INTRODUCTION
1. Background
Micah, like his contemporaries Isaiah and Amos, prophesied during the eighth century B.C., a time when Israel and Judah had risen to heights of economic affluence but had fallen to depths of spiritual decadence. Under the able leadership of Jeroboam II of Israel (786–746) and Uzziah of Judah (783–742), the territories of both kingdoms became almost as extensive as during the reign of Solomon. It was a time of great economic prosperity, fostered by the absence of international crises and by the mutual cooperation of both kingdoms. While Israel and Judah appeared to be strong externally, an internal decay was sapping their strength and threatening to destroy the social fabric of these two kingdoms. Canaanite religion had extended its influence among some of the people. And while Micah attacked the idolatry, it was not this aspect of Israel’s condition that he emphasized most. It was rather the social injustices of the ruling classes.
The days of peace were destined to come to an end, however, as Assyria arose from a state of quiescence to occupy a threatening posture on the national scene. Under Tiglath-pileser III (745–727 B.C.), Assyria experienced a remarkable resurgence of power. At the same time Israel was being torn by internal strife and dissension. Finally, under the leadership of Shalmaneser V, Israel, the northern kingdom, was occupied; and several years later the city of Samaria fell to him and to Sargon II (721). In Judah, Ahaz’s pro-Assyrian policies made Judah little more than a satellite of Assyria. Not till Hezekiah came to the throne (715) were sweeping religious—and most probably social—reforms instituted. Assyria continued to threaten Judah under Hezekiah’s reign, but an attempt by Sennacherib to take Jerusalem was frustrated (2Ki 19:32–36; 2Ch 32:21; Isa 37:33–37). It was about a century after the death of Hezekiah that Jerusalem would finally fall to the Babylonians.
2. Authorship
The superscription to the prophecy (1:1) asserts that Micah was the author. The prophet who bore that name was from Moresheth (probably Moresheth Gath) in Judah. This was a town in the general proximity of Isaiah’s home, a factor that may explain certain similarities between the prophecies of both men. Little is known about Micah apart from what may be inferred from his prophecy. The book eloquently affirms his sensitivity to the social and religious wrongs of his time.
3. Date
The superscription (1:1) places Micah in the milieu of eighth-century B.C. prophetism. The reference to the destruction of Samaria (v.6) places the beginning of his prophetic career sometime before the capture of that city (722/721 B.C.); and this is in agreement with the superscription that fixes the beginning of his ministry in the reign of Jotham (750–731). The prophetic indictments of social and religious corruption fit well the time of Ahaz and could even be appropriate to the prereformation period of Hezekiah, who reigned 715–686 B.C. The reference to Micah’s prophecy in Jer 26:18–19 fixes at least a portion of Micah’s message in the time of Hezekiah.
4. Theological Values
While Micah may not have written a theology, he certainly based his pleas to the people on a consistent theology of God. The first theological emphasis is the sovereignty of God (1:2). To Micah the Lord acted within the nations to effect their destiny as well as the destiny of his own people. Micah understood the coming destruction of Samaria and Jerusalem to result from the Lord’s punishing these centers of wickedness for their rebellion against him. However, only in the last days will God’s activity regarding the nations reach its climax. Then the ultimate triumph and vindication of God’s people will take place (4:11–13), and the nations will become subject to the rule of the Lord.
Another theological emphasis of Micah is the self-consistency of the Lord. He is immutably committed to his covenantal obligations. It is this theme, coupled with that of divine sovereignty, that gives such urgency to Micah’s words. That God seems austere and unbending is only a partial picture of his self-consistency. He is consistent also with his nature, and that nature is to forgive (7:18–20). God will not give up his people altogether; he will forgive the sins of the believing remnant.
Micah’s doctrine of the “remnant” (GK 8642) is unique among the prophets and is perhaps his most significant contribution to the prophetic theology of hope. The remnant is a force in the world, not simply a residue of people. It is a force that will ultimately conquer the world (4:11–13). By removing everything that robs his people of complete trust in him (5:10–15), the Ruler from Bethlehem will deliver his people.
The basis of the divine redemptive activity lies within the nature of God. The absence of a vicarious role in the redemptive work of the messianic King in Micah underscores the prophet’s theological perspective, which is to assure us of the future exaltation and glory of the remnant; and this is done against the background of the humiliation the nation would soon endure. We may state this aspect of Micah’s theology thus: The nation will suffer the shame of defeat and exile. But that is not the end, for certain triumph and glory lay ahead, not for the whole nation, but only for the remnant. The people of God will be delivered from affliction and exile by their King and will return with him, secure in his power. Thus Micah’s focus is on the kingdom of the Lord and its manifestation in the world.
The kingdom is an expression of divine power and sovereignty within the sphere of the nations. The messianic King is depicted in close association with the Lord and embodies his might and authority. The work of the messianic King is presented by Micah almost entirely in terms of power. Even the tender act of caring for his own as a shepherd cares for his sheep is done in the strength of the Lord (5:4).
Micah spoke to a people whose disobedience had led them to ignominy and ruin. But he reminded them—and us—that the Lord is almighty; and, because he is consistent with his word and with his nature, the people of God will not fail to receive all he has promised them. Though we suffer shame now, glory and vindication lie ahead because the Lord will “be true to Jacob, and show mercy to Abraham” (7:20).
EXPOSITION
I. The Superscription (1:1)
1 According to the superscription, the prophetic activity of Micah spanned the reigns of three kings of Judah in the eighth century B.C. This period was one of great spiritual decline, especially for the northern kingdom; and the messages of Micah and the other eighth-century prophets, with their emphases on social justice and obedience to the laws of the Mosaic covenant, were a refreshing breeze in the arid climate of spiritual ignorance and disobedience.
The prophecy of Micah was directed primarily toward Samaria and Jerusalem, the capital cities of the northern and southern kingdoms (Israel and Judah). While Micah’s message was applicable to all the inhabitants of these kingdoms, he singled out the capitals because the leaders of these centers of influence were largely responsible for the social ills of that time. In particular he singled out Jerusalem, not only because of the corruption of its leaders, but also because of its future glory—a central motif in the prophetic theology of hope.
