The Bible doesn't just describe God; it also describes:
- what God has done,
- what God will do in the future,
- other characters besides God,
- what those other characters have done,
- what those other characters will do in the future.
Getting any part of those right doesn't automatically mean that they got any other part right.
The way that we might establish that the Bible - or rather,
@capumetu 's particular interpretation of the JW translation of the Bible - as reliable would be through
justification.
As the saying goes, a stopped clock is right twice a day. Sometimes, unjustified guesses end up being coincidentally correct. But the fact that someone made a coincidentally correct guess doesn't mean that you ought to follow their advice for anything else.
The OP asked us to consider the possibility that (his particular version of) God is real. By itself, that has no bearing on whether someone ought to follow his religion. Unless that religion is justified, it would be unreliable and worthless
whether or not it was right about God.