8Because of this I will weep and wail;
I will go about barefoot and naked.
I will howl like a jackal
and moan like an owl.
9For her wound is incurable;
it has come to Judah.
It has reached the very gate of my people,
even to Jerusalem itself.
10Tell it not in Gath,
weep not at all.
In Beth Ophrah
roll in the dust.
11Pass on in nakedness and shame,
you who live in Shaphir.
Those who live in Zaanan
will not come out.
Beth Ezel is in mourning;
its protection is taken from you.
12Those who live in Maroth writhe in pain,
waiting for relief,
because disaster has come from the LORD,
even to the gate of Jerusalem.
13You who live in Lachish,
harness the team to the chariot.
You were the beginning of sin
to the Daughter of Zion,
for the transgressions of Israel
were found in you.
14Therefore you will give parting gifts
to Moresheth Gath.
The town of Aczib will prove deceptive
to the kings of Israel.
15I will bring a conqueror against you
who live in Mareshah.
He who is the glory of Israel
will come to Adullam.
16Shave your heads in mourning
for the children in whom you delight;
make yourselves as bald as the vulture,
for they will go from you into exile
Original Meaning
MICAH’S LAMENT IS marked off by his initial determination to begin lamenting (1:8) and his final encouragement for others to join him (1:16). Although some see a strong connection between “this” (zoʾt) at the beginning of verses 5 and 8 and thus put verses 8–9 in the first paragraph, doing so improperly separates the announcement of a lament (1:8–9) from the lament itself (1:10–16).1 The section is organized into the following structure:
1:8–9 Announcement of a lament
v. 8 The prophet’s determination to lament
v. 9 The reason for his lament
1:10–12 Lament for six cities in Judah
vv. 10–12a The cities lamented
v. 12b The reason for the lament
1:13–16 Lament for five cities in Judah
vv. 13–15 The cities lamented
v. 16 The reason why others should lament2
This structure shows that the prophet was not just interested in lamenting by himself to put on a good show. The rationale that ends each paragraph highlights the reason why lamenting is necessary and why others should join him. Death and destruction are coming to Judah in the near future, so people should stop fooling themselves into thinking that nothing will ever happen to them (2:7; 3:11). God will bring a great disaster right to the gates of Jerusalem (1:12).
The date of this lament is before the attack on Jerusalem in 701 B.C., but no one knows how long before that event. Those who place it at 701 B.C. when Sennacherib is already attacking Jerusalem interpret the perfect verbs in verses 9 (“it has come”), 12 (“disaster has come”), and 16 (“[have gone] into exile”) in a past tense, but it is better to view these verbs as pointing to future events (called the prophetic perfect)3 that God will accomplish. These cities are not now in exile or even being attacked, for the prophet is using puns on the name of each city to tell the people who still live in these places what will happen. We date this lament either around 720 or 714–711 B.C., when the Assyrians were conducting campaigns in the area around Judah.4
The predictions in this prophetic lament were at least partially fulfilled by Sennacherib’s invasion and conquest of forty-six cities, including his attack on Jerusalem in 701 B.C. (Isa. 36–37).5 Like Amos’s lament in 5:1–17, Micah is warning people of an impending problem that will strike them if they do not humble themselves and lament.
The lament nature of this message is introduced in verse 8.6 In other texts this mourning theme is connected to the death or funeral of a loved one (Gen. 23:2; 50:1–4; 2 Sam. 1:17–27) or a nation (Lam. 1–4). People also lamented the approaching threat or death of a person because of sickness, oppression, injustice (Ps. 6; 13; Jer. 11:18–23), or the impending demise of a nation (Isa. 15:1–9; Jer. 48:36–44; Ezek. 26:27–36).7 When people mourned, they often shaved their hair, wore sackcloth, sat in ashes, wept, and sometimes employed professional mourners.8
Since these were the normal cultural behaviors for people giving laments, one can assume that Micah follows some of these practices. This suggests that Micah is weeping as he sings this dirge. Maybe his plaintive cries would cause some in his audience to listen with a sympathetic ear to his warnings. Perhaps this lament, which identifies the prophet with the future sorrows of the people and reveals the agony of his heart, would cause some to realize that God is truly about to judge them. The fulfillment of this lament gives credibility to his words as he preaches in the following years.
