Shouldn't the above criterion be reworded? It seems to conflict with the site's guidance as is.
There is no conflict.
The universe of questions can be partitioned in two sets: One set consists of "questions about specific passages of the Bible", and the other consists of "the rest of questions". The former is on topic by default whereas the rest is on topic only if "about hermeneutical approaches". The component of hermeneutics underlies both sets in a modality that, respectively, is applied or theoretical.
Both criteria could be consolidated as "Questions that neither provide a specific passage of the Bible nor are about hermeneutical approaches are off-topic.", although the current wording has its merits because it explains why questions about biblical topics without a specific passage are considered off-topic.
Is this criterion for closing a question invalid?
It is unclear to which criterion you are referring, so I will address each one.
Questions about biblical topics not only are overly broad, but they also tend to trigger debate, and involve inconsistencies between books of the Bible. Many of these inconsistencies happen because different books of the Bible address different issues and different contexts. Other times a book contradicts itself. The only way to narrow down the scope of a question about an otherwise broad topic is by pointing to specific passages of the Bible. Only to specific passages can hermeneutical principles be applied.
By contrast, questions about hermeneutical approaches do not tend to be overly broad. These questions generally focus on concepts and consistent principles with which to analyze a text.