Book Of Micah

Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible

Micah, Book Of The Book of Micah stands in EV [Note: English Version.] sixth in order of the so-called Minor Prophets. In the LXX [Note: Septuagint.] it stood third, preceded only by Hosea and Amos. EV [Note: English Version.] in its arrangement follows the Hebrew Bible. In the Hebrew Bible the Book of Micah is the sixth section of a collection of prophecies already known about b.c. 180 as ‘the Twelve Prophets’ ( Sir 49:10 ). This Book of ‘the Twelve Prophets’ cannot have been compiled earlier than the 5th cent. b.c., for it contains the Book of Malachi, and it probably was not compiled till towards the close of the 3rd century b.c. For the history of the Book of Micah prior to its inclusion in this compilation we must rely entirely on internal evidence, except for any conclusions which may be drawn from   Jeremiah 26:17 ff., it appears certain that the section of the Book of the Twelve Prophets entitled Micah consists in part of prophecies of Micah the Morashtite (see preced. art.), a contemporary of Isaiah, and in part of prophecies of later date; but the determination of what are the later prophecies is not in every case equally easy or sure.

The book divides into three clearly marked sections chs. 1 3, Prophecies of Judgment for sin (exception  Micah 2:12 f.); chs. 4, 5, Prophecies of Promise (mainly, if not entirely); chs. 6, 7, more miscellaneous in character, but containing in ch. 7 confessions of national sin.

The first of these sections contains, and for the most part consists of, prophecies of Micah. The allusion to Samaria (which was destroyed in 722) as still standing, and the accordance of the other conditions presupposed with what is otherwise known of the latter half of the 8th cent. b.c., would suffice to prove this; but we also possess early external evidence that Micah was the author of a saying occurring in this section of the book. At the close of the following century (b.c. 608) the prophet Jeremiah was denounced by the priests and prophets as worthy of death, because he had predicted the destruction of Jerusalem; but certain elders cited against the priests and prophets the precedent of Micah the Morashtite, who had made a similar prediction in the days of Hezekiah, and yet, so far from being put to death, had led his people to repentance; in citing this case the speakers quote the words with which  Micah 3:1-12 closes (see   Jeremiah 26:1-24 , esp.   Jeremiah 26:17-18 ). Of course, the citation of this single verse does not prove that even the first three chapters of the Book of Micah were then in circulation in their present form  ; but the narrative in Jeremiah shows that Micah, a century after he prophesied, ranked as a prophet of judgment, and   Micah 1:1-16;   Micah 2:1-13;   Micah 3:1-12 is preeminently prophecy of judgment. The two verses (  Micah 2:12 f.) which interrupt the general tenor of chs. 1 3 with a promise, represent Israel as scattered, and appear to presuppose the Exile; they are certainly not part of the preceding prophecy, and probably are an insertion in the book after the time of Jeremiah. It is held by some that the Book of Micah known to Jeremiah’s contemporaries also lacked the following portions of chs. 1 3;   Micah 1:1-5 a,   Micah 1:7 ,   Micah 1:10-15 ,   Micah 2:5 . Note, for example, that   Micah 1:7 stands most awkwardly before   Micah 1:3 , which may give the reason for   Micah 1:6 , but certainly not for   Micah 1:7 . Yet the grounds given for deleting these passages in order to recover the earliest form of the Book of Micah are by no means in all cases equally conclusive. For the teaching of Micah, see preceding article.

Two not quite identical questions now naturally arise: Did the Book of Micah in the time of Jeremiah extend beyond ch. 3? Do chs. 4 7 contain any prophecies of Micah? The answers, so far as they can be given, must rest mainly on internal evidence. What suggestion the narrative of  Jeremiah 26:1-24 offers in this connexion may best be put in the form of a question. Could the elders have cited (  Jeremiah 26:18 ) the words of   Micah 3:12 if those words were then, as now, immediately followed (  Micah 4:1-4 ) by a glowing description of the future glory of Jerusalem? Would they not thereby have given the priests an opening to say that Micah’s life was spared because he repented of his blasphemy against their city and spoke of its glory?