Announcement of a Lament (1:8–9)
THE LAMENT BEGINS with Micah’s decision to “weep and wail” and go “barefoot and naked.”9 The Hebrew cohortative verbs “I will . . .” express the prophet’s firm resolve to act.10 No matter how strange this sounds to Westerners, Micah is following the ancient Near Eastern cultural pattern that expressed profound grief and sorrow over the approaching death and destruction of a nation (cf. Isa. 15:1–4; Jer. 48:37–38). This symbolic action is also meant as a sign act of things to come in the future; that is, Micah is behaving as the people will behave when this terrible disaster finally reaches Judah (cf. Isaiah’s behavior in Isa. 20:1–4).
Micah’s bitter cries have the weird and eerie sounds of the howling jackal and the loud screech of the ostrich (not “owl,” as in NIV). The louder and more overt the expressions of grief, the stronger the pain that is communicated to others. Micah’s ravings are a sign of his deep anguish over what is about to happen. Such a demonstration of wailing is sure to draw a crowd, which will be sympathetic to the pain of the grieving person.
The reason for this commotion was the “incurable” or inescapable wound that has hit the northern nation of Israel, which “will” (not “has,” as in NIV) be inflicted on the city of Jerusalem (Mic. 1:9). It is unclear if this wound refers to a military disaster, to the coming of the Lord (see 1:3 and 12), or to both these two factors. Though no military army is mentioned, Micah’s audience knows that the Assyrians are the major international power at this time and probably assume that God may use them. Although this is shocking news, if the people of Judah follow in the footsteps of the Israelites (1:5), it should not be surprising that they will suffer a similar destiny.
Lament on Six Cities in Judah (1:10–12)
THE LAMENT PROPER begins with a series of puns on the names of six towns in the Shephelah near Moresheth Gath, the hometown of Micah. These towns seem to be chosen because puns can be made with their names.11 The puns are like saying: Watertown will be covered with water, Washington will be washed away, and Waterloo will meet its waterloo. The puns that play on the sound or meaning of the name of the towns are as follows:
meaning/sound | the pun | |
Gath | the sound gat | the sound tag (Heb. verb “tell”) |
Beth Ophrah | “house of dust” | roll12 in the dust |
Shaphir | “pleasant/beautiful” | nakedness and shame |
Zaanan | (similar sound)13 | not come/go out |
Beth Ezel | “house of taking away” | protection taken away |
Maroth | “bitter” | good |
In each case a disaster will happen and the town will suffer an evil end related to the meaning of its name. The themes of weeping (1:10), nakedness and shame (1:11), mourning (1:11), and calamity from God (1:12) give the listeners some insight into the nature of the terrible events that will happen in Judah.
Where will this disaster come from? Why will someone destroy Judah and Jerusalem? The answer is clear. The God of Judah is sending it on them. Since this problem will reach the gates of Jerusalem, one is left with the impression that the central government will be unable to protect any of the cities in Judah and that the enemy will attempt to wipe the whole nation off the map—including Micah and his listeners.
This claim probably sounds preposterous to some in Micah’s audience, and it raises all kinds of theological questions: Will the God of Judah purposely try to destroy his own people? Why will he become a traitor to those who serve him? Is he not the God who lives in Jerusalem and protects it? What good will be accomplished by having a pagan king destroy Jerusalem? Can any army actually defeat Jerusalem and breach its strong walls? Does Micah really know what he is talking about?
Lament on Five Cities in Judah (1:13–16)
THE SECOND STANZA of the lament continues the puns of the first stanza. This additional set of towns adds to the force of the lament by showing how extensive the devastation will be. Town after town will be affected, from the smaller villages to the major fortresses like Lachish.
meaning/sound | the pun | |
Lachish | (similar sound) | to the horses/team |
Moresheth Gath | “to be betrothed” | you will give parting gifts |
Aczib | “deception” | will prove deceptive |
Mareshah | “conqueror/possessor” | a conqueror against you |
Adullam | the place where David fled | glory of Israel will flee there |
Even Micah’s home town of Moresheth Gath will be included in this destruction from God. Micah has probably visited many of these villages. These are not just far-off places he has only heard about. The friends he grew up with and his parents and relatives who live in these towns will have to face this terrible day of disaster. This makes the coming attack personal for Micah. His family will have to suffer as well.
