Translation & Sermon by Nate Wilson for Christ The Redeemer Church of Manhattan, KS, 6 October 2024
I noted in my last sermon that Biblical prophecy is important for us who love God because it tells us two things that enable us to follow God:
First it tells us that “We must through many tribulations enter the kingdom of God.” (Acts 14:22b, NKJV)
Second it tells us that those hardships are temporary and will be removed in the future by the salvific work and righteous rulership of Jesus.
Only when we know there is a better future coming and that the painful cruciables of the present are temporary can we persevere! That is the shape of Micah’s message at this point.
As we get into our passage again, remember that the end of chapter 4 contained 3 “now’s”:
v.9 “now you raising a hue and cry” – which I suggested was Assyrian army’s unsuccessful seige of Jerusalem towards the end of Micah’s life,
v.10 “now you will go out ... into Babylon” – which is generally agreed to be the Chaldean army’s succesful overthrow of Jerusalem a century after Micah, and
v.11 “now, many nations have been assembled against you…” [but you will thrash them] – which I suggested comes back to Micah’s contemporary situation and prophesies God’s deliverance from the Assyrian threat.
Our passage today starts at the beginning of chapter with one more “now” (and it will end with a 5th “now” in v. 4)
What our English Bibles have as chapter 5 verse 1, is verse 14 of chapter 4 in Hebrew Bibles, so that the Hebrew chapter five begins with our verse 2. It doesn’t change the meaning, but it does underscore the importance of considering how chapter 5 connects back with chapter 4.
It is my opinion that this “now” (which opens chapter 5 in English) parallels the “now” in chapter 4, v.10, which described the siege and conquest of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon1. In other words, I think Micah has been toggling back and forth between the current event of his own day – when Sennacherib of Assyria unsuccessfully laid siege to Jerusalem – and the future siege by the Chaldeans that would happen a century later and would devastate Jerusalem.
Read
my translation of Micah 4:8-5:5:
Yes, you,
tower of the flock – {obscurity} of the daughter of Zion – unto
you it shall come, that is, the chief rulership will come – the
kingdom – to the daughter of Jerusalem. Why are you raising a hue
and cry now? Is there no king with you, or has your counselor
perished because labor-pain has gotten hold of you like a woman
giving birth? Go into labor and deliver, daughter of Zion, like a
woman giving birth, for now you will go out from the walled-city and
dwell in the field and then go into Babylon. There you will be
rescued; there Yahweh will redeem you from the control of your
enemies. But for now, many nations have been assembled against you,
who are saying, “Let her be breached, then let our eyes look into
Zion!” But, as for them, they have not known the thoughts of
Yahweh, nor have they understood His counsel: that He has gathered
them together like sheaves to the threshing-floor. Get up and
thresh, Daughter of Zion, for I will set your horn with iron and I
will set your hooves with bronze, and you will crush many peoples,
and {you} will devote their gain to Yahweh and their resources to
the Master of all the earth. Now you will be robbed, daughter of
robbers; {they} have laid a siege against us! With the rod they make
a strike against the Judge of Israel on the cheek! But as for you,
Bethlehem Ephratah, little though you may be among the precincts of
Judah, from you will go forth for me one who is to be Ruler in
Israel – indeed His goings-forth have been from of old – since
the days of eternity. Therefore He will extend them until the time
the birthing-woman has given birth, then the remnant of His brothers
will return in addition to the sons of Israel. Then he will stand
and shepherd in the strength of Yahweh, in the majesty of the name
of Yahweh His God, and they will {be returned} because now He will
be great unto the ends of the earth! And this one will be peace! ...
Verse 1 opens with two occurrences of a Hebrew root that is hard to interpret. The root is used first in a verb describing something that will be done to (or by) God’s people2 and then it is used in a noun to describe the character of the people – “daughter of troops/robbers.”
Most of the times this root occurs in the Bible as a verb, it is paired with words for “shaving/ baldness/cutting/bleeding,” but most of the times this root occurs in the Bible as a noun, it is translated in terms of a military unit: “band/troop/raiding party/company.” Accordingly the NET Bible3 translated v.1 “...now slash yourself, daughter surrounded by soldiers!”
But practically all other English translations sought to find a single English root that could be used for both the verb describing the action and the noun describing the character of Jerusalem, and they found it in the word “troop” – “form a troop, daughter of troops.”
However, the ancient versions all found the common idea in a word related to “attacking/robbing”:
Vulgate: “you will be robbed, daughter of the robber”
Peshitta: “you will help rob, daughter of robbers”
and the Septuagint has a similar meaning.
All the English versions translate as though this verb is imperative (“muster/marshal/gather troops”), but the Hebrew spelling is not imperative but future indicative (“you shall…”) and all the older versions understood it that way.
Furthermore, although the Hebrew noun for “troops” is neutral as to whether it is a group of people doing good or evil, the only other place in the Hebrew Bible where this noun is used to describe Israel as a whole is Hosea 6:9-7:1, where it is used in parallel with murderers and thieves: “As bands of robbers lie in wait for a man, So the company of priests murder on the way to Shechem; Surely they commit lewdness. I have seen a horrible thing in the house of Israel... For they have committed fraud; A thief comes in; A band of robbers takes spoil outside.” (NKJV)
So I suspect that the Latin and Syriac versions (which Christians have used for almost two thousand years) were onto something when they translated this phrase in Micah “daughter of robbers.”
God is implying that it is only fair for the corrupt spiritual leaders, political leaders, and land barons that Micah has been talking about in his first few chapters, who have been “building Zion with bloodshed and Jerusalem with injustice” (3:10) – “who plan iniquity and work out evil… covet fields and steal them – houses too, and take them away. Thus they extort a man and his house – both a man and his inheritance.” (2:1-2, NAW) These robbers are going to get a fair comeback when the Chaldean army barges in and robs everything from Jerusalem.
I think the verb could also be parallel to the word that the siege-layers said back in v.11 when they wanted to “defile/penetrate/breach” the wall of Jerusalem, so I have gone out on a limb to translate the opening phrase, “Now you will be robbed, daughter of robbers4.”
How will they be “robbed”? Why does Jerusalem need to “mobilize troops”?
Because a foreign army will surround the city and “lay siege” to it. (The word “siege” is emphatic in the Hebrew.) Also because their political leader – their Judge – will be “struck on the cheek with the rod.”
I believe that this prophecy, like most others, has multiple horizons of fulfillment.
Ahijah the Prophet had warned Jeroboam (the very first king of the Northern kingdom of Israel) that if they kept worshiping idols, “...the LORD will strike Israel… and will scatter them beyond the River…” (the geographical boundary of Babylon), but they persisted in idolatry, so God brought discipline to His people through military strikes against them. (NKJV, cf. 2 Ki. 10:32, )
During Micah’s ministry, Pekah, one of the last kings of Israel, joined ranks with with Syria and made a military strike against the southern kingdom of Judah, and 2 Chronicles 28:5 uses the same Hebrew word for “strike” that Micah does, when it says, “...they struck him [that is, King Ahaz of Judah] and carried away a great multitude of them as captives” (NKJV) Also during Micah’s time, Hoshea assassinated – 2 Kings 15:30 uses the same word5 that Micah does – he “struck” King Pekah of Israel and took over the throne, but then he and the northern kingdom of Israel were conquered by the king of Assyria (2 Ki. 17:3ff). Here, I believe is the first horizon of fulfillment: strikes were made against both the king of Israel and the king of Judah during Micah’s life, and it spelled the end of the northern kingdom of Israel6.
A century later, the Prophet Jeremiah warned the remnant of the Jews in Jerusalem to repent or else God would “strike” their King7. They refused to obey God, so we read in 2 Kings 25 that “...Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon and all his army came against Jerusalem… So the city was besieged until the eleventh year of King Zedekiah... Then the city wall was broken through8... Then they killed the sons of Zedekiah before his eyes, put out the eyes of Zedekiah, bound him with bronze fetters, and took him to Babylon.” (NKJV) Many other fulfillments have been suggested by Bible commentators over the centuries, but here, I believe is the second wave of fulfillment to Micah’s prophecy about the Judge of Israel being struck on the cheek9, a symbol of the end of the southern kingdom of Judah.
But, as Revelation 19:10 says, “...the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.” So we must look to what this prophecy says about Jesus, and, sure enough, Jesus too was struck on the cheek (cf. Isa. 50:6, Zech. 13:7) in the context of an assembly of peoples against Him!
The early church recognized Jesus’ crucifixion as the fulfillment of prophecy, quoting Psalm 2 and key words from the Greek translation of Micah 4:11 about “multiple nations gathering together,” saying in Acts 4:27 “...both Herod [who was an Edomite] and Pontius Pilate [who was a Roman], with the Gentiles and the people of Israel, were gathered together… against Your holy Servant Jesus, whom You anointed...” (NKJV)
And Matthew 26:67 describes how Jesus was mistreated by the Jewish leaders after He had testified that He is God’s “Anointed/Messiah”: “They spit into His face and beat Him up, then they slapped Him10...” (NAW) There is the Messianic fulfillment of Micah’s prophecy.
Israel was “struck” as discipline for its own sin against God, but Isaiah 53:5 tells us that the Messiah was struck by God’s punishment as a substitute for us to save us from God’s wrath! “He was pierced because of our rebellion – beaten because of our iniquity. Chastisement for our peace was upon Him, and by His stripes there is healing for us.” (NAW)
At this point, Micah seems to pivot from prophecies of the sieges of Jerusalem out to the more-distant future of the coming of the Messiah, first in His humiliation, then in His glory.
When a king “goes out/forth” in Old Testament Hebrew, he is usually going to war11. It should not be lost on us that this Messianic Judge of Israel who gets struck on the cheek is in v.2 also the “Ruler of Israel” who “goes forth” to war against sin and death and emerges victorious (1 Cor. 15:57), resurrected from the grave and leading in His train former captives to sin (Eph. 4:8).
God says He will do it “for/before me,”12 this is God’s agenda carried out by God’s representative, for God’s glory!
In the Hebrew of verse 2, the word for “will go forth/come out” is the same root as the word for “his goings-forth/origins,13” so the NASB and ESV did well to use the same English word for both.
The eternality of his goings-forth identifies him with the one true God who inhabits eternity and who created the world14, and that is exactly what Jesus and the prophets and the apostles said of Jesus:
Heb. 1:8 “...concerning the Son, ‘Your throne, O God, is forever and ever...’” (NAW)
Hebrews 13:8 “Jesus is the Anointed One – past and present the same – even into eternity.” (NAW)
John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” (NKJV, cf. 1 John 1:1, Prov. 8:2, Ps. 102:25)
John 8:58 Jesus also said to them, "Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM.’” (NKJV)
John 17:5 "And now, O Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was.” (NKJV)
Revelation 1:8 "I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End," says the Lord, "who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty.’” (NKJV)
This indicates that the Ruler under consideration in Micah has been leaving His throne to go on missions since ancient times, (literally “from the days of eternity,” which denotes the age before the creation of the world), but one of the most significant of these missions will be to the “little” town of Bethlehem.
Throughout Scripture Jesus is presented to us as the “One who is coming/is to come.”15 “Coming” is what He does!
He was the angel of the Lord who came from heaven to earth and spoke to the Old Testament patriarchs,
He came as the Word of God to the prophets as they wrote Scripture,
He left heaven and came as a baby born in Bethlehem,
and when He returned to heaven He sent His Spirit to stay with us,
His coming in judgment on Jerusalem in 70 AD was prophesied in Matthew 24,
and He is coming again to judge the whole earth and recreate it (Luke 9:26, 12:36-37, Rok. 11:26, 1 Cor. 11:26, 2 Thess.1:10, etc.).
And 700 years before Jesus was born in Bethlehem, Micah prophesied that Bethlehem would be the place from which the Messiah would come.
According to the second chapter of the Gospel of Matthew (cf. John 7:42), it was this verse in Micah that tipped off the Jewish religious leaders and King Herod and the Magi, as to Jesus’ whereabouts when He was born, although King Herod’s assassins got there too late after Joseph and Mary had already skipped town with Jesus.
Ephrata is related to the Hebrew word for “fruits.” We know from 1 Samuel that grapes and figs were grown in abundance in that area at Abigail and Nabal’s farm.
Genesis 48:7 tells us that Jacob buried his wife Rachel near Ephrath and says that Ephrath is the same as Bethlehem, so it may have been an old name for the region.
In Matthew’s quote of Micah’s prophecy, he substitutes “land of Judah” for Ephrata, so some scholars think it was a way of differentiating two different Bethlehem’s, one in Judah and one somewhere else16.
Bethlehem is also called the “smallest/least/most insignificant of the clans/thousands of Judah.”
Israel, since the time of Moses (Ex. 18:21), had developed a political system with precincts of approximately 1,000 heads of household each, and, because of how they were related by blood, they are often called “clans.”17
David apparently arose from humble origins in a small18 clan with little political influence (the Gospel of John 7:42 calls Bethlehem a “hamlet/village/κωμης”), but God loves to work with underdogs to show His glory (cf. Isa. 60:22).
Gideon was the “least” in his father’s house and from the “weakest” clan in his tribe (Judges 6:15), YET God made him the deliverer and judge of Israel!
Saul was “from the least-influential family of the smallest tribe in Israel,” according to 1 Samuel 9:21, but God made him king!
David was “the youngest and despised” according to Psalm 119:141, yet he became the most influential king of Israel.
The Hebrew infinitive construct “to be,” indicating purpose19, shows up twice, first in the phrase “little to be among the clans” and then in the phrase “go forth to be Ruler.” This indicates that both the obscure beginnings in Bethlehem and the magnificent finale as King are part of God’s purpose and plan that He is executing for His glory.
The New Testament explains in 1 Corinthians 1:26-29 “For y'all see your calling, brothers, that not many were wise according to the flesh, not many were powerful, not many were upper-class. But it was the stupid ones of the world God chose for Himself in order that He might put down the strength of the smart men, and it was the weak ones of the world God chose for Himself in order that He might put down the strength of the strong, and the ones without class of the world and the ones that have been despised God chose for Himself and the ones who do not exist in order that He might put out of commission the ones that do exist, so that all flesh might not boast before the face of God.” (NAW)
The Messiah was to rise to be “ruler in Israel,”
and that phrase “ruler in Israel” has special significance because it only occurs one other place in the Hebrew Old Testament, and that is in the renewal of the Davidic covenant with King Solomon in 2 Chronicles 7:18 “then I will establish the throne of your kingdom, as I covenanted with David your father, saying,`You shall not fail to have a man as ruler in Israel.'”20
“Ruler in Israel” meant the Messianic King who would be of the line of David (as indeed the genealogies of Matthew and Luke show that Jesus was) who would reign forever. Micah has already been talking in chapter four about this King coming! (By the time of the New Testament, the title “King of Israel” or “King of the Jews” had replaced the title “Ruler of Israel” as the title for the Messiah21.)
The Gospels also introduce us to a few folks who comprehended who Jesus was:
Nathaniel said in John 1:49 “...Rabbi, You are the Son of God! You are the King of Israel!”
and then there were the crowds in Jerusalem who cried out to Jesus, “...Hosanna! 'BLESSED IS HE WHO COMES IN THE NAME OF THE LORD!' The King of Israel!" (John 12:13, NKJV22)
With this glorious promise, “The Prophet... prepare[s] the minds of the godly to bear evils, that they might not despair in great trouble…” and so in v.3 Micah steps back to his own time, when God is about to remove His protection from His unfaithful people for a time.
Micah is not explicit in what he means at the beginning of v.3 by “He will give,” but it is understood by almost everyone to refer to God allowing Nebuchadnezzar to conquer Jerusalem and take the Jews into exile in Babylon for 70 years.
It reiterates what the prophet Ahijah told King Jeroboam’s wife, years before in 1 Kings 14:15-16, “For the LORD will strike Israel... He will uproot Israel from this good land which He gave to their fathers, and will scatter them beyond the River, because they have made their wooden images, provoking the LORD to anger. And He will give Israel up because of the sins of Jeroboam, who sinned and who made Israel sin." (NKJV)
Because the coming of Jesus the Messiah was another 550 years or so after the exile, this intermission time in which God gave various Gentile kings authority over the Israelites (and in which there was no true Davidic king) seems to be included in this prophecy23.
The childbirth metaphor comes back here in v.3. We saw it in chapter 4, verse 10 describing the agonizing conditions of Nebuchadnezzar’s seige against Jerusalem followed by the explusion of the Jews from Jerusalem into exile in Babylon. That, of course was followed by the “return” of the “remnant” of Jews still faithful to God from Babylon to Jerusalem, to reconstruct it under Zerubbabel and Nehemiah24. God is letting His people know that these stressfull things must occur before the Messiah comes.
But the “woman giving birth” is also connected to the coming of the Messiah Himself. This birth marks the “time” when God stops “giving” Israel to the Gentiles and brings His eternal king from the line of David to the throne. So it is entirely appropriate to see fulfillment of this prophecy also in the Christmas story, with Mary as the woman25.
And, if that is the case, then there is also a Messianic-age fulfillment to be found in the “remnant of His brothers returning in addition to the sons of Israel” –
the “remnant” being the same as those gentiles mentioned by Paul in Romans 9:27 “...The remnant will be saved.” (NKJV)
“His brothers” being the same as the ones “sanctified” by Jesus in Hebrews 2:11 whom “He is not ashamed to call brothers”
and the “return” in the New Testament is not to the earthly Jerusalem but the heavenly one, that is, to membership as “citizens of heaven” (Phil. 3:20) as we trust in “our savior, the Lord Jesus Christ,”
and are incorporated “with the sons26 of Israel,” as Paul put it in Romans 11:26, “And so all Israel will be saved, as it is written: ‘THE DELIVERER WILL COME OUT OF ZION, AND HE WILL TURN AWAY UNGODLINESS... WHEN I TAKE AWAY THEIR SINS.’”
Towards the end of v.4 we see the word “Now/at that time/then” – this is the same Hebrew word translated “now” at the beginning of v.1, but it is describing a future time when the “power” and “majesty” of the LORD27 are apparent in the leadership of the Messiah and He is “magnified” all over the world. In the midst of a tumultuous time, Micah keeps bring back into focus the future blessings that Christ will bring to bear.
This is what the other prophets also foretold:
Psalm 72:8 “He shall have dominion also from sea to sea, And from the River to the ends of the earth.” (NKJV)
Isaiah 9:6 “For a child is born for us, a son is given for us, and the government is on His shoulder. And His name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace… 40:11 Like a shepherd He will shepherd His flock: With His arm He will gather lambs, And in His bosom carry; Those who are nursing He will lead gently… 52:10-13 Yahweh has bared the arm of His holiness before the eyes of all the nations, and all the ends of the earth will see the salvation of our God! ... Look, my Servant will act prudently; He will be high, and lifted up, and greatly exalted...” (NAW)
Ezekiel 34:23 “I will establish one shepherd over them, and he shall feed them My servant David. He shall feed them and be their shepherd.” (NKJV)
Zechariah 9:10 “I will cut off the chariot from Ephraim And the horse from Jerusalem; The battle bow shall be cut off. He shall speak peace to the nations; His dominion shall be `from sea to sea, And from the River to the ends of the earth.” (NKJV)
And Jesus is the fulfillment of these prophecies:
The angels announced
at His conception, “He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Highest; and the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David.” (Luke 1:32, NKJV)
and at His birth, “Glory to God in the highest, And on earth peace, goodwill toward men!” (Luke 2:14, NKJV)
Jesus said in John 10:14-16 “I am the good shepherd... and I lay down My life for the sheep. And other sheep I have which are not of this fold; them also I must bring, and they will hear My voice; and there will be one flock and one shepherd.” (NKJV)
And the Apostles testified:
Colossians 1:20 “… [He] made peace through the blood of His cross.” (NKJV)
Romans 5:1 “Therefore, having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ” (NKJV)
Ephesians 2:14 “For He Himself is our peace...” (NKJV)
And the New Testament prophecies promise even more:
Matthew 25:31 “So, whenever the Son of Man shall come in His glory and all the holy angels with Him, then He will sit upon His throne of glory” (NAW)
Revelation 11:15 “...And there were loud voices in heaven, saying, ‘The kingdoms of this world have become the kingdoms of our Lord and of His Christ, and He shall reign forever and ever!’” (NKJV)
Do you believe that Jesus is the “Master of all the earth” who “will redeem you from the control of [all] your enemies,” whose “goings-forth have been from eternity past” and who “went forth” “from Bethlehem” to be the eternal king promised to David, the “Judge” who received upon Himself on your behalf the “stroke” of God’s justice on the cross, who “shepherds in the strength of the LORD” and is “growing” in fame “to the ends of the earth”?
“Believe on the name of [this] Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved, you and your household!” (Acts 16:31)
If you are a believer, will you continue to hold before your mind the promises He has made to you, bringing them back to mind again and again like Micah did, every time his mind strayed to the stress of his present situation or to the threats of the future? “Unto you, even to you, the king shall come... you will be rescued… the LORD will redeem you from the control of your enemies… you will crush many peoples and devote their gain to the LORD… the remnant of His brothers will return… Jesus will stand and shepherd in the strength of Yahweh, in the majesty of the name of Yahweh… He will be great unto the ends of the earth! And this one will be peace!” Remind yourself of these precious promises and, as Philippians 4:7 says, “...the peace of God which surpasses all understanding will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus.” (NAW)
DouayB (Vulgate) |
Mat. 2:6 GNT |
LXXC |
BrentonD (Vaticanus) |
KJVE |
NAW |
Masoretic HebrewF |
1
Now shalt
thou be
laid waste, O daughter of the
robber: |
|
4:14
νῦν ἐμφραχθήσ |
1
Now shall
the daughter [of
SionI]
be
|
1
Now X
gather
thyself [in
troops],
O daughter of troops:
he hath laid siege against us: they shall smite the judge
of Israel with |
1 Now you will be robbed daughter of robbers; {they} have laid a siege against us! With the rod they make a strike against the Judge of Israel on the cheek. |
(יד) עַתָּה תִּתְגֹּדְדִיJ בַת גְּדוּד מָצוֹר שָׂםK עָלֵינוּ Lבַּשֵּׁבֶט יַכּוּ עַל הַלְּחִיM אֵת שֹׁפֵטN יִשְׂרָאֵל. |
2
And thou Bethlehem Ephrata, X
|
καὶ
σὺ Βηθλέεμ, |
1 Καὶ σύ, ΒηθλεεμO [οἶκος] τοῦ Εφραθα, ὀλιγοστὸς εἶP τοῦ εἶναι ἐν χιλιάσιν Ιουδα· ἐκ σοῦ μοι ἐξελεύσεται τοῦ εἶναι εἰς ἄρχοντα ἐν τῷ Ισραηλ, καὶ αἱ ἔξοδοι αὐτοῦ ἀπ᾿ ἀρχῆς ἐξ ἡμερῶν αἰῶνος. |
2 And thou, Bethleem, [house of] Ephratha, art few [in number] to be [reckoned] among the thousands of Juda; [yet] out of thee shall one come forth to me, to be a ruler of Israel; and his goings forth were from the beginning, [even] from X eternity. |
2 But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; X whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlastingX. |
2 But as for you, Bethlehem Ephratah, little though you be among the precincts of Judah, from you will go forth for me one who is to be Ruler in Israel, indeed His goings-forth have been from of old – since the days of eternity. |
(א) וְאַתָּהQ בֵּית לֶחֶם אֶפְרָתָהR צָעִיר לִהְיוֹתS בְּאַלְפֵיT יְהוּדָה מִמְּךָ לִי Uיֵצֵא לִהְיוֹת מוֹשֵׁל בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל וּמוֹצָאֹתָיו מִקֶּדֶם מִימֵי עוֹלָם. |
3 Therefore will he give them up even till the time wherein she that travaileth shall bring forth: and the remnant of his brethren shall [be] convert[ed] to the children of Israel. |
|
2
διὰ τοῦτο
δώσει αὐτοὺς ἕως καιροῦ τικτούσης
τέξεται, καὶ οἱ ἐπίλοιποι τῶν
ἀδελφῶν αὐτ |
3
Therefore
shall he appoint them to wait till the time of her that
travails:
she shall bring forth, and then the remnant of |
3 Therefore will he give them up, until the time that she which travaileth hath brought forth: then the remnant of his brethren shall return unto the children of Israel. |
3 Therefore He will extend them until the time the birthing-woman has given birth, then the remnant of His brothers will return in addition to the sons of Israel. |
(ב) לָכֵןW יִתְּנֵםX עַד עֵת יוֹלֵדָה יָלָדָה וְיֶתֶר אֶחָיו יְשׁוּבוּןY עַלZ בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל. |
4 And he shall stand, and feed in the strength of the Lord, in the height of the name of the Lord, his God: and they shall be converted, for now shall he be magnified even to the ends of the earth. |
|
3
καὶ
στήσεται
[καὶ ὄψεταιAA]
καὶ ποιμανεῖ
[τὸ ποίμνιον αὐτοῦ]
ἐν ἰσχύι
κυρίουAB,
[καὶ]
ἐν τῇ δόξῃ τοῦ
ὀνόματος κυρίου τοῦ
θεοῦ αὐτ |
4
And the Lord shall stand, [and
see], and
feed [his
flock] with
power, and they shall dwell
in the glory
of the name of the Lord |
4 And he shall stand and feed in the strength of the LORD, in the majesty of the name of the LORD his God; and they shall abide: for now shall he be great unto the ends of the earth. |
4 Then he will stand and shepherd in the strength of Yahweh, in the majesty of the name of Yahweh His God, and they will {be returned} because now He will be great unto the ends of the earth! |
(ג) וְעָמַד וְרָעָהAE בְּעֹז יְהוָה בִּגְאוֹן שֵׁם יְהוָה אֱלֹהָיו וְיָשָׁבוּAF כִּי עַתָּה יִגְדַּל עַד אַפְסֵי אָרֶץ. |
5 And this man shall be [our] peace, when the Assyrian shall come into our land, and when he shall set his foot in our houses: and we shall raise against him seven shepherds, and eight principal men. |
|
4
καὶ ἔσται
αὕτ |
5
And |
5 And this man shall be the peace, when the Assyrian shall come into our land: and when he shall tread in our palaces, then shall we raise against him seven shepherds, and eight principal men. |
5 And this one will be peace! As for Assyrian, when he comes into our land and when he steps into our compounds, then we will erect against him seven shepherds and eight anointed by men. |
(ד) וְהָיָה זֶה שָׁלוֹם אַשּׁוּרAJ כִּי יָבוֹא בְאַרְצֵנוּ וְכִי יִדְרֹךְ בְּאַרְמְנֹתֵינוּ וַהֲקֵמֹנוּ עָלָיו שִׁבְעָה רֹעִים וּשְׁמֹנָה נְסִיכֵיAK אָדָם. |
1Keil asserted that the lack of a vav conjunction before this “now” meant it was disjunctive, which I can agree with, but he concluded that it had to be the same point in time as the “now” of v.9 (which also has no vav conjunction), but I believe it is the same point in time as the “now” in v. 10 (which also has no vav conjunction). Interestingly, the “now” in 5:3 also does not have a vav conjunction, and I believe it marks a third point in time – the Messianic age.
2Gilby, Keil, Calvin, Waltke (and others) agreed that this is addressed to Jerusalem, but there are other commentators who interpreted these two words describing the character and action of Israel’s enemies, in other words, God commanding Assyria (Isaiah de Trani) or Babylon (Rashi, Owen), and even Rome (Marckius) to mobilize against Jerusalem.
3Probably following 18th Century Jewish commentator Metsudath David. Keil, however, was emphatic that it “does not mean here to scratch one’s self or make incisions… but… people pressing anxiously together.”
4cf. Anthony Gilby “Nowe shalte thou be compassed with garisons, thou doughter of garysons” and Calvin, “‘Thou shalt be collected, O daughter of collection.’ … ‘You have been hitherto… without a cause oppressive to others: the time then is come when the Lord will return to you your recompense.’ As Isaiah says, ‘Woe to thee, plunderer! Shalt thou not also be exposed to plunder?’ Isaiah 33:1”
52 Kings 15:30 “Then Hoshea the son of Elah led a conspiracy against Pekah the son of Remaliah, and struck and killed him; so he reigned in his place in the twentieth year of Jotham the son of Uzziah.” (NKJV)
6Waltke saw this as the main horizon of fulfillment, but doing so requires a strangely-figurative interpretation of “striking” and ignoring of the “giving up” and the “return” also in the passage.
7Jer. 29:21 “Thus says the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel, concerning Ahab the son of Kolaiah, and Zedekiah the son of Maaseiah, who prophesy a lie to you in My name: Behold, I will deliver them into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon, and he shall slay [strike] them before your eyes.” (NKJV)
8בּקע (“broken open”) – a synonym, I think, to Micah’s words גּדד (“robbed” also translated “formed troops”) in v.1 and חנף (“defiled/penetrated”) in 4:11.
9This is by no means the only interpretation. Isaiah da Trani identified it with Rabshaqah’s insults toward King Hezekiah, Rashi identified it with the way the Jews mistreated the prophets, Rachi identified it with Gog & Magog in the future, Metsudath David identified it with the mistreatement of Jewish exiles in Babylon (Lam. 3:30). Keil agreed with me, interpreting the Judge as the King, and noting that the only way anyone could get away with such a terrible affront as a faceblow to the king would be if that king were overthrown. He commented, “The principal fulfilment occurred in the Chaldaean period; but the fulfilment was repeated in every succeeding siege of Jerusalem until the destruction of the city by the Romans.” (Gilby also advocated multiple horizons of fulfillment.)
10Matthew’s
verbs are ἐκολάφισαν ... ἐρ[ρ]άπισαν, both
synonyms to πατάξουσιν (“struck”) in the LXX of Micah
5:1.
Compare with the synonyms used in the LXX of Isaiah 53:5
ἐτραυματίσθη... μεμαλάκισται.
11This could also be expressing derivation, such as in Jer. 30:21 “...their governor shall come out from their midst...”
12cf. 1 Sam. 16:1 “...Yahweh said to Samuel, ‘...I'm sending you to Jesse the Bethlehemite, for I have noticed among his sons a king for myself!’” (NAW)
13This word is plural in the Masoretic Hebrew and Septuagint Greek Bibles, as well as in the only Dead Sea Scroll where this phrase is legible, but it is singular (“his going”) in the Latin Vulgate, Peshitta, Targums, and in a couple of Hebrew manuscripts. Calvin was adamant that it should be read as singular, but whether this refers to one or all of the many comings of the second person of the Trinity amply proved by my scripture citations, is immaterial.
14cf. Prov. 8:22-23 which use the same words to denote eternal time before the creation of the world. Even the Midrash (Pirke de Rabbi Eliezer, ch. 3) and Talmud (Pes. 54A, Ned. 39b) assert the same of the meaning of Micah’s phrase, but do not attribute it to Jesus.
15Dan.
9:26; John 6:14, 11:27, 12:13; Rev. 1:4, 1:8, 4:8; 11:17; etc.
cf.
Adam Clarke: “In every age from the foundation of the world, there
has been some manifestation of the Messiah...”
16Thus did Calvin, but Keil disagreed flatly, saying it was “to give greater solemnity to the address.” Other citations equating Bethlehem with Ephratah are Ruth 4:11 & Judges 17:7.
17Gilby: “[I]t was able to make but a small noumber in the musters and taxes when the people were noumbred by... thousandes…” Calvin called them “tribunes” and “prefectures.”
18Answering the objection that Matthew 2:6’s quote contradicts Micah’s description of “smallness,” Calvin commented, “Matthew had regards to the condition of the town Bethlehem, such as it was at the coming of Christ. It then indeed began to be eminent: but the Prophet represents here how ignoble and mean a place Bethlehem then was...”
19“-ל is used with a strong value for the direction, the aim, the purpose of an action.” ~JOÜON/MURAOKA Grammar of Biblical Hebrew, P. 405.
20“There is no doubt but that the Prophet... recalls the attention of the faithful to the promise which had been given to David.” ~J. Calvin
21“King of/in/over Israel” occurs frequently in the O.T. history of the Israelite Monarchy, but perhaps Micah chose a different word to distinguish between the reigning human kings and the Messiah. Interestingly, the OT messianic archontos Israel (“ruler of Israel”) or hegoumenos Israel (“leader of Israel”) drops off in the NT and seems to be replaced by “King of Israel” and “King of the Jews” (Mat. 2:2; 27:11,29,37; Mark 15:2,9,12,18,26; Luke 23:3,37,38; John 18:33,39; 19:3,19,21), perhaps because there was no longer any risk of confusing the reigning kings (like Herod) with the Messiah.
22cf. Mark 15:32. Basileus (“king”) is used in all of these passages.
23Gilby, typical of the multiple horizon approach to interpreting prophecy, also saw its fulfillment in the Roman occupation of Jerusalem.
24Cross-references on the return from captivity: Isa. 11:11, Jer. 30:3, Ezek. 37:21, Amos 9:9, Mic. 2:12, 4:7, & 5:7-8.
25Theodoret,
Vitringa, and Calvin flatly denied this (perhaps due to concerns of
Mariolitry), but Cyril, Newcomb, Owen, Ewald, Hitzig, Keil, Waltke,
and most others at least include the physical birth of Jesus in the
fulfillment.
Cf. the connections between the arrival of the
Messiah and birth in Isaiah 7:14, 9:9:6, and 49:5.
26ESV incorrectly translates “people,” but the sense is still not destroyed by this error.
27Anthony Gilby commented, “Neither may it trouble any scrupulous conscience that ye prophet nameth him ‘his god’ for so sayth Christe that his father did giue him... forme and shape of manne...”
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 5 are 4Q81 containing parts of verses 2-3
and dated between 175-50BC, 4Q82 containing parts of verses 7-8 and
dated between 30-1 BC, The Nahal Hever Greek scroll,
containing parts of vs. 2-7 and dated around 25BC and the Wadi
Muraba’at Scroll, containing parts verses 1-2 & 6-13 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
GAccording to Fields, all the other Greek versions read “you will be wasted, daughter of robbers,” although he quotes a different verb from Symmachus “have labor contractions” (ωδινησουσι).
HThis could come from mistaking the MT word “judge” שפט for שבט (“tribe”). Second Century AD Greek translators Aquilla, Symmachus, and Theodotion each supported the MT tradition with κριτην (“judge”).
ILXX actually reads “of Ephraim,” but this is an insertion not in any other manuscript. The Vaticanus manuscript from which Brenton made his Greek-English translation reads like the MT without this insertion. It does not harm the meaning because the word “daughter” is regularly associated with Jews in Jerusalem in Micah (which may be why he rendered it “Zion” instead of “Ephraim”).
JThis
verb only occurs 7 other times: 5 in contexts parallel to “shaving
bald” and “bleeding” (Deut. 14:1; 1 Ki. 18:28; Jer. 16:6;
41:5; 47:5, and 2 in different contexts as follows: Ps. 94:21
(parallel with condemning someone, and done against the life of the
righteous) and Jer. 5:7 (done by plurality of men committing
adultery in a prostitute’s house).
Westminster Morphology
labels it as Qal Passive Imperfect, and BDB definitions for Qal are:
“penetrate, cut... attack… make inroads” (cf. Holladay: “band
together against”). On the other hand, Davidson’s Analytical
Lexicon, Beall/Banks/Smith Parsing Guide, Waltke, and the OSHB
Morphology labeled this verb as Hithpolel Imperfect. Holladay
defined the Hithpolel meaning as “inflict cuts on oneself” (cf.
BDB “1. cut oneself… 2. gather in troops… bands... throngs…”).
The Targums and practically every English version rendered it
“gather/band together/muster” (except the NET Bible, which went
with “slash yourself”). The ancient versions all went with
“attack/rob,” although they are split between the passive “be
attacked” (Vulgate and LXX) and active “rob” (Peshitta). All
the English versions translate as though this verb is imperative,
but the spelling is not imperative; all the ancient versions
correctly translate it as a future indicative (“you
shall...”).
Although one of the Targums interpreted it of
gathering together after the “dispersion,” clearly it is in
parallel with the siege – cf. 4:11 “But for now, many
nations have been assembled against you, who are saying, ‘Let her
be breached, then let our eyes look into Zion!’” It’s also
parallel to “daughter of robbers/troops,” so a good translation
needs to find an English root that can describe what will happen to
Jerusalem in the siege as well as the character of the Jews in
Jerusalem. The noun form is used to describe Israel in only one
other place in the Bible (although it is also used to describe
David’s outlawed band), and that is in Hosea 6:9-7:1, in parallel
with murderers and thieves, which matches the character of the Jews
depicted in the previous two chapters of Micah. Conversely, Keil
translated it “crowd together.”
KAs it is in the MT, the word “siege” is emphatic, but it could be the subject or the object of “laid.” All the ancient versions make “siege” the object (e.g. accusative case in the LXX), not the subject, and the Geneva, KJV, NASB, and NLT follow suit. Vulgate, Peshitta and Targums (followed by NASB) all render the verb plural, but LXX agrees with the singular verb in the MT. There is no legible DSS to cross-reference.
LThe word “rod” is definite. It is “the” rod, and “the rod” refers to corporal discipline (Ex. 21:20, Prov. 23:13-14 – although the rod was to be administered “to the backside,” not the face – Prov. 10:13 cf. parallel passage in Isa. 10:24 parallel with “ מַטֵּ֥ה/staff” and 30:31), to the shepherd’s rod (used for counting: Lev. 27:32/Ezek 20:37, as a weapon: 2 Sam 23:21, and for threshing: Isaiah 28:27), and to the “tribe” (Deut. 1:23, Josh. 7:14, etc.).
MIn the rest of the HOT, adversaries “struck” others on the “cheek” in Deut. 18:3; Jdg. 15:9, 14-17, Ps. 3:8; Isa. 50:6; Lam. 3:30; and in the NT, there’s Matt. 5:39/Lk. 6:29 (Jesus’ instruction to “turn the other cheek” sigona when “struck” rhapisei). The GNT does not pair the LXX translation of Micah’s word for “strike” (pataxousin) with any blow to the face. Cf. Mat. 26:67 (Jesus “struck” ekolafisan in the “face” proswpon) Acts 23:2 (Paul “struck” tuptein on “mouth” - stoma).
NVulgate and Targums follow the MT with “judge,” but Peshitta curiously has רעיא (“shepherd” – cf. v.4), and LXX reads “tribes,” although Aquilla, Symmachus, and Theodotion all support the MT tradition with κριτην (“judge”). Cohen suggests this unusual word for “king” shophet was chosen as a word play with shevet (“rod”).
ONahal Hever Greek manuscript from 25BC translates the “Beth” of “Bethlehem” as “house” but drops out the “lehem.” But since it keeps the other name Efratha, referring to the same place by an older name (Gen. 48:7), there is no conflict in meaning with the traditional text. LXX, on the other hand, as often is the case, provides both a place name transliteration (“Bethlehem”) and also a translation (“house” – dropping out the “lehem/bread”) whereas the Hebrew MT, Latin Vulgate, Syriac Peshitta, and Targum just provide the one word “Bethlehem.” GNT does the same in Matt. 2:6, not following the LXX with the extra word “house.” Matt. 2:6 is clearly a separate translation of Micah with many different, but synonymous words and phrasing.
PNahal Hever does not use this particle (or the εις later in this verse before αρχοντα, and it uses the preposition αφ’ instead of the LXX εξ at the end before ‘ημερων), but maintains the same meaning as LXX, so LXX is not a copy of N.H. but a separate translation, but both are translations of the same ultimate source.
Qcf. 4:8 which starts with the same word. Keil commented that the masulines here for “you,” “little,” and “from you” all relate to the “inhabitants” of the “little town.” (“Thousands” is masculine in Hebrew here.)
RWhereas the ancient versions transliterated this word, the New Testament quote of it in Matthew 2 paraphrases as “land of Judah.”
SMost versions translate with Bethlehem as the subject of this infinitive of the verb of being, but the Peshitta translates with the “clans/thousands” as the subject (“little of those who are among the thousands…”), which also works.
TLiterally “thousands,” but in reference to the Jewish national structure, equates to the clan level of government. Matthew’s paraphrase renders it “leaders.”
UThe word before this Hebrew word in DSS 4Q81 is לא (“not”). No other manuscript negates this verb, not even the other DSS containing this part of the verse (Nahal Hever). Since the previous word in the traditional Hebrew is לי (“to me”), and since several words before לא in 4Q81 are obliterated, it seems most likely that it is an archaic spelling (or a misspelling) of the word לי found in the MT. Curiously, the Peshitta drops this word out, and the Gospel of Matthew translates it “for” as though the Hebrew were כי instead of לי.
VAlthough the Targum supports this plural, the MT, Vulgate, and Peshitta are singular, and Aquilla, Symmachus, and Theodotion also all translated it singular in their Greek versions.
WGrotius
= “Surely,” Dathius = “Truly,” Scott and Owen =
“Nevertheless,” Caspari and Keil = “Therefore”
Keil
explained that the loss of the kingship from Jerusalem is the reason
that God “therefore” is going to have to reboot the Davidic
dynasty from Bethlehem.
XThe nearest precedent plural noun nearby is “days” - which could be “extended/given,” but I didn’t find any commentator who deviated from applying “them” to the Jews, a.k.a. “daughter of troops… us… you Bethlehem… the birthing-woman… sons of Israel… they will dwell...”
YCuriously, the Vulgate and Peshitta read passive “be converted/turned” but it is active in LXX, Nahal Hever, and Targums. The paragogic nun suffixing this verb could merely be a matter of euphonics to elide with the subsequent ayin, or it could be a reassuring tone to further certify this good news.
ZWaltke quoted Renaud in saying that “The formula yswbwn’al ‘to return upon’ expresses the idea of coming back to a prior state…” Keil, however, made a more-convincing case that this should be interpreted in the sense of “upon” – “with” (“on top of/in addition to”) citing Jer. 3:18 in support: “In those days the house of Judah shall walk with [על] the house of Israel, and they shall come together out of the land of the north to the land that I have given as an inheritance to your fathers.” In other words, God is not saying that Samaria will become the Messianic capitol and that the Judaites will all go “to” Israel but that those from the exiled south and north will return together “with/in addition to” each other.
AALXX waxed paraphrastic here, adding “and watch… his flock,” which is not in the MT or N.H. or Vulgate or Peshitta or even the Targums, but which does not change the meaning at all. It’s possible that there was some question in the mind of the LXX translator whether the Hebrew word was ראה (“watch”) or רעה (“feed/shepherd”), but there was no such question in the minds of the other ancient translators.
ABNahal Hever used the paleo-hebrew letters to spell the Hebrew name for YHWH rather than using the substitute word “lord” which the LXX translators and New Testament writers employed for the divine Name. Brenton mistakenly made “Lord” the nominative in his translation instead of the accusative.
ACN.H. = επιστραφησονται (“be converted”), Sym. = κατοικησουσι (“residing”)
ADN.H. translated with the synonym περατων, but Symm. went with a more temporally-related end with εσχατου (“last”).
AEcf. Micah 7:14.
AFNahal Hever, Vulgate, Targums, and Peshitta all translated as though the Hebrew root were שוב (“turn/convert”), but LXX, Symmachus, and English versions translated as though the root were ישב (“dwell”). “Be turned” is probably the older and most traditional translation. (The NIV and ESV paraphrastically added the word “secure[ly].”)
AGBHS suggested that the third letter, resh, when read as the very similar-looking letter daleth instead (or perhaps trilled by a lector and mistaken for the sound of a daleth) could have been translated “ground/land” as the LXX did. N.H. reads βαρ--- (dashes represent illegible letters) referring to something “expensive/heavily-built/weighty.”
AHN.H. (επεγερουμεν) is active, 1p, like the MT, Vulgate, Peshitta, and Targums.
AILXX follows the homonym נשׁך (“bite”) rather than what is written in the MT נסך (“outpouring/prince”). This is not the first time in Micah that the LXX has confused the word in the MT for a different word which sounds the same but does not look the same. This could be evidence of the LXX translator translating as he listened to someone reading rather than reading the Hebrew for himself. The earlier Nahal Hever Greek translation does not suffer from this problem; it translates with the word αρχοντας (“rulers”) followed by Theodotian (αρχηγους). Αquilla, however, translated it καθεσταμενους (“antagonists”) and Symmachus χριστους (“Anointed ones” – closest to the MT) – all of which are persons rather than an impersonal “attack” as per the LXX.
AJScott and M. Henry, followed by Owen saw Assyria primarily as a symbol of “the enemies of the Christian church.”
AKRare word only here and Josh. 13:21; Ps. 83:12; Ezek. 32:30; Dan. 11:8 (and Deut. 32:38 describing drink offerings), denoting those who had had oil poured over them to anoint them for an office.