Chs. 4, 5 appear to be a cento of brief prophecies, several of them being fragments as follows:  Micah 4:1-13 ,   Micah 5:1-14 . The first of these (  Micah 4:1-4 ) stands also in the Book of Isaiah (  Isaiah 2:2-4 ). Neither in Isaiah nor in Micah is the passage connected either with what precedes or with what follows; owing to mistranslation, RV [Note: Revised Version.] indeed suggests that   Micah 4:1-4 is the contrast to   Micah 3:12; but for ‘but’ in   Micah 4:1 must be substituted ‘and’ as in RV [Note: Revised Version.] itself in   Isaiah 2:2 . The verses contain a prophetic poem of 20 short lines (two of which were omitted in Isaiah); as the same Psalm (14 = 53) was included in two separate collections of Psalms, so this poem was not unreasonably thought worthy by two editors of prophetic literature to be included in their collections. It is impossible to examine here in detail the remaining sections of these chapters; some seem, if naturally interpreted, to presuppose the dispersion of Israel at the Exile; see e.g .   Micah 4:6-8 ,   Micah 5:7 , where promises of a bright future are made to Israel, who has already been reduced to a remnant; some passages contain the expectation of a judgment on the nations in general (  Micah 4:13 ,   Micah 5:15 ), which is certainly more conspicuous in the later prophets than in those of the age of Micah; in   Micah 4:11-13 Zion seems to be regarded as inviolable a point of view strikingly different from that with which Micah was popularly identified (  Micah 3:12 ,   Jeremiah 26:18 ). In   Micah 5:10-14 there is little or nothing inconsistent with an eighth century origin; read by themselves, without   Micah 5:15 , they are not necessarily a prophecy of promise, but rather of judgment. Here (and perchance in   Micah 5:1 ), if anywhere in chs. 4, 5, we may look for Micah’s work; for though so early an origin of these verses is not certain, neither is it certain that they are a piece of late reproductive prophecy.

Turning next to chs. 6, 7, we remark first that since Ewald the allusion to sacrificing the firstborn, and certain other features, have been commonly considered to point to the period of Manasseh as that in which chs. 6, 7 were written a date which would not quite necessarily exclude Micah’s authorship, for Manasseh began to reign about 695 b.c.

In  Micah 6:1-8 some points, such as the use of ‘burnt-offering’ (not ‘sin-offering’) and the nature of the allusion to Balaam, may be more easily explained if the passage be at least pre-exilic. The classical prophetic definition of religion with which this section closes (  Micah 6:8 ), though it embraces and summarizes the fundamental teaching of Amos, Hosea, and Isaiah, does not pass beyond it a fact which is thoroughly compatible with Ewald’s theory, though not, of course, in itself a proof of its correctness.

But it is more than doubtful whether chs. 6, 7 should be treated as a single prophecy;  Micah 6:9-16 and   Micah 7:1-6 , though scarcely a continuation of   Micah 6:1-8 , are not obviously separated from it at all widely in situation or time. On the other hand, as compared with   Micah 7:1-20 show a marked difference. Wellhausen (cited by Driver, LOT [Note: OT Introd. to the Literature of the Old Testament.] 5 332 f.) has tersely summed this up.

‘ Micah 7:1-6 consists of a bitter lamentation uttered by Zion over the corruption of her children: and the day of retribution, though ready, is yet future,   Micah 7:4 .’ In   Micah 7:7-20 ‘Zion, indeed, is still the speaker; but here she has already been overpowered by her foe, the heathen world, which is persuaded that by its victory over Israel it has at the same time vanquished Jahweh (  Micah 7:10 ). The city has fallen, its walls are destroyed, its inhabitants pine away in darkness, i.e . in the darkness of captivity (  Micah 7:8;   Micah 7:11 ). Nevertheless, Zion is still confident, and though she may have to wait long, she does not question her final triumph over the foe (  Micah 7:7-8;   Micah 7:10 a,   Micah 7:11 ). She endures patiently the punishment merited by her past sins, assured that when she has atoned for them, God will take up her cause and lead her to victory (  Micah 7:9 ). What was present in   Micah 7:1-6 , viz., moral disorder and confusion in the existing Jewish State, is in   Micah 7:7-20 past  : what is there future , viz., the retribution of   Micah 7:4 b, has here come to pass, and has been continuing for some time. Between   Micah 7:8 and   Micah 7:7 yawns a century.’

