I view the Bible as a collection of books that early church fathers like Augustine, choose to include in our present Bible because these books mostly agreed with there own type of theology. Many books were not given the churches approval and so were eventually lost,(we today have found many books that early christians used before the church ruled on what was to be considered scripture).
So I look at the OT as a collection of Jewish fables with some history thrown which was slanted by the religous thought of the time period in which they were written. And so back 3000 - 2200 years ago when ever they lost a battle it was God, that was angry with them, when ever they won it was God that caused the victory, to think otherwise was to make God jealous, The writters concepts of God show Him to be very much a production of the human mind which created Him in the Likeness of men, not the other way around, they thought him to be so much like them, giving him human qualities such as Rage, Jealousy, Needing to be Worshipped as the Most Important, Easily Offended by Slights and not following Formality in His Worship exactly, Cruelity toward those who Offend Him, and many other common human traits.
I think if the OT is read with this in mind and not taken literally one can avoid a lot of conflict in ones mind, by trying to prove that whenever God in the OT lost his temper and wiped out thousands of human lives, he did so out of Love. By letting the God of the Bible rightly stand in the same catagory as Jupitor, Apollo, Zeus, Dagon, Baal, and others, namely Myths of ancient people that no longer are feared or worshipped, we free ourselves to take a fresher look at the world around us that is not filtered throught fear of displeasing this easily offended Diety.
As far as the NT is concernded I find its 4 different gospels to be reflective of 4 different churches, which had a common origen but slightly different theology, accept for the gospel of John which seem to be quite different being heavily Gnostic in its story telling. The Letters seem to be contridictory to many of the teachings of Jesus found in the Gospels, especially where Judging is concerned, and treating women as inferior to men. Paul's continually argueing about his qualifications to convince others to listen to him, and obey his council seems to contridict Jesus words about following leaders among his disciples. And Revelation is interesting but clearly about the future of early chrisitans and the Roman empire, and not as so many fundamentalist try to interpet as being fullfilled in our time.
I view the Bible;s call for every one to live by "faith" and to never become unbelieving, or doubting the things written, with the dire consequences of loosing God's approval with its accompaning punishment, to be a clever device to induce beleif on hear say, and once becomeing a beleiver a further inducement to stay a beleiver, and not question the things written. Perhaps this has led to its survival as a book that influences people even today, dispite the fact that so many ancient myths about the gods have passed away.