The Copenhagen School of OT Historiocity

My understanding of Catholic theology is that it does not rely on the literal historiocity of the OT. But there is a limit to what can be dismissed as creative story telling by the OT authors and, in any case, I am curious.

Skeptics abound, as always, but some archeologists are particularly skeptical dismissing much of the OT as myth including Moses, the conquest of Cannan, and minimizing the kingdom of David and Solomon.

I am perfectly willing to follow where the architectural evidence leads but I am more than a little distrustful of skeptics’ interpretation of the evidence. In other words, I am ambivalent on this subject and hungry to learn more.

So this article caught my attention:

It’s a nice summary of where things currently stand and who is saying what.


If this can help the discussion, I found this Catholic Update article to be a great primer on what one writer sees as OT books with historical persons or events, and which they did not consider as historical.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit