The author of the Bible is the central and originating example of the field of author identification, so all techniques get applied to it. The program probably implements the standard techniques that people already claim reach this same conclusion. I'm surprised that it only agrees 90% with the standard lines for the binary authorship classification.
It is good that people implement algorithms in computers, even if they don't reach new conclusions, because it pins them down to definite, checkable claims. Of course, there is a danger that the programmers overfit the parameters of the program to get the answer they desired, but if they do, it is probably much more clear from the source code than the verbal argument. Anyhow, once the program is published, it can be applied to new corpora without opportunity for further tuning. (though changing languages probably gives lots of room for fudging things)
Was it ever a dispute? I remember that 33 authors - from ship herders to kings - was an "argument for the authenticity of the Good Book".
It's important to distinguish the Five Books of Moses -- aka "the Pentateuch" aka "the Torah" from "the Jewish Bible" or "the Old Testament" from "the [Christian] Bible". The [Jewish] Bible as a whole is openly and unambiguously the work of multiple authors over multiple eras.
The first five books are a separate coherent unit; the inter-book divisions do not correspond to authorship in any theory I've ever heard of. This article was about teasing out authorship in those first five books.
Orthodox Jews believe a single author - god, with Moses doing the writing (some allow the possibility of Joshua writing the very last verses). 33 authors would be blasphemy-level deviation for them.
Not so for a billion or more Catholics, Orthodox, Protestants and so on.
But it doesn't really matter. The real question is, how good id the mentioned algorithm, not the Bible.
Eh. Wouldn't it also be blasphemous to compare the mind of God to the mind of men?
I don't know how Maimonides is viewed among Orthodox Jews, but his whole ineffability of God seems to cast serious doubt on the efficacy of any analysis built out of experience of human writers. Afterall, does anything in Orthodox Jewish belief preclude God from writing in multiple voices, styles, ideological agenda?
I imagine the blasphemy comes in when the authors suggest that the variation was due to variation in the "conduits" or "transmitters" of God's chosen words.
http://www.haaretz.com/jewish-world/israeli-software-aims-to-shed-light-on-the-bible-1.370343
The more interesting aspect of the story is that the algorithm was originally developed by an (rather impressive IMO) orthodox jewish CS researcher - http://u.cs.biu.ac.il/~koppel/Publications.html. See his group's comment towards the end of the article. Some lessons about compartmentalization there (which is a reason I chose to beat the dead horse once again)