Let me ask you a rhetorical question: Am I asking you a rhetorical question? Answer: Yes. Let me ask you another question: Is this a Christian ministry? Answer: Yes. The header image was made with an app on my iPhone called YouVersion. From the previous sentence, you can deduce that I have an iPhone, and that the iPhone has (or at the very least did have at some past point) an app called YouVersion.
From the above paragraph, you see the wonderful power of language. I have a thought that I intend to convey to you. You are not telepathic, I can't just think my thought and have you share it. Therefore, I need some form of communication to help you share my thought. My chosen method is the written word. What I thought, I typed, and what I typed, you understood. If I have done it well, you will have understood it correctly.
Now imagine some berk comes along and says "Brian's words are open for interpretation. I think he wasn't asking you a rhetorical question, Bible Brain is a Hindu ministry, and he made today's image on a Photoshop app on a Samsung Galaxy." Should such a person be taken seriously? Of course not! My words are as plain to read as theirs are.
What's different about the Bible? Obviously, there is some difference. The more complex the thought, the more likely it is to be misunderstood. And yes, the Bible is full of complex thought (and, in the case of the KJV, an ancient form of the English language). That being the case, the Bible is harder to understand than a Facebook post. But what about similar books? Or even dissimilar books? Can we interpret Shakespeare's "Romeo and Juliet" in such a way that the two survive at the end and live happily ever after, with Mercutio as Romeo's best man, and Tybalt as the priest? Can we interpret Moby Dick as being the written version of the movie "Jaws"? Some people have such a lax attitude to scriptural interpretation that using the same logic, Charles Darwin can be made out to be the greatest Creationist of all time (especially since he gave a lot of reasons not to believe in Evolution that are only growing more solid as our understanding of science grows). And I say that because in reality, the greatest Creationist of all time is Jesus, but modern Christians claim the Bible is so unbelievably ambiguous that Jesus would actually have scolded Ken Ham for taking such a strong stance on it.
In 1 Corinthians 1:10, Paul says "Now I plead with you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment." The Bible is not intended to be read and have us come to our own conclusions, but to be read and have us come to God's conclusions. When the Bible makes a statement, "it's open to interpretation" is not a valid excuse for refusing to seek the right conclusion, for refusing to defend the right conclusion when you know it, and certainly not for drawing the wrong conclusion. Therefore, let us set aside all denominational differences, all misquotes, all bad doctrines, certainly all heresies, and treat the Bible as it is: A book, much like any other, with an intended meaning, much like any other, and thus absolutely not open to interpretation.