II. The First Oracle: Israel’s Impending Judgment and Her Future Restoration (1:2–2:13)
A. The Impending Judgment (1:2–7)
2 The opening statement of the prophecy consists of a summons to the nations to attend to the cosmic judgment scene so vividly described by the prophet in the subsequent verses. It is clear that the summons is directed to the nations.
Micah pictured God as coming from his dwelling place to “witness against” (GK 6332) the nations. This witness was effected in the cataclysmic destruction of the cities of Samaria and Jerusalem. Micah, like Isaiah, saw the destiny of the nations as integrally related to the destiny of God’s people. He deftly developed this theme throughout the prophecy.
The burning timbers and ruined houses of Samaria and Jerusalem would be an eloquent sermon to the people of the world that God does not allow sin to go unpunished, even in the case of his own people. God’s destruction of Samaria and Jerusalem was to be a witness to the nations of God’s hatred of sin and the harbinger of their own eventual destruction.
3–4 God’s witness against the nations is depicted in a vivid anthropomorphic scene in which God comes forth from heaven to tread the high places of the earth and to bring about the destruction of Samaria and Jerusalem. In this representation, the prophet illustrates that God is not only transcendent above the world but immanent in it, and that he intervenes in history to effect his will.
The term “high places” (GK 1195) connotes several concepts. Aside from the basic meaning, it was used of pagan religious sanctuaries (Jer 7:31; Eze 20:29), the place of security and protection (Dt 32:13; Hab 3:19), and the place of military advantage (Dt 33:29; Eze 36:2). Apparently here Micah envisioned God as the majestic Sovereign who steps from heaven into the course of human events. Samaria and Jerusalem cannot stand before the might and power of the Conqueror who strides across the heights of the earth and before whom the pagan sanctuaries crumble as the mountains melt. The cataclysm that accompanied God’s intervention in history is described in terms of a violent storm or earthquake (v.4). The language is metaphorical and describes the intensity of the destruction of Samaria and Jerusalem.
5 With telling force the prophet asserts that the national upheaval would be caused by the sins of the people of Israel. The close association between “high places” and “sin” in the mind of the prophet makes it clear that to him the incursion of non-Israelite religious practices was at the heart of the crisis of the house of Israel. Because of the influence of Canaanite religion, Israel was giving only lip service to the Lord; and the ethical demands of the law, with their resultant benign effect on the social structure of the nation, were being disregarded. This was the sin that led to estrangement from God and eventual captivity.
Literally the Hebrew here says, “Who is Jacob’s transgression?” The prophet personified the cites of Samaria and Jerusalem, possibly because he wished to depict them as harlots.
6–7 Samaria was to become a ruin, a place with vineyards planted on her sloping sides amid the stones of her ruined buildings. The expression “lay bare her foundations” may echo the use of the word for uncovering one’s nakedness (Lev 20:11, 17–18, 20–21), a term used in the OT of prostitution (Eze 16:36; 23:18) and lewdness (2Sa 6:20; Hos 2:10). The imagery of the harlot appears where the wages Samaria received from the practice of prostitution would be burned. The prostitution referred to is idolatry, which the OT consistently regards as spiritual fornication.
The word translated “temple gifts” (GK 924) seems out of place in a sequence describing the destruction of idols and may reflect a Semitic root meaning “resemble”; hence it may refer to an image or idol. But the same word also connotes payment to a harlot, and Micah used the same word later in this verse (translated “the wages of prostitutes”). The wealth that accrued to Samaria from her idolatry would be taken away from her to be used again for the wages of prostitution—i.e., the invading Assyrians would transfer the wealth of Samaria to their own temples, where it would again be used for idolatrous worship.
B. The Prophet’s Reaction to the Pronouncement of Judgment (1:8–9)
8–9 The prophet next laments the destruction of the great metropolis of Samaria by representing himself as wailing and going about unclothed as a sign of mourning. The judgment to come on Samaria was like an incurable wound, i.e., it was irreversible. But in its malignant course it had come to Jerusalem as well.
C. The Prophet’s Warning and Summons to the People (1:10–16)
10 The phrase “Tell it not in Gath” is reflective of David’s lament at Saul’s death (2Sa 1:20). It warns the people not to weep lest the inhabitants of Gath, a Philistine city, learn of their impending destruction. In Beth Ophrah (“house of dust”) the inhabitants are to roll in the dust as a sign of mourning (Jos 7:6; Job 16:15; Isa 47:1).
11–12 The people of Shaphir (“beautiful,” “fair,” “pleasant”) are to experience something quite the opposite of what the name of their town means; they are to be reduced to shame and dishonor. Those who live in Zaanan (“come out”) will not be able to come out from their city. Beth Ezel is unknown to us. The word ’etsel means “beside,” “contiguous to.” We may paraphrase the name Beth Ezel as “nearby house.” Perhaps the town was in close proximity to Jerusalem. That its “standing place” was to be taken away may indicate that this town would cease to exist. Thus a buffer between Jerusalem and the invading armies would be removed. The wailing is “because” Maroth (“bitter”) will also endure God’s punishment. All this is because God will punish his people, including Jerusalem.
13–14 The inhabitants of Lachish are to harness the team to the chariot and are to flee the coming destruction like steeds. The significance of Moresheth is difficult to determine. Its name in Hebrew is somewhat similar in sound to the word for “betrothed” and, since “parting gifts” were given to brides as dowries (1Ki 9:16), possibly the name was intended to connote that the town was soon to be parted from Judah as a bride parts from her family.
Aczib (“deception”) will prove to be a deception to Judah. The word is used of a stream that has dried up (Jer 15:18); so this city will cease to exist.
15–16 The name Mareshah is somewhat similar to the root that means “to possess.” Thus this town’s name might have engendered associations with the word “conqueror.” The glory of Israel, i.e., the people, will be forced to flee as David did to Adullam.
This section (vv.10–16) begins with words that recall David’s lament at the death of Saul and ends with the name of the cave where David hid from Saul. These dark moments in David’s life form a gloomy backdrop to the description of the fall of the towns Micah spoke of. Though he is never directly mentioned, the figure of a David bowed down by humiliation appears hauntingly in the tapestry of destruction. It is as if Micah saw in the fall of each town and the eventual captivity of the two kingdoms the final dissolution of the Davidic monarchy. Like David, the glory of Israel would come to Adullam.
