This is a response to a piece of Anti-Judaic polemic promoted by atheist pseudohistorian Michael Sherlock.
Fact 1: The Torah (“Five Books of Moses”), the very pillar of Judaism, wasn’t written by Moses, but by numerous anonymous authors who contradicted one another with regards to theology and history. 
This is not the very pillar of Judaism, one can still be a believing Jew without believing these were written by Moses, those writers could very well still have been under divine inspiration, Mike does nothing to refute this. Mike is relying on Judeo-Christian tradition, not the Bible itself.
Fact 2: The bulk of the Book of Genesis wasn’t written in the second millennium BCE, as both Jewish and Christian traditions assert, but in the Exilicor Post-Exilic Period (6th Century BCE ~ during or after the Jewish exile in Babylon). 
‘Jewish and Christian traditions’ (again) is about right, since the Bible itself never actually says this. According to Pete Enns, who has a PhD in Near Eastern Languages and Civilisations from Harvard has this to say:
I should be quick to point out, however, that Genesis did not simply copy from Enuma Elish, as if the Hebrew author of Genesis had a copy of this Akkadian text in front of him and borrowed from it. Furthermore, at each of the points mentioned above, the Babylonian and biblical creation stories are both similar and dissimilar. Hence, the consensus scholarly position is not to draw a simple direct line of dependence from Genesis to Enuma Elish, and I concur wholeheartedly. When these tablets were discovered, there was a tendency to exaggerate their influence— in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries this was known as the “Bible and Babel” controversy. As time went on, scholars generally began to develop a more sober appreciation for the relevance of the Babylonian material, mainly the recognition of these dissimilarities. (1)
Fact 4: The Exodus probably didn’t happen, as there is no archaeological evidence for the 1.2 million people who were alleged to have left Egypt and camped at Mt. Sinai – no Egyptian records, nor any form of historical or archaeological evidence where there should be (archaeological argument from silence), given the circumstances and presence of records prior to and during this alleged event. Also, at the time in which the exodus was alleged to have taken place, Egypt’s entire population was around 3 million, so an exodus of 1.2 million of its free labour force would have crushed Egypt economically, but Egypt continued to reign well after this alleged event. 
I should direct Mike to the book The Exodus, by Biblical scholar Richard Elliott Friedman, where he argues the Exodus was only by the Levites, not six million Israelites. One of the Earliest texts, the Song of Deborah does not mention the Levites in Israel, and only the Levites have Egyptian names (Like Moses).
Fact 5: The Story of Moses being placed in a basket of reeds covered with bitumen was a direct plagiarism (adoption) of the earlier Mesopotamian ruler’s escape from infanticide narrative, Sargon of Babylonia, who was also said to have been placed in a basket of reeds covered with bitumen, plucked from the water, and whom, Akkadian legend holds, went on to become the great law giver of the more ancient Akkadians. 
According to PhD Semitic Language scholar Michael Heiser:
“Note this comment from Pritchard’s Ancient Near Eastern Texts Anthology.‘The legend concerning the birth of Sargon of Agade is available in two incomplete Neo-Assyrian copies (A and B) and in a Neo-Babylonian fragment (C).’
The Neo-Assyrian period covers the 8th and part of the 7th centuries BC. The Neo-Babylonian period is later, encompassing the 7th and 6th centuries BC. This would mean that, even by higher critical standards, who would have the Moses birth account as written by J or E (or an amalgam of JE), the biblical story is EARLIER, at least with respect to the literary evidence that actually exists. J and E are dated to the 10th and 9th centuries BC, respectively, by most source critics.” (2)
Fact 6: The popular Ten Commandments can be accounted for, almost in their entirely, in the earlier Egyptian ‘Negative Confessions’, located in the ancient Egyptian ‘Book of the Dead’, and many other “Jewish” teachings, including the ‘lex talionis’ (Eye for an eye) were also present in the earlier Babylonian Code of Hammurabi. 
Really? Where do these texts every say ‘I am YHWH your god’, ‘You shall have no other gods before me’, or ‘No graven images’. NO ONE ELSE in the ANE thought this way, certainly not in Egypt. So no, especially considering how virtually all societies consider murder and theft to be Taboo, there is no reason to shoehorn the Ten Commandments into the Book of the Dead.
