Do problems with the historocity of the Bible affect your faith (or lack of it)?

[ShadowRocket]

The historocity of the Bible is a topic that I've always been interested in. Most mainstream scholars would say that while the stories told in it may have various basis in fact, the Bible itself isn't an accurate account of the history of ancient Israel.  Views such as the Patriarchs not being historical figures, there never being a mass Israelite exodus from Egypt, and the United Monarchy being much more modest than the Bible's portrayal seems to be the majority view in academic circles. Not to mention that it seems that the Abrahamic God may've started out as just the chief god of the ancient Canaanite pantheon, El, with the name Yahweh being an epithet that came later.

That said, does this affect your faith, or contribute to the lack of it?  I mean, the foundation of the Abrahamic faiths is the idea of divine revelation as expressed in the Bible.  But if this is not true, does that invalidate those beliefs? Or does it not matter?

[ShadowRocket]

See, I've known for a long time that pretty much every book and story within the Bible were written decades, sometimes centuries, after the events described. So I was aware that there were likely quite a few inaccuracies. But it wasn't until I started to do more research that I learned the full extent of it that it was likely somethings never happened and some figures never existed, like the Exodus for example. The problems with the Old Testament have always bothered me more, as that serves as the basic foundation for the Abrahamic faiths.

Plus, I never realized the extent Canaanite mythology influenced Judaism. Especially the idea that the Abrahamic God may've started out as simply just a god from that pantheon. That's the thing I've speculated a lot about how to reconcile with that.