Skeptics find any way they can to dismiss the Bible as authoritative by any means they can. Claiming it is just a collection of fairy tales, myths and legend is one of the more casual (and uninformed) ways to disregard the Bible. It is particularly flippant and seems to be based solely on the presupposition of philosophical naturalism (See: The Impossibility Of Miracles), not because text suggests it.
I see a couple of issues with this complaint against biblical authority. By filtering the Bible purely naturalistic worldview is a philosophical presupposition, not a line of rebuttal or argumentation. This comparison is nefariously void of any tangible evidence. The line of reasoning is roughly: Fairy Tales and Myths contain supernatural events. The Bible contains supernatural events. Therefore the Bible, Fairy Tales, and Myths for all intents and purposes the same. This is akin to saying: Witness statements from murder scenes contain details similar to crime dramas on television, therefore witness statements and crime dramas are basically the same. The problem is the Bible doesn’t read like a Fairy Tale or Myth. Save for Revelation, it reads like a historical narrative which includes miraculous happenings.
What I find most amusing is how critics of the Bible’s authors accuse them of being scientifically ignorant and prone to being easily duped into believing in Divine interventions by phenomena they can’t explain. How is it these supposed fools have themselves duped billions of people over the millenia with their Myths? I compare it with those who claimed former president George W. Bush — who graduated from both Yale and Harvard — was all but diagnosed as mentally retarded, but was somehow able to fool the entire world — and a large number of Democrats — that Iraq was hiding WMDs (and if you’re into conspiracies, he was able to pull off the largest ongoing cover-up by orchestrating the attacks on September 11th.).
Attributing the Bible with Fairy Tale and Mythic status belies a bias against the supernatural which permeates so deeply into one’s worldview that you cannot even refrain from imposing your naturalistic paradigm in your investigation of historical claims. Just because the Bible records events which your worldview dismisses as impossible doesn’t make it false. And the Bible’s authors were either feeble-minded superstitious goddidits, or they were mastermind’s able to trick billions of people who believe it represents accurate theological, moral, and historical accounts (who also would have to be even more feeble-minded than the authors). This is one of those objections I find difficult to take seriously, and it makes it harder to take seriously the person who offers it.