ALTERNATIVE ORGANIZATIONS FOR THE BOOK OF RUTH

In my post “Ruth: introduction to the Literary Structure,” I proposed the symmetrical organization given in Figure 1.

Figure 1: The Structure of Ruth

    Prologue (1:1-5)

        Section I (1:6-22)              Two Scenes

            Section II (ch. 2)                 Three Scenes

            Section III (ch. 3)                Three Scenes

       Section IV (4:1-17)            Two Scenes

    Epilogue (4:18-22)

But others have taken different approaches to the subject, as presented and critiqued below.

The twin pitfalls of (a) over-analysis and (b) reliance on preconceived notions can be well illustrated in one particular approach to the Book of Ruth. Robert Hubbard, Jr., has summarized its overall structure quite rightly, “Though not tightly arranged, the book generally displays a mirror structure.” This is, in fact, the conclusion presented above. David Dorsey, in addition, builds up a very persuasive case for even the individual sub-units of Ruth having their own highly organized literary structures, usually taking the form of seven-membered chiasms. This scheme breaks down when he attempts to fit these individual sections into an overall pattern for the book. His prior expectations in this matter (and concerning almost all the other OT books he analyzes) are clearly spelled out: “The book is most likely designed to form a seven-part symmetry.” This proposed symmetry is shown in Fig. 2.

Figure 2: Dorsey’s Seven-Part Organization for the Book of Ruth

I. Devastation of Naomi’s family (1:1-5)

II. Two of Naomi’s relatives deliberate whether to support her (1:6-19a)

III. Return to Bethlehem in emptiness and hopelessness (1:19b-22)

IV. Meeting of Ruth and Boaz (2:1-23)

III'. Ruth’s appeal at the threshing floor, and her return to Bethlehem in fullness and hope (3:1-18)

II'. Two of Naomi’s relatives deliberate whether to support her (4:1-12)

I'. Restoration of Naomi’s family (4:13-22)

Due to Dorsey’s intellectual honesty, he freely admits that a major problem with this scheme is that it disrupts the many well recognized parallels between chs. 2 and 3. Thus, he offers a second but, even in his mind, less likely organization for the book in which his sections II and III are collapsed into one, resulting in a structure approximating that of Fig. 1. Some additional barriers to accepting the scheme of Fig. 2 can be cited:

a. Dorsey treats his Section III as a separate unit because he has trouble accepting that 1:19b-22 is merely the conclusion to the action begun in 1:6. The unity of this passage seems to be undoubted, however, as evidenced by the clear similarities in the opening and closing verses:

“Then she [Naomi] started with her daughters-in-law with her to return from the country of Moab.” (1:6)

“So Naomi returned, and...her daughter-in-law with her, who returned from the country of Moab.” (1:22)

b. If one looks at the supposed thematic parallel between sections III and III' in Fig. 2, it can be seen that only the last four verses of III' even vaguely match the former section's emphasis.

c. The support of Naomi may be a minor sub-text in Dorsey’s Section II' but does not at all appear to be its major theme.

d. By breaking up ch. 1 into separate literary sections, as do others such as Ryken, the scheme of Fig. 2 totally disrupts the strong verbal parallels previously noted between 1:2-5 and 4:9-10 with their common mention of Elimelech, Chilion and Mahlon, Ruth as a Moabitess, and relatives dying. This same objection can be leveled at Howard’s six-part chiasm for the book. Strong support for the literary unity of ch. 1 has been offered by VanGemeren including: (a) the common language utilized in 1:1-5 and 1:6-22, (b) the use of “went” as an set of bookends in 1:1 and 1:19, and (c) a proposal for an approximately symmetrical structure for the chapter as a whole. In addition, Gray notes that Ruth 1 contains exactly twelve occurrences of the key verb sub (“to return or be rehabilitated”).

Yehuda Radday has presented a highly detailed structure for the book in which each of the four chapters can be broken down into from three to four separate chiasms, all of which in turn fit together as an overall chiasm for each chapter. This is not the place to critique each of them, but I would encourage readers to look at them yourselves. He also offered a modified symmetrical structure for this book consisting of the fourteen symmetrically arranged sections as in Figure 3.

Figure 3: Radday's Structure for the Book of Ruth

A. Progeny lost (1:1-5)

    B. Orpah's unfaithfulness (1:6-14a)

        C. Ruth's devotion (1:14b-18)

            D. Naomi's emptiness (1:19-22)

                E. Ruth to Naomi: her faith in finding grace (2:1-2a)

                    F. Ruth to Boaz: your good works will be rewarded (2:2- 17)

                        G. Naomi with Ruth: blessing Boaz (2:18-23)

                        G'. Naomi with Ruth: instructions regarding Boaz (3:1-3:5)

                    F'. Boaz to Ruth: your kindness shall bring blessings (3:6- 15)

                E'. Ruth to Naomi to Ruth: report in finding grace (3:16-18)

    B'. The kinsman's unfaithfulness (4:1-10)

        C'. Ruth a blessing to Boaz's house (4:11-12)

            D'. Naomi restored (4:13-17a)

A'. Progeny regained (4:17b-22)

There is much in favor of this analysis except for the following: (a) the pairing C // C' is rather weak, (b) the longer sections are often characterized above by only small passages within them so that the descriptions do not truly reflect the whole unit, (c) these section divisions do not exactly match up with those Radday gives in his detailed analyses for each individual chapter, (d) and one would be hard pressed to defend G-G' as the intended point of emphasis within the book.