D. The Prophet’s Indictment of the Oppressing Classes (2:1–5)
1–2 The oracle continues with a denunciation of the corrupt practices of the affluent and influential classes whose hold on society was so strong in Micah’s day. The basis for the national crisis and the future collapse of the nation was Israel’s disobedience to her God. Micah turned to the powerful ruling classes and began to vividly picture the intensity with which they sought to defraud the poor and become richer at the expense of the less fortunate. He pictured them lying awake at night devising their plans. At first light of day, they proceeded to put their schemes into action. They controlled the structure of society and had a free hand to perpetrate their deeds with impunity. They coveted the houses and lands of those who could not adequately defend themselves in this oppressive society.
3 The word “therefore” establishes the preceding catalog of wrongs as the basis for the “disaster” (GK 8288). Micah referred to the nation as a “people.” He pictured the disaster as a burden from which they would be unable to save themselves (lit., “to remove their necks”). Micah saw the captivity as unavoidable. Because of the national humiliation, they would be unable to hold their heads high among the nations.
4 This verse contains a “mournful song” (GK 5631) or lament that is characteristic of the way the people would mourn the desolation of the land. This word is used of figurative prophetic accounts (e.g., Isa 14:4). In general, however, it is a “descriptive saying,” “byword,” or “proverb” that has popular appeal or significance. Because it is entirely in the first person, the song is clearly uttered by the house of Israel itself.
The lamentation concerns the fact that the land allotted to the people had changed hands. The land that had been Israel’s exclusive possession had become the property of her enemies. The land was to be assigned to “traitors” (GK 8745) or, better, “to a rebel.” Micah describes the enemy as a rebel, which is consistent with his view of the “nations that have not obeyed” (5:15).
5 The word “assembly” (GK 7736) may mean a “multitude” in general; here it connotes the assembly of people that is distinctly the Lord’s, i.e., the covenantal community (Dt 23). Because of their blatant disregard for the obligations of the covenant, the oppressors had removed themselves from any inheritance in the congregation. Micah is saying that the corrupt people of his day would have no further participation in the covenant community.
E. The True Prophet Versus the False Prophets (2:6–11)
6 Micah quotes the false prophets of his day. “Do not prophesy,” they said. The prohibition against prophesying is uttered by prophets, evidently the false, self-serving prophets of Micah’s time. “Overtake” (GK 6047) never means that but always means “leave.” Thus those false prophets appear to be saying: “Do not prophesy. Do not prophesy of these things; for as long as you do, disgrace will not leave us.” The true prophets were apparently considered troublemakers whose powerful sermons disgraced the privileged classes and embarrassed the false prophets. As long as their prophetic protest continued, so the humiliation these corrupt leaders felt would continue.
7 The sense here indicates that one should not blame the continuing disgrace on the prophetic pronouncements of Micah. The subsequent questions imply that it is not of the nature of God only to punish or to reproach because, Micah continues, “my words [i.e., the words of the Lord through the prophet] do good to him whose ways are upright.” If the ungodly people of his day would have lived according to the covenantal standards of the Lord, Micah’s words would have had a benign effect on their lives as well as on the life of the nation; and the reproach and disgrace that they felt as he prophesied to them would have become a means of blessing.
8 But the people were not living according to the standards of the Lord, for Micah says, “Lately my people have risen up like an enemy.” By their blatant disregard for the social concern demanded by the covenant, they were really rebelling against the Lord and evoking his anger. The acts of unbelievable hostility Micah cites describe the ways in which the poor were treated like an enemy. The people forcibly stripped off the outer garments of those who unsuspectingly passed by. The word “strip” (GK 7320) frequently has the sense of a “raid” that a marauding party would make against an enemy (Jdg 9:33; 1Sa 23:27), and it is used also of stripping for spoil (Hos 7:1). The peaceful and unsuspecting were suddenly bereft of some necessity of life by those who cared nothing for their victims’ security or comfort.
9–10 The money hungry even treated the women cruelly. That only women are mentioned implies that they were probably widows forced from their homes. The children too were affected, for the Lord’s blessing was taken from them forever. Because of the sin of the leaders of Micah’s day, a whole generation would never see the glorious works of God but would live out their days in a strange land. Micah emphasized this as the intensity of his language rose to a sharp command. The people were to be banished because the land was irrevocably defiled.
11 The people of this time had an intense desire for the fruits of their affluent society, expressed in the terms “wine” and “beer.” So if someone were to preach to them of greater affluence and prosperity, they would listen to him; and he would readily find acceptance among them. The implication is that Micah’s message of doom was unacceptable to those who were basking in the affluence of the eighth century.
F. The Prophet’s Statement of Hope (2:12–13)
12–13 The prophet turns abruptly to the statement of hope that ends the first oracle. In it he announces Israel’s future restoration. The abruptness of the transition serves to place his message of hope in stark contrast to the message of the hypothetical preacher of v.11, who falsely preaches of continuing bright prospects for Israel. Micah’s hope was not centered in his generation but in a remnant that would be led by their king from captivity to deliverance.
If studied in isolation from the total context of the prophecy, the passage may be understood simply as a prediction of the return from the captivity. But this is inadequate in view of the broader background of Micah’s concept of the future. Micah envisioned a kingdom of eternal duration with the Lord as King (4:7). The Deliverer-King of 5:2–4 seems to be identical with the king of the present passage; he plays an important role in the restoration of God’s people. In both passages the motif of the “flock” is prominent. The fulfillment of the great prophecy in 5:2–4 requires a ruler whose birthplace is Bethlehem and who will extend his influence to the ends of the earth and bring security to God’s people. Micah’s perspective of hope extends beyond a mere restoration from captivity to the messianic kingdom. It is only then that Israel’s hope will be finally and consummately realized.
