Imagine if we wake up one day and we are told that a lost, inspired book written in 16th centuary has been found. Then the book foretells the present events with dead accuracy. What will it happen? Will we all now suddenly begine to believe in prophecy? Of course the answer is not even half complex. Many will simply question whether the book was actually written in 16th centuary. Possibly, no one knew of the book simply because there was no such a book. So the book was not 'lost'. It simply did not exist. The next question is: is this idea that people can write a book and then lie that it was written long time ago but got lost an idea like Riemannian Geometry, in that it was never conceived by people in BCs? Does the fact that they could not make computers back then means that they were stupid? This seems to be what modern scholars insinuates when they speculate on ancient history!

The his-story of Israel is said to be the story of King Josiah! Those days Israel was a far cry away from the majestic neighbours, of tge type os Assyria. In fact their kings were mere puppets of these other real kings. Israel and Judah's kings were far more like mere village chiefs rulling over microscopic regions. But then king Josiah saw an opportunity to make Judah a great empire. The Assyrian Empire was in decline. The Assyrians were rulling over the northern 'Israel' Kingdom. The southern, Judah kingdom was a mere puppet of Assyria. As Assyria declined, Josiah, so it is thought, wanted to fill the gap and create a united kingdom of Israel. He wanted to rule both Judah and Israel, much like how Assyrian ruled both Syria and Israel. Amongst his plans, so it is said, was to literally create the old Testament bible!

So the whole story of Israel in Egypt, Deuteronomy, Judges, samwell, Kings etc were a concoction by Josiah to serve his own petty political ambitions! Particularly interesting is the story of Kings David and Solomon. These kings, depicted in splendour in the bible, were infact mere village chiefs, if they even existed in the first place. At no time in Israel history was Israel and Judah united! The 12 tribes never realy saw each other as 'close cousins', especially as opposed to the rest of cannanites. Or in short, the main story of Israel as depicted in the bible is blatant fiction created by, and meant to serve only a single king!

This modern view, shared by many scholars, is, of course nonsensical. First of all what could Josiah realy be aiming to achieve by creating a fictitious his-story? Can some story of Germany being once united with Britain, worshipping the same god, having some common ancestor, etc help someone like 'Hitler' rule both Germany and Britain? Why can't North Korea easily rejoin South Korea given that they, of course, believe it was once a united country. Same applies to north and south Sudan, Austria and Hungary, Germany and Poland, Russia and Ukraine etc. If unquestionable historical facts cannot unite two countries, how can a fabricated his-story do that?

What would happen, should Josiah try to fabricate history is easy to understand. The people of the north would resoundly reject such a story! They, of course, had their own narratives, written or orally passed. They could not easily relinquish them and buy into a fiction from the south, a fiction meant to make them believe that they, in the north, have no right to rule themselves but must submit to the rulers from the south! So if Josiah created the history of Israel, with the intentions mentioned, we expect that Judaism will be least popular in the northern kingdom. However, both Samaria and Galilee, in the north, embraced Judaism! Specifically no idea was ever put forward complaining about Josiah fabricating history until in 20th century when it became fashionable to try to contradict ancient beliefs! How could someone slip in thaosands of pages of fake history and get away with it without anyone even noticing anything odd?

Second, why create such a long, many times boring stories of someone killing a lion with bare hands, goliaths, someone, going to heaven on some fiery vehicle, seemingly endless geneologies, detailed descriptions of temples, names of places etc, only to try to convince people to beleive that the two kingdoms should be ruled by a single king from Jerusalem? Wasn't a short book, direct to the point summarize this teaching in a convincing way?

Next, Josiah never said that there should be only one kingdom, nor that there should be only one place of worship in Jerusalem, as the scholars assumes. These are not part of Josiah's reforms. Josiah only did away with idolatry in Israel and Judah. For the modern scholar's view to make sense, we must believe that Josiah was the founder of Jewish monotheism itself! That is to say the person who said 'though shall not worship other gods besides me' will be Josiah, not 'Moses'! Make sense?

Who Wrote Deutoronomy, Judges, Samwell and Kings?

Modern scholar cannot discern, thanks to his bias, especially against prophecy! These books were written by Israel/Judah's prophets and/or their close associates.They are the same type if people who wrote Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel etc. They were neither propagandists, historian nor written for/by kings. They were written by genuine believers in Yahweh. The book of kings, for instance (written most likely by Baruch, Jeremiah's Secretary), was written to depict kings as mostly evil and disobedient to Yahweh. It was written to depict prophets, rather than kings as true heroes of Israel. It was not history book in the sense of merely satisfying curiosity about what happened in the past. The writers were only interest in the aspect of king's lifes that was relevant to man's relationship with Yahweh. Entirely secular things, if ever mensioned, were dismissed in few sentences. Therefore the most towering figures ends up being people like Elijah etc. No one knows Josiah! It is a big lie to say that the book of kings is centered around Josiah, or that this figure is the most praised one in the book!

The book of kings was not written during Josiah's time. It was written a generation or so afterwards. The writter did not fear to paint the kings after Josiah as 'evil'. We have no readon to think that he was under fear that compelled him to only praise Josiah. Furthermore, Josiah's own father and grandfather is depicted horribly, in away that is not likely for Josiah to concoct! If 'kings' were the work of kings to serve their propaganda, they would tend to praise Judah's kings in general, for they were all from the same 'house of David'. They would try to create 'faith in kings' by focussing much attention on their positive sides, much like the way modern scientists depicts the past scientists like Newton, Einstein etc.