Conservative Judaism faces a critical theological challenge: how to maintain halakhic authenticity while engaging with modern biblical scholarship that questions traditional views of Torah revelation. Through analysis of recent Conservative theologians Neil Gillman and Gordon Tucker, a fundamental tension emerges between accepting the Documentary Hypothesis and preserving the movement's claims to halakhic legitimacy. Drawing upon Isaiah's concept of divine providence working through natural processes, a novel theological framework emerges that reconciles these seemingly incompatible positions. This "providential editing" theory proposes that while the J, E, P, and D documents originated through human authorship, divine providence guided their selection and redaction into Torah. Under this framework, textual inconsistencies and contradictions serve as providentially designed elements enabling midrashic interpretation and ensuring eternal relevance, rather than undermining Torah's authority. Based on theological reasoning, examination of responsa literature, and halakhic precedent, the analysis demonstrates how Conservative Judaism can maintain its authentic halakhic identity while accepting biblical criticism. This providential understanding of Torah composition preserves the foundational premise of Torah's legal infallibility without requiring belief in direct verbal revelation, thus enabling the movement to continue writing recognizable chapters in halakhic literature rather than initiating an entirely new legal tradition.