Translation & Sermon by
Nate Wilson for Christ The Redeemer Church of Manhattan, KS, 28
July,
2024
Omitting
greyed-out text should bring spoken presentation down to about 45
minutes.
Read my translation, starting at v.6: “Don’t y’all spout off,” they spout off. They will not spout-off about these things; humiliations will not be removed. Is it being said, O house of Jacob, “Has the Spirit of Yahweh become short-tempered, since these are His works?” Do my words not cause good with the one who walks right? And lately my people have been rising up to be an enemy; y’all have been stripping off the coat from off the clothing of those who pass by unsuspecting, turned back from war. Y’all have been evicting each woman of my people out of her luxurious home. Y’all have been taking my splendor away from her nursing children for a long time. Get yourselves up and get going, because this is not the resting-place. On account of {uncleanness}, it will experience pangs – indeed, a painful pang. {There is no} man who is walking spiritually; instead, falsehood deceives, “I will spout off for you about wine and about beer,” indeed, that will be the one to spout off for this people. I will surely gather each of you, Jacob; I will surely assemble a remnant of Israel. I will put it together like sheep in the enclosure – like a flock in the midst of its feed-lot; They will be excited because of the men. The Prevailer went up before their faces; they prevailed and passed through the gate. Then they went forth to it, and their king passed by before their faces, even Yahweh at their head.
“Here are two sins charged upon the people of Israel, and judgments denounced against them for each, such judgments as exactly answer the sin – persecuting God's prophets and oppressing God's poor. Persecuting God's prophets, suppressing and silencing them, is a sin that provokes God as much as anything, for it not only spits in the face of his authority over us, but spurns at the bowels of his mercy to us; for his sending prophets to us is a sure and valuable token of his goodwill.” ~M. Henry, 1714 AD
The Hebrew word tiyf occurs three times in v.6. Here, most English versions translate it “prophesy/preach/speak out,”
but it is not the usual word for speaking. It literally means to “spout/ooze/drip,” so I thought it would be appropriate to translate it according to our contemporary idiom of “spouting off.” It characterizes the speech as foolish.
And here, we have one group of folks telling another group of folks not to “spout off” while they themselves “spout” foolishly1.
Probably it is false prophets telling Micah and Isaiah and Hosea to shut up.
“[T]he wycked worlde alwayes resysted the spyryte of God and laboured to… stop the mouthes of the Prophetes, to putte them to shame as they supposed. Therfore saith Ierem[iah in chapter 20] ‘I am made a laughinge stocke all the daye longe... They dooe all deryde me because nowe a longe space I haue cryed agaynste theyr iniquitie and tolde them of destruccion… [T]hey wyl desyre Christ hym selfe to depart with the Gaderines... This is the condempnacion of the world, that light is come into the worlde, and men loue rather darckenes then lyghte. Therfore are they geuen ouer into myndes reprobate… Romains 1” ~Anthony Gilby, 1551 AD
We see an example of this around Micah’s time in Amos 7:10-17 “...Amaziah the priest of Bethel sent to Jeroboam king of Israel, saying, ‘Amos has conspired against you in the midst of the house of Israel. The land is not able to bear all his words. For thus Amos has said: “Jeroboam shall die by the sword, And Israel shall surely be led away captive From their own land.”’ Then Amaziah said to Amos: ‘Go, you seer! Flee... never again prophesy at Bethel, For it is the king's sanctuary, And it is the royal residence.’… Then the LORD… said to me, 'Now therefore, hear the word of the LORD: You say, “Do not prophesy against Israel, And do not spout against the house of Isaac.” Therefore thus says the LORD: ...You shall die in a defiled land; And Israel shall surely be led away captive From his own land.’”(NKJV)
They also did it to Isaiah: Isaiah 30:9-13 “For they are a rebellious people, false sons, children who will not choose to heed the Instruction of Yahweh, who say to the seers, ‘Stop seeing,’ and to the visionaries, ‘Stop envisioning for us what is right; speak to us about what is pleasant. Envision deceptions. Turn away from the way; turn aside from the path; cause the Holy One of Israel to cease from before our faces.’ Therefore, thus said the Holy One of Israel, ‘Because you reject this word and you trust in what is twisted and crooked, and you rely upon it, therefore this iniquity will happen for you like a crack running down and expanding in a high wall, which suddenly, in an instant it goes, it shatters her."” (NAW, cf. 29:10)
And false prophets were still around afterwards in Jeremiah’s time: Jeremiah 5:11-13 “For the house of Israel and the house of Judah Have dealt very treacherously with Me," says the LORD. They have lied2 about the LORD, And said, "It is not He. Neither will evil come upon us, Nor shall we see sword or famine.And the prophets become wind, For the word is not in them. Thus shall it be done to them…. 31 “The prophets prophesy falsely, And the priests rule by their own power; And My people love to have it so. But what will you do in the end?” (NKJV)
Even after Jesus’ resurrection and ascension, the high priests commanded Jesus’ disciples, “not to speak at all nor teach in the name of Jesus” (Acts 4:18, NKJV)
False prophets will continue to try to control and limit the speech of those who are called by God to speak what is true.
The second half of the verse gets interpreted a variety of ways:
Either it is a re-statement of the first phrase, “Don’t spout off… disgrace will never overtake us,” as the NIV and ESV interpreted it3, continuing the words of the fools who want true prophets like Micah to quit talking about their accountability to God.
Or, I think more likely, it is a prophecy by Micah concerning the humiliation that will happen to those who want to shut him up: “In the future, they will not spout off about these things; humiliations will not be removed.” This fits the Hebrew grammar forms more closely and seems to have been the interpretation of the KJV4.
For what it’s worth, I think the NASB’s interpretation5 that it is the true prophets saying that if they don’t speak out, there will be no chance for things to be made right, is the least likely because it requires adding the word “if” to make it work, but I do think they got the last phrase correct that “reproaches won’t be turned back.”
Later on Micah wrote in Micah 3:6 “Therefore you shall have night without vision, And you shall have darkness without divination; The sun shall go down on the prophets, And the day shall be dark for them.” (NKJV, cf. Amos 8:11)
Like v.6, Micah appears in v.7 to be quoting unfaithful Israelites who have opposed his messages.
The question “Should it be said” (or more literally, “Is it said?”) is interpreted by some6 to refer back to the end of v.6, “I can hardly believe my own ears when you say that God would never reproach us!” But I think it more likely refers to what follows, “Should there really be any question over the fact that God is reaching the end of His long fuse and is about to bring judgment?”
On the one hand, it is wrong to respond to a warning from God by blowing it off and denying that He would ever bring punishment.
