The cedar and cypress, among other trees, occupy a prominent place in the Bible—representing life, sustenance, and wisdom. The prophets draw on their deep knowledge of trees to convey messages of hope and destruction.

Unlike human kings, YHWH does not need witnesses and enforcers. However, Moses in Deuteronomy draws on formulations found in ancient Near Eastern treaties.

Revised in the post-exilic period in the voice of Moses, Deuteronomy describes Judah’s destruction and exile to a foreign land כַּיּוֹם הַזֶּה “as it is still the case” (Deuteronomy 29:27), but reassures the people that, at the end of days, Israel will be reconciled with YHWH, who will circumcise their hearts to ensure their permanent loyalty.

The blessings and curses formulae in Deuteronomy 27–28 reveal a rich, complex and innovative interaction with ancient Near Eastern and Achaemenid parallels.

In the ancient Near East and the Torah, covenants were enacted with both a written text and a series of ritual actions.

As the Israelites are about to enter the land, Moses presents them with a covenant. Yet, Israel is already subject to YHWH’s commands since the covenant at Horeb and has already been punished for disobedience, so what choice do they really have?

This is the place of My throne and the place for the soles of My feet... Ezekiel 43:7

Deuteronomy uses unusual parallel terms “the shegar of your herd and the ashtorot of your flock” to describe the offspring of livestock. These are names of the ancient West Semitic fertility goddess known as Ashtoret or by her less familiar bi-name Sheger. Her consort is (sometimes) the god Ashtor. What do we know about these deities and what do they have to do with livestock?

An enormous ancient altar from the early twelfth-century B.C.E., uncovered at the site of El-Burnat, sheds light on the biblical account of Joshua’s altar at Mt. Ebal as well as on the famous story of Jacob crossing his arms to bless Ephraim over Manasseh with the birthright.

The textual remnants of a Second Temple religious polemic between Judeans and Samaritans about where God’s chosen mountain lies.

Early rabbinic interpretation connected the curse of child eating (Leviticus 26:29; Deuteronomy 28:53-57) with the description of the Babylonian destruction of Jerusalem in Lamentations (2:20 and 4:10) and the Roman destruction of the Second Temple. In the Middle Ages, however, Jewish commentators de-emphasize this connection. The reason for this lies in the 12th c. development of Christian Bible commentary.

Mount Gerizim appears in the Pentateuch as the mountain of blessing and plays a prominent role in Samaritan tradition, but the Jewish tradition sidelines this mountain and the Samaritans themselves in a polemic that began more than two and half thousand years ago.

Two places in the Bible describe God striking people with hemorrhoids (ophalim): the curses in Deuteronomy 28 and the story of the Philistines’ capture of the ark in 1 Samuel 5-6. In the latter, the Philistines make golden statues of their afflicted buttocks to propitiate the Israelite deity. Traditional readings replace these crass references with the less offensive term techorim (abscesses).

Israel had a vassal treaty with Assyria which commanded them to love King Ashurbanipal, a “love" that brought with it legal requirements and penalty clause. Deuteronomy's command that Israel “love God” is best understood in this context, but what about God's love for Israel?

Deuteronomy directs male landowners to bring the first fruits and recite a declaration. The Rabbis distinguish between the two parts of this commandment, including everyone in the bringing of the produce and excluding Levites, converts, and women only from the declarations. Eventually, even this exclusion largely falls by the wayside.

A look at the Torah and Mishnah’s treatment of the mitzvah of bringing bikkurim (first fruits) to the Temple and its associated requirement to recite a historical confession through five prisms: phenomenological, historical, anthropological, feminist and liturgical.

Deuteronomy has Moses receiving a revelation at Horeb, but only teaching the Israelites its contents decades later in the Land of Moab. This two-step revelatory process, which is presented as two covenants (Deuteronomy 28:69), masks an earlier form of Deuteronomy that had no record of a Horeb revelation.

The rabbis translate the phrase ארמי אובד אבי in Deuteronomy 26:5 “an Aramean tried to destroy my father” and understand it as a reference to Laban, who they claim was worse than Pharaoh. But whereas the biblical Laban can be read either sympathetically or unsympathetically, he is hardly a Pharaoh-like villain, so why demonize him?

A medieval non-traditional interpretation of arami oved avi and the push-back against it. 

To uphold the covenant, Deuteronomy requires two forms of torah study: Learning the commandments and learning the reasons for keeping them. But what happens if even that fails?

The Difference between God’s “Name (שם)” and “Presence (כבוד)”

Leviticus 26 and Deuteronomy 28 are often lumped together, as the two great curses, but their careful comparison reveals some fundamental and surprising differences.

The anomalous and paradoxical nature of the twelfth curse – Deuteronomy 27:26.