Well.. quite a few of those responses were based on ignorance rather than anything else.
Starting with the actually intelligent response and working on down...
Iceaura
As a work of fiction, especially in the King James version, it has a great deal of value - some of it historical. As does, you mention, the Odyssey, and one might add the Norse Eddas, the Mabinogion, the Tale of Genji, Beowulf, the Bhagavad Gita, and so forth.
Indeed, all of those are of very good use when looking at their historical content. I am a big fan of Beowulf, and while I do not believe in dragons, the wealth of detail in the saga is extremely interesting. The hall Heorot, the tradition of ring giving as well as the names and backgrounds given.... all quite authentic despite centuries of alterations.
mikenostic
If you have half a brain in your head, you should know that history can be forged, skewed and altered to suit whoever was in charge at the time.
The bible is no different.
Sigh... I like to think that I do have at least half a brain... and my degree is in history, so you would think that I know a bit about it.
While individual documents may lie, you rarely have only one document to rely on.... and even the lies help you find the truth.
A good example is the document called "The donation of Constantine". You can look it up if you want. The document is an obvious forgery, however it's influence on history is quite genuine and it does tell you a great deal about the forger, his education and the status of the church at the time.
Every piece of evidence about the past, whether a lie or not, is information and therefore valuable.
Lastly...
swarm
1. The Bible includes a huge amount of day to day information.
”
none of which is reliable
All of which is reliable after you have tested the info against other documents and against archeological evidence.
The Bible serves as a guide, not a rulebook and is only one of many. However, it would be stupid to ignore any source, especially one that was so influential.
“
There is little from the period that can tell us that other than the bible.
”
except for actual letters and documents from real people.
Do you have any?
There are some, but not many and again always limited in scope. After two thousand years, not a lot remains sadly.
I am not saying that the Bible is the only source... but it is a source.
“
2. The Bible has had a marked influence on history as a whole.
”
So did dirt but there isn't any need to wallow in it.
However, we do study dirt. It's called geology.
its ok for an unreliable Tertiary source.
It really depends on what it is you are studying.
If you want to learn about Jerusalem in the 1st century AD, then archeology is your best bet along with some documentation. The Bible serves as a narrative guide more than anything else.
If you want to learn about the Middle Ages and what people believed .... you must read the Bible, it's a requirement. So much of what happened in the Middle Ages is base on the Bible that you could not understand it otherwise. It would be like studying the Muslim empire without knowing about the Koran, or an in depth study of any people without understanding their religion.
If you don't care about the Bible.. no big deal.
However, if you want to learn about the Christian past...you have to care.
This has nothing to do with a value judgment on the religion itself. It's about knowledge... not faith.
