>>53811824
It's often because they believe what the Bible is trying to teach is more important than what it literally says.
The Bible's not a single work after all. It's a collection of stories over a millennium and more, many from before widespread literacy so being passed down orally (which was referred to as mythos by the Greeks, referring to information given by word of mouth, which is where we get the term myth)
The first five books of the Bible (aka the Torah or Pentateuch) have generally been agreed to come from several different sources, generally given as the Jawist, the Elohist, the Deuteronomist (guess which book they're mostly behind), and the Priestly source.
Which of course means there's going to be disagreements. It's like the four gospels will tell different stories.
But you can also see what the authors were trying to tell you by what they wrote. Which some would see as the important thing.
Let's take, for example, one of my favourite books: Job.
Ultimately it comes down to Theodicy and the Problem of Evil. Job is a character, a tool to use to demonstrate the author's answer to that (which could be said to be: God is far greater than we can understand, and well, it's sometimes bad shit just happens)
Now, sure, this can raise questions about "well, how can you say this story happened, or this one didn't?" Which is a question asked by both literalists and disbelievers.
And if you're looking for an answer.
... well, I'll defer to Job's author, shit just happens.
I'm not skilled enough to provide an answer. I'd just say try to be a good person and follow what seems right to you.