaganda video, they drew on the idea that God identifies Himself as our Father, and that therefore there must be a Mother God as well. After all, in order for an earthly father to exist, his children must have a mother.
But this is bad Theology. Although God does identify Himself as our Father, the Bible gives no credence to any kind of feminine God. In fact, the only time the Bible refers to any kind of female god, she is referred to as a pagan deity, the worship of whom results in God getting rather angry (e.g. Jeremiah 7:18). WMS is thus a heretical sect reading bad theology into the text, using implications rather than what the text says as "proof" thereof.
Another example would be transubstantiation. Catholics argue that since the people left Jesus in John 6 when He said we must eat His flesh and drink His blood to have eternal life, therefore they must have understood Jesus to be speaking literally. But there are two explicit statements they deliberately ignore. The first is in verse 60, in which the people who leave say "This is a hard saying; who can understand it?" In other words, they were thinking the exact opposite of what Catholics claim they were thinking. Catholics claim they knew Jesus was speaking literally and didn't like it, when their own words show that, far from understanding it literally, they didn't understand it at all! But more importantly, in verse 63, Jesus Himself says "the words I speak are spirit". Just as WMS tries to defend its idea of "Mother God" with implications, ignoring the actual text, so also does the Catholic Church try to defend transubstantiation with their implications, ignoring the actual text.
By far my "favourite" example is the extreme misuse of 2 Peter 3:8: "But, beloved, do not forget this one thing, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day." Old Earth Creationists often use this verse to suggest that when God says He created the heavens and the earth in 6 days (Exodus 20:11), that doesn't necessarily mean 6 days. It could mean some undefined amount of time.
Now, the meaning of the 6 days is really not that complex. The purpose of 2 Peter 3:8 is not to suggest that centuries after Peter died, Christians were intended to start trying to cram the atheistic creation myth into the Bible to avoid mean and childish insults from people who literally believe they are descended from apes. Quite the opposite; Peter actually predicts that those who mock the (apparently slow) return of Christ will be anti-Creationists! Peter is trying to encourage his readers that God doesn't have to stick to our time frame. It may well be that Jesus hasn't been back to the earth for nearly 2,000 years, that doesn't mean He's not coming back, it just means His patience is greater than ours. He's more than happy to wait a few centuries if it means more people go to Heaven, because He doesn't want anyone in Hell (v9).
But take a look at what he says in verses 5-7: "For this they willfully forget: that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of water and in the water, by which the world that then existed perished, being flooded with water. But the heavens and the earth which are now preserved by the same word, are reserved for fire until the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men."
In other words, far from giving us cause to change our interpretation of the Creation account, Peter is saying ungodly men will be willfully ignorant of it. They'll ignore that the world started as water, that waters once destroyed the earth, and of course that the earth will one day be judged again, this time by fire. The big bang didn't start the universe, but it will end it (v10).
I could go on. I didn't even include the example that inspired this article. But what I think I have done is demonstrate the faithlessness of those who think this way. If we truly believe the Bible is the word of God, why would we waste so much time trying to make it fit our own opinions? If you're willing to twist the word of God to fit you, your god is you. Let us heed the words of Paul: Do not think beyond what is written. There are no lines to read between. No secret theology that can only be gathered if we piece together God's secret codes. No clues to lead us to something a fairly literate child couldn't gain just by reading the text. The word of the Lord was designed to give understanding even to the simple (Psalm 119:130). To think beyond what is written is to believe we can do better, and that is more puffed up than an angry pufferfish.