A pivotal debate between scholars Bernard Heller and Jacob B. Agus over Milton Steinberg's philosophical legacy reveals deep fault lines in modern Jewish theological interpretation. Through textual analysis and theological argumentation, their exchange confronts fundamental questions about Jewish doctrine, rationalism, and religious epistemology. Heller critiques Agus's interpretation of Steinberg's incomplete formulations, particularly challenging Agus's claims about psychological origins of religious beliefs and alleged correspondences between Jewish and Christian theological concepts. The exchange addresses core issues including the validity of "normative Judaism" as a scholarly concept, the role of paradox in Jewish versus Christian thought, and the proper relationship between reason and revelation in Jewish tradition. Agus responds by defending his rationalist approach while rejecting both narrow rationalism and pure subjectivism, advocating instead for a dynamic tension between subjective insight and objective understanding. Their disagreements expose broader tensions about the nature of Jewish authenticity, the legitimacy of comparative theological analysis, and the proper methodology for contemporary Jewish thought. While both scholars acknowledge that Jewish tradition maintains distinctive emphases on rational-moral approaches within religious life, they diverge significantly on how this tradition should engage with modern philosophical and theological developments, highlighting an ongoing struggle between traditionalist and modernist approaches to Jewish theological interpretation.