Sara Susswein Tesler's interesting piece sparked a few thoughts in my head.

1. The article more than once refers to Torah MiSinai, but that term is about the Oral Torah, not the Written Torah. It is obvious that much of the Written Torah includes events in Moshe's lifetime that are post-Sinai. The main issue is Torah min hashamayim, a different concept.

2. There is a big difference between minority shittot views that a few verses are post-Mosaic and Bible Criticism which says whole chunks are. The RCA has spoken on this matter. [www.rabbis.org]. We need to be honest with students about which sort of reconciliations are possible and which are not.

3. It matters why a student has trouble with a traditional doctrine. Is it because the student sees that the academics have powerful arguments? Is it because academics are simply trusted in what they say? Is it because the student doubts that a verse is divine i.e. not revealed to any Navi, and Mosaic authorship is not the issue? Each would warrant a different response.