Isaiah 59:1 “Look, Yahweh's hand is not too short to save, and His ear is not too heavy to hear.” (NAW)
“[T]he same spirite whych hath drawen foorthe the sweard agaynst the old world, the same spirit whych hath foughten wyth Pharao, and drowned hys army, which hath for theyr synnes dryuen forth the Cananees... and hathe not spared the kynges Saule and Ieroboam, the same spirit hath not hys arme shortned that for lacke of power, it shoulde be afrayed of the face of any man...” ~Anthony Gilby, 1551 AD
By the same token, this points out the ridiculousness of unfaithful people commanding God’s messengers to stop preaching. The Spirit of God is not constrained by the demands of the world; He will do whatever He pleases, and it is His good pleasure to communicate the Word of God!
On the other hand it is also wrong to respond to a warning from God with fatalistic hopelessness and say, “What an unfair God! All He wants to do is smite people.”
To this fatalistic and hopeless way of thinking about God’s judgment, Micah replies that God’s word does good to the one who walks uprightly.
It reminds us that when God warns us of judgment, that is not the time to stoically wait for the judgment to strike; that is the time to get right with God so that good rather than punishment comes from Him!
“Walks right” seems to be an abbreviation of the formula found many times in Kings and Chronicles7 “walk in the ways of God (as David did) and do what is right in the eyes of God, (including keeping God’s commands, statutes and judgments and not turning aside from them).” That is what is meant by that phrase “walks right/uprightly” – it is not a man-made standard of piety, but a reference to faithfully doing what the Bible says with your life, especially relying upon Christ to make you right.
“[I]f thou wylt heare the woorde of the Lorde, keepe it, and do it, thou shalte haue all the blessynges. But if thou wylte not heare the woorde of the Lorde to fulfyll all hys commaundementes, the cursses wryten in the law shal come vpon the. Deue. xxviii. Wherefore neyther the Iewes in theyr tyme, neyther we in our tyme may boast of the promyses, vnles in walkyng vprightly we wyl fulfil our condicions and couenantes.” ~Anthony Gilby, 1551 AD
And God’s word promises to do much good to us:
Psalm 19:7 “Yahweh's written-instruction has soul-returning integrity. Yahweh's testimony is trustworthy, causing the naïve to be wise.” (NAW)
Psalm 84:11 “For the LORD God is a sun and shield; The LORD will give grace and glory; No good thing will He withhold From those who walk uprightly.” (NKJV)
Psalm 119:68 “You are good, and do good; Teach me Your statutes.” (NKJV)
Proverbs 2:7 “He stores up sound wisdom for the upright; He is a shield to those who walk uprightly” (NKJV)
When the Holy Spirit lays it on someone’s heart to warn you about something, it is tempting to think, “Why is God always mad at me? I can’t do anything right! If this is what a relationship with God is like, then I want nothing of it,” or, on the other hand, it is tempting to fail to see God in it and to think, “This person is such a crank. All they do is complain. I don’t ever want to see this person again.”
Now sometimes folks are just cranky and complainy, and sometimes they blow small problems way out of proportion, but usually there is at least a grain of truth in what they say.
Every time we dismiss someone who takes the prophetic role of pointing out a sin in our life, we lose the opportunity to get right with God. And if God can’t get through to you that way, He will get through to you in more severe ways. So, open your heart to consider what God might be bringing to your attention when someone criticizes you for something, even if it feels harsh and unfair. Don’t “shoot the messenger!”
2 Thessalonians 2:9-12 “...they did not receive the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this reason God will send them strong delusion, that they should believe the lie, that they all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness.” (NKJV)
This broken relationship with God in the “false church” also shows up in broken relationships with other human beings, especially in selfishness that oppresses others. This is highlighted in verses 8-9, which opens with God’s observation that His covenant people had become “enemies” to Him and then observes how they were enemies to each other:
In the second half of v.8, both the subject (“y’all”) and the object (“those who pass by confidently/securely/carelessly/trustingly”) are plural, so it is hard to say whether the plural subject who is “returning from war,” is the “y’all” who “strip the coats off passers-by,” or whether it is the “confident passers-by” who are “returning from war/averse to war” and getting ambushed by local leaders. But either way, people are not at peace and they’re stealing from each other.
The rich “robes/coats” that are being “ripped off” of people could refer to petty theft or it could refer to the practice where a coat was accepted as collateral for a small business loan8, so that a poor man could borrow some money from a banker and leave his coat with the banker as surety. He would then try to make a living with the money he borrowed, but if he didn’t make enough to pay the banker back right away, the banker would keep his coat, and the poor man would have to spend the night shivering without his coat. In Exodus 22:25ff, God forbade that practice. The banker has no use for poor man’s coat; it’s just going to hang on a hook in his house all night, so might as well let the poor man have his coat back.
This stripping off of clothes could be referring to King Pekah of Israel’s war campaign on Judah in 2 Chronicles 28:8 “And the children of Israel carried away captive of their brethren two hundred thousand women, sons, and daughters; and they also took away much spoil from them, and brought the spoil to Samaria.” (NKJV)
Or it more likely refers to the corruption and greed and oppression going on in Judah itself, which Micah touches on throughout his book, such as in Micah 3:2-3 “You who hate good and love evil; Who strip the skin from My people , And the flesh from their bones” and Micah 7:2-3 “The faithful man has perished from the earth, And there is no one upright among men. They all lie in wait for blood; Every man hunts his brother with a net. That they may successfully do evil with both hands...” (NKJV)
Greed especially hurts the most vulnerable in society, like widows and orphans, so Micah mentions them in v.9.
Jesus called out abusive leaders for doing the same thing in His day: Matthew 23:14 “And woe to you scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, because y'all eat up the houses of the widows, while pretending to pray for a long [time]; on account of this, y'all will receive extra condemnation.” (NAW)
There is some question as to what God’s “splendor” is which was being taken away from God’s little children in the second half of v.9.
The only other place in the Old Testament where we see that phrase “my glory/splendor” is Ezekiel 16:14 “‘Your fame went out among the nations because of your beauty, for it was perfect through My splendor which I had bestowed on you,’ says the Lord GOD.” (NKJV)
Perhaps it’s the wealth and nice clothes which God had blessed the Jews with. This would make it parallel to the “house” in the first half of v. 9 with which God had also blessed His people, but which was also being confiscated by the wealthy Jews of Micah’s day, and which would be destroyed later by the Chaldean army.9
The last word in verse 9 is the word “forever,” but that Hebrew word doesn’t always mean literally “forever;” it often means “for a long time” or “for time out of mind,” or “permanently,” and I think that’s the sense here10.
But notice God’s sense of ownership over His people – He calls them “my people” in v.8, and “the women of my people” in v.9. Even though He is bringing warning and punishment to them, He hasn’t abandoned them; He hasn’t quit being their God. He is still seeking their best even in the midst of discipline, and He is still that way with us!
