Uh-oh, it looks like your Internet Explorer is out of date.
For a better shopping experience, please upgrade now.
Overview
Product Details
| ISBN-13: | 9780310282983 |
|---|---|
| Publisher: | Zondervan Academic |
| Publication date: | 10/13/2015 |
| Series: | Hearing the Message of Scripture: A Commentary on the Old Testament |
| Pages: | 304 |
| Product dimensions: | 7.20(w) x 9.20(h) x 1.00(d) |
About the Author
Daniel I. Block (D.Phil, University of Liverpool) is Gunther H. Knoedler Professor of Old Testament, Wheaton College.
Read an Excerpt
Ruth
A Discourse Analysis of the Hebrew Bible
By Daniel I. Block
ZONDERVAN
Copyright © 2015 Daniel I. BlockAll rights reserved.
ISBN: 978-0-310-28298-3
CHAPTER 1
Ruth 1:1-5
Introduction
As argued above, the illocutionary purpose of Ruth is to bridge the historical and theological gap between the book of Judges and the books of Samuel (more accurately referred to as the books of David), and to explain specifically first how David, the most important character in the Hebrew Bible, could emerge from the spiritual and ethical morass of the premonarchic period, and second to account for the Moabite blood in this king's veins.
Given the longstanding divine plan to choose someone to rule Israel as king on YHWH's behalf (Gen 17:6; 35:11; 49:10; Num 24:17; Deut 17:14 – 20), the book of Judges demonstrates that in the early centuries of Israel's history in the promised land, this divine project was threatened generally by Israel's spiritual perfidy. In Ruth, Bethlehem represents an oasis in the broader Israelite spiritual desert; here we encounter a man who represents the Israelite ideal of covenant. However, chapter 1 of this drama recounts the first step of a different threat to the genesis of the royal hope: the branch chosen from the genealogical tree that was to produce the king was in danger of extinction.
Although vv. 1 – 5 do not refer explicitly to the central concern of the author of Ruth, that is, the origins of Israel's royal line, if we take into account the genealogy with which the book ends (4:18 – 22) we recognize immediately the significance of this narrative introduction. Despite the concluding genealogy, which bypasses Elimelech altogether and views Obed as Boaz' legal heir, Boaz' expressed concern to preserve Elimelech's estate and his branch in the family tree (4:10) and Naomi's claim to Obed as her son (4:16 – 17) suggest that the crisis for the royal line arises from the widowhood of Naomi and her daughter-in-law Ruth. On the surface the royal line appears to be threatened by the response to the progenitors of the line to the famine that ravaged the land of Israel, and more particularly by Elimelech and Naomi's decision to seek refuge from the famine in Moab. While sojourning in a foreign land Elimelech's line is doomed by the death of all the males in this family. Although the narrative is concerned internally with the preservation of Elimelech's legacy, within the broader scheme the issue actually driving events is getting Ruth to Bethlehem, so she could meet Boaz, so he would marry her, so she would bear an heir for him. As it turns out, while the locutionary agenda involves resolving the crisis of the widows' childlessness, the illocutionary agenda involves Boaz' unmarried state. But this raises the question: Were there no eligible brides for Boaz in Israel? Did God need to go outside to provide him with a wife? Whatever the answer to these questions, in the mind of the narrator, the hand of God was quietly guiding events so that this widowed Moabite would find a place in the royal line.
A. Setting the Stage for Naomi's Emptying (1:1 – 2)
Main Idea of the Passage
The narrator sets the stage for the drama to follow by announcing the time of these events (in the premonarchic period), establishing the geographic context of these events (between Bethlehem of Judah and Moab), and identifying the persons most affected by these events (the family of Elimelech).
Literary Context
Verses 1 – 2 function as an expository opening to Act I, providing necessary background for the story, with vv. 2 – 5 summarizing the grave consequences of the move to Moab, as the narrator introduces us to the crisis threatening this special branch of Israel's family tree. The heart of the first Act consists of a dialogue between Naomi and her daughters-in-law (vv. 6 – 17), climaxing in Ruth's speech in vv. 16 – 17. The Act concludes with a dialogue between Naomi and the women of Bethlehem through which hearers come to feel Naomi's pain (vv. 19f – 22). The first Act is dominated by the ten-fold occurrence of the Leitwort (key word) [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] "to turn, return," skillfully employed to trace Naomi's travels. When the Act ends she has come full circle — from Bethlehem to Moab to Bethlehem.
However, the significance of vv. 1 – 2 extends beyond setting the stage for Act I; this statement establishes the background for the entire book. As a brief chronicle of a family from Bethlehem it opens the door to a much more significant story whose end will be celebrated in a royal genealogy in 4:17 – 22. Viewed in this light, 1:1 – 2 summarizes the unlikely origins of Israel's royal hope. Everything that transpired between these bookends had significance in the light of that hope.
Translation and Exegetical Outline
(See the next page.)
Structure and Literary Form
This small segment consists of twelve cola, evenly distributed between vv. 1 and 2. From a discourse perspective, following the opening signal of a new narrative ("Now it happened"; [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], 1a), as is typical of Hebrew narrative, four wayyiqtol verb forms provide the skeleton of this scene: "and it happened" ([TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], 1c) ... "and he went" ([TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], 1d) ... "and he came" ([TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], 2e) ... "and they were" ([TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], 2f). These verbs describe the movements of two primary subjects, the famine (1c) and the man and his family (1d, 2e, 2f). This series of verbal statements is interrupted by v. 2, which consists of four circumstantial verbless clauses that add information necessary for interpreting the actions, but are not fundamental to the plot structure. These insertions identify the primary human actors in the drama by name and raise the motif of family integrity, which will be an important subject throughout the book.
Explanation of the Text
1. The Time of the Crisis (v. 1a – b)
The author locates the story of Naomi, Ruth, and Boaz chronologically "in the days when the chieftains governed." The opening construction involving [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]), "Now it happened," followed by a temporal clause is common at the beginning of narrative episodes (e.g., Gen 22:1), and even of biblical books. On the surface, it looks like books that begin with this or other wayyiqtol forms are intended to be heard as sequels to preceding compositions. This certainly applies to some books, but is difficult for stand-alone compositions like Esther, Ezekiel, and Jonah. Therefore, some suggest that in Ruth 1:1 it serves a purely literary scene-setting function, simply signaling the beginning of a composition or section thereof without reference to an antecedent text. However, rather than treating the book as a literary extension of the preceding composition, this form of opening may simply invite hearers to interpret it within the context of a generally known oral history. Whether or not Ruth was written to bridge the gap between Judges and 1 – 2 Samuel, the events described in Judges provide background for what follows, and what follows anticipates what happens in 1 – 2 Samuel, reinforcing the impression that this was an illocutionary goal of the author.
This interpretation is reinforced by the following temporal prepositional phrase, "in the days when the chieftains governed" ([TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]). The combination, [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], "And it happened in the days of ..." also occurs in Gen 14:1, Isa 7:1, Jer 1:3, and Esth 1:1, but in these cases the period is defined by reference to the rule of a specific king. Here the epoch is referred to generally and anonymously as "in the days of the governing of the [tribal] chieftains." Obviously "days" ([TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII])" does not refer to twenty-four hour periods, but a period of time, which hearers know as "the epoch of the chieftains."
Usually in the Hebrew Bible the word ?????? relates to internal administration, specifically maintaining social harmony by settling disputes in judicial settings. However, as in the book of Judges the narrator of Ruth uses the expression in its relatively rare (in Hebrew) but original sense, "to govern." According to the book of Judges, the "judges" were local chieftains called up by YHWH to deliver the people from foreign oppressors. The opening line reflects the narrator's determination to place the events of the book in a truly historical context. The use of the phrase, "in the days when the chieftains governed," indicates that the premonarchic period was recognized as a clearly identifiable phase in Israel's history, between the death of Joshua and the crowning of Saul as the nation's first king. Any attempt to narrow the particular time of the events recorded in this book is speculative.
2. The Precipitant of the Crisis (v. 1c)
Historically, the events of the book were precipitated by a famine that struck the land, apparently the entire land of Israel, during the time when tribal chieftains governed. Like 1a, 1c begins with [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], "and it happened," but the significance of the expression changes; here it serves as a predicate with "famine" ([TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]) as the subject. The phrase [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], literally, "and there was famine in the land," links this event with two famines in the book of Genesis, the first of which caused Abraham to go down to Egypt (Gen 12:10), and the second that tempted Isaac to do the same (Gen 26:1). However, in the latter case YHWH warned him not to go and promised to bless him if he dwelled ([TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]) and sojourned ([TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]) in the land promised him. Later, but with YHWH's blessing, in response to a third famine Jacob moved his entire family to Egypt (Gen 46:1 – 19), where they remained and flourished for 400 years (Exod 1:1 – 7). The echoes of these three texts, where the affected principals responded quite differently, invite hearers to consider what the appropriate response to this famine should have been, and what would happen to the family that moved away from home to survive the famine. I have intentionally rendered the clause "famine stalked the land," to highlight the famine as the subject of the verb, rather than treating the latter impersonally as the predicate, "There was famine in the land." Although it is doubtful the narrator intended [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] as the proper name of a personified agent, in the covenant curses and the prophets, along with other agents of divine judgment, YHWH threatened famine to devour and consume the people. While the cause of the famine is not indicated, this may be the sense intended here. From a natural meteorological perspective, it seems that the normal rains in the growing season in Israel had failed, presumably for several successive years. However, according to Lev 26 and Deut 28, if YHWH's people would persist in rebelling against their covenant Lord, he would not only send in enemies to destroy their crops and occupy the land (as in the book of Judges), but also cut off the rains. This consequence was specifically predicted in Lev 26:18 – 20 and Deut 28:23 – 24.
3. The Target of the Crisis (vv. 1d – 2d)
Lines 1d – 2d introduce the principals in the opening scenes and announce the first action. The attention is focused on a man who responds to the famine by moving with his family from Bethlehem of Judah to the territory of Moab. It seems the most important detail about this supposed main character — who is not named until line 2a — is his home address. Syntactically, it is unclear whether "from Bethlehem of Judah" is intended adverbially, that is, describing his move, or adjectivally, that is, the man was f rom Bethlehem. The tendency of biblical narrators to introduce significant characters with reference to their place of origin, the reiteration in line 2d, and the geographic focus on Bethlehem elsewhere (1:19, 22; 2:4; 4:11), argue in favor of the latter. Indeed, his location seems more important than his name. Although he was moving away, after ch. 1 this will be the location of all the scenes in the drama — though the first character introduced will not be involved.
While 1d establishes the geographic setting of the book, the note is ironic: Beth lehem, which means "house, granary of bread," has no food for this family. The qualifier, "of Judah," distinguishes this Bethlehem from the Zebulunite town where the governor Ibzan lived and was b uried (Judg 12:8 – 10). In premonarchic Israel, Bethlehem of Judah was an insignificant town five miles south of Jerusalem. Though David never established this town as his capital, it became important only after his rise to kingship in Israel, and was featured especially in prophetic texts related to Israel's messianic hope (cf. Mic 5:1[2]). If Ruth was written in the late seventh century BCE, as I proposed above, then the author was probably familiar with Micah's prophecy concerning Bethlehem Ephrathah, and with this name hinted at the significance of this story. Like David, Jesus was born in Bethlehem (Matt 2:1), though it never served as his base of operation either.
The purpose of this as yet unidentified man's move is declared in 1e: "to reside temporarily in the territory of Moab." The verb, [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], "to sojourn," suggests he intended to wait out the famine in the land of Moab and return to Bethlehem when it was over; he had no intention of becoming a citizen of the land. However, the narrator does not interpret the move. Was it an act of faith or unbelief? Several factors suggest the latter. First, instead of using the normal expression for "land of Moab" ([TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]; e.g., Judg 11:15, 18), the narrator tends to use [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]; 1:1, 2, 6a, 22), which translates literally, "field of Moab." While this expression may reflect his agricultural focus (see below), the odd consonantal spelling as [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] instead of [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] remain a riddle. In any case, since the pronunciation of the two forms is identical, hearers would scarcely have recognized a problem.
Second, the statement echoes the report of Abraham's response to the famine in his time by going down to Egypt "to sojourn" ([TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]) there (Gen 12:10). That famine had tested his faith, a test he apparently failed, for his move exposed other negative characteristics as well (vv. 10 – 20), and presented a negative example when Isaac was tested similarly (Gen 26:1 – 2).
Third, the purpose phrase, "to sojourn," links this story even more tightly to the account of a shiftless Levite in Judg 17:7 – 8, who also moved ([TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]) "from Bethlehem of Judah" to a place where he might "sojourn," and arrived at the home of the apostate Micah, whom he served as priest.
Fourth, according to the book of Deuteronomy, along with oppression by outside nations and other calamities, famine would be the divine judgment for persistent rebellion. The proper response to this punishment was not to flee, but repent, which would motivate YHWH to withdraw his anger and lift the famine. However, it seems Elimelech designed his own solution; instead of calling upon YHWH for mercy and repenting of the sins that plagued the nation during the dark days of the judges, he moved to Moab.
Fifth, we should interpret the move to Moab in light of the generally negative Israelite disposition toward the Moabites, which seems to have been determined by five historical factors: (1) the Moabites' contemptible origins in the incestuous relationship of Lot and his daughter (Gen 19:30 – 38); (2) Moabite resistance to Israelite passage through their territory when they came from Egypt (Num 22 – 24); (3) Moabite women's seduction of Israelites and the latter's punishment (Num 25:1 – 9); (4) Moses' exclusion of Moab from the assembly of YHWH (Deut 23:3 – 6[23:2 – 5]); and (5) the recent oppression of the Israelites by Eglon the king of Moab (Judg 3:15 – 30). These factors underlie the "Moabite" motif in the book. Although arguments from silence may mislead, this book knows of no other Bethlehemites who fled when the famine struck. While it could be interpreted positively, Elimelech's intent merely "to sojourn" in Moab — rather than identify with Moabites and move there permanently — contrasts with Ruth's wholehearted commitment to Naomi, Israel, and their God. That this family should have headed for Moab is ironic if not ominous: not only did they leave the "house of bread" ([TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]) for the land that had refused their ancestors "bread and water" (Deut 23:5[4]), but they also sought hospitality in the land of those who had earlier hired Balaam the prophet to curse the Israelites (Deut 23:3 – 5[2 – 4]).
(Continues...)
Excerpted from Ruth by Daniel I. Block. Copyright © 2015 Daniel I. Block. Excerpted by permission of ZONDERVAN.
All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.
Excerpts are provided by Dial-A-Book Inc. solely for the personal use of visitors to this web site.
Table of Contents
Contents
Series Introduction, 9,Author's Preface and Acknowledgments, 13,
Abbreviations, 15,
Select Bibliography, 19,
Translation of Ruth, 23,
Introduction to Ruth, 29,
Commentary on Ruth, 59,
Appendix A: A Dramatic Reading of the Book of Ruth, 263,
Scripture Index, 273,
Subject Index, 285,
Author Index, 289,
Customer Reviews
