I think for many people, myself included, when it comes to the Bible it's either all or nothing. Either the Bible is divinely inspired or it's not. Either it's the Word of God, or it's not. Picking and choosing what we do and do not like out of the Bible is a dangerous path to take, because it's in man's nature to only accept the easy things, and to throw away those things that we most need to hear.
Your example is a classic. The easy path is just to divide up the Bible and say, well this is different so therefore even though the Bible says later on that these things were written by a particular person, it's easier to just divide it up among several different authors. Your example follows the famous (or infamous, IMO) JDEP (or whatever it's called, I forget the initials) framework for divying up various books of the Old Testament. What that particular theory does, ultimately, is deny the unity of the Bible, and the miraculous aspects of the writing and preservation of the text itself. It also denies the fullness and multi-faceted nature of God and implies that man's "perception" of God is what's important by elevating supposedly different writers' perceptions and understanding of God into a position of authority rather than accepting God as the ultimate authority over His own word...
-penny
All you've shared with us in your beginning comments was *myth*. So, how are we to know anything different than what you tell us?
So, only *parts* of the Bible are myth? Try again.