But discipline is necessary for those who are rebellious, so God lays out what His discipline will be in v.10: Israel would lose their “resting place,” and they would experience the pain of being “destroyed” as a nation.
While the Hebrews were wandering in the wilderness after escaping from slavery in Egypt, God had told them in Deuteronomy 12:9-11 that the Promised Land would be a resting-place for them: “...you have not come to the rest and the inheritance which the LORD your God is giving you. But when you cross over the Jordan and dwell in the land which the LORD your God is giving you to inherit, and He gives you rest from all your enemies round about, so that you dwell in safety, then there will be the place where the LORD your God chooses to make His name abide…” (NKJV)
And indeed, the Promised Land had been a “resting place” for the people of God for hundreds of years, but it could no longer be a place they could stay settled in, because their sin had defiled it.
God, in His justice, had decreed that a people that defiles its land with idols, adultery, and murder should be removed from its land, just like what happened to the Canaanites before Israel on that same land.
Leviticus 18:25 “...the land became unclean, so I brought accountability upon it for its iniquity, so that the land vomited out its residents.” (NAW)
God said in Numbers 35:34 “Therefore do not defile the land which you inhabit, in the midst of which I dwell; for I the LORD dwell among the children of Israel.” (NKJV)
But, according to Psalm 106:38 the Israelites “shed innocent blood, The blood of their sons and daughters, Whom they sacrificed to the idols of Canaan; And the land was polluted with blood.” (NKJV)
So, Micah’s fellow-prophet observed in Isaiah 24:5 “The earth lies defiled under its inhabitants; for they have passed over the Torah, changed statute, broken the eternal covenant.” (NAW)
The reason Micah gives in v.10 for Israel losing the Promised Land is their “uncleanness/defilement.”
Ezekiel11 mentioned “uncleanness/defilement” in his book more often than it is mentioned in any other Bible book except for Leviticus. Ezekiel pointed out that Idolatry, Adultery, and Murder are the three sins which most-particularly “defile/make unclean” and which were the basis for God’s judgment upon Israel. For instance: Ezekiel 36:17-19 “Son of man, when the house of Israel dwelt in their own land, they defiled it by their own ways and deeds... for the blood they had shed on the land, and for their idols with which they had defiled it. So I scattered them among the nations, and they were dispersed throughout the countries; I judged them according to their ways and their deeds.” (NKJV)
So now Micah says, they will have to “get up and go” into exile in Babylon.
Just as these wealthy landowners had evicted women from their homes, now they, in turn would be evicted from their land.
In fact, the very command, “Get up and get going” may have been the very words which the abusive landowners had said to the widows and orphans in the previous verse, and, in an exact turn of justice, God says the same thing to the landlords! (Waltke)
But there is a resting place still available for God’s people. The Promised Land12 was never intended to be the ultimate resting place. It was meant to point to a more permanent rest, and the Gospels tell us where that ultimate resting place is, using the very same Greek word used to translate the Hebrew word for “resting-place” in Micah 2:10: Matthew 11:29 “Start taking my yoke upon yourselves and start learning from me, because I am gentle and humble in the heart, and you will find rest to your souls.” (NAW) Jesus the Messiah is our resting-place.
The last phrase in verse 10 has a root word that is repeated twice in Hebrew: word “destroy/experience pangs.”
This is the just punishment for not loving God and not loving your neighbor.
Proverbs 13:13 “He who despises the word will be destroyed, But he who fears the commandment will be rewarded.” (NKJV, cf. Psalm 7:14)
In v.11 we see the debauched condition of these Jewish leaders more clearly:
There are several words in this verse, the meaning of which is not commonly agreed upon: The first word is one of them. The Enlightenment-era Masoretic Hebrew edition used as the basis of most modern English Bibles starts with the word “if,” but the oldest-known Hebrew manuscript and the oldest Greek and Latin versions from before the Enlightenment all start with the word “no.”
We know from the rest of Micah and Isaiah that falsehood was not a hypothetical “if,” but a common problem, for instance,
Micah 7:2 “The faithful man has perished from the earth, And there is no one upright among men…” (NKJV)
Isaiah 64:7 “And there is no one calling in your name, stirring himself to get a strong grip in you…” (NAW)
But the gist is not really different whether you start with the word “no” or the word “if.”
The next word in v.11 that is ambiguous is the word ruach, which can mean “wind,” or “spirit.” But again, the meaning is not substantially different between a man who is not walking after the Holy Spirit13 and a man who is chasing after the wind14. Both are lost.
The subject of the verb “lies/deceives” could be the masculine singular “falsehood” or the masculine singular “man.” Either way, deception is spreading.
About a hundred years before Micah, King Ahab of Israel and King Jehoshaphat of Judah had decided to go on a war campaign together on the Eastern border of Israel, so they consulted with the prophets and wise men as part of their planning process. Well, all Ahab had in his court were false prophets, and they all predicted success in the campaign, but Jehoshaphat was suspicious. They seemed too much like “Yes-men,” so he asked Ahab if there were any true prophets they could consult, and that ended up in a face-off between Michaiah (the true prophet of God) and all the false prophets. He called them all liars, so they threw him in jail – until his prophecy of God’s punishment actually came true!
But false prophets have remained a problem up to the present.
Jeremiah 6:13-14 "Because from the least of them even to the greatest of them, Everyone is given to covetousness; And from the prophet even to the priest, Everyone deals falsely. They have also healed the hurt of My people slightly, Saying, `Peace, peace!’ When there is no peace…. 23:14 “Also I have seen a horrible thing in the prophets of Jerusalem: They commit adultery and walk in lies; They also strengthen the hands of evildoers, So that no one turns back from his wickedness. All of them are like Sodom to Me, And her inhabitants like Gomorrah.” (NKJV)
The word here in v.11 for “prophesy/speak/ preach/spout off” and “prophet/spokesman/ preacher/one who spouts off” is the same word we encountered back in v.6.
The word sheqer refers to some kind of alcoholic beverage, but there is no consensus as to whether it is beer, liquor, or some other “strong drink.”
(The poetry in Micah comes through here because, in Hebrew, this word for “alcohol” sounds like the word in Hebrew for “falsehood.”)
Alchoholism was apparently a big problem in Bible times:
Isaiah 28:7 “And also these reel with wine and with alcohol they stagger: Priest and prophet reel with alcohol; they are swallowed from the wine. They stagger from the alcohol, they reel while seeing; they waver in judgment.” (NAW)
Amos 2:12 “But you gave the Nazirites [who were not supposed to drink wine] wine to drink, And commanded the prophets saying, ‘Do not prophesy!’” (NKJV)
And it’s still a problem today, when there are a lot more different kinds of drugs in addition to alcohol being abused. I remember a church pastor introducing another church pastor to me many years ago with the words, “He can really hold his liquor!” But that’s not what preachers should be known for!