Briefly, then, the history of the Book of Micah seems to have been this: a summary of the teaching of the prophet Micah, not improbably prepared and written by himself, was well known in Jerusalem at the end of the seventh century a century after the lifetime of the prophet. This small book was re-edited and provided with its present expanded title, and enlarged by the addition of a collection of prophetic pieces, some of pre-exilic, and several of post-exilic, origin. It is not necessary to suppose that this added matter was originally attributed to Micah, though subsequently it came to he regarded as his work in the same way as  Isaiah 40:1-31;   Isaiah 41:1-29;   Isaiah 42:1-25;   Isaiah 43:1-28;   Isaiah 44:1-28;   Isaiah 45:1-25;   Isaiah 46:1-13;   Isaiah 47:1-15;   Isaiah 48:1-22;   Isaiah 49:1-26;   Isaiah 50:1-11;   Isaiah 51:1-23;   Isaiah 52:1-15;   Isaiah 53:1-12;   Isaiah 54:1-17;   Isaiah 55:1-13;   Isaiah 56:1-12;   Isaiah 57:1-21;   Isaiah 58:1-14;   Isaiah 59:1-21;   Isaiah 60:1-22;   Isaiah 61:1-11;   Isaiah 62:1-12;   Isaiah 63:1-19;   Isaiah 64:1-12;   Isaiah 65:1-25;   Isaiah 66:1-24 and   Zechariah 9:1-17;   Zechariah 10:1-12;   Zechariah 11:1-17;   Zechariah 12:1-14;   Zechariah 13:1-9;   Zechariah 14:1-21 came to he looked upon as writings of Isaiah and Zechariah respectively. The final stage in. the history of the book was its incorporation, probably towards the close of the 3rd cent. b.c., in the great prophetic work ‘The Book of the Twelve.’ It is impossible to determine through how many stages of editorial treatment the book passed, but some of these stages certainly fell within the post-exilic period.

The most convenient English commentaries are those by T. K. Cheyne in the Cambridge Bible , and R. F. Horton in the Century Bible . The discussion and new translation from an emended text in G. A. Smith, Book of the Twelve Prophets , i. 355 ff., will be found most valuable and helpful.

G. B. Gray.

Holman Bible Dictionary

MicahMicaiahMichaiahMicha

 Micah 1:1 gives the reader three pieces of information about the prophet. He came from Maresheth (NIV) which probably should be identified with Moresheth-gath. This village was located about 25 miles southwest of Jerusalem in the tribe of Judah. Micah, however, may have lived in Jerusalem during his ministry. He worked in the reigns of Jotham (750-732 B.C.), Ahaz (735-715 B.C.), and Hezekiah (715-686 B.C.) who were kings of Judah. The identification of these kings does not mean that he was active from 750-686, but that his ministry spanned parts of each reign.   Jeremiah 26:17-18 refers to Micah as prophesying during the time of Hezekiah. Determining exact dates, however, for each of the prophecies contained in the book is difficult. Micah was a contemporary of Isaiah, Hosea, and possibly Amos.

Finally, His prophecies addressed Samaria and Jerusalem. Samaria was the capital of the Northern Kingdom (Israel) and Jerusalem, of the Southern Kingdom (Judah). Even though Micah ministered in Judah, some of his messages were directed toward Israel.

Historical Background In Micah's time, many political and national crises occurred. Micah addressed those issues.

