What do you mean when you say “the Bible”?
Usually the Tanakh, otherwise I typically say the “Christian Bible” or, depending on what’s being discussed, the “New Testament.”
Do you think the Old Testament is a pretty good historical document?
Pretty good historical document? No, but I do think that it’s an important historical tool partly because much of it is folk etiology suborned to a theological agenda.
I can see your point…but what makes the Christian New Testament not worthy of the same assessment, in your opinion?
It may be, at least the “historical” Acts may be. I’m simply less acquainted with the NT. At the same time, I would suggest that the combination of Paul, Acts, and Josephus is sufficient to warrant the presumption of a historical Jesus.
Sorry, but I need to go offline now. Perhaps we can pursue this at some later lime.
L’Shalom …
Peace.
I asked my wife the medieval historian what she would do. She said:
“If any of my students wanted to use the Bible as a historical source (rather than a cultural one) I would ask them to justify their cite by displaying a knowledge of the transmission history of the cited passage. When was the passage written according to Biblical scholars? What was the cultural context of its creation? How has interpretation of the passage varied through time?”
Point out that the Bible claims that the city of Jericho was destroyed, forever.
Then, show them a webcam link to modern, downtown Jericho.
Call the ACLU first and warn them you might be fired soon.
Tell the student the bible is a work of fiction and give him an F unless he cites a real source.
Dare your employers to fire you.
Depends on what part of the Bible you’re talking about. Someone may claim that Moses wrote the stuff about Exodus, for example, which would be a primary source, but Luke is obviously a secondary source, even according to church doctrine.
If they can use Bible/Old Testament pop-culture, then my answer is:
“Say, brainless, don’t you know where Science comes from?”
[pulls out a National Geographic magazine]
"Look-it here, from Florida, Canada, and Washington DC too!
Never saw it? 'Course you never. This is just for us Explorers. It just so happens I’ve been Nominated for Membership…!
I’m going out Exploring some day… just you watch!!!"
Merry Christmas, Mary…
I tried that. It was in the 1980’s. The Bible said that the city of Tyre was destroyed, and no more than a place where fishermen spread their nets. I showed my fundamentalist friend a photo of modern Tyre, with high-rise office and hotel buildings.
He said that was a lie.
(I do not want to tar all believers with this one person’s idiocy. But when someone is that big an idiot, photographic proof won’t do an atom of good.)
This. If he wanted to argue that such-and-such scholars found it to be historically accurate, invite him to use those scholars’ works as his primary sources rather than the Bible.
God blew up Tyre?
Or was it just flattened?
^ It’s called moving the goalpost. 
I think that there are only two works of literature that are called “the Bible”; one is The Holy Bible (Christian, w/the OT and NT) and, IIRC, the other is whatever is encompassed in what the Jewish religion calls the Bible.
I don’t think that you will find any other religion that calls their canon “the Bible”, at least in English.
You would have to repeat that into their good ear.
I think that the Bible can teach us about the way people led their live in ln the lands of the Bible but as a historical document no. The Bible is a library that over the years has been censored, the OT is incomplete, only 25% of available scripture has been used in the NT. Mary Magdalene who I believe to be a true apostle of Jesus is relegated to a volunteer by one of the early Pope’s. Why does Paul who never met Jesus take up such a large portion of the NT. when Thomas who knew Jesus and was also a family friend and also was the author of his Gospel of Thomas, why was this gospel omitted from the NT. The present Bible is to incomplete to be a historical document
Because the Christian religion is largely the creation of Paul.