Very nice answers, thanks! Small problem about your parthenogenesis; That would mean the child being exactly as her, with all her genetic information, therefore not coming from God...
About the particle-wave duality: nice but it doesnt sustain the theory of God being an aglomeration of different attributes, often supposed to be inlimited. It leads obviously to contradictions, and I don`t think there`s a way around it. Only Buddhism has managed to do that, with the concept of no-Self. Actually it`s smarter that that, there`s no God! No-self, nothing to hold on to, no contradictions, no surface on which dust can gather. I am now looking foward to some Buddhist replies!
About the apples, you know the saying: one a day....

"If one doesn't have at least a base understanding of the Bible and Christianity (main ideas here) and you live in the western world, you will spend a lot of your time very confused."

But why stop at the Bible - without a base understanding of: Greek mythology, the history of the Mediterranean basin (including the fertile crescent), philosophical developments since the Greeks (at least), the interplay of history, economy, science, technology and art over the same period and geographic area, (and to bring the focus on literature) classical authors, the Torah, Rabelais, Shakespeare, la chanson de Roland, Dante, any amount of trivial and popular literature, etc., etc., which weaves a complex web from which any author worth her salt has liberally plucked the flies, how can one understand much of what goes on, artistically, politically, philosophically, scientifically? And why not include the same mess from the rest of the world, with all the equally rich cultures and histories, all the more so in English, where pretty much every culture has contributed to literature? Where does one stop?

"- ... and, if you do, you'll spend even more of your time confused! :) "

to paraphrase: does understanding and knowing all that actually help avoiding being confused? (probably only if one can synthesize it into a coherent ensemble - could somebody recommend a good book that would do that, please? ;)

I'd say that this background knowledge may help understand contexts, nuances, allusions, but I am not convinced that one can't enjoy most literature almost as much in vacuum, without reference to external cultural landmarks. When an author compares her lips to rose petals, do I need to know that another author thought that they are instead similar to petunias, or that some alleged word of a god considers them to be apricots? I gorge myself on Rushdies prose, even if I don't know much more than a rat's whisker about any of the mythologies that appeared on the subcontinent, and devour Murakami although I have only the faintest knowledge of the numerous inputs that shaped his mind. I'd argue that too much emphasis is placed on the impact of the Bible, especially when looking at contemporary literature, where so many other influences play a larger role, and where that one book's influence has been greatly diluted by passing through so many other author's creative digestions.