TEXT [Commentary]
E. Judgment against Israel’s Leaders (3:1-12)
1 I said, “Listen, you leaders of Israel!
You are supposed to know right from wrong,
2 but you are the very ones
who hate good and love evil.
You skin my people alive
and tear the flesh from their bones.
3 Yes, you eat my people’s flesh,
strip off their skin,
and break their bones.
You chop them up
like meat for the cooking pot.
4 Then you beg the LORD for help in times of trouble!
Do you really expect him to answer?
After all the evil you have done,
he won’t even look at you!”
5 This is what the LORD says:
“You false prophets are leading my people astray!
You promise peace for those who give you food,
but you declare war on those who refuse to feed you.
6 Now the night will close around you,
cutting off all your visions.
Darkness will cover you,
putting an end to your predictions.
The sun will set for you prophets,
and your day will come to an end.
7 Then you seers will be put to shame,
and you fortune-tellers will be disgraced.
And you will cover your faces
because there is no answer from God.”
8 But as for me, I am filled with power—
with the Spirit of the LORD.
I am filled with justice and strength
to boldly declare Israel’s sin and rebellion.
9 Listen to me, you leaders of Israel!
You hate justice and twist all that is right.
10 You are building Jerusalem
on a foundation of murder and corruption.
11 You rulers make decisions based on bribes;
you priests teach God’s laws only for a price;
you prophets won’t prophesy unless you are paid.
Yet all of you claim to depend on the LORD.
“No harm can come to us,” you say,
“for the LORD is here among us.”
12 Because of you, Mount Zion will be plowed like an open field;
Jerusalem will be reduced to ruins!
A thicket will grow on the heights
where the Temple now stands.
NOTES
3:1 Listen. See the discussion on “attention!” in the note on 1:2.
leaders. The term (ro’sh [TH7218, ZH8031], “head”) refers to judges and other judicial officials in the national court system. According to Allen (1976:306), the “heads” of families and clans formed a type of “people’s court” that dated back to the time of Moses (cf. Exod 18:17-26). The court was apparently under the control of the monarchy with regard to appointment and policy.
know right from wrong. Lit., “to know the judgment” (mishpat [TH4941, ZH5477]). According to Andersen and Freedman (2000:351), the term “judgment” refers to the entire process of the administration of justice, including hearing the case, rendering a decision, pronouncing a verdict, and implementing the sentence.
3:2-3 hate good and love evil. The leaders had inverted the basic principles established by covenant relationship with Yahweh that were foundational for social justice in Hebrew society. The covenant community was called to love good and hate evil in their imitation of Yahweh’s holiness (Ps 97:10; Isa 1:17; Amos 5:14-15).
skin my people alive . . . chop them up. This series of brutal metaphors calls attention to both the callousness and the degree of social oppression the legal system had inflicted upon the people.
you eat my people’s flesh. This was a common figure of speech for oppression and injustice (Allen 1976:307). The repetition of the verb gazal [TH1497, ZH1608] (“skin my people alive,” 3:2) connects the section to the earlier indictment of the wealthy land-grabbers, who seized land by fraud and violence (2:2).
3:4 beg . . . for help. The verb (za‘aq [TH2199, ZH2410]) means to “cry out in distress, call for help.” Ironically, the prophet saw a certain poetic justice in the judges who had brought distress on others now crying out in distress for help from God.
he won’t even look. The idiom is “to hide the face,” and it “symbolizes covenant violation and breach of fellowship between God and Israel. The expression signifies the wrath of God, the rejection of his people (temporarily), and the initiation of covenant curses against Israel for their sin” (NIDOTTE 3.301).
3:5 This is what the LORD says. The construction koh ’amar yhwh [TH3541/559/3068, ZH3907/606/3378] constitutes the messenger formula in OT prophetic speech and signifies the oral transmission of a message by a third party. The expression suggests the divine assembly or council of the gods in ancient Near Eastern thought. The messenger of the council stands as an observer in council sessions and then, as an envoy of the council, reports what he has heard to others (ABD 2.214-217). The formula emphasizes the divine source of the message.
false prophets. The prophets (nabi’ [TH5030, ZH5566]) were considered “false” because they led God’s people astray (ta‘ah [TH8582, ZH9494]) with bogus visions (cf. Jer 23:32, where Jeremiah condemns the false prophets who lead people astray with concocted dreams).
promise peace . . . declare war. The prophetic message was either favorable or unfavorable, depending upon whether or not the people could meet the prophet’s demand for payment (cf. Andersen and Freedman 2000:364, who suggest the “prophecy for pay” scam was some type of “protection racket” for the wealthy in that the bribes they paid to the false prophets caused the prophets to ignore the injustices perpetrated by the wealthy against the poor).
3:6 the night will close around you. Ironically, God would cut off the revelations to the false prophets in the darkness of the night—a time when seers would typically receive their dreams and visions.
visions. Micah did not deny that the false prophets were endowed with God-given abilities, but “his stress is that those psychic gifts will be taken away because they have been used improperly” (Allen 1976:312).