The Assyrian Empire began to dominate the Ancient Near East about 740 B.C. Juhad and Israel became tribute-paying vassals of this new political power, and in 722 B.C. Israel felt the might of the Assyrian army. Shalmaneser V and Sargon II destroyed the Northern Kingdom and its capital, Samaria ( 2 Kings 16-17 ) because of an attempted rebellion. The records of Sargon II state that he “besieged and conquered Samaria, (and) led away as booty 27,290 inhabitants of it.” While Judah survived, they still were vassals.  Micah 1:2-7 associates the imminent destruction of Samaria as God's judgment for the people's idolatry. Hezekiah, king of Judah, instituted many reforms that caused the Assyrian king, Sennacherib, to respond with force. Many cities of Judah were destroyed, and Jerusalem was unsuccessfully besieged (  2 Kings 18-19 ). The annals of Sennacherib boast that he laid siege to 46 cities and countless small villages. He took 200,150 people as booty along with the livestock. As for Hezekiah, Sennacherib says, “Himself I made a prisoner in Jerusalem, his royal residence, like a bird in a cage.” Despite the failure to take Jerusalem, the citizens of the Southern Kingdom suffered greatly from the invasion.

The Prophet's Message The subjects of Micah's messages reveal much about the society of his day. He constantly renounced the oppression of the poor by the rich. He characterized the rich as devising ways in which to cheat the poor out of their land ( Micah 2:1-5 ). People were evicted from their homes and had their possessions stolen. Those who committed such crimes were fellow Israelites ( Micah 2:6-11 ). The marketplace was full of deception and injustice ( Micah 6:9-16 ). The rulers of the country, who had the responsibility of upholding justice, did the opposite ( Micah 3:1-4 ).

Micah also denounced the religious practices of the nation. He predicted the destruction of Judah as an act of God's judgment. Other prophets, however, led the people to believe that this could never happen because God was residing in the nation and would protect them. Micah contended that the other prophets' message was not from God. Instead, the message from God was the imminent devastation of Judah ( Micah 3:5-12 ).

The people worshiped other gods. They did not quit believing in and worshiping the God of Judah, but they combined this worship with devotion to other details ( Micah 5:10-15 ). The people believed all that religion required of them was to bring their sacrifices and offerings to the Temple. No relationship was acknowledged between their activity in the Temple and their activity in daily life. Micah attempted to correct this misconception by arguing that God is not just interested in the physical act of making a sacrifice but is supremely concerned with obedience that extends into daily life ( Micah 6:6-8 ).

Micah warned of impending judgment on God's people for their disobedience. At the same time, he proclaimed messages of hope. Judgment would come, but afterwards, God would restore a remnant of the people devoted to Him ( Micah 4:1-13;  Micah 7:14-20 ). Unlike the unjust kings that the people were accustomed to, God would bring a ruler who would allow the people to live in peace ( Micah 5:1-5 ). Ultimately, Judah was destroyed in 586 B.C. by the Babylonians, but a remnant returned. Matthew saw in Micah's hope for a new ruler a description of Christ ( Matthew 2:6 ). See Ahaz; Assyria; Israel; Hezekiah; Jerusalem; Prophet; Samaria.