Micah depicts the “remnant” (GK 8642) as a flock of sheep penned up in an enclosure. In the next clause the figurative depiction of sheep gives place to the picture of a vast throng of people. The word translated “throng” (GK 2101) means “to murmur.” It depicts the murmuring of the members of a community (Ru 1:19) and the resonating sound of the earth echoing to the noise of a loud shout (1Sa 4:5; 1Ki 1:45).
Suddenly a figure, called “the Breaker” (NIV, “One who breaks open the way”), appears in the narrative and goes up before the multitude. Led by the Breaker, the people burst through the gate of the enclosure to form a procession with their King at their head. Micah envisions a time when the kingdom of God will burst forth into sudden reality and the people of God will be manifested. He affirms that the strictures that now prevent the visible realization of the power and glory of God’s kingdom and that blur the identity of God’s people in the world will be shattered and the Breaker will lead his people to glory.
The parallelism of the last clause establishes a close relationship between the work of the Breaker and the King of 5:2–4. Both arise from the people (5:2) and bring deliverance to the people (5:4); the people they lead are likened to a flock (5:4); and both are intimately associated with the Lord (5:4). We may thus understand the Breaker to be Israel’s King.
The last line of v.13 establishes a close connection between the Lord and the King. It is the Lord whose strength and power are manifested in the reign of the King. The King reflects the strength and majesty of the Lord as does the figure of 5:4. The remnant, according to Micah, will receive its final glory and vindication only through the Messiah. He will arise from his people and lead them into the security of God’s kingdom. This passage anticipates a later passage (4:7) in which Micah envisioned the remnant as a “strong nation” over which the Lord reigns.
III. The Second Oracle: The Prophet’s Indictment of the Leaders of the House of Israel and Israel’s Future Hope (3:1–5:15)
A. The Prophet’s Indictment of the Rulers of Israel (3:1–4)
1 The second oracle begins, like the first, with a summons to hear the prophet’s message. The summons was directed in this instance to the rulers of Judah and Israel. Micah begins this oracle with a devastating question. If any should know the meaning of “justice” (GK 5477), it is those who have the awesome responsibility of leadership. Here “justice” is used in the sense of fairness and equity in governmental administration.
2–4 The language of the prophet becomes vividly emotive as he describes the harsh treatment directed against the poor. He pictures the civil leaders as treating the exploited classes like animals being butchered and prepared for eating. The skin was torn from them and their flesh butchered. Because they had so treated the poor, the Lord would not hear these merciless authorities when they cried to him. Those who violate God’s covenant cannot expect him to maintain the blessings of the covenant.
B. The Prophet’s Indictment of the Religious Leaders of Israel (3:5–8)
5 Micah addresses another group of leaders in Israel, the false prophets of the time. The word “feeds” (lit., “bites”; GK 5966) is always used in the OT for the bite of a serpent—except where the root reflects the secondary connotation of paying interest on loaned money. Its primary use has led some to interpret the phrase as describing the harm inflicted on the people by the lying prophets, whose false message of peace was as harmful as a serpent’s bite.
In this structure, however, “bite” is paralleled by “not put into their mouths,” and “proclaim “peace’ ” by “wage war.” The parallelism thus determines that “bite” has to do with the action of putting something into the mouth. While the word is never used for “eating” in the OT, there is no reason why Micah could not have used this forceful figure to express the voracity with which these greedy prophets accepted the bribes given them for the performance of their prophetic activity.
6–7 The end would come for these religious hucksters. While they were basking in the sunlight of power and affluence, the sun would go down on their prophesying and the resultant night would be devoid of vision or divination. It would be a time in which false predictions of peace (v.5) would be discredited by the reality of the Captivity. These prophets would “cover their faces” (lit., “cover the beard”), an expression connoting deep mourning.
8 Micah contrasts his prophetic activity with that of the false prophets. He asserts that he was filled with power “with the [help of] the Spirit.” The implication is that the false prophets were motivated by greed. The word “justice” (GK 5477) is used frequently in the OT prophetic books in the sense of true religion—i.e., the crystallization of the ethic of the law. Because Micah was not violating the covenantal standards, he stood in sharp contrast to the religious leaders who participated in and encouraged the social exploitation of their time. Because Micah was guiltless of his compatriot’s crimes against their fellow Israelites, he could stand before his adversaries with the power of moral courage and a clear conscience. Thus he could fearlessly cry out against the sin of the house of Israel.
C. The Result of the Leaders’ Corruption on the Nation (3:9–12)
9 The address to the leaders of the house of Jacob continues with a biting portrayal of their sins. Micah accuses them of despising justice. The word for “despise” (GK 9493) means utter abhorrence of something.
10–11 As the leaders discharged their duties, they did so with bloodshed and greed, motivated by their desire for personal gain. Characterized by avarice and violence, their whole system of government inevitably led to corruption. These leaders maintained a form of external religion based to some extent on the covenantal relationship. “Is not the Lord among us?” they asked. But they had lost sight of the ethical requirements of the covenant and felt that their historical relationship to the Lord would prevent the onslaught of misfortune. Yet a clear body of prophetic tradition made it obvious that God desired obedience, not allegiance to externals (1Sa 15:22; Ps 51:17). This optimistic but unfounded trust is described as “leaning on the Lord.” It was a kind of trust, but one devoid of obedience to God.
12 Because of the actions of the corrupt religious and civil leaders, the predicted doom would become a reality. Again the “therefore” establishes that the cause of the Captivity was the disobedience of the people. While the name “Zion” originally referred to the Jebusite stronghold captured by David (2Sa 5:7), it became a synonym for the city of Jerusalem (Ps 149:2; Isa 4:3; 40:9; Am 6:1). Micah includes the destruction of the temple, the visible sign of God’s presence, in his prophecy. The symbol of the people’s empty religion would perish.
D. The Future Exaltation of Zion (4:1–8)
The chapter division at the end of ch. 3 is unfortunate because Micah continues to speak of Jerusalem. The mood changes, however, from gloom to sublime hope as Micah portrays the future glory of the city. The temple mount would be exalted in the latter days, and the city of Jerusalem would become the center of God’s gracious activity to the peoples of the earth.