Darkness. This is a metaphor for divine judgment, even death (e.g., Job 10:21; Prov 20:20; cf. NIDOTTE 2.313-314). The false prophets will fade into obscurity in the darkness of the night of God’s judgment, even as “their crystal balls will become black” (Alexander, Baker, and Waltke 1988:163).
3:7 seers. This word is derived from khazah [TH2372, ZH2600] and describes those who see visions. According to Andersen and Freedman (2000:374) the terms “visionary” (khozeh [TH2374, ZH2602]) and “prophet” (nabi’ [TH5030, ZH5566]) are interchangeable in eighth-century usage.
shame. The false prophets will be shamed (bosh [TH954, ZH1017]) for two reasons: First, they will have to admit their messages and visions were fraudulent; and second, they will have nothing to say—God will not answer them.
fortune-tellers. The fortune-tellers (qosemim [TH7080A, ZH7876]) are a class of prophets who resorted to mantic or mechanical means of prognostication (e.g., casting lots, examining animal livers, spilling arrows onto the ground, etc.; cf. NIDOTTE 3.945-946). Mosaic law condemned fortune-tellers and prohibited most forms of divination among the Hebrews (cf. Lev 19:31; Deut 18:10-14). Allen (1976:313) comments that “it speaks well for Micah’s objectivity and fair-mindedness that he concentrates his attack not on methods but on motives.”
disgraced. The verb khapar [TH2659, ZH2917] describes dismay when something unexpected happens and is usually found in parallel with bosh [TH954, ZH1017] (Andersen and Freedman 2000:374).
cover your faces. The Hebrew idiom implies shame and means “to cover up to the lips” or “to wrap oneself in a robe right up to the mustache, leaving only nose and eyes visible” (Andersen and Freedman 2000:375). A harlot (Gen 38:14), a mourner (Ezek 24:17), or a leper (Lev 13:45) might wrap themselves up in this fashion.
3:8 filled with . . . the Spirit of the LORD. Micah’s autobiographical comment stresses “that the source of Micah’s authority . . . lies not in himself but in God” (Alexander, Baker, and Waltke 1988:163). The OT prophets were Spirit-filled messengers sent from God (Isa 48:16). The NT teaches that “no prophecy in Scripture ever came from the prophet’s own understanding . . . those prophets were moved by the Holy Spirit, and they spoke from God” (2 Pet 1:20-21).
justice. “The sign of being filled with the Spirit is speaking of justice” (Alexander, Baker, and Waltke 1988:164). The touchstone of Micah’s message is “doing what is right” or practicing justice (mishpat [TH4941, ZH5477]), 6:8; see further the note on 3:1.
strength. “The strength conveyed by the word (geburah [TH1369, ZH1476]) is a gift from God” (NIDOTTE 1.812). Such divine enablement was necessary given the demands of the prophetic call.
sin and rebellion. See the notes on “sins” and “rebellion” in 1:5 above.
3:11 rulers. See the note on 3:1.
bribes. The OT condemns bribery (shokhad [TH7810, ZH8816]) because it perverts justice in the judicial sphere and equity in the social sphere of the Hebrew covenant community (cf. Exod 23:8; Deut 16:19; Prov 17:23).
priests teach God’s laws. The religious leaders of the Hebrew people were charged with overseeing the sacrificial worship of the sanctuary and commissioned to teach and guide the community in the Law of Moses (Deut 33:8-11; Jer 18:18; Ezek 7:26; Mal 2:5-9).
price. The word mekhir [TH4242, ZH4697] indicates money that was exchanged for priestly rulings on the Torah or law of Moses. Andersen and Freedman (2000:384) note that “the torah [TH8451, ZH9368] that is sold will be made to please the buyer.”
prophets. The prophets (nabi’ [TH5030, ZH5566]) were supposed to be the “watchmen” (Jer 6:17; Ezek 3:17) and “conscience” of Israel (cf. 1 Kgs 18:17). Their task was to warn the people of divine judgment for covenant trespasses and call the people to repentance and covenant renewal with Yahweh (Ezek 33).
paid. Like the leaders and the priests, the office and ministry of the prophet was corrupted by greed—by prophecy for pay (kesep [TH3701, ZH4084]).
all of you claim to depend on the LORD. This claim was based on the idea of the divine presence symbolized by the Ark of the Covenant housed in Solomon’s Temple. The corrupt leadership of Jerusalem “justified their lives of lies with the half-truth that the Lord’s presence guaranteed the nation’s security, forgetting that God made his presence contingent on ethical behavior” (Alexander, Baker, and Waltke 1988:165; cf. Exod 17:7; 33:3, 5, 14-16; 34:9).
