[lsbskins1]

Well, there is also the idea of the evolving God, but that does not negate the concept of the Bible as a political document. Look at it like this, the later books as amendments to the political "constitution". The early books were born of their own political purposes, the later of their own. I do not say this to claim it as an absolute truth, but rather as a position to consider. There are many "inconsistencies" in the Bible as we know it today. Think about this. The language of the "Thou shalt have no other gods before me" commandment presupposes the existence of multiple gods. It does not say "Fools, there are no other gods but me", it tells you not to "place" the "other gods" ahead of the god that should be most important and most feared. How does that jibe with the evolved concept we find later of the other gods being "false". I suppose I am mostly in your camp. I am aware of the multiple writers, as I am aware that it wasn't until fairly late in the game that certain of the books that were floating around out there as "holy" were picked as official, while others were rejected. It all goes to both of our points.