HOW IS MICAH ORGANIZED?

At first pass, it would seem that the only scholarly agreement possible on this book is in regard to its chaotic structure:

“Micah is a blatant example of this seeming jumble [found in the books of prophecy].” – Allen

            “[S]ome conservative commentators have been tempted to impose on the book an artificial unity which its sometimes abrupt changes of topic can hardly sustain.” – Clark

            “The character of the book is somewhat desultory. Micah does not present one long, sustained argument, but...passes from one subject to another.” – Young

“As the example of Micah illustrates, redactional 'order' in the Prophets is not always perspicuous. The received texts are cluttered and chaotic, and the signs of literary shaping have studiously to be recovered from under a welter of vestiges and interpolations.” – Marks

“The book's somewhat jerkiness of style is due to his binding together of formerly independent oracles.” – Waltke

“The Book of Micah has no overarching macrostructure; it appears to be a loosely arranged anthology of speeches.” – Chisholm

Childs does the best job of summing up the current state of structural scholarship on Micah: “In spite of many good insights and interesting observations of detail, the growing confusion over conflicting theories of composition has increasingly buried the book in academic debris. Needless to say, no general consensus of the book's form or function appears in sight.” To this statement, McConville concurs: “No structure of Micah is perfect or commands agreement.”

Previously Proposed Structures

All of the above, though, is not to say that scholars have entirely given up on the attempt to discern an organizational plan. Even Childs states, “The book of Micah gives every evidence of being arranged in a clear pattern of alternating sections of judgment and salvation.” The problem lies in the fact that it is hard to know which is worse, a book that has no sort of organization or one which does have a definite order on which no one can agree. A brief review of some proposed divisions for Micah and how the individual sections relate to one another will illustrate what I am talking about:

1. Archer sees the major sections as consisting of ch. 1 (sentence upon both kingdoms); chs. 2-3 (oppression by the upper classes); chs. 4-5 (God's ultimate grace upon Israel); ch. 6 (God's controversy with Israel); and ch. 7 (covenant promises to the faithful remnant). There have been few followers of this viewpoint.

Interestingly, the best evidence for the unity of Micah 2-3 comes from Andersen and Freedman’s symmetrical structure although these authors treat these chapters as only part of a larger section (see discussion below).

A. Social justice denounced (2:1-5)

B. Attack on prophets (2:6-11)

A'. Attack on rulers (3:1-4)

B'. Condemnation of prophets (3:5-8)

A''.Condemnation of rulers (3:9-12)

2. A more popular way of dividing the book is into three chapter groupings: 1-3 (God's judgment on his people), 4-5 (hope for the future), and 6-7 (condemnation and consolation). Verbal inclusions indicating the limits of each respective sections are formed by the presence of “Jerusalem” and “mountains” in the context of destruction,” eschatological references, and “sin/transgression.” (Andersen and Freedman) Childs rejects this analysis out of hand as being a mere product of “a historical critical evaluation of the history of the book's composition.”

Andersen and Freedman ably defend the unity of chs. 1-3 throughout their commentary on Micah, noting the inclusio formed by similar doom passages against Samaria in 1:6-7 and Jerusalem at 3:12, and the presence of 2:12 as a focal point with its expression of hope. They, however, admit that the formal literary structure of this section is harder to find than its thematic unity.

Special attention has been given to the center section of Micah according to this scheme. Renaud's chiastic analysis of chs. 4-5 is shown below with each of the six sections moving from a hopeless situation into hope. Willis arranges these same verses into seven units that parallel one another and have the same judgment-hope combination recognized by Renaud: 4:1-5; 4:6-8; 4:9-10; 4:11-13; 5:1-6; 5:7-9; and 5:10-15. Dorsey’s seven-part chiastic structure differs from both of these proposals in its divisions and pairings as does that in the Anchor Bible commentary, which is based on occurrences of the keyword “now.”

