This is a question for those true rational believers out there. I understand that you believe the skeptics are dead wrong but my question is whether you see their views as justified.
Is it a justified conclusion for a person to view the Torah plainly, see the literary anachronisms, see the immoral commands, see the mythic nature of the stories and come to the conclusion that it was not penned, either directly or indirectly, by God?
Is it justified for a person to come to the Talmud, see the many mistakes those great rabbis made, see the logic used as contrived and faulty and come to the conclusion that the opinions and rulings in those many pages are without authority?
I'm not asking if you see the skeptics as being _right_ but of being justified in their views. Justified means that both you and the skeptic recognize that these issues do exist but that as opposed to you they come to different conclusions. These conclusions are not wild and crazy but indeed rationally constructed with the evidence at hand.
As an example, sure, you may not buy the Documentary Hypothesis, but is it a wild conclusion based on nothing but a madman's imagination? Or do you see how one can come to that conclusion even if you disagree with it?
So is skepticism justified? Or is faith the only justified path?