Sure, and that’s what the “documentary hypothesis” does
You say above that Deuteronomy fits with Moses’ time. How, other than the fact that it’s set in Moses’ time?
I don’t think the Mosaic authorship theory can explain the internal Biblical evidence. Apart from the frequent references in the Pentateuch to “until this day” clearly meaning a much later time–the frequent explanations of things that only later Israelites would have found confusing–Deuteronomy in particular condemns a whole lot of practices that were clearly common throughout much of later Israelite history and were engaged in by “righteous” kings. It makes much more sense to say that this text was written much later and reflects a later stage in Israelite religious development. Sure, you can say that even the “good” kings like David and Solomon had already lost the book and had on idea they weren’t supposed to be worshiping on high places or allowing their wives to have family idols. . . but by no means is that the most probable conclusion.
Perhaps to some degree–and what’s wrong with that? That’s pretty clearly what happened.
Really? How do you know that? Again, you criticize standard Biblical criticism for being overly speculative and then you make wild statements like this. . . .
But you don’t know this. You have no independent knowledge of this “experimenting.” You only have wishful thinking and later Jewish tradition.
One thing I did discover in preparing a response to your earlier post (which I then forgot to post before I closed the browser): according to wikipedia at least, the Egyptians did have leather books (perhaps not “parchment” per se) as early as the third millennium B.C. I didn’t know that, and that does make your theory relatively less crazy
But it’s still sheer speculation.
Edwin