I agree. I happened to see about two minutes where he stated the book was to be viewed as an historical account, not as a religious work. I’m not sure what new historical perspectives one could put into a book about Jesus that hasn’t been discussed many times over.
But O’Reilly always comes across to me as arrogant. I don’t usually watch him. Eight o’clock is my time to argue with the Catholics here. Not that I’m arrogant. ;O)