Secondly, the Levitical/Deuteronomic laws share similarities with all laws in the ANE, including those in Hattusa (regarding Beastiality) and Assyria. So there is no reason to assume plagiarism, but rather common ancestry.
Fact 7: Much the so-called ‘Wisdom Literature’ in the Hebrew Bible (Particularly Proverbs), dishonestly represented as direct revelations of the wisdom of the tribal deity of the Israelites, contains sayings and proverbs that were directly taken (in some cases word for word) from earlier Egyptian and Mesopotamian literature. 
I wonder if Michael Sherlock has ever read any of the Wisdom Literature. They do not say they were ‘direct’, rather, Ecclesiastes 12:9 says Solomon searched out and compiled them. Implying he very well could have compiled them from elsewhere.
Fact 8: The birth of the Israel (Joshua’s alleged conquest) has been shown to have been an outright fiction, along with the exaggerated size of the so-called “Kingdom” of David, who may have been, along with Moses and Abraham, a fictional character. 
With regard to the Tel Dan Stela, it is hard to say David was completely fictional character.
Fact 9: Both the Jerusalem and Babylonian Talmuds (collection of rabbinical discourses that interpret the Torah) are laced with harmful racism, xenophobia, and silly superstitious stories that are almost certainly false. 
I have no need, nor desire to defend the Talmud, next:
Fact 10: The religion of Judaism was originally a polytheistic religion and although apologists have tried to argue that the pluralistic epithet ‘Elohim’ (gods) is merely a pluralis Majestatis (majestic we), there are places in the Hebrew Bible that contradict this notion, and this epithet is also applied to the gods of other nations. Judaism only became monotheistic at a relatively late point in history, and it wasn’t the first monotheistic religion. Long before it developed into a monotheistic religion, the ancient Egyptian religion of ‘Atonism’ (worship of the god Aton) existed as a strict monotheistic religion. 
Once again, Michael Sherlock (who has no qualifications in Hebrew) has no idea what he is talking about. In Genesis 1 for example, the Hebrew word Bara (create) which occurs alongside Elohim, is grammatically singular. So no, Elohim does not always mean ‘gods’. There is evidence from the Amarna Correspondences, that other peoples of the ANE also used pluralistic titles to refer to singular gods. As PhD Semiticist Michael S. Heiser explains here.
On a side note, I personally have no issue with believing in monolatry.
Fact 11: The practice of circumcision originated in ancient Egypt. The ancient historian Herodotus informs us that the people of Israel and Palestine adopted this custom from the ancient Egyptians. Also, the practice of circumcision and particularly, the ultra-orthodox practice of ‘metzitzah b’peh,’ (the sucking off of the baby’s partially severed foreskin by an old rabbi) has been responsible for killing numerous infants in recent years, by infecting the infants with herpes. 
Whilst the Metzitzah b’peh is tragic (and nowhere endorsed in the Tanakh, God chose to use circumcision as a means of establishing a covenant, and in my view it does not matter where it came from.
Fact 12: The Hebrew Bible promotes slavery, genocide, human sacrifice, infanticide, rape, misogyny, murder, the theft of land and property, among other crimes. In the words of Robert G. Ingersoll: “If a man would follow, today, the teachings of the Old Testament, he would be a criminal. If he would follow strictly the teachings of the New, he would be insane.” In other words, the Hebrew Bible is the ancient moral equivalent of Hitler’s Mein Kampf. 
As we have already established, the laws of the ANE have no bearing on the goodness of God, who did not order the laws, only allowed them to persist, then in Isaiah 66, disavowed the laws:
But whoever sacrifices a bull
is like one who kills a person,
and whoever offers a lamb
is like one who breaks a dog’s neck;
whoever makes a grain offering
is like one who presents pig’s blood,
and whoever burns memorial incense
is like one who worships an idol.
They have chosen their own ways,
and they delight in their abominations;
Also, no, no verse in the Bible ever allows Human sacrifice, in fact, it explicitly forbids it in certain areas. See Deuteronomy 12:31, Deut 18:9-12, 2 Kings 16:3 for example.
That was my rebuttal to Michale Sherlock’s twelve nonsenses.
1) Inspiration and Incarnation: Evangelicals and the Problem of the Old Testament, Peter Enns, Baker Academic, 2005, p40