My dad once talked to a man who had majored in philosophy. He concluded he would have been better off majoring in basket weaving.
The question keeps coming up here about the Bible, so I'll relate why I, one who tends to be quite skeptical and is not the easiest to convince, believe it is much more than human wisdom.
First, I had to think that since, for me, it is obvious that this universe and the life in it just could not be a product of spontaneous chance, that there is a creator, that the qualities of that creator would be evident. Now, what is the most outstanding quality that I see in humans? That would be love. How could such a quality come about by chance, I'll let others try to explain it, but, for me, it just couldn't have happened, it must have been put in us. So, if love is a quality that was bestowed upon mankind by a creator, then would it be loving of him to cause so much confusion as to who he is, what he is and how he thinks? What parent would do that to his children? So, I concluded that he would give instructions to his earthly children.
What would I expect then? It should be widely available, wouldn't it? That availability would extend to not only geographically, but also to languages. The Bible is the most produced book in history, available to over 95% of the languages on earth.
What else? In researching the Bible, I find it historically accurate. Wouldn't that be expected? Myths are quite vague as to who, what, where, when. The Bible gives names, places, years, months and days. An example is the first few verses in Luke: "In the 15th year of the reign of Ti·beʹri·us Caesar, when Pontius Pilate was governor of Ju·deʹa, Herod was district ruler of Galʹi·lee, Philip his brother was district ruler of the country of It·u·raeʹa and Trach·o·niʹtis, and Ly·saʹni·as was district ruler of Ab·i·leʹne, in the days of chief priest Anʹnas and of Caʹia·phas, God’s declaration came to John the son of Zech·a·riʹah in the wilderness." This can be pinpointed to the year 29CE.
I am impressed by the candor of the ones used to write the Bible. To this day, it is the tendency of historians to put a bias on history, expanding on success and minimizing, if even mentioning, failures. That has always been the case. The Bible writers were very candid about the failures of their people, even themselves. An example is the book of Mark. It is believed that Peter was the source of this book. It very candidly relates how Peter denied Jesus, something that, no doubt, he was quite ashamed of.
The Bible is also remarkable in its internal harmony. It is remarkable in that there were some forty men, from varying backgrounds, over a time of a millennia and a half. However, from the first to the last there is a constant theme, and it harmonizes.
The Bible is not a scientific textbook. However, when it touches science, it is accurate. The order of events in the first chapter of Genesis is accurate. How did Moses know, not only what these events were, but the order in which they happened? The odds are staggering. The laws concerning hygiene, quarantining, waste disposal, the handling of dead bodies were centuries a head of it's time and contrary to the thinking of the contemporary nations around them. Centuries before it was theorized, the Bible said that the earth is round and also that it has no visible support.
I find the most outstanding aspect is fulfilled prophecy. Scores of prophecy about the messiah was fulfilled in Jesus, and while there were a few that he made sure he did, most was quite out of his control. The odds of just a few of these being fulfilled in one person are staggering. One of these is that, in the book of Daniel, the year of when the Messiah would come was foretold, and that was 29CE. Two hundred years before the event, it foretold the fall of Babylon, which was, at the time, a secondary power. It named the person that would do it and how it would be done. Some may think that if you make lots and lots of prophecy that some will end up sticking in a manner. But that is really not the case here.
I have just barely touched on these reasons why I think that the Bible is not just a human invention. Much, much more I can relate. I am just showing that my reasons are sound. They may not be for you, and I'm fine with that.