And one of the best book I never read about how the bible is "born" is this one : The Bible unearthed by Israel Finkelstein.
Israel Finkelstein is a prime example of a Jewish historical anti-Bible propagandist. The problem here is that the Jews have always had their own timeline. That is, there is a rabbinical timeline that claims the Persian Period was artificially expanded by some 164 years. Case in point, the completion of the second temple in the 6th year of Darius I is dated by the rabbinical Jews to 352 BCE. The popular timeline dates that event to 516 BCE. (516 - 352 = 164).
But that's the fundamental problem. There is more than one theoretical Biblical timeline. The conclusions archaeologists like Israel Finkelstein come to are slanted toward just one timeline of comparison, giving negative results. But as someone else said, you have to take off the spectacles of bias by either JWs or archaeologists when it comes to Bible history. Here's an example.
Israel Finkelstein claims that Solomon is a myth and, therefore, that Jesus must be a myth since he is called the "greater Solomon." But who asked him? He's an archaeologist. All we need from him is his best dating of some artifacts. We don't need his Jewish-based Bible commentary, right? But that's his right to express his opinion as a "historian" as long as you separate that historical opinion from the archaeology. Note what happens when you do.
The Bible says there was a time of great wealth and building during the reign of Solomon. The question is, have archaeologists found any building works worthy of Solomon in that region? The answer is: Yes! Great monumental buildings at Megiddo, Gezer and Hazor, in particular were found and attributed to the great period of Solomon. So the actual archaeology confirms a time of great wealth, confirming Solomon. That is in contrast with no great works worthy of Solomon being found.
So what's the problem? Why is Finkelstein claiming Solomon is a myth? It is solely based on his personal choice of a timeline for comparison. He uses the secular timeline dating Solomon from 970-930 BCE. The great works found by archaeologists, though, occur later during the "early 9th Century (900-867 BCE). Because Solomon appears in this particular timeline too early, Finkelstein calls Solomon a myth. But this is not an archaeological assessment, but a historical one. That is, all we need to hear from Finkelstein is that (1) yes, there are great works found worthy of Solomon, and (2) that those great works were found in the early 9th Century. That's the archaeological reference. His theory that Omri built these buildings and not Solomon has to do with his choice of a timeline. So he is misrepresenting the evidence supporting the Bible. Israel Finkelstein is thus not to be trusted since from a strict archaeological point of view, all Finkelstein discovered was not that Solomon did not exist, but that he existed at a later period of time. Finkelstein had the option to claim that Solomon was a myth based on the current timeline, or that Solomon is misdated a half century too early. But you don't hear Finkelstein making that assessment. Rather he promotes the Bible is inaccurate and that Solomon is a mythical character invented by postexilic Jews for the emotional well being of the people at that time, which is not archaeology but anti-Biblical propaganda.
So you see, archaeology confirms Solomon did exist, but the archaeologists is saying he didn't. Israel Finkelstein is either stupid or dishonest. Or I should say, has his own agenda. But since he is Jewish and thus has a religious obligation to deny Christ, you can't remove that bias from his discussions in the field. So as I said, you have to separate the archaeology from the archaeologist-historian. After you do that, you can then come up with your own conclusions. When you do that, every major character and event, including the Exodus gets a confirmation which those with their own timeline and agendas are blinded to.
Case in point with JWs. JWs date the Exodus to 1513 BCE. The fall of Jericho by Joshua according to archaeologists occurred between 1350-1325 BCE. That means the Exodus would have occurred 40 years earlier between 1390-1365 BCE. So the JW date compared to archaeology is over 100 years too early. The secular date for the Exodus in 1446 BCE is about 60 years too early. But does that mean the Exodus never happened. Of course not. The fall of Jericho confirms the Bible historical record. The only problem is WHEN the Exodus occurred. The period of 1390-1365 BCE confirms the Exodus, indeed occurred at this time, because this is the Amarna Period, the period of Akhenaten, who suddenly became a monotheist and started to depress all the other gods of Egypt. That is, after the 10 plagues, the next pharaoh converted to worshipping Yahweh in the form of Aten, a monotheistic god. The Israelites, by contrast with everybody else back then, were also monotheists. So in reality, you have an archaeological confirmation of the impact of the 10 plagues on the land of Egypt, which is, the entire land converted to monotheism.
So per archaeology, the Exodus as well as the fall of Jericho have arcaheological confirmations, but you don't get to that point going through either the WTS or Jewish or other so-called "Biblical archaeologists." Since it is not reasonable to think that the experts in the field with all this interest and information are so incredibly dumb, there is no other conclusion but to conclude they have agenda greater than truth. One of those agendas apparently is to suppress any connection between the Exodus and Akhenaten, who confirms the Exodus actually occurred by converting to monotheism.
So if you are truly interested in Bible history, you have to get ready for the biases, since you are diving into treacherous waters. The Bible is truly reliable history, supported by lots of archaeology, but all that is distorted by people like the WTS and Jewish historians and others who have their own agendas. Once you separate those biases, though, then many things in the Bible are amazingly confirmed by what has been found by archaeology.
The best way to approach Bible history, therefore, is with much caution and skeptism of those with an agenda. The general concept, therefore, is that archaeologists and Jewish archaeologists in particular know quite well when the Exodus actually happened at the time of Akhenaten, but have a conflict of interest to share that with the world at this time. If they tell the truth about the Exodus, it will expose all the other lies they are telling. The easy way out is to keep the world in the dark like the WTS likes to keep its members in the dark. Avoid discussions. Call anyone who disagrees with you crazy.
In the meantime, the Bible is indeed a reliable book of history. In the meantime, science that supports the Bible's reliable history is being suppressed by those writing books in the field and so the Bible has a bad reputation because of them. Israel Finkelstein is by far the most abusive. But maybe he likes selling books. ?? Everyone is entitled to make a living.