Micah says at the end of v. 11 that “[S]uch a prophet as this is a man after their own heart, who will tell them that there is neither sin nor danger in the wicked course of life they lead.” ~Matthew Henry, 1714 AD
We still need to be careful today to distinguish between true and false prophecy.
“A badge of false teachers is their distorted preaching on only God’s love and never on his wrath and judgment. Preaching half-truths, they lead the populace to death. True prophets must preach the whole counsel of God, for from now on I AM of Hosts will not raise up military geniuses like Joshua and David to establish an external kingdom, but prophets, who, through the doubled-edged sword of preaching, cut out spiritual rot and convert the hearts of men, thereby establishing an everlasting spiritual kingdom… True prophets are distinguished from counterfeits by their message... they insist on a loyalty to I AM that issues in keeping his commands (Deut 13:2–6[1–5])...” ~Bruce Waltke, 2007 AD
A common false prophecy today is called the “prosperity gospel,” which basically teaches that it is God’s will to make church-goers rich, so if you want to become wealthy and successful, you should become a Christian, and if you are a Christian and you aren’t rich yet, then you just need to exercise more faith.
In many ways it is like what the prophets of Micah’s day were saying, focusing only on the covenant blessings15 (highlighting only the material ones and ignoring the spiritual ones) and ignoring the covenantal shape of a relationship with God.
Romans 16:18 “For those who are such do not serve our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly, and by smooth words and flattering speech deceive the hearts of the simple.” (NKJV)
1 John 4:1 “Loved ones, do not believe in every spirit, but rather, judge the spirits whether they are out of God, because many false prophets have come out into the world.” (NAW)
2 Peter 2:1 “Nevertheless, there were also false prophets among the people, as also among y'all there will be false teachers – those who will slip destructive heresies in, even denying the Master Who bought them, thus bringing upon themselves sudden destruction.” (NAW)
In v.12, God begins to speak again in the first person, declaring what He will do in the future to and for His people.
It is not clear to me whether the fulfillment of this prophecy is in the siege of Jerusalem under Nebuchadnezzar or in the reconstruction of Jerusalem under Nehemiah and the New Covenant people. It almost seems purposefully ambiguous so as to refer to both at the same time.
Most folks think that this is a positive reunion and a positive hubbub16,
such as it is in Ruth 1:19 “Now the two of them [Ruth and her mother-in-law] went until they came to Bethlehem. And it happened, when they had come to Bethlehem, that all the city was excited because of them; and the women said, ‘Is this Naomi?’” (NKJV)
Applying it to Micah’s prophecy, it could describe a remnant returning from Babylonian exile and being welcomed with excitement as the population of Jerusalem swelled once again under Nehemiah’s leadership and the New Covenant promises of Jeremiah 31 began to unfold.17
The verb for God “gathering/assembling” His people is indeed often used to describe bringing them back out of exile to re-form the nation of Israel under Ezra and Nehemiah, for instance Micah 4:6-7 "In that day," says the LORD, "I will assemble the lame, I will gather the outcast And those whom I have afflicted; I will make the lame a remnant, And the outcast a strong nation; So the LORD will reign over them in Mount Zion From now on, even forever.” (NKJV, cf. Jeremiah 23:3, 30:3, 31:10)
But the noise and excitement of the throng at the end of the verse could be negative. The “gathering” could be within the walls of Jerusalem in the context of a siege, and the “remnant” could be all the folks who were not massacred by the Assyrian and Chaldean armies in their marches through Israel and Judah. The refugees from the surrounding area who fled to Jerusalem could be pictured as milling around inside the walls, anxious about the foreign army with all its “men” camped outside18.
The Hebrew word paratz translated “breaker” in v.12, has a wide range of meaning; it can also mean to “prosper” or to “prevail.”
Verse 12 passage speaks of a successful conqueror breaking down a city gate and leading His people through it. Then the second half speaks of people going out to the same gate and watching their king pass by with God at the front.
Bible scholars basically fall into two camps here, with some seeing it as a group of people breaking into a city, and others seeing it as a group of people breaking out of a city.
The people who see it as an army breaking into a city generally see the fulfillment of this in Nebuchadnezzar’s conquest of Jerusalem in 586 BC or in Zerubbabel’s reconstruction of Jerusalem in 538 BC, but people who hold this view have a hard time explaining the people going “out” of the gate and who the king might be.
Conversely, those who see it as people breaking out of a walled city see the fulfillment of it in Hezekiah’s withstanding of Sennacherib’s siege in 701 BC or the Jews leaving exile in Babylon around 539BC, but they have trouble explaining how anybody actually breached a gate.
There are an additional few who see people both going in and coming out. I think that the second group of people must have been inside the city, because they “come out to the gate” after the first group has “come in to the gate.” I think that they must be “coming out” of their homes (located inside the city) out to the plaza at the gate of their city to watch the conqueror – their new king – enter19.
There are a couple of points in scripture20 where it speaks of someone breaking through the wall or gate of Jerusalem:
2 Kings 14:13 Early in Micah’s ministry, Joash, a/k/a “Jehoash king of Israel captured Amaziah king of Judah, at Beth Shemesh; and he went to Jerusalem, and broke down the wall of Jerusalem from the Gate of Ephraim to the Corner Gate-- four hundred cubits.” (NKJV||2 Chronicles 25:23) – But Joash didn’t become King of Jerusalem, so that doesn’t seem to fit.
King Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon also successfully breached the walls and gate of Jerusalem over a century after Micah: Nehemiah 1:3 “...The wall of Jerusalem is also broken down, and its gates are burned with fire.” (NKJV, cf. Psalm 80:13, 89:31)
Nehemiah and Zerubbabel also led Jews into Jerusalem after the Babylonian exile:
Isaiah 52:12 “For it will not be in haste that y'all go out, and you will not proceed by fleeing, for Yahweh will proceed before your face… 45:2 “I myself will go before your face and level the stacks, I will shatter doors of bronze, and the bolts of iron I will cut… 49:25 “For thus says Yahweh, ‘Even the captives of the mighty will be taken and the prey of the ruthless one will be rescued, and I myself will fight against those who fight against you, and I myself will cause to save your children’ ...54:3 “For right and left you will burst forth, and your seed will take over the nations! And they will cause desolate cities to be inhabited.” (NAW)
And I can’t help but see the triumphal entry of Jesus, first into Jerusalem at the Passover, then at His ascension into the gates of heaven, “leading captivity captive/with captives in his train,” (Eph. 4:8), as a fulfillment of this prophecy too!21
I believe that the prophets often have multiple levels of fulfillment, so I have no problem seeing all of these past and future events in a kernel in Micah’s prophecy.