Outline

I. God's Word Witnesses Against All People ( Micah 1:1-2 ).

II. God Judges His People for Their Sins ( Micah 1:3-3:12 ).

A. God judges religious infidelity ( Micah 1:3-16 ).

B. God judges economic injustice ( Micah 2:1-5 ).

C. God judges false preaching ( Micah 2:6-11 ).

D. God's judgment looks to the remnant's restoration ( Micah 2:12-13 ).

E. God judges unjust leaders ( Micah 3:1-4 ).

F. God judges those who preach peace and prosperity for sinners ( Micah 3:5-7 ).

G. God judges through His Spirit-filled messenger ( Micah 3:8 ).

H. God judges corrupt, greedy officials ( Micah 3:9-12 ).

III. God Promises a Day of International Peace and Worship ( Micah 4:1-5:15 ).

A. God plans for His people to teach His way to the nations ( Micah 4:1-5 ).

B. God plans to redeem and rule His weakened remnant ( Micah 4:6-11 ).

C. God plans to show the world His universal rule ( Micah 4:12-13 ).

D. God plans to raise up a Shepherd from Bethlehem to bring peace and victory to His beleagured flock ( Micah 5:1-9 ).

E. God plans to destroy weapons and idolatry from His people ( Micah 5:10-15 ).

IV. God Has a Case Against His People ( Micah 6:1-7:6 ).

A. God has done His part, redeeming His people ( Micah 6:1-5 ).

B. God's expectations are clear: justice, mercy, piety ( Micah 6:6-8 ).

C. God's people have not met His expectations ( Micah 6:9-12 ).

D. God's punishment is sure for a corrupt people ( Micah 6:13-7:6 ).

V. God in Righteousness, Love, and Faithfulness Will Forgive and Renew His People ( Micah 7:7-20 ).

A. God's people can trust Him for salvation ( Micah 7:7 ).

B. God's repentant people can expect better days ahead ( Micah 7:8-14 ).

C. God's enemies face shameful judgment ( Micah 7:15-17 ).

D. The incomparable God of patience, mercy, compassion, and faithfulness will forgive and renew His people ( Micah 7:18-20 ).

Scott Langston

Morrish Bible Dictionary

Nothing is known of the prophet personally. He prophesied during the reigns of Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, kings of Judah, and was thus contemporary with Isaiah and Hosea. His prophecy was concerning Samaria and Jerusalem. God spoke from His holy temple, and the prophet exclaimed, "Hear, all ye peoples." He spoke to all people saying "Hearken, O earth. " All the earth was involved in the judgements that God was going to bring upon His chosen people: a solemn consideration when the people of God, instead of being a testimony for Him, bring the judgements of God down on the world. The time has come that judgement must begin at the house of God. The prophecy seems to divide itself into three sections: the word 'hear' introducing each.

1.   Micah 1,2;

2.   Micah 3 - 5; and

3.   Micah 6,7

 Micah 1,2 may be regarded as introductory. Judgements should fall upon Samaria, her wound was incurable; but they should also approach Judah and Jerusalem. The Assyrian is the special instrument of the judgements.

 Micah 2 . The prophet speaks of the moral state of the people that called for judgement. Schemes of violence were devised by them to gratify their covetousness. They had turned away from the testimony, and it should be taken from them.  Micah 2:6 may be translated "Prophesy ye not, they prophesy. If they do not prophesy to these, the ignominy will not depart." Their wickedness spared neither women nor children. There was a call to arise and depart, for the land of promise was polluted. Nevertheless, God does not renounce His purpose concerning Israel, He will gather them together for blessing in the last days. There shall be a 'breaker' by whom He will remove all obstacles.

 Micah 3 . The princes and prophets are denounced because of their iniquity; but the prophet himself was full of power to declare the sin of Israel, consequently Zion should be ploughed as a field, and Jerusalem should become heaps. This prophecy has been literally fulfilled.

 Micah 4 turns to the blessing of the last days, when Mount Zion will have the first place, and many nations will approach the mountain of the Lord that they may learn His ways. The people will be judged in righteousness; and there will be peace, safety, and plenty. But before this there would be the loss of the royal power established in Zion, and their captivity in Babylon, but they should be redeemed. Eventually there would be many nations come against Zion, but the daughter of Zion should beat them to pieces, and consecrate their spoils to Jehovah, the Lord of the whole earth: comp.   Psalm 83;  Isaiah 17:12-14;  Zechariah 14:2 .

 Micah 5 Another subject and another Person are introduced before the final blessings of Israel can be brought to them, namely, the MESSIAH,'the judge of Israel,' whose goings forth had been from of old, from everlasting.   Micah 5:2 tells where Christ would be born, and this prophecy was referred to by the religious rulers when Herod inquired of them respecting His birth. If this verse be read as a parenthesis it will make the context clearer. Because the Judge of Israel was smitten on the cheek with a rod, therefore He gave them up until the time of bringing forth, when the remnant of His brethren should return unto the children of Israel; that is, they will no longer be added to the church as in   Acts 2:27 . "He shall stand and feed in the strength of Jehovah, in the majesty of the name of Jehovah his God; and they shall abide."

