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?
No comments:
Post a Comment