1 “In the last days” always denotes a period of time that is in the indefinite future (cf. esp. Da 10:4; Hos 3:5). Since the term is used in this context of the reign of the Lord, it is eschatological. That the prophet envisioned the exaltation of Jerusalem in association with the messianic kingdom is clear from 4:8 and 5:2–4, 7–9. So it appears that Micah looked for the fulfillment of this prophecy, not specifically in the return from the Captivity, but rather in that time when the messianic King would effect the will of God for his people and would restore the fortunes of Israel.
2 The object of the people’s attraction to Jeru-salem is to be their desire for God’s word that emanates from the city. Micah sees a change in the hearts of all peoples at this time when the law of the Lord will be received universally rather than by Israel and Judah alone.
3 The result of God’s rule in this time will be that the nations of the world will experience peace. The prophecy is national and even universal in scope and looks forward to a time when the nations will come so fully under the peaceful influence of God’s Word that war will be no more. Because of this, weapons of war will be fashioned into agricultural implements. The pastoral motif reflects the peace that Micah sees as the ruling element of the messianic kingdom (cf. Isa 11:6–10; Hos 2:15; Am 9:13–15). The close identification between the Lord and the messianic King is evident in the prophecy of Micah (see comments on Isa 2:2–4).
4 The peacefulness of this era is further described in pastoral imagery (cf. 1Ki 4:25; Zec 3:10). The people will dwell in peace and safety because of the word of the Lord of Hosts. The certainty of this event is established in Micah’s mind because God has sovereignly declared that such will happen: “The LORD Almighty has spoken.”
5 The reason for the people’s safety and security is that they will walk in the name of the Lord forever. This means more than simply adhering to religious requirements. It means to live in reliance on the strength of the Lord, relying on the might of his power. Unlike the nations, God’s people will enjoy his strength forever. It will be otherwise with the nations, for the dominion of their gods will end when the people of the world submit to the rule of the Lord.
6–7 “In that day” refers back to the era of Jerusalem’s exaltation (4:1). The future regathering of Israel in the time of Zion’s exaltation is described differently from the way Micah described it earlier (2:12–13). Micah depicts those who are regathered as lame, referring to their weakness as a result of God’s afflicting them; and he further describes them as exiles, connoting the shame of expulsion from one’s homeland. The emphasis is on the misery and helplessness of the exiles and forms a striking contrast to the “strong nation” they are to become as a result of God’s intervention on their behalf.
The returning people do not automatically comprise the remnant but are to be made into a remnant. To Micah the “remnant” is the repository of God’s grace and promise as well as the force that will ultimately conquer the godless nations at the end time (5:8–15). Since the remnant is the beneficiary of God’s promise, it cannot fail to experience ultimate vindication and glory. The nation the remnant is transformed into will have the Lord as its King forever. The center of God’s governmental activity will be restored and exalted Zion.
8 The climax of this representation of Jerusalem’s future glory is described in terms of its restoration as the seat of the “former dominion.” The dominion soon to be lost in the dark time just ahead will be restored!
The phrase “watchtower of the flock” is in apposition with “stronghold [‘ophel, GK 6754] of Zion” and synonymous with it. The “stronghold” was a fortified section of Jerusalem on the east side in the immediate area of the temple mount and the Kidron Valley. Since the expressions Micah uses have such close ties with the location of David’s dominion, the words “former dominion” can mean little else than that the Davidic kingdom will in some sense be restored to Jerusalem. By asserting this, Micah stands firmly in the tradition of the preexilic prophets (Isa 9:17; Hos 3:5; Am 9:11).
E. The Future Might of Zion (4:9–13)
9 The writer shifts the reader’s attention abruptly from the description of the future glory to the realities of the current crisis. The rhetorical questions are affirmations. Israel would have no king. She would be left without a counselor. The king was the Lord’s anointed and stood as his vicegerent, mediating God’s law to the people. The loss of Israel’s ruler would lead many to question the veracity of God’s promises as they related to the future of the nation and to the Messiah who was to come from Israel. The extreme anguish the nation was to endure through losing its national sovereignty is pictured as that of a woman in childbirth.
10 Micah saw the Captivity as taking place in three stages: leaving the city, sojourning in the open country, and arriving at the land of captivity. “Babylon” may typify world powers whose hostility to Israel was exhibited in so many ways and would continue to be shown until the time of Israel’s restoration (cf. Ge 10:10; 11:4–9). The plural “enemies” indicates that “Babylon” had for Micah a broader significance than the empire soon to replace Assyria as the dominant world power.
The statement of hope that opened the chapter is reiterated and complemented by the truth that it is not a hope to be realized by an unrepentant people who have not paid for their sins. They are to suffer for their disobedience; but beyond that night of despair is the bright morning of Zion’s glory, when God’s people will be redeemed from the hand of their enemies.
11–13 The nations that exhibit hostility do this in ignorance; for as they gather to gloat over the misfortune of God’s people, the nations do not know their part in God’s plan for his people. The prophet pictures the nations as sheaves brought to the threshing floor; and only too late do they recognize that they are to be threshed and broken by Israel herself. The “horns of iron” symbolizes strength (cf. Dt 33:17; 1Sa 2:1). The wealth of the world is to be devoted to God, and all its might is to be under his dominion.
F. The Future King of Zion (5:1–4)
1 “Marshal your troops” is a summons for Jerusalem to gather troops for her defense. The expression “city of troops” depicts a warlike city. The implication is that Jerusalem, so renowned for its hostility toward the less fortunate, is to suffer siege because of its wrongdoing. The striking of the king on the cheek represents the most extreme of insults and marks the victory of Israel’s enemies over her (1Ki 22:24). The king is called “judge” (GK 9149; NIV, “ruler”), depicting the judicial aspect of his office.
2 The statement of doom is followed by one of hope: the prediction of a king who will bring lasting security to Israel and whose influence will extend to the ends of the earth.
Ephrathah is the ancient name of Bethlehem (Ge 35:16, 19; 48:7; Ru 4:11) and distinguishes it from other towns named Bethlehem (cf. Jos 19:15). Its use identifies the town in which David was born (1Sa 17:12), thus establishing a connection between the messianic King and David.
The “ruler” (GK 5440) is represented as speaking here, and the close identification of the king with the purposes of God is thus implied. The ruler is the one whose activities stem from the distant past, yet whose coming is still future.
