David Sperling, The Original Torah

Introduction:
1. Sperling refers to the Torah as an "iconic" book and describes his goal as the "humanizing" of the text. Can you explain what he means by these two terms? (Does an icon need to be understood? What kind of explanation or understanding of the biblical text is Sperling seeking?
2. Sperling lists a series of difficulties that affect our ability to "humanize" the bible. What are these difficulties?
3. One of the "difficulties" mentioned by Sperling is the tendency to treat the bible monolithically. What does he mean by this? What, in contrast, is his claim about the biblical text? What two texts does he use to illustrate his view? How convincing do you find his argument about the Persian context of the texts? Does he offer any proof that Genesis I dates from this period? (It might be a good idea to find out what the term Deutero-Isaiah means. Check in the Anchor Bible Dictionary or some other parallel reference work.)
4. Sperling llimits his goal to the "Torah" as opposed to other parts of the bible. What does he mean by this word?
5. Sperling understands his book as aimed at "allegorizing" the biblical stories, and he compares his task to other biblical interpreters over the centuries who have understood the text as a set of allegories with a message to contemporaries. What is the difference, then, between Sperling's allegorical understanding of the text and that of, for example, Paul in I Corinthians 10:11?