Deletion of Lost Book of the Covenant

Comment: as |original research. speculating there was a "Book of the Covenant" different than the Covenant Code that was somehow lost to history is not supported by serious, scholarly, |verified evidence that any such book ever existed and furthermore, the very name of the article appears to be a |neologism
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:NOR||WP:V||WP:NEO)

Comment: looking at the sources I'm still not convinced this is verified via |reliable sources.  I can find just as many sources (if not more) that say that JFK was assinated by the CIA... but that doesn't necessarily make it so.  Furthermore one of your sources states http://www.thelostbooks.com/intro2.htm "There are those that believe the Book of the Covenant is found in Exodus chapters 20 through 23. There are no authoritative sources for this text." This in no ways suggests that there is a "Book of the Covenant" that was "lost" from the bible and in fact ''points out'' there are '''no''' authoritative sources for this text.  The Hackwriters site mentions this "Book of the Covenant" but never suggests it was once part of the Torah, or added to the Old Testament when it was compiled.  Ditto for http://www.westarkchurchofchrist.org/benjamin/2006/060115am.htm, which mentions the passage from 2 Kings but in no way sources or supports the sections of this article which are not scriptural quotes. http://www.answering-christianity.com/lost_books.htm This just repeats the first source.  Unless I missed something http://www.aishdas.org/toratemet/en_torah.html doesn't even mention the book of the covenant.  This makes the whole article other than the scripture quotes, the statment "no copies are known to exist...", and the website quote "...there 'are no authoritative sources' for this attribution...." |original research.   I think that last statement is the most telling
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:NOR)