Online 17-19

Traditions such as Passover and sermons in the New Testament are modeled after Old Testament writings.  I find it interesting that these first books of the Bible, the Torah, are so widely accepted.  There is little or no debate as to whether the books are truth or of their origins.  Why has no one questioned these books versus others? Is it because they focus on the strict law and are not "stories" or parables?  The definition of Torah to mean instruction is pleasing to me that the name can reflect its contents so readily.
When coming from God, most things are never definite.  Thus, Moses might have written all five books of the Torah, but no one will ever really know.  The important thing I feel is to read the books with a mind set that allows the meaning to be one thing if Moses wrote it, and another if he did not.  This way we won't be blinded or confused if a passage arises that may be in contradiction to Mosaic teachings.
These are the answers that I have come to find.  When I originally saw this I wasn't going to complete it because I thought to myself, "I can't think of one thing, without reading the Bible, that could support Moses' side, much less deny him authorship."

				i.	Deuteronomy 34:1-9 ...States Moses died after seeing the land God promised to Abraham.  He was buried.  However it says that Joshua was "full of the spirit of wisdom", can this mean that all Moses knew was transferred to Joshua? Therefore, in directly Moses could have written through Joshua?

				ii.	Num. 12:3; Deut. 34:10-12 You can be humble but still be great.  Humble means you do not flaunt your talents but subtly use them to help others.  Moses has the ability to do both.  I do not see how this denies Moses' ability to write all 5 books.

				iii.	Compare Gen. 12:10-20 with Gen. 20:1-18 and Gen. 26:1-11 I don't know what Moses has to do with these scriptures either, though they were quite interesting...

iv.

Compare Gen. 6:19-20 with 7:2-3 Oh, God only sent Noah on the Arc so how could Moses have survived.  However, God did say that he gave Moses insight, so maybe there is relation between Noah's family and Moses.

As has been stated, there are many different types of genres and if Moses or God felt it would be more meaningful or more clear to the people to write in third-person, then that is what was done. I would like to know the year dates between Leviticus and Deuteronomy.  Many writers, as they grow older, achieve a maturity or understanding of their writing and that is why the styles or vocabulary may differ.  I am not trying to support the claim that Moses did write all the books; I am trying to look at the information with an open mind, stating other possibilities.

I can understand the possibility of Moses combining the books, and personally agree with that.  Are the later books in the OT named after their author: Hosea, Jonah, Malachi? If not, that would be in congruence with the Torah.  God is able to give one man the knowledge to write five books, but I feel God wanted to have multiple writers, and multiple perspectives, in order for the masses (different people and cultures) to understand.  I am not educated enough to know whether Moses had a major hand in the writing of these books, but Wellhausen's idea that Moses was not involved doesn't line up with a majority of thinkers.  

I like that critics have decided not to "develop" a hypothetical Torah, and are instead studying the one that came out on top.  I feel many theologians will try to make something of a subject that has no basis and no roots.  There is no point in studying material that might have never existed except in your mind.  Responding to the online text is difficult because the conclusion summed up how I felt about authoritativeness(if that's even a word).  It does matter rhetorically who wrote the books, but it also matters rhetorically that the author is still unknown.  There can never be absolutes in the Bible because every fact takes a little bit of faith to make them real to us.