Can you back that statement up or is that just your opinion?

It's a 4-D projection/Rubik's cube manual about personal development, the logos, and the formation, nurturing, and triumph of a society, despite going up against what seems to be impossible odds. Simply calling it mythology or tying it's value as history or any other ill-conceived standard of truth and guidance we have now is missing the point.

The Bible is a library, not a document. A collection of texts assembled over millennia. Some parts metaphors, some historic, some parts examples, etc.

The early Christians assembled the New Testament over many decades in an environment where you would be nailed to trees by strong men for spreading the message of slaves being equal in dignity to Romans.

In this environment they determined which texts would be incorporated as they interacted with eye witnesses of the time.

There are arguments on both sides of the chronology. It isn't known whether this came before or after. Some argue that Luke added to the document. Others argue that Marcion removed parts of the story that they deemed contradictory to the OT version of God.