C.F. Keil commented, “Just as Jehovah went before Israel as the angel of the Lord in the pillar of cloud and fire at the exodus from Egypt (Ex. 13:21), so at the future redemption of the people of God will Jehovah go before them as King, and lead the procession (see Isa. 52:12).”
That is certainly a lot of information to take in, but basically we see two sorts of folks in this passage:
those who walk in God’s righteousness, who speak His word, who walk with the Holy Spirit, who assemble with God’s people and are God’s people and follow the headship of the Lord – the true church,
and the false church, those who spout off, who shut down those who speak God’s word, who criticize God and rise up against God as enemies, who steal from others and oppress the vulnerable, who take away God’s glory and take it for themselves, who engage in falsehood and deception and alcohol abuse.
If you are part of the true church, the false ones will persecute you and speak ill of you and try to shut you down. Jesus warned His disciples this would happen. But our job is to keep being faithful to follow Jesus, our good Shepherd, and to keep sharing the truth like Micah did.
DouayB (Vulgate) |
LXXC |
BrentonD (Vaticanus) |
KJVE |
NAW |
Masoretic HebrewF |
6
Speak
ye not, saying:
|
6 μὴ κλαίετεG δάκρυσιν, μηδὲ δακρυέτωσαν ἐπὶ τούτοις· οὐ γὰρ ἀπώσεται ὀνείδη. |
6
Weep
not [with]
tears... neither let |
6
Prophesy
ye not, say
they to them
that prophesy:
they shall not prophesy
to the |
6 “Don’t y’all spout off,” they spout off. They will not spout-off about these things; humiliations will not be removed. |
(ו) אַל תַּטִּפוּH יַטִּיפוּןI לֹא יַטִּפוּJ לָאֵלֶּה לֹא יִסַּגK כְּלִמּוֹת. |
7
The house of Jacob X
sai |
7
ὁ λέγ |
7
who
sa |
7
O
thou
that art
|
7 Is it being said, O house of Jacob, “Has the Spirit of Yahweh become short-tempered, since these are His works?” Do my words not cause good with the one who walks right? |
(ז) הֶאָמוּרO בֵּית יַעֲקֹב הֲקָצַרP רוּחַ יְהוָה אִםQ אֵלֶּה R מַעֲלָלָיוS הֲלוֹא דְבָרַי יֵיטִיבוּ עִם הַיָּשָׁר הוֹלֵךְ. |
8
But my people, on
the contrary,
are risen up as an enemy: you
have taken away
the cloak
off from the coat:
and them that passed harmless
you
have turned
|
8
καὶ
ἔμπροσθενT
ὁ λαός μου εἰς ἔχθραν ἀντέστη·
κατέναντι
τῆς |
8
Even beforetime
my people withstood [him]
as an enemy against his |
8
Even of
late
my people is risen up as an enemy: ye
pull off the
robe
|
8 And lately my people have been rising up to be an enemy; y’all have been stripping off the coat from off the clothing of those who pass by unsuspecting, turned back from war. |
(ח) וְאֶתְמוּלX עַמִּי Yלְאוֹיֵב יְקוֹמֵם מִמּוּל שַׂלְמָה אֶדֶרZ תַּפְשִׁטוּןAA מֵעֹבְרִים בֶּטַח שׁוּבֵיAB מִלְחָמָה. |
9
You have cast out the women of my people from their house[s,
in which they took]
delight:
you have taken my praise
forever from |
9
διὰ τοῦτο |
9
The |
9
The women of my people have ye cast out from their pleasant
house[s];
from |
9 Y’all have been evicting each woman of my people out of her luxurious home. Y’all have been taking my splendor away from her nursing children for a long time. |
(ט) נְשֵׁי עַמִּי תְּגָרְשׁוּןAF מִבֵּית תַּעֲנֻגֶיהָAG מֵעַל עֹלָלֶיהָAH תִּקְחוּ הֲדָרִי לְעוֹלָם. |
10
Arise ye, and depart, for there is no rest [here
for you]. For
that |
10
ἀνάστηθιAI
καὶ πορεύου, ὅτι οὐκ ἔστιν [σοι]
αὕτη ἡ ἀνάπαυσις ἕνεκεν |
10
Arise thou, and depart; for this is not [thy]
rest because of |
10 Arise ye, and depart; for this is not your rest: because it is polluted, it shall destroy you, even with a sore destruction. |
10 Get yourselves up and get going, because this is not the resting-place. On account of {uncleanness}, it will experience pangs – indeed, a painful pang. |
(י) קוּמוּ וּלְכוּ כִּי לֹא זֹאת הַמְּנוּחָה בַּעֲבוּר טָמְאָהAK תְּחַבֵּלAL וְחֶבֶלAM נִמְרָץ.AN |
11
[Would
God I were]
not a man that |
οὐδενὸς
|
no
one |
11 If a man walking [in the] spirit and falsehood do lie, saying, I will prophesy unto thee of wine and of strong drink; he shall even be the prophet of this people. |
11 {There is no} man who is walking spiritually; instead, falsehood deceives, “I will spout off for you about wine and about beer,” indeed, that will be the one to spout off for this people. |
(יא) לוּAP אִישׁ הֹלֵךְ רוּחַ וָשֶׁקֶר כִּזֵּב אַטִּףAQ לְךָ לַיַּיִן וְלַשֵּׁכָר וְהָיָה מַטִּיף הָעָם הַזֶּה. |
12
I will X assemble
and gather together all of thee, O Jacob: I will X
bring together [the]
remnant of Israel, I will put |
12
συναγ-όμενος συναχθήσεται
Ιακωβ |
12
Jacob shall |
12
I will surely assemble, O Jacob, all of thee; I will surely
gather [the]
remnant of Israel; I will put |
12 I will surely gather each of you, Jacob; I will surely assemble a remnant of Israel. I will put it together like sheep in the enclosure – like a flock in the midst of its feed-lot; They will be excited because of the men. |
(יב) אָסֹף אֶאֱסֹףAU יַעֲקֹב כֻּלָּךְ קַבֵּץ אֲקַבֵּץ שְׁאֵרִית יִשְׂרָאֵל AVיַחַד אֲשִׂימֶנּוּ כְּצֹאן בָּצְרָהAW כְּעֵדֶר בְּתוֹךְ הַדָּבְרוֹAX תְּהִימֶנָהAY מֵאָדָם.AZ |
13
For he
shall go up that shall
open [the
way]
before them: they shall
|
13
|
through
the
breach
made before
them
13
the[y]
have
broken
through,
and passed the gate, and gone out by it: and their king has gone
out before them, and the Lord |
13 The breaker is come up before them: they have broken up, and have passed through the gate, and are gone out by it: and their king shall pass before them, and the LORD on the head of them. |
13 The Prevailer went up before their faces; they prevailed and passed through the gate. Then they went forth to it, and their king passed by before their faces, even Yahweh at their head. |
(יג) עָלָהBB הַפֹּרֵץ לִפְנֵיהֶם פָּרְצוּ וַיַּעֲבֹרוּ שַׁעַר וַיֵּצְאוּ בוֹ וַיַּעֲבֹרBC מַלְכָּם לִפְנֵיהֶם BDוַיהוָה בְּרֹאשָׁםBE. |
1Calvin suggested a modified version of this with the voice of God in the second phrase saying, “Nay, but they shall distil; ye forbid, but it is not in your power; I have sent them!” He then went on to suggest instead that the second instance of the word was a “relative” meaning “ye that prophesy,” an interpretation supported by Newcome, but not by the Hebrew grammar.
2כּחשׁ - a synonym to כּזב in Mic. 2:11.
3Following Kimchi, Ewald, Hitzig, Maurer, Caspari
4Calvin commented that “This is the true meaning,” and Matthew Henry and Bruce Waltke also interpreted it this way.
5Following Michaelis, Hengstenberg, and Keil
6Including M. L. Malbim,
71 Kings 11:33 & 38, 14:8, 22:43, 2 Kings 22:2, 2 Chron 20:32 & 34:2
8Kimchi, Cohen. Waltke instead saw it is figurative language describing unjust court rulings, but that doesn’t seem to explain the vivid Hebrew vocabulary having to do with clothes.
9This view was held by Metsudath David, Calvin, Henderson, and Waltke. Alternately, Matthew Henry suggested that it was the political and economic freedom which the children of Israel enjoyed. On the other hand, Gilby (and some others) argued that the splendor was the children themselves, but I don’t see how that can make sense: “From their children ye take away my ?children?.”
10“The
word לעלום,
laoulam, designates the continuance of their crimes, as
though he had said, that they were cruel without ever showing any
repentance.” ~Calvin
“...the oppressors designed their
captivity should be perpetual.” ~ M. Henry (Waltke concurred)
11Ezek. 4:14; 5:11; 9:7; 14:11; 18:6, 11, 15; 20:7, 18, 26, 30-31, 43; 22:3-4, 11; 23:7, 13, 17, 30, 38; 33:26; 36:17-18; 37:23; 43:7-8; 44:25
12cf. Waltke: “A person enters into the “holy land,” a type of the Christian’s position in Jesus Christ (cf. Hebrews 4), only by faith, as Israel learned at Kadesh-barnea (Numbers 13–14) and Ai (Joshua 7), and he stays in that land only through persevering faith (Leviticus 26; Deut 7:1–5; 28). Those bearing merely the external marks of faith, such as circumcision or baptism, in contrast to the inward mark of a circumcised heart and baptism of spirit, will be banished to eternal judgment, even as Israel was in Micah’s time.”
13This was the interpretation of the Vulgate, LXX, Peshitta, Targum, Geneva, KJV, NKJV. Calvin made the interesting comment, “I doubt not, but that to ‘walk in the spirit’ was then a common mode of speaking, to set forth the exercise of the prophetic office.”
14This was the interpretation of Kimchi, Keil, Waltke, AJV, NASB, ESV, NET. (NIV and NLT omitted this word.)
15Such as Lev. 26:4-5, 10, Deut. 28:4, 11, Joel 2:24 & 3:18.
16Including Abarbanel, Targums, Henry, Marckius, Newcome, Henderson, Keil, Cohen, and Waltke. (Ibn Ezra, Michaelis, and Ewald oddly, saw it as more of the false prophets’ messages of false peace. Of this, Keil commented that “I will gather the remnant of Israel” “presupposes the carrying away into exile,” a fact the false prophets would not have admitted, and, “Micah could not possibly introduce a false prophet as speaking in the name of Jehovah…”
17“[M]ost scholars contend that the prophecy is exilic or postexilic. In their view the sheepfolds/city walls symbolize captivity in Babylonia, and Yahweh will break open a way for the exiles and will lead them in a new exodus back to Judah.” ~Waltke
18This was the position of Ephraem Syrus, Theodoret, Kimchi, Calvin, Scott, Grotius, Tarnovius, Owen of Thrussington, and A. van Hoonacker.
19Another possibility suggested by John Calvin was that the conqueror is leading all the folks in the city out as captives, with the king of Jerusalem out front, but this doesn’t seem to fit with the presence of the Lord at their head or with the people and the king conducting themselves to the gate. Another interpretation advanced by Bruce Waltke in his recent commentary combines the two elements of doom and salvation in this prophecy by referring it to the unsuccessful siege of Jerusalem by the Assyrian army late in Micah’s lifetime, but this doesn’t seem to fit the plurality that “broke through” and the emphasis on “going out” of the gate.
201 Chronicles 13:2-3 could also be considered, since it uses this word in the sense of David “sending out” a bunch of messengers to gather Israel to bring the ark into Jerusalem, but this would be a bit anachronistic, and furthermore, that incident ended in God “breaking out” against Uzzah and the parade being aborted.
21“[T]hys
texte is for the moost part vnderstande as a Prophecye of the
commynge of Christe, and it maye wel so be, but I had rather so to
expounde the prophetes, that they myght seme to hange together by
comelye ordre, then to teare them in peaces.” ~Anthony
Gilby
“[T]he ‘breaker through,’ who goes before them, is
not Jehovah, but, as the counterpart of Moses the leader of Israel
out of Egypt... Zerubbabel, and in the highest sense Christ, who
opens the prison-doors, and redeems the captives of Zion (vid. Isa.
42:7).” ~Keil
AMy original chart includes the following copyrighted English versions: NASB, NIV, ESV, Bauscher’s version of the Peshitta, and Cathcart’s version of the Targums, but I remove these columns from my public, non-copyrighted edition of this chart so as not to infringe on their copyrights. NAW is my translation. When a translation adds words not in the Hebrew text, but does not indicate it has done so by the use of italics or greyed-out text, I put the added words in [square brackets]. When one version chooses a wording which is different from all the other translations, I underline it. When a version chooses a translation which, in my opinion, either departs too far from the root meaning of the Hebrew word or departs too far from the grammar form of the original text, I use strikeout. And when a version omits a word which is in the original text, I insert an X. I also place an X at the end of a word if the original word is plural but the English translation is singular. I occasionally use colors to help the reader see correlations between the various editions and versions when there are more than two different translations of a given word. The only known Dead Sea Scrolls containing Micah 2 are 4Q82 (containing parts of verses 3-4 and dated between 30-1 BC), The Nahal Hever Greek scroll (containing parts of vs. 7-8 and dated around 25BC), and the Wadi Muraba’at Scroll (containing parts of verses 1-13 and dated around 135 AD). Where the DSS is legible and in agreement with the MT, the MT is colored purple. Where the DSS supports the LXX/Vulgate/Peshitta with omissions or text not in the MT, I have highlighted with yellow the LXX and its translation into English, and where I have accepted that into my NAW translation, I have marked it with {pointed brackets}.
BDouay Old Testament first published by the English College at Douay, A.D. 1609, Revised and Diligently Compared with the Latin Vulgate by Bishop Richard Challoner, Published in 1582, 1609, 1752. As published on E-Sword.
C“Septuagint” Greek Old Testament, edited by Alfred Rahlfs. Published in 1935. As published on E-Sword.
DEnglish translation of the Septuagint by Sir Lancelot Charles Lee Brenton, 1851, “based upon the text of the Vaticanus” but not identical to the Vaticanus. As published electronically by E-Sword.
E1769 King James Version of the Holy Bible; public domain. As published electronically by E-Sword.
FFrom
the Wiki Hebrew Bible
https://he.wikisource.org/wiki/%D7%9E%D7%99%D7%9B%D7%94_%D7%91/%D7%A9%D7%95%D7%A8%D7%95%D7%AA.
DSS text comes from https://downloads.thewaytoyahuweh.com
GAquilla (σταλαζετε “drip” – a literal rendering of the MT word) and Symmachus (επιτιματε “rebuke”) further illustrate the ambivalence of the ancient manuscripts on how to interpret this word. In v.11, LXX renders it ἐστάλαξέν (“dropped”). Also, in Amos 7:16, where the same Hebrew root appears, the LXX translated it ὀχλαγωγήσῃς (“crowd-leaders”).
HThis triple instance of this verb is poetic. It occurs again in v.11 and only about a dozen more times in the Bible, half of which denote a physical liquid dripping down, and the other half of which denote the utterance of words.
IWaltke commented that this paragogic nun ending may denote “certainty.”
JThis is a simple imperfect indicative which normally indicates a future event, but contemporary English versions interpret it as an imperative in parallel with the first part of this verse.
KThis Hebrew root נסג means “remove/turn back,” but its homonym נשׂג means “take/overtake.” The NASB followed the LXX, MT, and DSS with the former, but Geneva, KJV, NIV, and ESV followed the Latin and Syriac versions with the latter. Matthew Henry also sided with the latter, commenting, “As it is the work of magistrates, so it is also of ministers, to put men to shame when they do amiss (Jdg.18:7), that, being made ashamed of their folly, they may not return again to it; but, when God gives men up to be impudent and shameless in sin, he says to his prophets, They are joined to idols; let them alone.” Keil and Waltke sided with the latter, Keil insisting that the verb only means “remove,” and Waltke adding that the verb should be interpreted in the middle voice (“it will not turn itself aside”). There is no singular subject explicitly stated in this verse to go with this singular verb, but perhaps the plural “these things” and the plural “humiliations/disgraces” is conceived of as one comprehensive problem that’s not going to go away.
LAquilla and Symmachus both corrected the Greek to μου (“my”), which is the way the MT reads.
MAquilla and Symmachus both rendered this word with the synonym αγαθυναν (“good”), and it appears that the Nahal Hever did the same.
NThe word “not” is not in the LXX, N.H. or in Aq. or Sym.’s Greek translations, or in the Greek text Brenton translated from. It appears to just be an editorial insertion by Brenton in his English translation.
OThis is a participle in Qal passive form: “that which is said” (although the Vulgate and LXX strangely interpreted it as active), prefixed by what the MT pointing (and the NASB, NIV, ESV, Targum, and Hitzig) interpreted as an interrogative, but which the LXX and KJV interpreted as a definite article (which would be another valid interpretation of the unpointed Hebrew text), meanwhile, Ewald, Umbreit, and Caspari interpreted as an exclamation, and Keil interpreted as a vocative (equating the “speakers” with the “house of Jacob”). The Peshitta interpreted it as as a conjunction “for/that,” and the Vulgate ignored it. The lack of consensus historically makes any interpretation somewhat tentative.
PIn almost every instance of this word, it means “harvest/reap/mow,” but in Job 21:4, Numbers 21:4, Judges 10:16 & 16:16, and Zech 11:8, where the subject is “spirit” or “soul,” it is interpreted to mean “get angry.” Cf. three other passages using the same verb, but with the arm of the LORD as the subject, “Is the arm of the LORD too short?” (Num. 11:23, Isaiah 50:2 & 59:11).
QNASB, NIV, ESV, and Waltke considered this an interrogative (which is definition “f” in BDB’s lexicon). LXX interprets it as conditional (which is definition “a” in BDB, but makes less sense). Peshitta interpreted the Targum as the preposition “in” (not listed in BDB for this Hebrew word), and Vulgate, Keil, Cathcart, and others interpreted it as “or” (which is also not listed in BDB as a meaning for this word). I suggest temporal “since” (definition “e” in BDB).
RWaltke explained “these” as referring to God’s judgments being announced by Micah.
S“Are
these his works? that is, do you lead a life, and form your conduct
according to the law laid down by him? But as your life does not in
any degree correspond with what God requires, it is no wonder that
the prophets handle you so roughly.” ~Calvin
Matthew Henry’s
suggestion that “his” refers to Jacob instead of to the Holy
Spirit works in terms of intelligible meaning in English, but the
Hebrew grammar does not support it.
“Or are these ('ēlleh,
the punishments threatened) His deeds? i.e., is He accustomed, or
does He only like to punish? The… refutation, follows in the next
question...” ~Keil
TNahal Hever supports the LXX here, but Aquilla (συναντιω) and Symmachus (προ μιας) chose synonyms which more clearly denoted time rather than physical position.
UWhat is legible of this word in the Nahal Hever Dead Sea scroll is the last three syllables of the Greek word for “outer cloak” περιβολαιον (the grey letters being the illegible part of the word), comporting with MT rather than LXX. Symmachus also translated more like the MT, but he used the synonym ‘ιματιων (“garment”).
VNahal Hever is partly illegible, but it could support the MT with a 2p verb ending (“you”) instead of 3p “they.” Symmachus definitely rendered it with the 2 pl. ending like the M.T.
WNahal Hever reads instead επιστραφησονται (“he will be returned”) – the grey letters actually being illegible.
XOnly here and 1 Sam. 4:7; 10:11; 14:21; 19:7; 2 Sam. 5:2; Ps. 90:4; Isa. 30:33.
YWaltke argued that this lamed preposition is a comparative (“like”), but it could just as well be an expression of “becoming.”
ZOnly here and Zech 11:13, where it is translated more according to its root meaning of “glory.”
AAWaltke commented that this paragogic nun “signifies frequency.”
ABSince both the subject (“y’all”) and the object (“those who pass by confidently/securely/carelessly/trustingly”) are plural, it is hard to say whether the plural subject who is “being returned from war” is the “y’all” who “strip the coats off passers-by” or whether it is the “confident passers-by” who are “being turned from war/averse to war” and getting ambushed by local leaders. Rashi interpreted it the latter way, describing the victims of these robberies as being like men returning home after losing a war, stripped of everything, but I would have expected a different Hebrew verb if these were escapees. Calvin interpreted it as describing the attitude of victorious soldiers who take all the spoil they want, and Waltke seemed to agree that it denoted them being in a secure situation. Owen of Thrussington followed Marckius and Henry with “averse to war” (and this was followed by BDB, Keil, and Waltke) describing the carefree people being robbed.
ACLXX reads as though the Hebrew word were נשׂיא (“high-ups/leaders”) rather than נשׂי (“women of”).
ADLXX reads as though the Hebrew were מפעלה instead of עללה.
AEThe MT הדרי means “my splendor,” but the LXX reads as though the Hebrew were הרי (“mountains of”).
AFWaltke labeled this a “frequentive” paragogic nun.
AGOnly here and Prov. 19:10; Eccl. 2:8; Cant. 7:7; and Mic. 1:16 (“delightful children”).
AHThis literally means “suckling” and is only found in the peri-exilic writings: here, Ps. 137:9; Jer. 6:11; 9:20; Lam. 1:5; 2:19; 4:4; Joel 2:16; and Nah. 3:10. Walte defined it as “dependent children.”
AILXX renders this command in the singular, but Aq, Sym, and others rendered it plural (“y’all”) like the MT did.
AJThis mistranslation appears to be an understandable result of seeing the root of מרצ (“pain”) as רצ (“run”).
AKKJV and NAS follow the MT pointing as a verb (“she became unclean”), but NIV & ESV follow the Vulgate, LXX, Peshitta, and Targums which all interpreted it as a noun (“uncleanness/defilement”).
ALNASB & ESV followed Keil in his assertion that this “is to be taken in a relative sense ‘which brings destruction,’ and is strengthened … with an explanatory ו...” but I see no basis for this in the Hebrew, nor did Waltke. Similarly, NIV followed the Vulgate, LXX, and Targums in changing the Hebrew verb from active to passive.
AMThis is the same noun as “cord/line/boundary/territory” in v.5. It is more frequently related to childbirth. Waltke commented that the vav conjunction is epexegetical (“even/that is to say”).
ANThis word only occurs in three other places in the O.T. (1 Ki. 2:8-re: Shemei, and Job 6:25; 16:3), all of which refer to words. Waltke translated it “sickening.”
AOBrenton appears to have inserted these words, as they are not in the Greek.
APDSS instead לא ("not"). Interestingly, the unpointed MT and DSS words could have the same pronunciation (although they would not sound the same the way the MT has been pointed). One explanation for this would be that an original was read out by a lector in a scriptorium and copied wrong by a scribe. But a later MT scribe would have to have considered “to him” to make no sense, therefore putting a dot in the middle of the vav, transforming it into a “wax nose” word which could mean anything. In the 24 times it appears in the Hebrew O.T., it is translated in the KJV, NASB, and NIV as: “if, oh, if only, O, would that, please, if you will, good, agreed, perhaps, maybe, I wish, would to God, though, even if, if he were, oh that” (and more, if you peruse the latest contemporary English versions). The LXX followed the meaning in the DSS. The Vulgate went both ways (utinam non), supporting both the MT and DSS. The Targum rendered it with a temporal (“since”), and the Peshitta dropped it out.
AQThis word is picked up from v.6 and used again twice in this verse.
ARThe 2nd Century Greek versions all translate in terms of a safe place for sheep – Aq. = “in the ring,” Sym. & Theod. = “in a stronghold” (οχθρωματι).
AScf. Aq., Sym., and Theod. αγελη (“herd”).
ATLit. “bed,” cf. Sym. and Theod. ερημου (“wilderness”).
AUThere is debate as to whether this is God threatening to put Jerusalem under siege (Calvin) or whether this is God promising to restore Israel after Babylonian exile (Keil), or whether this is the false prophets still spouting off (Ibn Ezra, Michaelis, Ewald).
AVAll the ancient versions interpreted this word “together” with the preceding “I will surely assemble/gather” instead of with the antecedent “I will put,” but the Masoretic cantillation indicates it should go with the latter, which is what all the modern English versions did (https://hb.openscriptures.org/structure/OshbVerse/index.html?b=Mic&c=2&v=12). Since the phrases are in synonymous parallelism, it doesn’t change the meaning to be with one phrase instead of the other.
AWEverywhere
else in the Bible where this word occurs, it refers to the place
named Bozrah (Gen. 36:33; 1 Chr. 1:44; Isa. 34:6; 63:1; Jer. 48:24;
49:13, 22; Amos 1:12), thus most of the old commentators (with the
exception of Hitzig, Caspari, and Dietrich) kept the name. The root
meaning has to do with “enclosure/fencing/restraint,” and the
ancient Syriac and Greek versions took it in a negative direction
with “trouble/seige.” BHS suggests it would be more clearly a
“sheepfold” if this word were pointed differently with a hireq
instead of a sheva under the tsade.
“...Bozra;
that is, I will cast them into one heap. Bozrah was a city or a
country of Idumea; and it was a very fruitful place, and had the
richest pastures.” ~Calvin
“[B]est interpreted as meaning a
secure ‘enclosure’ … probably Jerusalem during Sennacherib’s
siege…” ~Waltke
AXIf this be translated “pen/pasture,” it is practically a Hapex Legomenon. Although some lexicons cite Isaiah 5:17 (and even Jeremiah 5:13) as instances of this meaning, not even in those passages does it require a meaning other than the standard meaning of “word/thing/manner.” But the instance in Isa. 5:17 specifies that the sheep “feed” there, so that has moved modern English translators away from “pen/fold” and towards “pasture.” Vulgate, Targum, Symmachus, and Theodotian all drop the final letter, omitting “its” (that is, the flock’s) pen.
AYThe feminine plural here answers to no other noun and is separated from the “men” with an ablative. Waltke maintained that this verb does not mean “noisy” but rather “thrown into confusion” (although it is not passive but Hiphil).
AZWaltke suggested “with no man [to care for them],” but that seems like an awful lot to get out of one word!
BALXX appears to have dropped out the verb. 2nd Century Greek versions put it back in: Ανεβη (“he went up” – Aquilla & Theodotian)/αναβξσεται (“he will go up” – Symmachus).
BBWaltke suggested that this means “marched out into battle,” but “go up” assumes this is the attacker fighting uphill rather than the defender of the high ground of a city.
BCDSS seems to omit.
BDI agree with Waltke that this is an ascensive (“even”) rather than a sequential conjunction.
BEFor a thorough refutation of a late (post-exilic) date for Micah, see Waltke’s commentary!