The word “origins” (GK 4606) comes from a word meaning “to go forth” or “to conduct one’s activities” (cf. 2Ki 19:27). Beyond that the phrase has a military connotation referring to the departure of an army for battle (2Sa 3:25); it may thus speak of the kingly activities of the Messiah in terms of his might and power.
The terms “old” (GK 7710) and “ancient times” may denote “great antiquity” as well as “eternity” in the strictest sense. The context must determine the expanse of time indicated by the expressions. This word here can indicate only great antiquity, and its application to a future ruler—one yet to appear on the scene of Israel’s history—is strong evidence that Micah expected a supernatural figure (cf. Isa 9:6; cf. also Isa 24:23; Mic 4:7). Only in Christ does this prophecy find fulfillment.
3 Because a ruler will eventually come to deliver Israel, God will give her up only temporarily. Israel will enter a period of absolute abandonment by God because of her sin (1:5–6; 2: 1–5; 3:4, 9–12; 4:10; 6:9–16), but a ruler will come who will end the period of Israel’s estrangement; therefore Israel will be given up only till that time.
Micah saw the period of abandonment continuing till “she who is in labor gives birth.” The end of the period of Israel’s estrangement from God is marked not only by the bringing forth of the ruler but also by the return to Israel of “the rest of his brothers.” The brothers are those who share a common national heritage with the ruler (cf. 2Sa 19:13). The word “return” (GK 8740) implies an original identification with Israel. The need for their return indicates that they have been dispersed.
The gathering of those who comprise the remnant is an essential element in Micah’s theology (2:12–13 and 4:6–7). The depiction of the future gathering of the remnant in 5:3 is presented in a captivity motif; the brothers have been dispersed—they are in exile.
4 The peaceful effect of the kingly reign of Messiah is described in pastoral terminology. Israel will be lovingly cared for by the messianic King who will carry out his regnal duties in the strength of God. The gracious benefits of his reign are to extend beyond national limitations, for the authority of the King is to be universal. This description of his power goes perfectly with the description of universal peace seen earlier (4:1–4) and complements it by affirming that the peace described there will be effected by the Ruler born in the insignificant town of Bethlehem. Isaiah called him the “Prince of Peace” (9:6).
G. The Future Peace of Zion (5:5–6)
5–6 The placid picture vanishes for a moment, and we hear the tramping boots of the invader. The events described here are difficult to place historically. If “Assyria” is understood as a figure of speech for all the world powers that oppress Israel, we may then understand the passage as a prophecy of Israel’s ultimate victory over her foes. Micah uses the word “Assyria” typically in 7:12, where in the restoration people come to Israel from Assyria. Zechariah also uses “Assyria” and “Egypt” (10:10) to refer to the nations God’s people will be gathered from when the kingdom is to be established. Significantly, the prophecy of Zechariah was written long after the fall of the Assyrian Empire. In the mind of Zechariah, Assyria (no longer a nation in his time) represented more than the empire that brought down the northern kingdom.
The “seven shepherds” and “eight leaders” are to be understood as an indefinite number of leaders. The figure stresses the abundance of manpower Israel will enjoy when God accomplishes the work of gathering his people from the godless nations to establish them in the land under the Messiah.
H. The Future Vindication of Zion (5:7–9)
7 The “remnant” of believers trusting in the promises of God is to be transformed from an insignificant group to one of absolute dominance in the world, disseminating its faith and ideals throughout the earth. As the dew and showers “do not wait for man” but come from the Lord, so the remnant will be lifted to its place of sovereignty by the power of God.
8–9 Micah next pictures the remnant as a lion overcoming its prey. The vivid description does not mean that the remnant will achieve victory by bloodthirsty militaristic conquest. Micah rather pictures the relentless force with which a lion captures its prey—“and no one can rescue.” The prophet indicates that the nations will not be able to withstand the burgeoning power of the remnant in the end time, with its ultimate triumph in the world.
I. The Future Purification of Zion (5:10–15)
10–13 If “in that day” refers to the period when the remnant will achieve victory over the nations (vv.7–9), then the prophet conceives of God as destroying the weaponry of the remnant and expunging their idolatrous practices after achieving the conquest. However, if it refers to Zion’s exaltation in 4:1–4, the purification of the remnant will take place in the initial stages of the era of peace; and their rise to dominance over the nations is not to be by military might but by their total dedication to God, brought about as God removes everything that interferes with their total trust in him. The world will eventually be conquered, not by its own corruption or false ideologies, but by the gospel.
The implication of vv.10–15 is that the instruments of war and the elements of idolatrous worship are wrong. Horses and chariots are to be removed because they tend to undermine Israel’s complete trust in God. The cities and defenses are to be destroyed as well as the elements of false religion. “Witchcraft” denotes the ways people sought control of natural forces or power over individuals. “Cast spells” connotes a type of sorcery and is always condemned in the OT (Dt 18:10; 2Ki 21:6). The foretelling of the future was an aspect of this type of divination.
Israel’s images are to be destroyed as well. The word “images” (GK 6773) means idols carved from some material. The “sacred stones” were standing pillars, usually of stone, that represented pagan deities. Both terms used in this verse require manual structuring or fashioning; hence, Micah said, “You will no longer bow down to the work of your hands.”
14–15 “Asherah,” a Canaanite goddess who is called in mythological texts the “Creatress of the gods,” was associated with all aspects of sexual life and thus with fertility in general. She was also a goddess of war. Sacred prostitution was an integral part of her cult. To Micah the “cities” were the centers of pagan worship. The repetition of “cities” (cf. v.11) throws into bold relief the inevitable captivity of the cities that were about to perish. The nations that do not yield to God will be subjugated so that the peace promised in 4:1–4 will never be threatened.
IV. The Third Oracle: God’s Lawsuit With Israel and the Ultimate Triumph of the Kingdom of God (6:1–7:20)
A. God’s Accusations Against His People (6:1–8)
1–2 The third oracle begins in the format of a legal controversy. The mountains are called as witnesses in the litigation. The enduring hills have mutely observed Israel’s history from its very beginning; hence they are called “everlasting foundations.” If they could speak, they would witness to the truthfulness of the Creator’s claims.
