The history of interpretation [of the Bible] is fascinating; but that is something else.

If I ever write a book on "How True Is the Bible?" I'll have to start out by saying that archaeology is not the way to find out; that it has very little to say.

I would not speak of Judaism as a Talmudic or Rabbinic religion. It's a Biblical religion.

There was certainly an old law code which stands behind the earliest form of Deuteronomy. Presumably that is what was lost.

If I had to choose between the two ways of approaching the deity, I should prefer the existential relational way, to the abstract philosophical way. I think it is truer, or in any case, less misleading, to say that God is an old Jew with a white beard whom I love, than to say that God is the ground of being and meaning, or to say that God is a name denoting the ultimate mystery. I prefer the bold primitive colors of the Biblical way of describing God.

The Bible is one, Old and New, in my particular tradition.

I became intimately acquainted with the Bible only as a theological student.