Atheist;Do you believe any of the history in the bible?

The parts that can be confirmed through extra-biblical sources, sure. Jericho had walls in ancient times, as depicted in the book of Joshua. The Middianites of Sinai really do appear to have been the first people to use camels in warfare, as depicted in the book of Judges. The Romans really did control the territory that they called Palestine at one time, as depicted in the New Testament.

But a global flood? An angel in the east guarding the way to Eden with a flaming sword? A virgin having a son (even if we speculated about parthenogenesis, the child would have to be a girl)? A man walking on the water? That stuff is rather far-fetched.

I believe the Bible is a story and some of that story is likely based on fact. Having never read the Bible, I cannot say completely if I believe some of it is true or not.

That being said, I've heard (as most have) about miracles and whatnot described in the Bible. That, I do not believe, however, I cannot speak for other Atheists.

I believe some of it happened. Inserting real things going on or that have gone on and real people is a good way to get the readers involved with the story. Writers insert pop culture all the time into fictional novels every day. Its hard to find a work of fiction that doesn't have some reality (current or historical) inserted into it. I also believe some of the history in Spider-man comics through the years as well though. Obama was elected president in the pages of Spider-man, and guess what, he was elected president in real life too!!! This doesn't mean Spider-man is real though.

The Bible is not history nor does it represent factual events. It is a fictional rewrite, a rehash of ancient myths and traditions dating to even before the first primitive Jewish desert goat-herders imagined a mono-God.

As for the New Testament, please be informed that the Catholic Church published the first NT 300 years AFTER Jesus supposedly died. That fact alone can make one conclude that it's a fabricated hoax.

There are a few things in the Bible that correspond with fact, but to give an analogy, I know London exists but I don't accept the existence of Lord Voldemort just because London is mentioned in the same story.

Yes...especially some of the old testament text that follows from the Torah. However, like with most history, it must be taken with a grain of salt. Most history is recorded in the way that it is hoped to be perceived later...not neccesarily entirely on point.

Most legends bear within them a grain of truth on top of which large amounts of fiction have been heaped.

Some aspects are historically and archeologically supported.

Some aspects are historically and archeologically disputed.

Some aspects have no evidence either way so far yet discovered.

incorrect. Diaries and human beings whose ancestors have been in contact. There are even pictures of the conflict. yet in spite of the reality that, you have already made up your suggestions which you're precise and all of us else is incorrect, so i understand you will no longer hear to what's published. besides, why ought to i think as you do? The previous GODS and GODDESSES are nonetheless alive and nicely for many human beings and devil is a Christian theory, no longer mine.

History is not about "believing". It is about gathering all the evidence available on a particular subject and hypothesising what may have actually happened. I believe the Bible to be a great historical document, but that does not mean I think it is accurate.

Sure, some bits are corroborated in other historical records: such as the freeing of the Hebrews from Persia, by Cyrus the Great.

There was a King of Israel called Herod the Great.