Interpreters are unclear about the meaning of the prophet’s comments about two of the towns. (1) Micah gives special attention to Lachish, a key defensive fortress protecting Judah’s southern flank (1 Kings 9:19; 10:26; 2 Chron. 11:9). Mays believes the sin of Lachish that has affected the rest of the nation is her trust in military strength (see also Micah 5:10). B. Waltke’s suggestion that Lachish has borrowed pagan worship from Israel and led the Daughter of Zion into the sin of idolatry is less likely.14
(2) What is the meaning of the “glory of Israel” in Micah 1:15? Does this refer to the king himself hiding out in a cave like David (1 Sam. 22:1), the men of rank in Judah running to hide (Isa. 5:13), or the riches of Judah being hidden? Rather than identifying one specific person, it is probably better to suggest that the “glory of Israel” points to all that is glorious in the nation. It will all be debased and forced to run for cover in a cave. This will not be a pretty ending for the people or the nation.
The lament ends (Mic. 1:16) with two imperative exhortations to Jerusalem (using a second feminine singular form). The people should join Micah in shaving their hair (as in Isa. 3:24; 15:2; Jer. 16:6; 47:5) and mourning for many dear people (including delightful children) who will be killed or exiled in the near future.15 This provides a final rationale for the lament. Surely some people will be moved to respond by the enormity of the destruction surrounding this event. People should cry out to God because of the devastation it will cause to others but also because it will reach to the very gates of Jerusalem (Mic. 1:12). The unnamed conqueror will come (Assyria is never mentioned by name), and it is clear that this enemy will not be stopped by Judah’s army.
It is a little surprising that Micah does not focus on Judah’s sins in this lament. This is perhaps because he simply wants people to sense the tragedy that lies ahead. If they can feel the pain and start to wail, they will almost automatically be moved to ask Micah (or God) why this is happening and will want to ask God to stop it. When they are ready to plead for God to act on their behalf, then Micah can give the answer to their questions and lead them to the next step. But if the audience is unconcerned about the future, there is no hope they will ever change their ways.
Bridging Contexts
LAMENTING. Since this lament focuses on what will happen to specific towns in Judah, these warnings contain little in the message itself that we can relate directly to our day. The area where some lasting significance can be developed is in what Micah is doing. When the prophet of God sees people headed for sure destruction, he is moved to outwardly express his sorrow and encourage others to respond appropriately to what God is planning. This raises an important question. What is the purpose for laments in the Bible? The answer to this question will enable us to ask another question in the next section: Should Christian people lament today, and if so, under what conditions?
Lamentation and wailing seem to be a normal practice in the Hebrew culture of the Old Testament, and it is mentioned from time to time in the New Testament. People lamented for several reasons, such as the death of a friend or ruler (David lamented the deaths of Saul and Jonathan in 2 Sam. 1:17–27) or troubles with an enemy (many examples in Psalms). But the better parallels to this passage in Micah (as well as Amos 5) are those examples where someone weeps because people have not responded to the ministry of a prophet and will be judged. The prophet Jeremiah lamented his own personal trials and failures (Jer. 11:18–23; 15:10–21; 20:7–18), but he also mourned and interceded with God when he heard that God was going to judge his covenant people and send them into exile (8:18–9:2; 14:17–15:2). Listen to his anguish and his call for mercy in 14:19, 21:
Have you rejected Judah completely?
Do you despise Zion?
Why have you afflicted us
so that we cannot be healed? . . .
For the sake of your name do not despise us;
do not dishonor your glorious throne.
Remember your covenant with us
and do not break it.16
Although Jesus wept when Lazarus died (John 11:33–35), much more significant was his weeping over Jerusalem when he wanted to gather these people together into his kingdom as a hen gathers her chicks (Matt. 23:37; Luke 19:41). Paul also seems to be in mourning and anguish over the stubborn resistance of the many Jews who refused to respond positively to the messianic claims about Jesus (Rom. 9:1–3).