3 Micah places the classic disputation form of the prophets in a legal context as he pictures God’s pleading with his people. The passage takes on an atmosphere of pathos as God is pictured asking his people how he has wearied them. The Creator of those mountains seeks the cause of Israel’s estrangement from him.
The word “burden” (GK 4206) signifies to wear down, to cause someone to become impatient, or to become physically tired. The Lord asks how he has caused them to become so weary of him that they have ceased to obey him. Their impatience cannot be due to inactivity on his part, for he has done much for them.
4 The deliverance from Egypt represents one of the first acts of redemption in which God demonstrated his saving love for the people. Moses was God’s great prophet, the prototype of the line of prophets yet to come (Dt 18:15–22). Miriam was a prophetess (Ex 15:20); and Aaron, the progenitor of the Aaronic priesthood, was the representative of the people before God.
5 Micah cites the failure of Balaam to curse the people (Nu 22–24) as evidence of God’s activity among them. Besides the failure of Balak to frustrate the progress of the people, the journey from Shittim to Gilgal witnessed the defeat of Midian, the crossing of the Jordan, and the conquest of Jericho. The recital of events stops abruptly as though the intent is to depict in one great sweep the progress of the nation from slavery in a foreign land to settlement in their own country.
“Righteous” (GK 7407) has the basic sense of “rightness” and can apply to the secular as well as religious spheres of life. Here the word underlines God’s faithfulness to his standard, i.e., the covenant obligations. His great acts on behalf of Israel are more than simply coming to the aid of his people. They are manifestations of his righteousness as he maintains his faithfulness to the covenant promise.
6–7 The recital of Israel’s history suddenly ends, and Micah speaks on behalf of the people, asking God what their responsibility is in the light of his faithfulness to the covenant. There is irony here as the prophet asks how one may come before the “exalted God.” The word “exalted” (GK 5294) connotes “height” and speaks of God in his dwelling place in heaven. What is the proper way to worship him? With burnt offerings and calves a year old? Yearling calves were regarded as the choicest sacrifices. “Thousands of rams” suggests the large quantity of animals that one might offer to curry God’s favor. But God is interested neither in the choicest animals nor in the number offered. Even great quantities of oil will not bring the worshiper into fellowship with God. The list reaches a shocking climax in the mention of the firstborn. Child sacrifice was carried out by certain Israelites on occasion (2Ki 3:27–16:3; Isa 57:5). The firstborn represents the most precious thing one could give to God. Again, this was not what God wants.
8 What God wants is a heart response to God demonstrated in the basic elements of true religion. God has told the people what is good. The Mosaic law differentiated between good and bad and reflected God’s will in their religious and social lives. They were to act “justly” (GK 5477), here in the sense of “true religion,” i.e., the ethical response to God that has a manifestation in social concerns as well. “To love mercy [GK 2876]” is freely and willingly to show kindness to others. “To walk humbly [GK 7570] with your God” means to live in conscious fellowship with him, exercising a spirit of humility before him. The prophet was not indicating that sacrifice was completely ineffectual and that simply a proper heart attitude to God would suffice. Rather, God has no interest in the multiplication of empty religious acts.
These ethical requirements do not comprise the way of salvation. Forgiveness of sin was received through the sacrifices. The standards of this verse are for those who are members of the covenantal community and delineate the areas of ethical response that God wants to see in those who share the covenantal obligations. These standards have not been abrogated for Christians, for the NT affirms their continuing validity. We are still called to the exercise of true religion (1Co 13:4; 2Co 6:6; Col 3:12; Jas 1:27; 1Pe 1:2; 5:5). Christians are in a covenant relationship with God in which the law has been placed within their hearts (Jer 31:33; cf. Heb 10:14–17), not abrogated. But our obedience is inspired by the indwelling Holy Spirit, not by the letter of the law.
B. The Sentence of Judgment (6:9–16)
9 The voice of the Lord suddenly sounds out. “Calling to the city” signifies the cry of alarm heard when disaster threatens a city. Micah adds that it is wise to fear God’s name. The “rod” is the punishment that Israel would endure, and she was to “heed” it. The people were to attend to the fact that the invasion would come and that it was God who would effect it through the instrumentality of the Assyrians.
10–13 The Hebrew says, literally, “Are there yet in the house of the wicked treasures of wickedness and the short measure that is cursed?” The question, of course, is rhetorical and affirms that the oppressing classes are still getting gain from their mistreatment of the poor and that the oppression has not ended. Hence the punishment is deserved and now imminent. Micah emphasizes social sins more than sins of idolatry, though ultimately they are closely intertwined in his thinking. The response to the question of v.11 was, of course, a resounding no! The society of Micah’s time was characterized by violence, lying, and deceit. False promises were uttered and claims made that were not fulfilled. According to v.13, it was because of the people’s sins that God was to bring ruin on them.
14–15 The land was to fall under the devastation of the sword and be totally unproductive. The greed that motivated the rich in that day would no longer be gratified because of the desolation of the land.
16 In their pagan religious practices, the people were no better than the generation of Omri, the notorious king who headed the dynasty that produced Ahab, the husband of Jezebel, and allowed Baal worship in Israel. “Therefore” indicates that Israel’s disobedience to God would bring the three calamities the prophet was about to describe. She was to become a “ruin” (GK 9014). The Hebrew word means both “to be desolated” and “to be appalled.” It may connote that which is an object of horror.
C. The Prophet’s Lament of the Lack of Godly Fellowship (7:1–2)
Like a day that begins with a dark, foreboding sky but ends in golden sunlight, this chapter begins in gloom and ends in hope. Clouds of gloom have rolled in on the horizon of the prophet’s life because of the disobedience of the people and the somber fate that awaited his nation. But rays of hope shine through the gloom.
1 This section begins with a lament as the prophet mourns the lack of godly fellowship in his time. The metaphor pictures the remnant as seeking for grapes and choice figs to satisfy its hunger, but it is as though it were the time of harvest when these have been picked and the hunger must go unsatiated.
