I usually have issues with people trying to force innocent explanations for religious frauds when willful and cunning deceit seems more plausible and more consistent with human nature.
I think revelations tend to be said to have been received on mountains for more pragmatic reasons:
1. Mountains are high and therefore closer to any putative daddy in the sky. So clamountain seem to set a good dramatic stage for the fraud to come.
2. Mountains are sparsely populated, so there will be less chance of someone saying "No, you didn't, I saw you while you claim to have been taking to a burning bush"
3. Mountains often have long standing association with spirits and the supernatural, dating to long before the alledged reception of revelations. So mountains lends a pre-fabricated air of mysticism to the fraud.
I think revelations tend to be said to have been received on mountains for more pragmatic reasons:
1. Mountains are high and therefore closer to any putative daddy in the sky. So clamountain seem to set a good dramatic stage for the fraud to come.
2. Mountains are sparsely populated, so there will be less chance of someone saying "No, you didn't, I saw you while you claim to have been taking to a burning bush"
3. Mountains often have long standing association with spirits and the supernatural, dating to long before the alledged reception of revelations. So mountains lends a pre-fabricated air of mysticism to the fraud.