In each of these cases a messenger of God declares God’s message, an audience does not accept that revelation, and the messenger expresses deep sorrow over the coming judgment. The first two elements are common to many forms of prophetic speech, but the third is unique to the lament. In the process of persuasion, the lament is a powerful alternative to accusations and condemnations. It expresses an attitude of identification and sympathy rather than opposition and conflict. The speaker takes the side of the audience and expresses regret (sometimes even uncomfortableness or disagreement with God—see Jer. 14:17–15:2) for what is about to happen.
This process should lead an audience to react appreciatively because of the support offered by the messenger rather than defensively because of the speaker’s severe condemnation. In other words, the lament builds a bridge of commonality with the ones who will suffer, yet it does not deny the truth that God will bring judgment. In many ways the lament may be a more effective persuasive tool than the judgment speech because the listeners finally realize the emotional depth of the speaker’s concern for the people being judged.
The reason for a lament must arise from the inner agony of the messenger, not from a desire to manipulate the emotional response of the audience. The apostle Paul was willing to have himself “cursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my brothers” (Rom. 9:3), and Moses was willing to have his name blotted from God’s book for the sake of the children of Israel (Ex. 32:32).17 Jesus expressed deep sorrow for the stubborn and unresponsive people of Jerusalem, and surprisingly for the hypocritical Pharisees in Matthew 23.
It is essential to notice, however, that the movement to a lament is not accompanied by a modification of the speaker’s theological beliefs. Micah still predicts the destruction of many towns in Judah—even Jerusalem. Moses and Paul do not all of a sudden change their minds about the sinfulness of their audience and take a mushy position that God’s love will somehow overlook all their evil. These kinds of laments are not a sign of weakness, pastoral compromise, denial of responsibility, or softening of a belief in God’s justice. Intercessory laments are personal expressions of deep sorrow that God is ending his long-suffering patience and bringing death. Why should we then not lament as Micah did when God decides to bring death on an individual or a nation? Do we not care?
Contemporary Significance
THE NEED TO LAMENT. When I think of a past situation evoking lamentation, my mind remembers my mother-in-law, Dorothy, who died in her early fifties of Amytrophic Lateral Sclerosis (Lou Gehrig’s Disease), or Glen, a close friend and neighbor who died a few years ago of an incurable cancer called Multiple Myeloma. If a friend or relative has one of these diseases, there is usually little hope of an extended survival unless God provides a miraculous deliverance.
In such contexts there seems to be little choice but to lament. You must learn to accept the inevitable, center your energies on whatever medical treatment is available, enjoy the pleasures of each day, try to keep your spirits up, and hang on to your trust in God’s sovereign plan. Although you could easily slip into denial and avoid any discussion of death, the disease and its emotional consequences cannot be managed by refusing to acknowledge it. Most visitors feel uncomfortable talking to people with incurable diseases because there is little hope and no explanation as to why this is happening. In private there is plenty of lamenting and mourning, but a public expression of sorrow is usually silenced by social pressure.
This is a tragedy, for a great and horrendous darkness will befall millions of people in this world in the near future. Many will die in military battles similar to the one that fell on Judah. A few people will lament the loss of life in senseless wars and intertribal fighting, but there seldom seems to be enough will among national leaders or in the church to head off the deaths of thousands of innocent people. Some of these victims will die without any knowledge of the true God of Scriptures, and others will purposely reject the saving grace of God.
Unfortunately, there is little talk in the church today about lamenting the lost of this world, who will suffer the punishment of eternal death, and far too little talk of ending war. Moses, Amos, Micah, Jeremiah, Jesus, and Paul found grieving a fitting way of communicating to the people in their audiences their deep sorrow for those who will die (many without a relationship with God). But this cultural pattern of communicating one’s deep feelings of sorrow is largely lost in many cultures. Why is this? Is there a fear of showing emotional weakness and vulnerability? Has the loss of this means of expression been caused by a theological weakness in the church? Has it resulted in any theological loss? Would it be appropriate for people in the church to lament today?
