Boy, those are a lot of accusations! I think that those are, however, common secular beliefs about the Bible, so they are worthy of our examination. But if you’re really honest with yourself, you will have to admit that those are easy accusations to make, and most people say stuff like that without any support whatsoever. Most of the time when I hear accusations like these, they come from people who really aren't able to support their claims
 

'Well, it’s just too easy to default to your scriptures when trying to make some kind of point. If your scriptures are filled with errors to begin with, or I simply don’t believe that they have any authority, why should I believe anything you say when you are trying to use scriptures to support your case?'
 

I know that many Christians will cite the Bible without making any evidential claims for its truthfulness, but I think that it's unfair to say that the Bible has no 'authority'. That argument simply needs to be examined more carefully. It's really very important for us to take a hard look at the Bible; the history of it’s transmission, it’s agreement or dis-agreement with the archaeological evidence, its use of prophecy, its agreement or disagreement with science, the existence or non-existence of textural error or contradiction, and then decide for yourself if this book can be trusted.
 

'Even if it can be trusted, why should I give it more credence than other religious books?'
 

Well, for just the reasons that I’ve already mentioned! If it does contain fulfilled prophecy, in addition to accurate history, it would exist in a category all its own! No other religious writings claim to contain prophetic truths, for example. The Bible is very unusual in that regard. And that’s why it’s so important to examine the claims of scripture, before discarding it altogether.