What do you think?
Rate this book
The Book of Joshua
The Cambridge Bible Commentary gives the full text in the N.E.B. version, with a lucid untechnical commentary designed for students in schools and colleges, for ministers of religion, and laymen generally. The volume is meant to be read as an uninterrupted unity, with introductory sections leading straight into the text, which is itself interwoven with the commentary. The central theme of Joshua is the acquisition of the land of Canaan by the people of Israel under the leadership of Joshua, the successor of Moses.
210 pages, Hardcover
First published September 5, 1974
5 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
January 7, 2019
Maybe it's the source material, which is a weird mix of glorified genocide and lengthy land politics, but this time around, I wasn't quite as engaged in the commentary, which does its best to contextualize the many place names and (in the first few chapters) multiple contradictions within the text itself.
Joshua as a book definitely has multiple sources and traditions, and trying to parse them out is impossible. What's left is mixed between the old traditions, some of which may have pre-dated Joshua, and the redactor whose writing in exile and wants to restore Israel to a perceived former glory. So you get things like an Ark that sometimes is at the head of a column, sometimes in the middle, and sometimes in the back. It makes for very weird reading that somehow gets lost when you're singing about how "Joshua won the battle of Jericho" in grade school.
The commentators do their best to untangle as much as they can, explaining the multiple re-writing and pointing out the problems. But the trouble is that there's no real way to discuss the philosophy or theology of Joshua, because, well, the theology is horrible. It's ruthless nationalism at its worst, and there's no way to sugarcoat that. This perspective on God is wrong, full stop. The analysis doesn't do anything to stop that view, either, and even makes a point of showing the evidence doesn't match the text.
The less I think of this book, the better. Not the commentary, just the source material.
Joshua as a book definitely has multiple sources and traditions, and trying to parse them out is impossible. What's left is mixed between the old traditions, some of which may have pre-dated Joshua, and the redactor whose writing in exile and wants to restore Israel to a perceived former glory. So you get things like an Ark that sometimes is at the head of a column, sometimes in the middle, and sometimes in the back. It makes for very weird reading that somehow gets lost when you're singing about how "Joshua won the battle of Jericho" in grade school.
The commentators do their best to untangle as much as they can, explaining the multiple re-writing and pointing out the problems. But the trouble is that there's no real way to discuss the philosophy or theology of Joshua, because, well, the theology is horrible. It's ruthless nationalism at its worst, and there's no way to sugarcoat that. This perspective on God is wrong, full stop. The analysis doesn't do anything to stop that view, either, and even makes a point of showing the evidence doesn't match the text.
The less I think of this book, the better. Not the commentary, just the source material.
Displaying 1 of 1 review