Does Denying A Proof To The Torah's Divinity Make You A Kofer (Heretic)?

I've been having a "debate" with the Hasidic Rebbele over the "proofs" to the Torah that I've disucssed in the last two posts.

In the "comments" thread to this post, the Rebbele has come thisclose to calling me a kofer (heretic) and outright calls me dishonest for daring to critique the "proofs" that I did in my last two posts.

In his comments he first admonishes me to use a "disclaimer" when posting, lest I "come across as a kofer."

When I asked him if simply questioning proofs presented (not the Torah itself, mind you, just the proofs to it's divinity) makes one a kofer, he responded with:

it's what and how u write about the TSBP and the Torah itself that obviously shows u as a kofer.

He then went on to say:

u deliberately distort, miscommunicate and flaunt your ignorance intellect so proudly, for whatever reason, and u have a problem with being called a kofer?

my question is, what ARE your reasons or feelings against Hashem that u r so "mad"? why are u not man enough to just say u r mad?

Mad at Hashem? Did I ever give that impression on my blog? Does refuting some bad logic or factual errors make one "mad" at HKBH?

He then follows up with:

i have no problem with u disagreeing with anyone, if u were honest. then again, i actually have no problem if u disagree in a dishonest way either. u have that choice. but if the result ends up with u being called a kofer, take it like the "wiseguy" u r.

And he has the irony to sign it "respectfully,..."

Just to make things clear that I believed in Torah MiSinai, I presented my belief on the matter:

I believe that the Jewish nation stood at Mt. Sinai many years ago. I believe that HKBH gave the Mitzvos (not the Written Torah as we have it!) and the explainations to it (TSBP) to Moshe.

How can I say that Hashem didn't give the Written Torah as we have it? That should be fairly obvious - do you think that Moshe had advance knowledge of Korach's rebellion. Do you think he had advance knowledge of his own sin that precluded his going into EY? Do you think he knew in advance that he wouldn't know the laws of yerushah (inheritence)? Do you think that Moshe wrote in Beshalach that the B'nei Yisroel ate the Manna for 40 years even before the sin of the Meraglim that caused them to be there for 40 years to begin with? It should be fairly obvious that the Written Torah that we have today was not given at Mt. Sinai. If you want to say that it was in it's present form right after Moshe's death, however, that's certainly far more plausible.

As for TSBP, it fairly obvious that an oral explaination was provided along with the written text. As has been often pointed out, the written text for many mitzvos in the chumash do not make much sense without an oral explaination. But does that mean that the Mishna and Gemara in thier present form were given? Certainly not.

To me it sounds perfectly logical. Heck, there's a mekor for it in the Gemara - that the last eight verses were written by Yehoshua (Joshua). Obviously according to this opinion they were written right after Moshe's death!

His response (which, I'll admit, I don't fully understand - if anyone wants to take a crack at explaining it to me, please feel free to do so):

-"If you want to say that it was in it's present form right after Moshe's death, however, that's certainly far more plausible."- r u acting illogical and/or ignorant to this issue or r u actually both? r u acting dumb and/or evil to make such a dumb chakira and then end it with this sentence or r u actually both? Did u not learn the Rashi Hakodesh on the last Parsha with the Gemara on it?

So, am I missing something here? Is one a kofer for even questioning the "proofs," or am I on solid ground with my last two posts. IOW, have the last two posts consigned me to the fiery netherworld when I shuffle off this mortal coil?

The Wolf