The Assyrian will appear at the close, but only to be destroyed; for Jehovah will have renewed His connection with Israel. The remnant of Jacob will then be in power as a lion: horses and chariots will be destroyed; and all graven images and symbols of idolatry. God will execute such vengeance as will not previously have been heard of.

 Micah 6 returns to the moral condition of the people, and the judgements that must follow. Jehovah pathetically appeals to His people. He recounts what He has done for them, and asks wherein He had wearied them. Let them testify against Him. He rehearses their sins, and the punishments that must follow.

 Micah 7 . The prophet takes the place of intercessor, and pleads with God for the people, lamenting their condition; but in faith he says, "I will look unto Jehovah; I will wait for the God of my salvation: my God will hear me." Those who rejoiced at their tribulation shall be trodden down as mire. The city will be rebuilt and the people brought from far, to the amazement of the nations, who will be confounded to see them in power again. The prophet closes with expressions of faith in and adoration of the God that pardons. He has confidence that God will perform the truth to Jacob, and the mercy to Abraham, which He had sworn to their fathers from the days of old.

Bridgeway Bible Dictionary

Of the four eighth century prophets whose writings have been preserved in the Old Testament, Micah was the last. Amos and Hosea had brought God’s message mainly to the northern kingdom Israel, whereas Isaiah and Micah were more concerned with the southern kingdom Judah. The two men prophesied during the same period ( Isaiah 1:1;  Micah 1:1) and both were especially concerned with the sins of Jerusalem. The two books contain many similarities, and it has been suggested that Micah might have been one of Isaiah’s disciples (cf.  Isaiah 8:16).

Social conditions

With the prosperity of the eighth century came the social evils of greed, corruption, injustice and immorality. Those who profited most from the economic development were the merchants, officials and other upper class city dwellers. Corruption in the law courts made it easy for these people to do as they wished, while poorer class people found it impossible to gain even the most basic justice ( Micah 3:9-11;  Micah 7:3).

Micah was particularly concerned with the injustice done to the poor farmers. He was from a farming village himself ( Micah 1:1), and he saw that the corruption of Israel and Judah was centred in the capital cities, Samaria and Jerusalem ( Micah 1:5;  Micah 6:9).

Because of the injustice of the officials and merchants with whom they had to deal, the farmers were forced to borrow from the wealthy to keep themselves in business ( Micah 3:1-3;  Micah 6:10-12). The wealthy lent them money at interest rates so high that the farmers found it impossible to pay their debts. The wealthy then seized the farmers’ possessions as payment. First they seized their clothing and household items ( Micah 2:8), then, when these were not sufficient, their houses and land ( Micah 2:1-3;  Micah 2:9). The farmers then had to rent back their land from their new masters, thereby increasing the farmers’ burden even more.

These practices showed no knowledge of the character of God or the nature of true religion. The people still followed the sacrifices and ceremonies of the Israelite religion, but Micah warned that formal religion was hateful to God if justice and love were absent ( Micah 6:6-8). Unless they repented, God would send the people into captivity and leave their homeland desolate ( Micah 3:12;  Micah 6:16).

Religious leaders also were corrupt. Preachers had comforting words for the upper class people from whom they received their income, but they condemned the prophet Micah for his forthright speaking ( Micah 2:6;  Micah 2:11;  Micah 3:5). Hezekiah the king, however, heeded Micah’s warnings. He managed to achieve some reformation in Judah, and as a result God postponed the day of judgment ( Jeremiah 26:18-19; cf.  Micah 3:12).

Eventually, in the reign of a later king, the judgment fell. Yet Micah saw that beyond the judgment lay the hope of a restored nation, a glorious kingdom and an ideal king ( Micah 2:12-13;  Micah 4:1-4;  Micah 5:2;  Micah 5:4).

