The Bible must be accurate because archaeology supports it.

To which we might add that archaeology also does not verify Biblical stories as well. No evidence has ever been found in the Sinai of millions of people having passed through specific places in the wilderness, not with ground nor satellite surveys. And many never think that real place names can be used to tell stories that are not literally true as well. The literally true place name does not make the story true. The Angel Moroni gave Joseph Smith the Gold Plates, now conveniently unavailable, to start the Mormon faith at Hill Comorah in NY. I have been to the literally real Smith farm in NY and grew up where this literally false story took place and on which millions of Mormons base their literal beliefs.

Bible's accuracy on other scientific points shows overall accuracy.

To which we can add that the Bible makes some very big blunders in scientific observation. The sun does not rise in the east nor really go down in the west as we know even though a modern apologist would insist that is only an explanation of an apparent truth just as we today know it is the earth that rotates. Well, the inspired Bible did not know that back then. To the bible characters, the earth was indeed flat. The "circle of the earth" was not a ball, it was their idea of a round plate 360 degrees around them, not a sphere. Its what they saw when they turned in a circle , not what they knew was beneath their feet. Satan could show Jesus all the Kingdoms of earth because the earth was flat and they could be "seen" from a "high mountain."

The 29,000 feet high Himalayas were not covered by flood waters and did exist a mere 4000 years ago no matter what apologetic geo-creationists come up with. That much water would drain no where and only penguins and polar bears would survive the adventure on the ark if they could breath.

The Bible is harmonious in it's presentation