Your second point is another attempt at adding to the Bible to make it more palatible and logical.
There was nothing illogical in that passage. Someone decided that Solomon made a potentially dangerous decision based on his own SPECULATION. I merely made the point that Solomon probably had more information than he realizes. You apparently want the bible to anticapte every attack concievable and pre-emptively defend itself or you are unsatisfied. The problem is that there are at least 800 billion things you can say to question something in the bible. If the bible tried to pre-empt everyone it would defeat the purpose of even having the bible because it would take 8000 years to read it.
This question that has been raised is very easy to address. It was based on UNFOUNDED speculation. So I answered with a perfectly plausible and LIKELYscenario that would satisfy the question.
So you think that two women just burst in on the King in his throne room and started bickering? You don't think that there was some security check points they had to get past first?
I will assume you agree that is logical. Therefore it is quite reasonable to also assume that before they were allowed to pass to see the King they would have to have a reason. So is it so hard to imagine that an escort told Solomon that their are two women who are arguing over a child, and asked him if he would like to see them? If I were King I would appreciate it if someone announced unexpected visitors before I had to see them. I mean it is just common courteousy and perfectly normal for any judicial proceedings.
My point was perfectly valid, but if you don't like the bible and think it is a myth, that's fine.