I ran out of room to keep replying in our thread since we hit the six deep mark. So here's the continuation-
Books are written across a vast array of genres. A lot of these genres require a certain type of interpretation and critical thinking to understand them as intended. There are no other books that I'm aware of that convey the same message as the Bible (you say others are similar, which I agree, but more different than the same). Therefore, I'm not under any obligation to treat the Bible the same as a history textbook or a novel. Books are, by nature, subjectively digested by the reader even if we're all supposed to read it the exact same way objectively. That's just part of the miracle of human nature and how our brains work. My reasoning isn't circular, it's entirely logical to me.
I don't just simply believe the Bible because I like it. There's a lot in there I don't like and that is incredibly hard to understand. The story is definitely different, but by all account as creatures of habit, why would that make anyone choose to believe the Bible instead of their own selfish doctrine? It's arguably a lot easier to live for yourself than it is to change your lifestyle and hold contentious opinions in our modern liberal culture. The Bible certainly isn't convenient for making a lot of friends these days. And we all have existential angst that we're trying to "soothe" in some way or another. As I explore mine, I find that the Bible offers the most capable help, hope, and truth. But, as many atheists and agnostics may not realize, when you eliminate God you also eliminate objective "truth". This is what makes this debate so incredibly hard to bridge.