Headache,
I'm asking you to examine the OT and NT on reliability or unreliability of historical evidence. We use the same criteria as ancient historians. If these documents are demonstrated to be reliable, then you go to them to discover whatever subject you are pursuing.
If they are not trustworthy, we should do what the Apostle Paul concluded:
You claim: 'In the end everything is wibbly-wobbly. As the old testament seems to be first written down at king David’s reign, 500 years after the exodus. So, from a time perspective it's as accurate as homers works which also has a wiggle room of 500 years'.
From where did you get those ideas? Your presuppositions?
The Old Testament was written in various times of human history. 'The sacred scriptures of the Jewish faith,
written at different times between about 1200 and 165 BC'.
As for Homer's writings, he wrote two epics,
The Iliad and
The Odyssey. When Homer wrote these epics is difficult to articulate because 'part of the problem is that Homer lived before a chronological dating system was in place. The Olympic Games of classical Greece marked an epoch, with 776 BC as a starting point by which to measure out four-year periods for the event. In short, it is difficult to give someone a birth date when he was born before there was a calendar' (
Biography.com: Homer). This scholarly estimates are he lived and wrote between
c. 800 BC– c. 701 BC.
So, your statement: 'From a time perspective it's as accurate as homers (sic) works which also have a wiggle room of 500 years'.
It's time for you to get into accurate historical investigation of the OT and NT, but I'm not holding my breath.
Oz