Renaud’s Structure                                              Dorsey’s Structure

A. 4:1-4                                                                  A. 4:1-5

B. 4:5-7                                                          B. 4:6-7

C. 4:8-5:1                                                 C. 4:8-10

            C'. 5:2-6                                                          D. 4:11-5:1

                        B'. 5:7-8(9?)                                                         C'. 5:2-5a

A'. 5:10-14                                                                  B'. 5:5b-9

        A'. 5:10-15

Andersen and Freedman’s Structure

A. 4:1-8

B. 4:9-5:3

1. 4:9-10a

2. 4:10b

3. 4:11-13

1'. 4:14

2'. 5:1-3

A'. 5:4-14

            3. Several other commentators see only two major sections to the book with the break after ch. 3 or ch. 5. Mays offers the following substructure as evidence for the latter division:

I. To a Universal Audience (1:2-5:15)

A. Yahweh's Judgment (1:2-3:12)

                                        B. Redemption of Zion and Israel (4:1-5:9)

                                            C. Punishment of the Nations (5:10-15)

II. To Israel (6:1-7:20)

A. Yahweh's Judgment (6:1-7:7)

                                        B. Salvation of God (7:8-17)

                                            C. Divine Forgiveness (7:18-20)

According to this scheme, Section I begins with a divine summons for all the peoples to listen to Yahweh (1:2) and ends with a threat directed at those who do not (5:15).

4. Another well defended viewpoint treats Micah as a three-fold composition in which each prophecy begins with the admonition “hear!” (The similar commands at Micah 3:9; 6:2 and 6:9 are usually ignored in this analysis): chs. 1-2 (judgment), chs. 3-5 (salvation), and chs. 6-7 (admonition to repentance). (Kaiser, Hart) Each of these sections is said to begin on a negative note and end with hope for the future. A variation using the same three-fold division sees each section to begin with a double warning followed by oracles of judgment and salvation. (Dictionary of Biblical Imagery) Further refinements of this scheme have been attempted by Renaud and by Allen. The latter scheme is outlined below:

I. Judgment (chs. 1-2)

A. Negative (1:2-2:11)

                            B. Positive (2:12-13)

II. Hope (chs. 3-5)

A. Judgment (ch. 3) + Hope (4:1-5)

B. Hope (4:6-5:9)

1. Hope (4:6-8)

2. Distress leading to Hope (4:9-5:6)

1'. Hope (5:7-9)

A'. Judgment (5:10-14) + Hope (5:15)

I'. Judgment (chs. 6-7)

A. Negative (6:1-7:7)

                            B. Positive (7:8-20)

            5. Willis detects four specific parallel elements between sections I and I' of the above scheme, but they do not occur in the same order in each case:

Covenant Lawsuit                  1:2-7              6:1-8

            Lament                                  1:8-16             7:1-6

            Impending Catastrophe         2:1-11             6:9-16

            Oracle of Hope                     2:12-13           7:7-20

More recently, Allen has devised another variation on a theme for the center section of this structure:

A. 3:1-4:5 [judgment (3:1-12) + hope (4:1-5)]

B. 4:6-8 (remnant: hope with distress allusions)

C. 4:9-10; 4:11-13; 5:1-6 (three sections of increasing hope)

B'. 5:7-9 (remnant: hope with distress allusions)

A'. 5:10-15 [judgment (5:10-14) + hope (5:15)]

            6. Redditt, following Cuffey, proposes a four-part structure for the book: Micah 1-2; 3:1-4:8; 4:9-5:15; and 6-7 in which each section has an oracle of doom followed by one of hope.

            7. David Dorsey detects a seven-membered chiastic organization for this book. He arrives at his section divisions by grouping together chs. 4 and 5 and dividing ch. 7 into two separate literary units.

A. Coming defeat and destruction (ch. 1)

B. Corruption of the people (ch. 2)

C. Corruption of leaders (ch. 3)

D. Glorious restoration (chs. 4-5)

C'. Corruption of leaders (ch. 6)

B'. Corruption of people (7:1-7)

A'. Future reversal of defeat and destruction (7:8-20)

Indirect support for this structure comes from those commentators who take the close correspondences between chs. 3 and 6 as evidence that Micah 4-5 was inserted at a later date (Redditt) and from Jeremias, who treats 7:8-20 as an excursus.

            8. Ryken differs from all of the above schemes in postulating a three-section division in which each unit contains a judgment followed by salvation passage:

                A. Judgment (1:1-2:11)

                        B. Salvation (2:12-13)

                A'. Judgment (ch. 3)

                        B'. Salvation (chs. 4-5)

                A''. Judgment (6:1-7:13)

                        B''. Salvation (7:14-20)

As confirmation of this organization, he notes that each of the three cycles begins with a call to “hear.”

In sum, just about every possible pairing of chapters has been seen for the major divisions of Micah except for my own proposal: Micah 1-3; 4; and 5-7. As to why I feel these groupings are defensible, see my post “Micah: Introduction to the Literary Structure.”