Summary of the book

From his prophetic viewpoint, Micah gives a picture of the judgment about to fall on Israel and Judah (1:1-16). He goes on to point out that the reason for the judgment is the oppression of the poor by the corrupt leaders (2:1-3:12). But, looking further ahead, he sees that after captivity in a foreign land, Israel’s shame will be replaced by glory (4:1-5:1), and God’s chosen king will reign over his people in an ideal kingdom (5:2-15). Returning to the present, Micah announces God’s accusations against his people (6:1-16), then confesses their sin to God and pleads for God’s mercy (7:1-20).

Easton's Bible Dictionary

 1 Kings 22:28

The book consists of three sections, each commencing with a rebuke, "Hear ye," etc., and closing with a promise, (1) ch. 1; 2; (2) ch. 3-5, especially addressed to the princes and heads of the people; (3) ch. 6-7, in which Jehovah is represented as holding a controversy with his people: the whole concluding with a song of triumph at the great deliverance which the Lord will achieve for his people. The closing verse is quoted in the song of Zacharias ( Luke 1:72,73 ). The prediction regarding the place "where Christ should be born," one of the most remarkable Messianic prophecies ( Micah 5:2 ), is quoted in  Matthew 2:6 .

There are the following references to this book in the New Testament:

5:2, with  Matthew 2:6;  John 7:42 . 7:6, with  Matthew 10:21,35,36 . 7:20, with  Luke 1:72,73 .

Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological and Ecclesiastical Literature

the sixth of the minor prophets in the usual arrangement, but the third in the Sept. (after Hosea and Amos). In the following account of it we treat in special detail those points that have created controversies in modern times.

I. The Name . — This , which the prophet bears in common with the other persons above and below, is found with considerable variation in the Heb. and A.V. The full form is מַיכָיָּהוּ , Mikaya'Hu, "who is like Jehovah," which is found in  2 Chronicles 13:2;  2 Chronicles 17:7. This is abbreviated to מַיכָיְהוּ , Mikayehu, in  Judges 17:1;  Judges 17:4; still further to מַכָיְהוּ , Mika'Yehu ( Jeremiah 36:11), מַיכָיָה , Mikayah ( 1 Kings 22:13); and finally to, מַיכָה , Mikah', or מַיכָא , Mika ( 2 Samuel 9:12).

II. Date . — The period during which Micah exercised the prophetical office is stated, in the superscription to his Proverbs 6 phecies, to have extended over the reigns of Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, kings of Judah, giving thus a maximum limit of 59 years (B.C. 756-697), from the accession of Jotham to the death of Hezekiah, and a minimum limit of 16 years (B.C. 742-726), from the death of Jotham to the accession of Hezekiah. In either case he would be contemporary with Hosea and Amos during part of their ministry in Israel, and with Isaiah in Judah. According to rabbinical tradition, he transmitted to the prophets Joel, Nahum, and Habakkuk, and to Seraiah the priest the mysteries of the Kabbala, which he had received from Isaiah (R. David Ganz. Tsemach David), and by Syncellas (Chronogr. page 199 c) he is enumerated in the reign of Jotham as contemporary with Hosea, Joel, Isaiah, and. Oded. The date of the book itself may be fixed at about B.C. 725. His prediction with impunity of the desolation of Jerusalem ( Micah 3:12) is expressly alluded to in Jeremiah ( Jeremiah 26:18, where the text has מַיכָיֹה , Micaiah), as having been uttered during the reign of Hezekiah. The allusions to idolatry ( Micah 7:13) and to Babylon ( Micah 4:10) have induced Berthold (Einleitung, § 411) to refer the prophecy of Micah to the time of the captivity; but De Wette truly observes that this supposition is unnecessary, as idolatry existed under Hezekiah (2 Kings 23), and Babylon equally belonged to the kingdom of Assyria. Hartmann's attempt to regard the passage respecting Babylon as an interpolation (see Micha neu ubersetzt), De Wette regards as even still more venturesome; nor had this writer the slightest authority for supposing that some only of the prophecies are Micah's, and that the work was compiled during the exile. The time assigned to the prophecies by the only direct evidence which we possess agrees so well with their contents that it may fairly be accepted as correct.

