The problem though David is that your alleged witnesses are dead. What court of law would take a book which has many, many "alleged discrepancies", and is a thousand+ years old and put it on the stand and accept it as fact without the ability to cross examine? Your book is not an acceptable witness in a court of law, at least that I'm aware of.
You mentioned that people didn't question the Bible in the past and just relatively recently started criticizing it. Not true from my understanding. For instance, the book of Daniel was attacked as a forgery by Porphyry, and he lived in the 4th century from my undertstanding. And look at the alleged writings of the "church fathers". In it there are criticisms of Christianity by opponents. Ever hear of Celsus and Trypho? This is not new David. And even if the Bible was completely accepted by everyone, so what? Also, openly attacking the Bible was not really allowed for much of the past. Do you think someone could, in the 5th century, attack the Bible in a Christian controlled area? Look at today in Muslim countries, can you openly attack Jesus? Blasphemy laws were in effect and still are in some places. Many, many people believed the earth was flat, and the sun revolved around the earth. That was the dominant position, wasn't it? The amount of people who believe something doesn't make it true.
I don't have a problem with believing there's a God. I don't have a problem with believing that God created the universe. Science will never explain everything. There will always be, at the least, the "God of the gaps". "God" as an explanation for what we don't, or can't understand.
And the reverse, I don't have a problem with you believing that your alleged witnesses were telling the truth. Christianity is fine, along with other religions, as long as they don't try to enforce their worldview on others through mental manipulation, laws, war, etc.