It is instructive to see the way people deal with the threat of physical death. Lamenting may be rejected because it is seen as blaming God. Or perhaps it does not seem to be a mature way of faith but a surrender to the negative instinct of giving up all hope. Others with good intentions may object to any sorrow by asking:
Haven’t the New Testament and resurrection morning effectively eliminated the need for lament? Aren’t the Old Testament cries of anguish superseded, rendered unnecessary? Might they even be a sign of unbelief now that God has raised Jesus from the dead? . . . If Jesus’ followers really believed in the resurrection, if they really believed in the power of God to overcome evil and provide joy and comfort in his Spirit, the lament wouldn’t be needed. Maybe laments are for those who can’t really believe as they ought.18
This kind of reasoning may sound like good theology, but it seems to imply that the coming age of victory is here already and that this present evil age of suffering is past. In one sense death was defeated by Christ’s death and resurrection, but the final elimination of death and sorrow must yet be fulfilled at some future time (Isa. 26:19; 1 Cor. 15:26). Death still has power over believers and unbelievers. Those who want to eliminate grief fail to bring any comfort by their pious remarks and only increase the weight of grief for those who need to lament. Criticisms of mourning should not be centered on the sufferer’s unbelief because the lament is simply an honest confrontation of God with questions and struggles that are not understood, plus emotions that are overwhelmed with sorrow and confusion.
A. Resner suggests that part of the reason for this dilemma about grief is that the church has lost the legitimate use of the Old Testament lament tradition.19 R. Davidson suggests that our truncated canon, our lopsided liturgy, and our incomplete preaching of the whole counsel of God has created a need for psychotherapy and self-help groups.20 He quotes a therapist who says that “churches have not learned that the best way to pass from defensive rationalizations to secure faith is to let doubt, inconsistencies, confusion and rebellion come out in the open instead of using various forms of spiritual coercion to keep them hidden.”21
Believers do not need to deny feelings of pain and loss, for God was willing to listen to the groaning and weeping of his people in the past. He repeatedly responded to the cry of his people, comforted them, and helped them. Those who do not cry out to God make him irrelevant to their lives and delay healing by not embracing the pain they experience. The Old Testament believers did not exclude God as part of the solution to their misery but openly expressed their exasperation and grief over the calamities of life. The prophet Amos, Job, and the psalmists allow us to face the deepest fears and sorrows simply because they voiced their grief. They did not face their sorrow alone but brought it to God, who could do something about it.
Underlying the sorrow of these saints was a faith that believes God is trustworthy and understanding; he is a resource who can change the lament orientation into assurance and praise.22 The effort to eliminate human laments to God has the effect of making God impotent to change our sorrows and unable to bring comfort to our spirits. It also eliminates the questions of theodicy and about the purpose, meaning, and justice of human life with God.23 It discourages honest and open interaction with God based on what people really feel.
Those who discourage lamenting take away a canonical form of expression that was an accepted and meaningful way for saints in the past to deal with their grief.24 The church should not teach people to suppress their deepest feelings and pretend we are big enough to handle the trials of life on our own without God. E. Kubler-Ross’s study of the five stages of grief suggests that accepting death is only possible if people stop their denial and isolation, deal with their anger and depression, and gain the loving support of others.25 Although she does not employ biblical laments, Old Testament laments were the Hebrew way of handling this issue constructively.
Lamenting God’s judgment. If the church can come to the place where it will allow laments, then Micah’s lament in Micah 1:8–16 begs us to ask a second, more difficult question. Should Christians, or the church community as a whole, lament God’s legitimate punishment of people and nations (like God’s coming judgment on Judah, which Micah lamented)? This raises all kinds of disturbing thoughts. Do not rebellious people deserve God’s wrath? Should we feel sorrow for those who have freely chosen to reject God and his will? Can one or should one really try to change God’s mind on these issues?
Such questions reveal some of our deepest attitudes toward the ungodly. Should we pray against them or for God’s mercy on them? Do we love them enough to have a theodicy crisis when God judges them? Do we just tell them a few Bible verses, or do we cry out to God in intercession for their lives? Do we show them our deep emotional hurt (assuming we do feel it) that God has rejected them? Moses, Paul, and Jesus lamented over those whom God would destroy, and I have seen a mother lament her son’s death, but the church seldom follows these examples by expressing its profound grieving love for lost souls. Have we just lost our ability to lament, or have we also lost our compassion on those who will die and experience God’s wrath?