3:12 Mount Zion. This was the easternmost ridge of Jerusalem, adjacent to the Kidron Valley and the Gihon Spring. The “stronghold of Zion” was the name applied to the Jebusite city conquered by David (2 Sam 5:7). Zion was the site of Solomon’s Temple and became a synonym for the greater city of Jerusalem.
Jerusalem. God’s commitment to justice is such that he is willing to lay waste to his “hometown.” Jerusalem was sacked and Solomon’s Temple destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar and the Babylonians in 587 BC (cf. 2 Kgs 25).
COMMENTARY [Text]
The ministry of the Old Testament prophets was essentially one of revealing the nature and character of God, making him known to Israel and the nations (7:18; cf. Hos 6:3). Like Amos and Zechariah, Micah was concerned that the Israelites of his day know God both as creator and redeemer (cf. 1:2; 7:7, 15, 18). To that end, “Micah, along with other inspired men, puts aside his chaste veil of modesty in controversy” and boldly claims that he is empowered by the Spirit of Yahweh (3:8; Alexander, Baker, and Waltke 1988:164). Both Amos and Zechariah testified to the same work of the Spirit of God in their respective prophetic ministries (cf. Amos 3:8; Zech 4:6). In fact, the Spirit of God and the Old Testament prophetic ministry were vitally linked because “it is through the Spirit prophets are called, inspired, transported, motivated . . . to accomplish their difficult tasks within the nations” (Hildebrandt 1995:27). The work of the Spirit in the lives and ministries of the Old Testament prophets speaks to the very nature of God’s person as a “plurality” of being.
The Christian church has struggled with the mystery of the triune nature of the Godhead for twenty centuries. Yet, as Augustine knew, we must speak of the Trinity not because we are able to fathom it with overwhelming confidence, but because we cannot keep silence on a matter so crucial to biblical faith (Augustine Trinity 3.1.3.5). Although there is no explicit reference to the Trinity in the Old Testament, God is constant and consistent in who he is and how he reveals himself to humanity. The references to the Holy Spirit in the Old Testament speak to the plurality of the Godhead and point to the triune God revealed more explicitly in the New Testament (e.g., at the baptism of Jesus, Matt 3:13-17; in the benedictions of the Epistles, 2 Cor 13:14). According to Oden, nearly all classical Christian exegetes have argued that broadly scattered throughout the Old Testament are prophetic anticipations of triune teaching (1998:88-94). The recognition of the work of the Holy Spirit by Micah and other of the Minor Prophets reminds us that Yahweh is the triune God of the Old Testament, too, and that “the Holy Spirit has been eternally present throughout the whole historical process” (Oden 1998:183). The renewed interest in biblical theology with its increasing emphasis on the theological continuity between the old and new covenants has spawned a new appreciation for the work of the Holy Spirit in the Old Testament. A summary of his work includes:
- Presiding with God over the act of creation (Gen 1:2)
- Authoring and interpreting Scripture (3:8; Amos 3:8; Zech 7:12; cf. Acts 4:25)
- Convicting and illuminating people’s hearts (Neh 9:30-32; Ps 51)
- Regenerating God’s people (Ezek 36:26-27; John 3:5-8)
- Indwelling and giving spiritual renewal to God’s people (Ps 139:11-12; Isa 63:10-11; Hag 2:5; Zech 4:6)
- Sealing the relationship of the faithful with God (as perhaps in the oath of adoption; cf. Josh 4–5; Jer 31:33)
- Filling people for ministry, enabling them, gifting them for service (Exod 28:3; 31:3; Num 11:25; Judg 13:25; 1 Sam 16:13)
In light of the Holy Spirit’s activity in the Old Testament, the promise of Jesus to send another Advocate (John 14:16) to his disciples may be understood not so much as “another” Advocate but as an expanded role for the ministry of the Advocate (or Holy Spirit) already present in God’s “salvation history” (cf. Wood 1976; Hildebrandt 1995).
Oden says, “the triune understanding of God gives us a way of looking at the meaning of the whole of history, which, as the arena of God’s revelation, is the subject of theology. Trinity rehearses and embraces the entire story of salvation, attesting to the church’s attempt to view history synoptically, to try to grasp a unified picture of God in creation, redemption, and consummation” (1998:182). If Oden is correct in his assessment of the importance of the doctrine of the Trinity, it seems the Christian church needs to reintroduce the tenet in its theological catechism for two reasons. First, in a world awash in religious pluralism, the doctrine of the Trinity makes Christianity unique among the world’s religions. In a postmodern world given to the “experience of mystery,” what better distinctive to promote as one of the defining doctrines of Christianity? Second, like it or not, we find ourselves living in a society that craves a future without a past. Increasingly, North American culture is characterized by a “centripetal individualism” that scorns any communal record framed in the “past tense” because of its preoccupation with self-gratification in the “present tense.” A vibrant doctrine of the Trinity gives the church the only metanarrative that meaningfully addresses the human condition and its solution—the message of “Good News” the church must take to the world.