I have better arguments than your arguments for Mosaic authorship of Deuteronomy

     I'm working on a blog post for the Reformer where I will defend Mosaic authorship of Deuteronomy (meaning I will defend the fact that Moses wrote it).  It should be a fairly thorough series of posts to first dismantle opposing scholarship on the point, and then provide the positive case for Mosaic authorship. It breaks my heart that anyone could read Deuteronomy, especially after they study and test the veracity of Genesis through Numbers, and end up concluding somehow that Moses was not the main contributor (so that is not to say there were not other redactors involved in the writing. I would support the "supplementary" point of view of Deuteronomy. Moses was the main writer). The book Deuteronomy is loaded with Moses's care, concern, and love for his people- a love from God indeed. I think people who read it and think that Moses did not write Deuteronomy have a very sinister problem with themselves that they should look at. Nonetheless, I am making somewhat an emotional argument. There is scholarship and study on my side, which when paired with logic, will produce arguments to tear the opposing points of view to shreds and to support and vindicate Mosaic authorship for once.
    I will start by first arguing against the documentary hypothesis which, historically, is the origin of criticism, the origin of current doubt over Mosaic authorship. Attacking the points which are the premises of the documentary hypothesis undermines most of the scholarship and thinking of people who believe Moses did not write Deuteronomy, because they use the same points of doubt, probably, to support whatever other model they are believing to be fact. So I will start with a post/article on the documentary hypothesis and move on from there.