Questions re: OT author's intent v. OT Reader's intent.

[More Than A Feeling]

I just finished reading The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its Sacred Texts by Neil Asher Silberman and Israel Finkelstein. Its main conclusion (as I understood it) is that the Old Testament was originally written or compiled at the direction of King Josiah of Judah in the 8th century BCE in order to provide a historical and theological justification for the kingdom of Judah to conquer territories that had previously comprised the northern kingdom of Israel.

If that hypothesis is indeed true, does that origin make it more or less likely that it can tell us something about God? If I decide that I am going to use it to say something about God, does reading it with that intent give it holiness that it didn't have before? Could it have been holy all along, even though the person creating it did not create it or mean to use it with a holy purpose (supposing that said conquest wasn't holy. Obviously, the answer changes if you suppose that the conquest was holy)?

[greyl]

1. Less.

However, I can't imagine any circumstance that would make a book more Holy or illuminating of God.

[cosmik debris]

2. It is as holy as you believe it is.

And it is as relevant as you believe it is.

You can not rely on provable facts to justify faith in an unprovable god. The whole faith thing is independent of provable facts. If you let facts interfere with your faith, you are in deep trouble.