Exactly. And the only arguments against this people who were so brutally honest about their own history are nothing more than arguments from silence, most of which have been disproven since:
They told us that there was no evidence that the Hitties ever existed, that the Bible just made them up. Then we found their libraries.
They told us that Ninevah could not possibly have been as big as the Bible claimed. Then we found the ruins, and it indeed matched the Bible's descriptions--it was just so thoroughly destroyed that it took a long time to find it.
They claimed that there was no evidence of the Jews living in the Land before the Babylonian exile. Now we've found numerous stellas and seals that prove the opposite--some of them from David's time.
They told us that Pontius Pilate was never procurer of Judea. Then we found his plaque.
They told us that Acts was full of historical inaccuracies and must have been written in the 2nd-3rd Centuries. Then Sir William Ramsey actually went to Turkey to do the excavations and found out that Luke got every detail right.
Every time they attack the Bible's historocity on a particular point, God provides the evidence needed after stringing the skeptics along for a few decades. I predict that He'll do it again now.
A great part of humanity believes that the holocaust is a fable. Germany invented Photoshop it seems. Archeologists who have evidence of biblical confirmation are scorned by their peers...and forced.....kneeling... to mutter under their breath that “ It does move.”
Everyone that wants to discredit the Bible really wants to eliminate Sodom & Gomorrah; TV stations that started on doubts about the great flood and divine intervention in Exodus (it was a change of tides) are now pushing the meteor theory for Sodom & Gomorrah.
So they don’t appear as atheists, they throw in those missing “gospels”...
They told us that there was no evidence that the Hitties ever existed, that the Bible just made them up. Then we found their libraries.That's not what happened. The archive was found, and between the world wars Emil Forrer discovered that the cuneiform included a number of different languages, all unknown, one of which he realized was related to his native German; before that time the otherwise unassigned ruins had been given the name Hittite, which was borrowed from the Old Testament.
They told us that Ninevah could not possibly have been as big as the Bible claimed. Then we found the ruins, and it indeed matched the Bible's descriptions...Whomever "They" are, I'd never heard that particular version of that one -- usually the line is that Nineveh, like the Hittites, were said to never have existed. If any actual scholar ever wrote down either of those, it was definitely a unique opinion. It was assumed that the Assyrians had existed, and obviously the existence of the Assyrian Orthodox Church was common knowledge.
They claimed that there was no evidence of the Jews living in the Land before the Babylonian exile. Now we've found numerous stellas and seals that prove the opposite--some of them from David's time.There's the Mesha Stele aka the Moabite stone, which refers to the House of David, and twenty years ago the Tel Dan stele fragment; both were erected by enemies to commemorate a victory over Israel. AFAIK there are no other steles; in very recent years there have been a handful of other written traces, such as a name, or a reference to the monarchy.