A literary and political masterpiece, the book of Deuteronomy deserves to be appreciated both for its final theological teaching and in light of the transformative. . .

Biblical scholars used to claim that discrepant accounts of the sale of Joseph indicate the presence of two separate sources. Recent scholarship shows otherwise.

“I grew up on a huge, mighty God who expects us to be faithful to all His demands. By now, I have adopted a merciful. . .

Biblical fundamentalism diverts people from the real message of Torah while setting up the “received” text as an object of faith.

Is it sacrilegious to interpret the Torah against its ancient historical background? According to medieval scholars, not only can the Torah be understood in context, it must be. 

The evolution of texts across the ancient Near East calls into question longstanding assumptions about the composition of the Hebrew Bible.

Almost every methodological approach used by modern Bible critics finds a parallel in the works of “traditional” Jewish exegetes in the Middle Ages.

To suggest that some verses in the Torah were not written by Moses, as does the medieval commentator Abraham ibn Ezra, is not in and of itself heretical.

Though its influence is difficult to detect, flawed theology is often at the root of defective religious practice.

Orthodox Judaism has bigger things to worry about than biblical criticism, and more dangerous threats to fight against.