The only possible origin for the revelation story of Moses is from the event itself

I would like to start off by thanking Con for initiating this debate. It has the promise of being most thought provoking and eye-opening as well as providing me with many additional hours of research.Just a few clarifications before we begin:1) A significant amount of the arguments I am presenting will be drawn from Rabbi Keleman's lecture linked by Con above as well as my previous debate on the subject, also linked by Con above.2) As Pro, I will be defending the position that G-d speaking to all the Jews at Mt. Sinai is the most plausible explanation for the story circulating the Jewish nation today.3) Burden of proof is shared. Con will also be required to present a plausible explanation for the Jewish revelation narrative.4) I will concede the debate if I believe Con has brought sufficient evidence supporting his side.5) No new arguments may be presented in the last round by either Pro or Con, unless in direct response to a contention made the previous round. Overview and Contention 1 - Narrative and Transmission The Jewish revelation narrative maintains that G-d spoke directly to all the Jewish people (approximately 3 million men, women, and children) at Mt. Sinai. The following are excerpts from the Torah revealing the basis for this belief:Exodus 19:9; and the LORD said unto Moses: Lo, I come unto thee in a thick cloud, that the people may hear when I speak with thee, and may also believe thee forever.Exodus 19:11; and be ready against the third day, for the third day the LORD will come down in the sight of all the people upon mount Sinai.Deuteronomy 5:4; The LORD spoke with you face to face in the mount out of the midst of the fire(www.mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt0219.htm) and (http://www.mechon-mamre.org...)This is a fundamental belief that permeates Jewish thought. (http://www.myjewishlearning.com...), (http://www.simpletoremember.com...), and (http://www.chabad.org...).It is also important to note that at no period after the mass revelation at Sinai was there ever an individual responsible for the transmission of the Torah. This does not hold true for other religions, where much of their faith is dependent upon the word of a single person who claimed to experience divine revelation. (This applies in the case of Joseph Smith - founder of Mormonism, the revelations of Mohammad - off of which the Koran was based, and visions stemming from Paul the Apostle - originator of much of the New Testament, etc.) Contention 2 - Past, Present, Future Lie Now, if we are to assume that this story is false we must trace it back to see where it originated and how this lie was told. At whatever point in Jewish history the 'lie' was transmitted, there are three possibilities explaining what form it took:1) Future lie - this lie would take the form of 'One day, G-d will speak to you and/or your children'.This lie can be easily dismissed, because the Jewish people today believe not that G-d will speak to us, but rather that He did.2) Present lie - this lie would be placed in a present setting, i.e. 'G-d just spoke to you now'. This lie is also excessively problematic because, being that it occurs in the present tense, it assumes either that:A. Someone lied outright to the Jewish people, claiming G-d was speaking to them.B. Someone duped the entire Jewish nation into believing G-d had just spoken to them.Both A and B are remarkably unlikely due to the sheer numbers of people present. To believe Moses told 3 million Jews G-d had spoken to them and they believed him - despite the fact that they heard and saw nothing - is unrealistic. Point B might seem a little bit more likely. It assumes that events as substantiated by the Jewish nation did indeed occur, however they were natural events and not Divinely inspired. (This could mean that all the Jews were hallucinating or Moses performed a Wizard-of-Oz-like feat, i.e. 'Ignore the prophet behind the mountain'.) Natural events are reoccurring, but why has a similar event never happened again? Whatever scenario a person might come up with to explain the event, it all falls away when we take into consideration that no other nation or sizable group of people has ever claimed to experience G-d. If indeed, the event as described happened with a natural explanation - take a national drug trip, for example - why have there not been claims throughout history of nations speaking with G-d because of national drug trips? However, if the revelation truly happened as told by the Jewish nation, that would be sufficient explanation for why it hasn't occurred again.3) Past lie - this lie takes place in a past setting, i.e. 'G-d spoke to your ancestors'. This lie is the most plausible form to have been told, because it doesn't seem to demand that three million people be convinced all at once. This lie could have spread gradually, starting with a small number of people, slowly increasing until the Jewish nation was formed.Now this form of lie also has some subtle problematic points. Number one, assuming the narrative's inaccuracy, the closer we are to the supposed revelation, the easier it is to verify its veracity. Anyone being told that their ancestors heard G-d speak simply needs to check with his own parents to see if such a story holds any truth. If they find that their parents aren't aware of any such claims, the lie falls away. In order to convince some would-be-followers, the person telling the lie would also have to explain why no one else knows about this story. They could justify it by explaining that the Torah was lost, the story was forgotten, all the people at the revelation died before they were able to transmit the story, etc. In other words, they would create a break in the line of transmission as an explanation. The problem here is that there is no such gap in transmission. Con cites a list in his first round detailing this chain of transmission, and I will post a link to a similar list here. (http://www.pidyon.com...)Now, one other major problem with all of the above theories is something I will posit once again. The story of revelation never depended upon an individual for transmission after the story was said to occur. This is a very significant point because if the story were to have shaped over time, starting from the word of one person, then it would make sense that said person would play a significant role in the religion. A similar example can be given for Joseph Smith, the individual responsible for and credited with writing the Book of Mormon. However, in Judaism, there is no single person, or even a group of people to whom credit of writing/transmitting the Torah is given. This is demonstrated in the graph below, which details Jewish population throughout history. Contention 3: The start of such a lie paradoxically requires the presence of a Jewish nationThe historical belief that G-d spoke to the entire Jewish nation is widespread amongst the Jewish nation today, (I, as an Orthodox Jew can testify to that, having been brought up with such a belief myself), as is the belief that this information has been passed down reliably from generation to generation since the occurrence of the actual event. The possibilities are twofold:1. It is true. 2. It was sold to the Jewish people as an intentional or unintentional deception. Note that at no point in time could a whole nation have been deceived into the content of such a story. This is because Judaism makes the outlandish claim that every generation, (including this one) received the tradition from their parents. The Jewish people would never have embraced the narrative of revelation, unless their parents had already told them the story. At no point would the Jewish nation have bought the lie that millions of their ancestors witnessed this revelation and that it was passed down reliably from generation to generation, unless all (or at least the majority) of the parents had already told them, and unless the people were already a sizable nation.That last point is integral because it shows that the lie couldn't have been spread gradually by a small number of people over time. To tell tales of a great nation when no such nation is in existence would be a clear example of a lie that IS verifiable. As outlandish as the claim of mass revelation may be, for the lie to be transmitted an entire nation is actually required to be present where (this is assuming its false-ness) there is none. The existence of a Jewish nation is a necessary prerequisite in order to spread such a lie successfully.In other words, an entire Jewish nation that witnessed G-d speaking to them would be necessary to spread such a 'lie', requiring the events in question to have occurred in order for them to have spread.I conclude here and look forward to Con's response.