That isn't a completely wrong interpretation of events. It is, however, difficult to say for certain what the course of events was. Much of what we know about religious orders that old is speculation over moon runes and stone doodles, for lack of a better word.
The prophet Isaiah had an interesting set of metaphors when he was trying to tell the Jews their leaders were evil. The three cities as sisters. Jerusalem the harlot. Jerusalem the meat pot, etc. I have long argued that the move of the Embassy to Jerusalem is symbolic of this, and I largely question modern belief that the Hebrews formed their own nation (or one that lasted) around Jerusalem, completely as their own.
Most settlements of that era were 'for time eternal' - they had existed as hubs of activity since pre-agrarian times. To have something like Jerusalem just pop up because the Hebrews found fertile land between four major trade empires that somehow went unrealized prior to them…. Seems a little suspect.
It makes more sense to see these as pre-existing locations with their own cultures (likely Egyptian, Babylonian, or others) and affiliations within those empires.
I would be very careful, however, subscribing too much to the belief that one religious order or another is 'right' or 'less comped' within all of this. The Catholic Church (even before Vatican II) was effectively the Romans realizing that Religions could outlast political empires and choosing to embrace this concept rather than fight it. Very little examples of 'early christianity' exist, and even then - that was more of a movement to reform the Jewish/Hebrew system.
I consider many of the ancient pantheons to be more accurate to the truth of things in terms of physical origins. Monotheism seems to be imperial worship that has largely been transformed into "the pursuit for the god of gods" - an absolute creator as a concept more so than an arbitrary entity with arbitrary laws; the type of God many believe exists within the West is closer to a sort of "chief principle of divinity". While certainly better than worship of an arbitrary entity, it also seeks to place a certain group and entity as being associated with that absolute entity.
To which point I actually find the pagan beliefs more pragmatic, as many held the understanding of a "god of gods" or "god of titans" - the things from which primordial forces come from and even the gods are, at best, in conflict with them when not outright killed by them.
Not to say I am pagan. The social values of Christianity, around which most western societies are built (whether these values are Christian or were endemic before the rise of Christianity is questionable… I have found that a guy I work with from Moldova has some extremely similar ideas of family and society to how I was raised, and many of the Ukranian and Russian families in the region blend in almost perfectly spare for a few scars of communism here and there. Every one of them drives a salvage title - which is both genius and hilarious at the same time - they are at the cutting edge of borderline legal ways to not pay taxes)…. Those social values are what I agree with and affiliate with. I just turn out like my Father … The guy who likes to point at the lesser-traveled scripture and say "yeah, you keep thinking this is all rainbows and unicorns with an offering plate." Certain people will always put large amounts of money in the offering plate so that they can try to put their name on things central to the community's perspective. Government, religion, country clubs… They all have very similar internal dynamics prone to the egos of the "capitally inclined."