G. T. Tran’s Review of THE BOOK OF RUTH (NICOT), by Peter H. W. Lau

A Book Review from Books At a Glance

by G. T. Tran

 

Summary of Content

Oftentimes, commentaries combine Ruth with Judges (or Esther), so it is a real treat to have a single volume completely dedicated to Ruth. Lau’s commentary replaces the earlier volume by Robert Hubbard (now in the Eerdmans Classic Biblical Commentaries series). On this, he expresses, “Bob Hubbard’s original Ruth commentary in this series is one of my favorites, so it was with much hesitation and trepidation that I accepted his invitation to write this commentary” (xi).

The commentary consists of two main sections: (1) Introduction (1-59) and (2) Text and Commentary (61-307). 

In the Introduction, Lau covers background issues, such as authorship, date, purpose, genre, and structure. Admittedly, the book never identifies its author, so any proposal (e.g., Samuel, Nathan, Tamar) remains inconclusive (12). Lau dates Ruth to the monarchic period, noting, “The elevation of David aligns best with this era and is consistent with the book’s primary purpose” (20). That purpose is “to present God’s providence and kindness in preserving the family that produced King David” (28, emphases removed). For Lau, Ruth is a short story (9), but unlike scholars who deny the historicity of Ruth, Lau insists that the book “be interpreted as a historiographical document” (11). Regarding its structure, Lau contends that Ruth consists of four acts, each act containing three scenes. 

• Act 1:Death and emptiness (1:1-22)
• Act 2: Seeking short-term security (2:1-23)
• Act 3: Seeking permanent security (3:1-18)
• Act 4: Redemption and fullness (4:1-22)

He also proposes a chiasm, as shown below (2-3).

• A The end of a family line in Moab (1:1-6)
  • B En route: Naomi, Orpah, and Ruth dialogue (1:7-19a)
    • C Town gate: Naomi laments before the townswomen (1:19b-22)
      • D Home: Naomi accepts Ruth’s plan (2:1-3)
        • E Boaz’s field: Encounter between Ruth and Boaz (2:4-17)
          • F Home: Naomi and Ruth debrief (2:18-23)
          • F’ Home: Ruth accepts Naomi’s plan (3:1-5)
        • E’ Threshing floor: Encounter between Ruth and Boaz (3:6-15)
      • D’ Home: Naomi and Ruth debrief (3:16-18)
    • C’ Town gate: Boaz redeems before the elders (4:1-12)
  • B’ Home: Naomi and the women dialogue (4:13-17)
• A’ The beginning of a royal line in Israel (4:18-22)

Regarding this chiasm, Lau observes, “This structure highlights human initiative at the core of the narrative, but two mentions of God’s activity bookend the narrative action (1:6; 4:13)” (5). In addition, the whole structure demonstrates the reversal of Naomi’s fortune (5-6). Her shame in the beginning of the book is replaced with honor at the end (7). Accordingly, Lau announces, “This commentary will use honor-shame dynamics to throw light on how the ancient audience would have understood elements of the narrative, such as widowhood, patronage, the nature of Naomi’s threshing floor plan, and the significance of the closing genealogy” (8).

The Text and Commentary section is divided into four parts, each focusing on an act in the narrative. In each part, Lau overviews its structure, provides his own translation with notes before exegeting each verse. 

 

Evaluation of Content

Two features of the commentary stand out. First, Lau writes clearly. Even difficult issues are presented in digestible manners (e.g., the meaning of מָכְרָה in 4:3 [see 240-43], the nature of Boaz’s proposal in 4:5 [see 246-52]). Further, his frequent use of numbers (e.g., first, second, third, etc.) assists reader comprehension and retention. 

Second, I was satisfied with the level of engagement which Lau demonstrates with the biblical text. He viritually leaves no stone unturned. For example, when did Boaz go to the gate (4:1)? Lau notes, “He could have gone up to the town gate before, during, or after Ruth and Naomi’s conversation. He could have returned home first or gone straight to the town gate after leaving Ruth. If he waited at the town gate, the subsequent events would have taken place after the women’s conversation because Ruth returned before sunrise, and people would pass through the town gate to pursue their activities, especially working in the fields, after sunrise” (236, emphases added).

Meanwhile, I have one quibble. Regarding “Mr. So-and-So” (Lau’s rendering of פְּלֹנִי אַלְמֹנִי), Lau rightly observes that his namelessness “is especially significant in a chapter concerned with names” (238). However, he goes on to posit that “the concealment of Mr. So-and-So’s name also has a protective effect” (238). Lau explains, “If he was identified by name in the narrative, there would be some shame attached to it—for him and his descendants…his reputation, and that of those who would follow him, would be damaged. The withheld name also ensures there is no ongoing shame” (238). 

In my view, it is unlikely that the narrator allows this “protective effect.” First, it would undermine the narrator’s rhetorical force by leaving פְּלֹנִי אַלְמֹנִי nameless. This omission is indeed meant to shame the guy for his selfishness. He is quick to take Naomi’s land, but quickly rejects Ruth’s hand when it costs him too much (4:4-6). Two times he states, “I cannot redeem it” (4:6). His action serves as a foil to Boaz, who considers others better than himself (cf. Phil 2:3). Second, even if we do not know who Mr. So-and-So is, it is hard to deny that there is still “ongoing shame” for him and his descendants. Third, from an honor-shame perspective, the scale tips in favor of shaming Mr. So-and-So, not protecting him.

Overall, Lau’s commentary on Ruth is a valuable resource. Pastors, scholars, and any student of God’s Word would benefit from the fruit of Lau’s labor. Bill T. Arnold, the editor of the NICOT series, shares that the series aims to provide “a faithful guide in one’s reading” of the biblical text (x). Lau succeeds in that goal admirably, and for that reason, I highly recommend his work. 

 

G. T. Tran