In Talmudic literature, certainly in the beginning, he was like a human being - except he was a serpent. But he was talking and walking and probably dreaming.
In my town we studied the five Books of Moses, but rarely the prophets. We studied the Talmud so much that I sometimes knew the prophets because of the prophetic quotations in the Talmud. We almost never studied the prophets themselves.
Judaism is in a sense a Rabbinic, Talmudic religion, rather than a Biblical religion.
The Bible is interpreted by the Talmud. Except, in Rabbinic tradition, a Talmudic law has the weight of the Biblical law. Sometimes we say in a prayer, "Blessed are Thou, O God, who has ordered us and commended us," to do something. But you don't find that "something" in the Bible; you find it in the Talmud. So Talmudic law becomes as important as Biblical law.
We've sort of agreed that the account of Adam and Eve is a story.
What of the Exodus? That too, is a wonderful story, but from the viewpoint of an historian, it is - to use a word scholars love - problematic. Let's say there are doubts, to say the least, among many scholars, as to whether the Exodus actually occurred. That's a historical issue.
I have a tremendous respect for Professor [Frank Moore] Cross.
If you read Exodus 15 carefully, it describes a storm at sea. This is the old Yahwistic source. In the retelling of the story in the later Priestly source, it is more miraculous: The water stands up on either side like a wall. There are walls of water standing up. As you move back in time, oddly enough, the story becomes more historical.
The Biblical text does not have punctuation marks like periods and question marks. Where we end sentences is a matter of interpretation.
If we want to know history, I would think there would be every reason to.
The story of Abraham and the sacrifice of Isaac are nowhere in any other tradition.
If you make a determination that [story of Abraham and the sacrifice of Isaac] is not historical, do you throw it away? I don't think we can say whether it's precisely, scientifically historical.
Christians call it the "Sacrifice of Isaac," and Jews call it the "Binding of Isaac."
I think [Sacrifice of Isaac] is the most important event in the Bible except for Sinai.
Abraham is trying to obey God, but not to kill. I feel that moment is one of the defining moments of Jewish faith.
The story [of the Sacrifice of Isaac ] is much more a part of theology than of history.
Occasionally, I come to moments of anguish in the text.
Josiah has a tremendous reputation in the text. He rediscovered the Book of the Law; you remember how Hilkiah the High Priest somehow found it [2 Kings 22:8].
We didn't really differ [with Frank Moore Cross] because we have the same love of the text. We share that love.
As for the discipline, we [me and Frank Moore Cross] belong to two different disciplines. One involves research and archaeological materials. Mine is more interpretive. But it is the love for the text that is there, and that is what makes the whole adventure of reading and studying and sharing worthwhile.
I respect scholarship. But I don't like to do things half-heartedly.
What I do, I want to do with all my being.
I have an open mind - - I read, I study, I study your work and the work of other people with less talent. But that is not what I do in my writing and teaching. Still the love for the text we have in common.
I believe a human being - if he or she wants to remain human, then he or she must do something with what we have seen, endured, witnessed.
Naturally, the human being wants to forget pain.
"Not to remember is not an option."
Follow AzQuotes on Facebook, Twitter and Google+. Every day we present the best quotes! Improve yourself, find your inspiration, share with friends
or simply: