What are some of the icons of human pride and/or achievement? In the class discussion, people mentioned the Colossus of Rhodes (one of the ancient Seven Wonders of the World, destroyed by an earthquake less than a century after it was constructed), the space program, the Challenger & its explosion, the Moon Landing, Martin Luther King march, Titanic, Communism, the “Almighty Dollar,” Sports, Military, and the Hindenburg. All of these are human, some are good, some good in their proper sphere, some bad for the world. Some were hailed as signs of human mastery, only to be proven wrong. Especially ironic is the Titanic, hailed as unsinkable and a proof that humans had prevailed over nature, only to be sunk on its maiden voyage.
All of these areas of endeavor and achievement might be subjects that the prophets, such as Micah, would find interest.
In Micah 5:7, comes an interesting image. The remnant of Jacob is compared to dew from the Lord. This soft, seemingly positve and gentle image of dew was used in I Samuel in the sense of powerful inevitability, which appears to be Micah’s intention here. Micah goes on in verses 8 & 9 to give a vision of the remnant of Israel becoming a strong nation, “like a young lion among the flocks of sheep.” Turn to verses 10-11 and we hear of God’s destruction of military installations and resources. Horses cut off, also the chariots and the cities of the land. In Palestine of that time, horses only had military application. The donkey was the animal of peace. Cities were strongholds, fortresses. As they were associated, therefore, with war, they were to be banished. (This idea seems to accord with the words of 4:1-4). People would not rely on the military (a human achievement).
Verse 12-14 goes on to the subject of religious righteousness. Sorceries were to be cut off, and soothsayers. These had to do with the arts by which people thought they could get miraculous power of people and things, treading on the prerogatives of God. Soothsaying was a way of trying to gain miraculous information. These were to be eliminated to a higher and more spiritual faith life. Idols and aspects of idol worship were also to be eliminated. Standing images may refer to uncarved tree trunks or stones that were thought to hold spirits. Graven images referred to images that have been carved. Asherim were images of the mother goddess, who in the ancient religious belief was the consort of the god Baal. Asherim were associated with fertility rites.
You shall no longer worship the work of your own hands... this comment could be seen as tying together the theme of the two sections. Military might is a human work, as are the poles and images.
People would no longer bow down to the work of their own hands.
This has definite application to the pride of the modern world. What are the icons and lessons of pride? The Titanic? The shock when the Challenger exploded? For some parallel ideas, read Psalm 20:7 and Psalm 33:16-17
Verse 15 returns to an anti-foreign theme. Some scholars see it as displaced, belonging to the earlier element. One suggests it was added by an editor or scribe who couldn’t bear the thought of the only prophecy being against Israel’s disobedience. Some of the other prophetic books have this as a much stronger theme.
All of chapters 4 and 5 contain challenging alternating images of universal peace, restoration of the Hebrew remnant, peace, war, triumph, change and judgement. Many scholars do not believe much, if any of these chapters were by the original Micah. Yet they were placed together by an editor who thought they did fit together.
What do you think of these varying images? What message do you hear out of them? What questions?
Chapters 6-7 returns to material believed by scholars much of which to have been by the original Micah.
The passage begins with a call upon God to arise and plead the case against Israel. The maintains and hills were the jury. (Ecological themes were likely not in Micah’s mind, but perhaps could be applied in modern thought.)
God presents the case. What has God done to the people? Good! God brought them up from the land of Egypt, redeemed them from slavery, sent helpers in the form of Moses, Aaron and Miriam. The reference to Balak and Balaam refers to a later period than the Exodus. You may recall that Balak, king of the Moabites, wanted Balaam to throw a nasty and powerful curse against the Israelites. But Balaam refused, saying he could only curse what God wanted cursed, and bless what God wanted blessed. Shittim and Gilgal are more symbols of more saving acts. Shittim was the last post in the wilderness and Gilgal the first encampment is they entered the land.
One scholar sees 6-8 as a passage inserted on a different subject. However, if the first 5 verses are like the opening in a law case, the next verses might appear as the plea on the guilt box for how to respond, how to make things right. Burnt offerings? Thousands of rams? Rivers of oil? First born child? The last has been taken by some as an implication that human sacrifice was being practiced at the time. But if it was, it was not being done by the people as an approved part of the worship of Yahweh. There are reports of it. Jepthah made a vow and sacrificed his only daughter. Ahaz (735-715 b.c.) and Manasseh (687-642 b.c.) are both said to have sacrificed their own children. But Jeremiah reports God’s anger with human sacrifice: Jeremiah 7:30-1 does the same. When practiced, human sacrifice was a result of assimilation/influence of pagan practices.
What God wants justice, kindness and walking humbly with God. This seems like a remarkable thing to say about a god in those days. In ancient times, a god was seen as a powerful being whose support was achieved through sacrifices and loyalty. Yet here, the service that God wants is humility, justice and kindness. Sacrifice is diminished in importance here. Amos had already lifted this thought (Amos 5:21-5) and possibly earlier thinkers (I Samuel 15:22)
This is not to say that sacrifice was or is unimportant. The entire concept of sacrifice remains to this day. Not animal sacrifice, but the idea of offering of ourselves and our resources unto the same place that our hearts reside. In worship, the offering is the modern rendition of the ancient concept of sacrifice.
After this (verse 9), Micah returns to the issues of social justice. Wicked scales, deceitful weights. Through these verses, the punishment again fits the crime.
The reference to Omri and Ahab has to do with the royal dynasty in Israel (the northern kingdom after the time of Solomon). They were strong rulers, but viewed by the prophets and the faithful as outstanding in wickedness. (Ahab married Jezebel.) Since the southern kingdom had returned to the ways of these evil doers, they would fall.
Chapter 7 has the style of a lament. Woe is me! Life is compared to the situation of someone going out to find something in the vineyard or tree, longing for it, but nothing can be found. In the same way, is the search for the godly individual. It may remind us of the old story of Diogenes going out with his lantern in search for an honest man. Jeremiah would also go out an hunt through the streets of Jerusalem looking for a righteous man - Jeremiah 5:1. It is reminiscent also of legend of Lot or an angel bargaining with God to save the city if a certain number of righteous individuals were located. A TV movie was once made on the same theme called “Human Feelings.”
In verses 5-6 we encounter a VERY dismal picture where no one can trust anyone and there is conflict within neighbors, friendships, marriages, family and home. (One scholars says that Micah must have slipped into an abnormally depressed mood, since he usually seemed to have more faith in the humble poor. -- or at least, his prophecies are uttered more specifically against the rich and powerful. Did he think he was the only good person alive? If so, he would have surely came off as an unbearable prig. On the other hand, a less than perfect person can still hunt with hope in their heart for those who are better. Micah never claimed he was perfect, just that he was conveying God’s message.
Friday, November 26, 2010
Thursday, November 18, 2010
Micah - 04
We come now to chapters four and five. These chapters are believed by many scholars to be from authors other than the original Micah. Those who want to claim Micah was the author of the entire book see these chapters as a response to the threatened invasion by the Assyrians under Sennacherib in 701 bc. The reference to Babylon would have to be a later addition (possibly to make the prophecies more relevant to another generation) as Babylon would have made little sense to the people of Micah’s day. The issue is not whether a prophet can “predict” the future with God’s help, but the fact that the reference to Babylon would have made no sense to those who heard Micah.
The chapters are a radical departure from the themes and mood of the first three chapters. Rather than the stern calling for justice, they are words of hope for the future and contain themes generally thought to belong to later generations. Putting later prophesies under someone else’s name would not have been considered inappropriate in that time. The words of the biblical prophets clearly found significance in times other than their own and became living documents to share God’s word. New writers, with new inspiration might have added new dimensions. If understanding the chapters as from later authors helps us gain insight and grow spiritually, this is where the historical question becomes most important.
Some review (Micah 03 covered some of this)
Micah 4:1-4 – a great vision of a future time when all peoples would acknowledge God, all nations would have their disputes peaceably settled by God, all individuals would live in peace and safety.
Verse 5 – appears to be a objection or alternate point of view to the first 4 verses, suggesting idea that pagans would continue to worship their own Gods, but the people of Israel would be faithful to Yahweh.
Some scholars have suggested that this verse was inserted as a statement by someone who thought the preceding was an unrealistic dream. (i.e. he/she was saying, Oh, well, other nations will worship other gods, but we’ll stay faithful). One commentary says it is a flat contradiction of the first four verses in the chapter. This scholar asserts that the verse is saying that paganism is proper for pagans and that Yahweh is for Israel alone. It is true that there was a division of thought amongst the people of Judaism. Some believed that the news of God should be shared with the nations, others believe their faith was to keep for themselves. Christians likely have a bias for the first position (sharing/witness). Jesus was clearly of the school that the news of God should be shared.
A question could be raised as to what the author intended verse 5 to be saying. Is it possible that the author was stepping into the “present” and referring to Israelite calling to remain a light to the nations? In other words, saying ‘this sounds unrealistic, this sounds too good to be true, but it’s God’s promise and in the meantime, we’ll be faithful’?
Micah 4:6- - has subtle differences from 1-4. Jerusalem becomes less of a center from which God will instruct a peaceful world, but the core of a mighty nation. The former dominion, the former sovereignty – probably a reference to an ideal return to political power as in the days of David and Solomon, (re authorship and date, this would indicate a time after the people were taken into exile.)
The reference to the king may indicate that the king has not yet been removed from his throne. However he may be unable to do anything to help in this situation. (Question: scholar here assumes the “king” is an earthly king, but since God is also considered to be the king, what change in meaning would that give these verses?)
4:11 - This verse could describe the period of 516-445 b.c. Jerusalem was destroyed in 485 b.c. Persia was determined there would be no restoration of monarchy in Israel and the neighboring nations also harassed the Hebrews to keep them from power.
Every time progress was made on restoring Jerusalem, they would destroy it. About 445 Nehemiah came from Babylon, feeling the need to help his home country (he’d never been there) and found the people dispirited and under fire. (See Nehemiah 1:3; 4:16-20) But if the other nations believed they could keep the Hebrews down, they weren’t including Yahweh in their calculations. (The class mentioned the two saysings concerning ‘man proposes, God disposes’ and the one about making plans and hearing God laugh.
Israel’s ruler shall be struck on the cheek with a rod: - could be a possibility referring to a ritual known to have taken place in Babylon, and possibly in Israel. This was the New Year’s festival when the king at one point has his crown and royal dress taken away and is struck on the cheek by a priest. If this verse is referring to such a ritual, the verse that follows is the natural follow-up predicting success for the king. If these verse are pre-exilic, the author probably had no Messianic ideas (as in a future ideal ruler).
Rolland Wolfe suggests that these verses refer to the chaotic times after the fall of the monarchy. Judges, like the time before the monarchy, would have been the last stand of civil authority. Yet the surrounding powers were trying to destroy them and any government among the Jewish communities. (Attacking local civic government has happened before in US history. It was not unknown during the civil war for courthouses, for example, to be burned.)
5:2b-5a begings with a verse/image is often cited at Advent and Christmas. Matthew tells the story of the Wise Men quoting Micah 5:2 when they answer Herod’s question about where the Messiah will be born. Scholars indicate that the author probably did not have the Messiah in mind, but a ruler from the line of David who would restore the monarchy. Later people of faith saw Messianic messages in it (the scriptures having the power to speak to many generations).
In 5:5b- Nimrod – son of Cush (in the bible I Chronicles 1:10 giving the descendents of Ham -... “Cush became the father of Nimrod, he was the first to be a mighty one on earth.” Also mentioned in Genesis 10:8-9) He was famous as a great hunter, also for his kingdom on Mesopotamia, one of the major cities of which was Babel (Babylon). He was associated also with Asshur and Nineveh (the city that Jonah was called to prophesy to... the prophet Nahum said of Ninevah: "Woe to the bloody city, all full of lies and booty." Assyria was once called the “land of Nimrod as the poetic parallelism here in Micah illustrates.
The reference to seven shepherds and eight installed as rulers could in one scholar’s opinion reflect thethe time of 218 - 198 b.c. and the conquest of Palestine by Antiochus III. The seven shepherds and eight princes of men could refer to the coalition of leaders known as the Maccabean coalition. The Maccabeans joined together after the temple was plundered in 170 b.c.
Some themes to consider in these passages.
Vs 4:9-5:5a - Childbirth was at the time without pain medications or modern aids. It is interesting, for one thing as a realization of the difficulties of childbirth (in one South American culture, death in childbirth was held in the same honor and class as death in battle). But birth labor is also a productive labor. Could the image be of travail producing something good in the long run? Go to 5:3 and it is seen that the childbirth here is productive. The woman here (IB) is Israel who with God’s help would be successful in giving birth to a king who would restore the nation and the monarchy.
What do you think of these images of childbirth, travail, hard labor, productivity?
Remnant Theology: -
"...the lame I will make the remnant,,,"--Scholars think this might have been written during the exile, looking to a return from exile. The lame, those driven away...makes an accurate picture of what exile must have been like. And in the beginning, it was likely true both physically as well as mentally and spiritually. War leaves many maimed. Even those physically whole would have been driven across the countryside and would have arrived limping and sore.
The idea is that God will take a remnant and make them into a strong nation.
WHAT OTHER THEMES CAN YOU THINK OF THAT SHOW GOD’S POWER USING THE SMALL, THE WEAK?
Peace vs Vengeance/violence
4:12 stands in stark contrast to the images and hope of the first verses in the chapter. People of Jewish and Christian traditions have often struggled with the alternating images in the scriptures and with what feels like unavoidable requirement for violent solutions to world problems.
How do you respond to these radically alternate visions in Micah?
The chapters are a radical departure from the themes and mood of the first three chapters. Rather than the stern calling for justice, they are words of hope for the future and contain themes generally thought to belong to later generations. Putting later prophesies under someone else’s name would not have been considered inappropriate in that time. The words of the biblical prophets clearly found significance in times other than their own and became living documents to share God’s word. New writers, with new inspiration might have added new dimensions. If understanding the chapters as from later authors helps us gain insight and grow spiritually, this is where the historical question becomes most important.
Some review (Micah 03 covered some of this)
Micah 4:1-4 – a great vision of a future time when all peoples would acknowledge God, all nations would have their disputes peaceably settled by God, all individuals would live in peace and safety.
Verse 5 – appears to be a objection or alternate point of view to the first 4 verses, suggesting idea that pagans would continue to worship their own Gods, but the people of Israel would be faithful to Yahweh.
Some scholars have suggested that this verse was inserted as a statement by someone who thought the preceding was an unrealistic dream. (i.e. he/she was saying, Oh, well, other nations will worship other gods, but we’ll stay faithful). One commentary says it is a flat contradiction of the first four verses in the chapter. This scholar asserts that the verse is saying that paganism is proper for pagans and that Yahweh is for Israel alone. It is true that there was a division of thought amongst the people of Judaism. Some believed that the news of God should be shared with the nations, others believe their faith was to keep for themselves. Christians likely have a bias for the first position (sharing/witness). Jesus was clearly of the school that the news of God should be shared.
A question could be raised as to what the author intended verse 5 to be saying. Is it possible that the author was stepping into the “present” and referring to Israelite calling to remain a light to the nations? In other words, saying ‘this sounds unrealistic, this sounds too good to be true, but it’s God’s promise and in the meantime, we’ll be faithful’?
At Tuesday’s session, we discussed this and the question of calling/wtness and the Christian perspective. Although he focused his ministry to his own people, Jesus seems to have the perspective that sharing news of God is important.
Micah 4:6- - has subtle differences from 1-4. Jerusalem becomes less of a center from which God will instruct a peaceful world, but the core of a mighty nation. The former dominion, the former sovereignty – probably a reference to an ideal return to political power as in the days of David and Solomon, (re authorship and date, this would indicate a time after the people were taken into exile.)
The reference to the king may indicate that the king has not yet been removed from his throne. However he may be unable to do anything to help in this situation. (Question: scholar here assumes the “king” is an earthly king, but since God is also considered to be the king, what change in meaning would that give these verses?)
4:11 - This verse could describe the period of 516-445 b.c. Jerusalem was destroyed in 485 b.c. Persia was determined there would be no restoration of monarchy in Israel and the neighboring nations also harassed the Hebrews to keep them from power.
Every time progress was made on restoring Jerusalem, they would destroy it. About 445 Nehemiah came from Babylon, feeling the need to help his home country (he’d never been there) and found the people dispirited and under fire. (See Nehemiah 1:3; 4:16-20) But if the other nations believed they could keep the Hebrews down, they weren’t including Yahweh in their calculations. (The class mentioned the two saysings concerning ‘man proposes, God disposes’ and the one about making plans and hearing God laugh.
Israel’s ruler shall be struck on the cheek with a rod: - could be a possibility referring to a ritual known to have taken place in Babylon, and possibly in Israel. This was the New Year’s festival when the king at one point has his crown and royal dress taken away and is struck on the cheek by a priest. If this verse is referring to such a ritual, the verse that follows is the natural follow-up predicting success for the king. If these verse are pre-exilic, the author probably had no Messianic ideas (as in a future ideal ruler).
Rolland Wolfe suggests that these verses refer to the chaotic times after the fall of the monarchy. Judges, like the time before the monarchy, would have been the last stand of civil authority. Yet the surrounding powers were trying to destroy them and any government among the Jewish communities. (Attacking local civic government has happened before in US history. It was not unknown during the civil war for courthouses, for example, to be burned.)
5:2b-5a begings with a verse/image is often cited at Advent and Christmas. Matthew tells the story of the Wise Men quoting Micah 5:2 when they answer Herod’s question about where the Messiah will be born. Scholars indicate that the author probably did not have the Messiah in mind, but a ruler from the line of David who would restore the monarchy. Later people of faith saw Messianic messages in it (the scriptures having the power to speak to many generations).
The images, as the class discussed, are a little conflicted. The one born in Bethlehem is described as the one of peace. But passages shortly afterwards talk of vengeance against enemies. In discussion, the class considered the difficulties the people were experiencing and how it is not to want to see enemies destroyed and perhaps the alternating images through this section of Micah presents us with the importance of questions about dealing with human nature, our calling as people of faith, and the vitality of having a vision for something God wants.
In 5:5b- Nimrod – son of Cush (in the bible I Chronicles 1:10 giving the descendents of Ham -... “Cush became the father of Nimrod, he was the first to be a mighty one on earth.” Also mentioned in Genesis 10:8-9) He was famous as a great hunter, also for his kingdom on Mesopotamia, one of the major cities of which was Babel (Babylon). He was associated also with Asshur and Nineveh (the city that Jonah was called to prophesy to... the prophet Nahum said of Ninevah: "Woe to the bloody city, all full of lies and booty." Assyria was once called the “land of Nimrod as the poetic parallelism here in Micah illustrates.
The reference to seven shepherds and eight installed as rulers could in one scholar’s opinion reflect thethe time of 218 - 198 b.c. and the conquest of Palestine by Antiochus III. The seven shepherds and eight princes of men could refer to the coalition of leaders known as the Maccabean coalition. The Maccabeans joined together after the temple was plundered in 170 b.c.
Some themes to consider in these passages.
Childbirth – woman in travail
Vs 4:9-5:5a - Childbirth was at the time without pain medications or modern aids. It is interesting, for one thing as a realization of the difficulties of childbirth (in one South American culture, death in childbirth was held in the same honor and class as death in battle). But birth labor is also a productive labor. Could the image be of travail producing something good in the long run? Go to 5:3 and it is seen that the childbirth here is productive. The woman here (IB) is Israel who with God’s help would be successful in giving birth to a king who would restore the nation and the monarchy.
What do you think of these images of childbirth, travail, hard labor, productivity?
Remnant Theology: -
"...the lame I will make the remnant,,,"--Scholars think this might have been written during the exile, looking to a return from exile. The lame, those driven away...makes an accurate picture of what exile must have been like. And in the beginning, it was likely true both physically as well as mentally and spiritually. War leaves many maimed. Even those physically whole would have been driven across the countryside and would have arrived limping and sore.
The idea is that God will take a remnant and make them into a strong nation.
WHAT OTHER THEMES CAN YOU THINK OF THAT SHOW GOD’S POWER USING THE SMALL, THE WEAK?
Some anti-Jewish Christians, unfortunately, used a form of “remnant” theology to suggest that the remnant was the church and everyone else in Judaism is condemned.
Peace vs Vengeance/violence
4:12 stands in stark contrast to the images and hope of the first verses in the chapter. People of Jewish and Christian traditions have often struggled with the alternating images in the scriptures and with what feels like unavoidable requirement for violent solutions to world problems.
How do you respond to these radically alternate visions in Micah?
Tuesday, November 9, 2010
Micah - 03
The following are notes on the third chapter of Micah and the first portion of the fourth. Because we respect copyrights, we have not printed the scriptures here. Please use the translation of your choice to follow along.
Micah 3:1
Heads of Jacob – those prominent in civil life
Rulers of the house of Israel – governmental personnel
In the ancient near east, rulers were often spoken of as shepherds. There was, therefore, a sense that the ruler had some responsibility for the welfare of their people. But Israel’s leaders did not protect the people, making it easy for land-grabbers and other oppressors to make their lives miserable.
Micah has a clear and unshakeable belief in justice and righteousness. Amos who lived earlier (and 20 miles from Micah’s home) had the same emphasis. Micah applies it here specifically to people in leadership.
Micah 3:2b-4
These graphic, almost savage verses, express Micah’s deep outrage at what is happening to the poor. Micah here continues his prophecy of equitable punishment. They “cry” to the Lord – that is they will pray. But since they gave no help to the people, they will receive none.
Those who were exploiting the poor and practicing injustice still considered themselves to be religious and likely thanked God for their bounty. But God’s opinion is not the same as human opinion. Those who practice injustice are not faithful to God, who (in Micah’s human terms) cannot bear to “look” at people (hiding of face) who make religion into a perverted mockery.
Micah, along with Amos and other prophets, see religion as something that doesn’t stop with rituals, but must be present in daily activities.
Micah 3:5
In the previous verses, it is the official leaders of the people that Micah targeted. Here he turns to the men of the prophetic guilds. They would cry “peace” when it profited them. Jeremiah experienced the same. In his book he speaks of those who treat the wounds of the people with callous disregard saying peace when there is no peace. (see Jeremiah 6:14; 8:11)
Because their words had influence, Micah saw the seers, etc. as particularly guilty. When it profited them, they gave comforting words. But if someone couldn’t afford to pay them, or refused to do so out of principle, they took vengeance. Therefore, Micah speaks a dark word against them.
Micah 3:6 –7
Cover their lips – One scholar says this might refer to putting their beards up over their heads to hide their faces out of shame. Another notes that covering the lips is a ritual of mourning. Note that in standing against their profiteering, Micah must have made himself a target as well. He strengthened himself through the Spirit of the Lord and his passion for justice.
Micah 3:8
Biblical prophets did not practice “humility” in the sense we think of it today, but had to defend themselves against opponents by asserting their status as authentic speakers of God’s word.
Issue to think about: Today we hear many competing voices that claim to speak for God – How do we distinguish between them?
Micah returns to the leadership of the people in verse 9 and speaks more about religious leaders.
Micah 3:9-11
Zion is a poetic variation for Jerusalem. The American Heritage dictionary defines it variously as the Jewish people or the Jewish homeland as a symbol for Judaism. Can also be a place or faith community that is devoted to God or an idealized community. One rousing chorus sings: “We’re marching to Zion, beautiful, beautiful Zion... – probably in the hymn it stands for the idealized community.
"Zionism” refers to a plan or movement of the Jewish people in the diaspora (dispersion) to return to Palestine. This is a post-exilic concern, not connected with Micah’s time. His passion is for the fact that “Zion” is filled with injustice, neither religious nor idyllic.
The corrupt society in that century is seen through the eyes of Micah and other prophets, Isaiah, Amos and Hosea. Here the specific corruption Micah targets is bribery. The leaders are so corrupt that they can be bribed, its priests are also motivated by money as are the professional prophets.
However, people are unaware that they are offending God. They believe God is with them and disaster cannot fall upon them.
The fourth chapter begins a section that most scholars seem to regard as not by Micah. Micah has gone through phases of scholarly interest. One was to try to identify those portions that were definitively Micah’s. Another was to identify the historical settings. One scholar says now that the trend is to look at it as a whole, to understand the vision of the later editor that put the various portions together. Scholars say that 2-4 authors might have had a hand in this section of Micah. There seems to be parallels with Isaiah 40:1-11 (probably also a different writer from Isaiah 1-39 and sometimes referred to as Second Isaiah.)
The vision represented in chapter 4 is not an “end-time” age. That idea only developed in the 2-3 centuries before the birth of Jesus. Micah’s vision is within history for a time coming when all people will follow God. It isn’t idyllic in the sense that there will be no disagreements, but the disputes will not be violent. The author moves from national images to the individual life.
In literary terms, note the poetic form or parallel synonyms.
The fourth chapter of Micah, verse 1-4 are almost a duplicate of 2:2-4. One scholars scholar suggests that neither Isaiah nor Micah originated this oracle, but that it was generally known, and the editor could draw upon it.
Jerusalem here is not the scene of political domination, but of spiritual truth. Beyond this, envisioned is a world where no one practices domination.
Micah 4:5 is an interesting statement in the midst of the vision.
Some scholars have suggested that this verse was inserted as a statement by someone who thought the preceding was an unrealistic dream. (i.e. he/she was saying, Oh, well, other nations will worship other gods, but we’ll stay faithful). One commentary says it is a flat contradiction of the first four verses in the chapter. This scholar asserts that the verse is saying that paganism is proper for pagans and that Yahweh is for Israel alone. It is true that there was a division of thought amongst the people of Judaism. Some believed that the news of God should be shared with the nations, others believe their faith was to keep for themselves. Christians likely have a bias for the first position (sharing/witness). Jesus was clearly of the school that the news of God should be shared.
A question could be raised as to what the author intended verse 5 to be saying. Is it possible that the author was stepping into the “present” and referring to Israelite calling to remain a light to the nations? In other words, saying ‘this sounds unrealistic, this sounds too good to be true, but it’s God’s promise and in the meantime, we’ll be faithful’?
Other ideas?
Looking Ahead:
Micah 4:6- - has subtle differences from 1-4. Jerusalem becomes less of a center from which God will instruct a peaceful world, but the core of a mighty nation.
Micah 3:1
Heads of Jacob – those prominent in civil life
Rulers of the house of Israel – governmental personnel
In the ancient near east, rulers were often spoken of as shepherds. There was, therefore, a sense that the ruler had some responsibility for the welfare of their people. But Israel’s leaders did not protect the people, making it easy for land-grabbers and other oppressors to make their lives miserable.
Micah has a clear and unshakeable belief in justice and righteousness. Amos who lived earlier (and 20 miles from Micah’s home) had the same emphasis. Micah applies it here specifically to people in leadership.
See Amos 2:6-7; 5:7, 10-11, 15, 24; 8:4-7 for similar themes of justice
Note, in the verses from Amos that the gate is the place of public meeting and anyone who lifts a voice in protest at the treatment of the poor is met with hatred and abhorrence.
Micah 3:2b-4
These graphic, almost savage verses, express Micah’s deep outrage at what is happening to the poor. Micah here continues his prophecy of equitable punishment. They “cry” to the Lord – that is they will pray. But since they gave no help to the people, they will receive none.
Those who were exploiting the poor and practicing injustice still considered themselves to be religious and likely thanked God for their bounty. But God’s opinion is not the same as human opinion. Those who practice injustice are not faithful to God, who (in Micah’s human terms) cannot bear to “look” at people (hiding of face) who make religion into a perverted mockery.
Micah, along with Amos and other prophets, see religion as something that doesn’t stop with rituals, but must be present in daily activities.
Micah 3:5
In the previous verses, it is the official leaders of the people that Micah targeted. Here he turns to the men of the prophetic guilds. They would cry “peace” when it profited them. Jeremiah experienced the same. In his book he speaks of those who treat the wounds of the people with callous disregard saying peace when there is no peace. (see Jeremiah 6:14; 8:11)
Because their words had influence, Micah saw the seers, etc. as particularly guilty. When it profited them, they gave comforting words. But if someone couldn’t afford to pay them, or refused to do so out of principle, they took vengeance. Therefore, Micah speaks a dark word against them.
Micah 3:6 –7
Cover their lips – One scholar says this might refer to putting their beards up over their heads to hide their faces out of shame. Another notes that covering the lips is a ritual of mourning. Note that in standing against their profiteering, Micah must have made himself a target as well. He strengthened himself through the Spirit of the Lord and his passion for justice.
Micah 3:8
Biblical prophets did not practice “humility” in the sense we think of it today, but had to defend themselves against opponents by asserting their status as authentic speakers of God’s word.
Issue to think about: Today we hear many competing voices that claim to speak for God – How do we distinguish between them?
Micah returns to the leadership of the people in verse 9 and speaks more about religious leaders.
Micah 3:9-11
Zion is a poetic variation for Jerusalem. The American Heritage dictionary defines it variously as the Jewish people or the Jewish homeland as a symbol for Judaism. Can also be a place or faith community that is devoted to God or an idealized community. One rousing chorus sings: “We’re marching to Zion, beautiful, beautiful Zion... – probably in the hymn it stands for the idealized community.
"Zionism” refers to a plan or movement of the Jewish people in the diaspora (dispersion) to return to Palestine. This is a post-exilic concern, not connected with Micah’s time. His passion is for the fact that “Zion” is filled with injustice, neither religious nor idyllic.
The corrupt society in that century is seen through the eyes of Micah and other prophets, Isaiah, Amos and Hosea. Here the specific corruption Micah targets is bribery. The leaders are so corrupt that they can be bribed, its priests are also motivated by money as are the professional prophets.
However, people are unaware that they are offending God. They believe God is with them and disaster cannot fall upon them.
The fourth chapter begins a section that most scholars seem to regard as not by Micah. Micah has gone through phases of scholarly interest. One was to try to identify those portions that were definitively Micah’s. Another was to identify the historical settings. One scholar says now that the trend is to look at it as a whole, to understand the vision of the later editor that put the various portions together. Scholars say that 2-4 authors might have had a hand in this section of Micah. There seems to be parallels with Isaiah 40:1-11 (probably also a different writer from Isaiah 1-39 and sometimes referred to as Second Isaiah.)
The vision represented in chapter 4 is not an “end-time” age. That idea only developed in the 2-3 centuries before the birth of Jesus. Micah’s vision is within history for a time coming when all people will follow God. It isn’t idyllic in the sense that there will be no disagreements, but the disputes will not be violent. The author moves from national images to the individual life.
In literary terms, note the poetic form or parallel synonyms.
The fourth chapter of Micah, verse 1-4 are almost a duplicate of 2:2-4. One scholars scholar suggests that neither Isaiah nor Micah originated this oracle, but that it was generally known, and the editor could draw upon it.
Jerusalem here is not the scene of political domination, but of spiritual truth. Beyond this, envisioned is a world where no one practices domination.
Micah 4:5 is an interesting statement in the midst of the vision.
Some scholars have suggested that this verse was inserted as a statement by someone who thought the preceding was an unrealistic dream. (i.e. he/she was saying, Oh, well, other nations will worship other gods, but we’ll stay faithful). One commentary says it is a flat contradiction of the first four verses in the chapter. This scholar asserts that the verse is saying that paganism is proper for pagans and that Yahweh is for Israel alone. It is true that there was a division of thought amongst the people of Judaism. Some believed that the news of God should be shared with the nations, others believe their faith was to keep for themselves. Christians likely have a bias for the first position (sharing/witness). Jesus was clearly of the school that the news of God should be shared.
A question could be raised as to what the author intended verse 5 to be saying. Is it possible that the author was stepping into the “present” and referring to Israelite calling to remain a light to the nations? In other words, saying ‘this sounds unrealistic, this sounds too good to be true, but it’s God’s promise and in the meantime, we’ll be faithful’?
Other ideas?
Looking Ahead:
Micah 4:6- - has subtle differences from 1-4. Jerusalem becomes less of a center from which God will instruct a peaceful world, but the core of a mighty nation.
Friday, November 5, 2010
November 2, 2010
Sorry this wasn't posted on the 3rd. We are taking a week "in-between." A new posting will be up next week on the 10th. Have a good week.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)