Judges, Ruth

Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, Sep 2001 by Vannoy, J Robert

Judges, Ruth. By Daniel I. Block, NAC. Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1999, 767 pp., n.p.

Daniel Block's commentary on Judges and Ruth is superbly written, comprehensive in scope, and insightful in its analysis of the literary, historical, and theological features of these two closely related OT books. Block's interaction with scholarly literature on nearly every aspect of the interpretation of Judges and Ruth not only provides the reader with his own conclusions, but also with a useful compendium of resources for considering alternative viewpoints on the topics under discussion. Block deals effectively with both the meaning of the book for those for whom it was originally written, as well as its meaning for the Church at the beginning of the 21st century.

Block regards the book of Judges as a "prophetic book" rather than a "political tractate" (p. 58). In connection with this he cautions against attributing a promonarchic significance to the phrase "In those days Israel had no king" that occurs four times in the last five chapters of the book (17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25). He argues that the author's purpose was to demonstrate that subsequent to the death of Joshua the nation of Israel became thoroughly Canaanized during the period of the settlement. The author's goal was to arouse his own generation to "abandon all forms of paganism and return to Yahweh" (p. 58). In Block's view the historical context for this call for reformation was the "long, spiritual ruinous reign of Manasseh" (p. 66), and he suggests that the writer was a Judahite "schooled in the Torah of Moses, particularly in the book of Deuteronomy" who lived during that troubling time (p. 67).

In the "Introduction" (pp. 21-72), Block addresses the historical and religious background to the book, provides a survey of modern theories of its composition, discusses the book's theme and purpose as well as the time and place of its writing, gives a brief history of its interpretation, and then concludes with some comments on the Hebrew text. In the commentary itself, Block divides the book of Judges into three sections (Introduction, Body, Climax) and organizes his discussion of each section around the theme, "the Canaanization of the nation of Israel in the premonarchic period."

Block's discussion of the Biblical text is lucid and thorough, including observations on such things as rhetorical structure, points of grammar and syntax, questions concerning the best English rendering of numerous Hebrew terms and expressions, as well as the historical and theological significance of this period in the early history of Israel. Many of the narrative units are concluded with a section entitled "Theological and Practical Implications." These discussions contain useful insights into how the reader can find the significance that these narratives may have for God's people who live in a time and culture far removed from that of this early period of Israel's history. Unfortunately there is no listing of these discussions in either the Table of Contents or the Index (they may be found on pp. 108, 116, 134, 141 155, 171, 175, 245, 307, 320, 334, 375, 385, 418, 436, 448, 470, 514, 542, 567, 583).

Many issues surface in this commentary that might be singled out for further comment. One such topic is the matter of "patriarchy" that has become a focal point of much disputation in the numerous feminist readings of the OT in the past 20 years or so. There is, of course, abundant fodder in Judges for arguing that the patriarchal culture of ancient Israel led to the mistreatment and dehumanization of women. Outstanding among the examples often cited are Jephthah's sacrificing of his daughter in fulfillment of his vow (Judg 11:30-40), Samson's self-serving relationship with both his Philistine wife and with Delilah (Judges 14-16), and the abuse and eventual dismemberment of the concubine of a Levite who was traveling through the territory of Benjamin (Judges 19). Block argues, however, that these examples do "not represent normal patriarchy," but rather, as in the case of Jephthah, "patriarchy at its worst ... expressed in the twisted and exploitative rule of the father" (p. 378). Nevertheless, Block contends that because of the disrepute into which the term "patriarchy" has fallen, due in some measure to the "modern connotations of abuse and exploitation inherent in the element `archy,'" it may be necessary to "abandon the word" (p. 379). For this reason Block suggests that the term "patricentric" be substituted for "patriarchy" because this term "corresponds more closely to the Israelite model reflected in the expression . . . `house of the father,' and allows for the biblical ideal, which emphasizes the responsibility of the father for the welfare of the household rather than his power over its members" (p. 94, n. 68). This is a helpful suggestion, and Block works out his perspective in constructive ways in his treatment of the many cases where the use of "patriarchy" arises in the book of Judges (see e.g. pp. 387, 470-71, 542, 43, 583-84).