2 The fruit in v.1 represents godly persons. The feeling of utter disappointment in seeking food and finding none conveys the feelings of the godly at the great lack of individuals who have remained faithful to God. The language describes the excesses that characterized the treatment of the “have nots” by the “haves.”
D. The Prophet’s Lament of the Corruption in His Society (7:3–6)
3 Micah describes the strong hold that those in responsible positions had on the throat of society. “The ruler demands gifts” means that the ruler insisted that justice be distorted for his gain. Power can corrupt if not guarded by the law of a higher Sovereign. The judicial system was corrupted by the lust for bribes. The controlling classes, i.e., the rich, simply dictated their desires; the implication is that they received them.
In the conspiracy of the ruling classes, the ruler sought, perhaps, for the indictment of an innocent person; the judge carried it out for a bribe; and the rich man was involved in the conspiracy by speaking “the desire of his soul” (“what they desire”). The word for “desire” (GK 2094) is always used in a bad sense and may mean “evil desire” but more commonly “calamity” or “destruction.”
4 Micah describes even the best of the people as briers. If one sought mercy or sympathy from any of them—even those who appeared to be upright and respectable—they would prove to be hard and piercing. In keeping with his use of sudden, almost jarring, contrasts, Micah points to the coming judgment: “The day of your watchmen [GK 7595] has come.” The watchmen were the prophets (Jer 6:17; Eze 3:19) who watched the course of their nation, saw its internal decay and decline, and, like watchmen who guarded the cities of ancient times, warned of the inherent danger. The day of the watchmen was the day of punishment—the Captivity.
5–6 Micah returns to the description of the wrongs of his society. In his day a man could not trust his friends or even his wife, and respect for one’s parents had vanished.
E. The Godly Man’s Attitude in the Midst of Discouragement (7:7–10)
7 The clouds of gloom begin to separate as the prophet describes the attitude of the godly person amid such difficult circumstances. Micah does not succumb to despair or lethargy. The word “watch” (GK 7595) means to “look” or “wait expectantly” (cf. v.4). The godly person will look expectantly for every evidence of God’s working. By waiting for him to act in his own time, Micah finds peace in the knowledge of God’s sovereign activity in the world. But Micah also expresses confidence that God will answer prayer.
8 Not only does he trust God to act and to answer prayer, but Micah trusts him to vindicate the faithful. Though the faithful are subjected to difficult experiences, they will one day rise to receive their heritage. There is vivid contrast between the people of God sitting in darkness and the gladdening effect of the light of God that will shine among them.
9 The remnant affirm their determination to wait till God pleads their cause and decides in their favor. They freely confess their sin in the awareness that the temporal punishment to be endured is just. However, the remnant can be confident of God’s favorable action on their behalf; for they, unlike their guilty compatriots, stand on the ground of the covenant.
10 Ultimately the remnant will be exalted and the hostile nations of the world covered with shame and trampled like mud. This latter figure is used by Isaiah (10:6) of the invading Assyrians. Micah uses it of the conquest of the hostile powers in the day of Israel’s exaltation.
F. The Assurance of Victory for the Kingdom of God (7:11–20)
1. Victory described in terms of the extension of the kingdom (7:11–13)
11–12 The remainder of the chapter is an exultant description of the eventual triumph of the remnant. The prophet envisions a great extension of the remnant’s influence as he sees a future day when the nation will greatly increase in population by an influx of people from Gentile nations, symbolized by Assyria and Egypt. That the Gentiles are to become partakers of the promise through faith is a cardinal doctrine of both OT and NT (Ge 12:3; Am 9:11–12; Ro 9:30; Gal 3:6–9).
13 At the same time, however, the judgment of God will fall on the sinful world. Out of the decay of a crumbling society, Micah perceives the emergence of the kingdom of God.
2. Victory assured because of God’s leadership (7:14–15)
14 The remnant will triumph because of their relationship to God. The text pictures them as dwelling alone, i.e., apart from the nations, in a forest. Bashan and Gilead were agricultural areas of great fertility that became symbols of plenty. The reference to them here is symbolic. This is a request that Israel’s former years of blessing be restored by her Good Shepherd.
15 The Exodus was the central event in the prophetic theology of history. It could be repeated because to the prophets history was continually being fulfilled. The Exodus would occur again—but in a new and even greater way. To the prophets the Exodus was an event of more than historical interest. Because God is unchanging and his attributes timeless, his people could expect his acts to be repeated again and again in history.
3. Victory assured over the nations (7:16–17)
16 As a result of God’s intervention on behalf of Israel, the nations will be humbled before God and his remnant. The power of the nations will be as nothing before the great power of Almighty God. To lay the hand on the mouth is to indicate reverence and awe. The deafness of the nations may be caused by the thunderous events that God brings about.
17 In the vindication of God and his remnant in the world, the nations are pictured as animals crawling from their dens and trembling before the Lord.
4. Victory assured because of God’s nature (7:18–20)
18 The question “Who is a God like you?” points to the uniqueness of the Lord. The name “Micah” means “Who is like the LORD?” The words “sin” (GK 6411) and “transgression” (GK 7322) recall the affirmation of Ex 34:6–7, wherein the Lord proclaimed an essential aspect of his nature to be his willingness to forgive sin.
19–20 Because God’s anger does not continue forever, the believing remnant can know that an end will come to their humiliation. After the great statement of forgiveness, the prophet recalls the promise given to Abraham and reaffirmed to Jacob. The remnant’s optimism was rooted in the eternal promise sworn to Abraham and their “fathers” (Ge 13:15; 17:7–8, 13, 19; 48:4), and its elements are applicable to Christians (see 1Pe 2:5; cf. 2Co 6:16; Heb 8:10; Rev 21:3, 7). The promise is a continuum that guarantees an inheritance to all God’s people. As God’s people, our sins have been trodden underfoot. We, too, know the loving care of the Shepherd who feeds his flock in the strength of the Lord. Micah’s concept of the remnant encompasses believers today.
The Old Testament in the New
| OT Text | NT Text | Subject |
| Mic 5:2 | Mt 2:6 | Birth in Bethlehem |
| Mic 7:6 | Mt 10:35; Lk 12:53 | A divided household |