I Am quite sure Richard Elliot Friedman was not around during that time for me to even ponder that thought.
so...because Friedman is not 2600 years old his input is not even worthy of your consideration? And you would not even bother to read Friedman to see if what he was saying made any sense? And the only thing that would make you reconsider your position is first hand accounts from 600 bce?
That is kind of a narrow approach to the question.
"Probably" is the key word in the statement that you made.
Of course it is. Probably is the best we can say about anything. Your children? Probably yours. They might not be. You cannot say for sure. You could do genetic testing, but there is still a possibility of the tests being wrong. So, probably is the best you can do. Germ theory? Probably true. Ohms law? Probably true. The Pentateuch written by Moses? Probably not.
If you believe Richard Elliot Freidman's hypothesis then believe on.
Typical religious confusion. It is not about belief like you are making it out to be. He presented a plausible idea with evidence to support it. Do I
believe it? It depends what you mean by believe. I find it to be sufficiently well supported to say "that is probably the case". However, I'm not married to the idea, like you seem to be with moses.
The statement was to illustrate The Scriptures themselves answers the question that was before asked. There was no need for any outside source to answer that question.
I have not idea what you are trying to say.
If Moses did not write the Scriptures it still does not change the statement that was made before no matter who Richard Elliot Freidman or yourself thinks who wrote it.
? I have no idea what you are trying to say.
If Moses did not write it then who did?
Several people, including Jeremiah, and Ezra. And in any case, it is not necessary to have an alternative if it is completely obvious that Moses didn't do it. It is okay to say "I do not know".
Are you prepared to deal with this accusation if it is not true?
? Am I prepared to deal with accusation? what is that supposed to mean? Can I admit I am wrong? Sure. I am not invested in the idea. I do not have my ego tied to it. That is the key to learning new things. It is
an idea, not
my idea, so I can let it go if I find a better one.
Don't be quick to cosign everything that you read unless you, yourself can prove other wise without a shadow of a doubt.
I don't have to prove something wrong to adopt a better idea. Look at
atomic models.
The old greek model is not
wrong, per se, but it was abandoned in favor of a better model that had more explanatory power.
And who set the standard of "beyond a shadow of a doubt"? If you are the one saying Moses wrote it, then why do you not have to prove that is so "beyond a shadow of a doubt"?
The word (El) was the name of the Chief Canaanite god (deity), ... The biggest mystery in history and religion YHWH is not God (EL / ALLAH) or a GOD / Deity.
Actually, I agree with everything you said up to that point.
All of this nonsense that you have in today's bibles is due to Canaanite influence when The Hebrews entered into the promise land after the Egyptian [Mitzryam] exodus...
And there you lost me. The Hebrews
were Canaanites. The Canaanites
were Hebrews. They were never a nation enslaved in Egypt. There had been some canaanites living in Sinai who were run out of town by they Egyptians because the Egyptians thought they were too successful. But Exodus did not happen.
The canaanite pantheon included el, baal, asherah and yhwh as well as several other gods. It evolved into proto-judaism. and later, when the Assyrians and Babylonians took turns crushing the hebrews, it became monotheistic judaism.
some sources for you:
http://www.csmonitor.com/World/2010/0111/Egypt-says-Jewish-slaves-didn-t-build-pyramidshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bible_Unearthed <-- excellent scholarly book.
