avalonandon, I'm not going to reply to all of your ridiculous posts, so I'll sum this up.

The Bible, while it may contain some history, also contains Theology and faith based belief systems. It also contains stories which have no evidence at all. Because there is no physical evidence, or written evidence from any source other than the Bible for nearly all of the stories, they can not be revered as actual history. They can be believed to be history if the interpreter chooses to view them as so, but they can not be historically accurate, scientifically proven, or evidentially verified. This causes the Bible to become in a class called non-fiction. While many people believe it not to be, as of now, it can not be verified in any way possible as anything more.

I'm not condemning the Bible, I am only giving this as an official viewpoint. It isn't logic, it is common sense that this is so.

Now for my views...

If somebody chooses to view the Bible as literal, I find them as an idiot. For one, many of the stories defy science and physics, which are things that can be tested time and time again, always achieving the same result.

Also, the reason given above is enough reason to disregard the Bible as a literal source of history. You get much more out of it as a metaphoric guide to morality and lifestyle than as a historical book documenting how people use magic to escape imprisonment (of which there is also no proof of) and wonder in the desert for 40 years, all while using magic. Then a magic man comes along and preaches about God, who is also his Dad, but is really him, but they're not the same because Jesus says so, but they are the same because Christian and Jewish Theology says so, so they completely contradict.

At least if you interpret it as metaphor, you don't look as stupid, if you look stupid at all.