Perhaps the difference is that with the Bible, and any book, the methodology isn’t revealed up front. If this is the case with say, evolution, that might be because evolution is just a story. If you believe it, you are inside the mind of fiction writers who confer meaning upon things that those things do not inherently possess.

Also, when it comes to the Bible, there is a spiritual darkness that veils it to the minds of men, which might explain why we need new eyes and ears.

This seems patently true of science. Once you’ve adopted the methodology (i.e., once you’re on the “inside”) then you’re good to go, as it were. It’s not that there aren’t “hard and fast” rules, rather, it’s that those rules exist, and are applied within, particular instances. Books and symphonies are not amorphous collections of their respective parts. If the Bible were just another book or song then we wouldn’t need new eyes and ears to understand it. If something is necessary for understanding to obtain, then isn’t that indicative of a hard and fast rule?