Why any discrepancy should be perceived between the statement in Jeremiah, that "Micah the Morasthite prophesied in the days of Hezekiah king of Judah," and the title of his book, which tells us that the word of the Lord came to him "in the days of Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah," it is difficult to imagine. The former does not limit the period of Micah's prophecy, and at most applies only to the passage to which direct allusion is made. Aconfusion appears to have existed in the minds of those who see in the prophecy in its present form a connected whole, between the actual delivery of the several portions of it, and their collection and transcription into one book. In the case of Jeremiah, we know that he dictated to Baruch the prophecies which he had delivered in the interval between the 13th year of Josiah and the 4th of Jehoiakim, and that when thus committed to writing they were read before the people on the fast day ( Jeremiah 36:2;  Jeremiah 36:4;  Jeremiah 36:6). There is reason to believe that a similar process took place with the prophecies of Amos. It is, therefore, conceivable, to say the least, that certain portions of Micah's prophecy may have been uttered in the reigns of Jotham and Ahaz, and for the probability of this there is strong internal evidence, while they were collected as a whole in the reign of Hezekiah and committed to writing. Caspari (Micha, page 78) suggests that the book thus written .may have been read in the presence of the king and the whole people on, some great fast or festival day, and that this circumstance may have been in-the minds of the elders of the land in the time of Jehoiakim, when they appealed to the. impunity which Micah enjoyed under Hezekiah. Knobel (Prophetismus, 2: § ,20) imagines that the prophecies which remain belong to the time of Hezekiah, and that those delivered-under Jotham and Ahaz have perished. It is evident from  Micah 1:6 that the section of the prophecy in which that verse occurs must have been delivered before the destruction of Samaria by Shalmaneser, which took place in the 6th year of Hezekiah (cir. B.C. 722), and connecting the "high-places" mentioned in  Micah 1:5 with those which existed in Judah in the reigns of Ahaz ( 2 Kings 16:4;  2 Chronicles 28:4;  2 Chronicles 28:25) and Jotham ( 2 Kings 15:35), we may be justified in assigning chap. 1 to the time of one of these monarchs, probably the latter; although, if chap. ii be considered as part of the section to which chapter 1 belongs, the utter corruption and demoralization of the people there depicted agree better with what history tells us of the times of Ahaz. Caspari maintains that of the two parallel passages,  Micah 4:1-5,  Isaiah 2:2-5, the former is the original, and the latter belongs to the times of Uzziah and Jotham, and this view is maintained by Hengstenberg (Christology, 1:480), and accepted by Pusey (Minor Prophets, page 289). But the evidence on the point is not at all conclusive:  Micah 4:1-4 may possibly, as Ewald and others have suggested, be a portion of an older prophecy current at the time, which was adopted by both Micah and Isaiah ( Isaiah 2:2-4). The denunciation of the horses and chariots of Judah (5:10) is appropriate to the state of the country under Jotham, after the long and prosperous reign of Uzziah, by whom the military strength of the people had been greatly developed ( 2 Chronicles 26:11-15;  2 Chronicles 27:4-6). Compare  Isaiah 2:7, which belongs to the same period. Again, the forms in which idolatry manifested itself in the reign of Ahaz correspond with those which are threatened with destruction in  Micah 5:12-14; and the allusions in 6:16 to the "statutes of Omri," and the "works of the house of Ahab," seem directly pointed at the king, of whom it is expressly said that "he walked in the way of the kings of Israel" ( 2 Kings 16:3). It is impossible in dealing with internal evidence to assert positively that the inferences deduced from it are correct; but in the present instance they at least establish a probability that, in placing the period of Micah's prophetical activity between the times of Jotham and Hezekiah, the superscription is correct. In the first years of Hezekiah's reign the idolatry which prevailed in the time of Ahaz was not eradicated, and in assigning the date of Micah's prophecy to this period there is no anachronism in the allusions to idolatrous practices. Maurer contends that chap. 1 was written not long before the taking of Samaria; but the third and following chapters he places in the interval between the destruction of Samaria and the, time that Jerusalem was menaced by the army of Sennacherib in the 14th year of Hezekiah. The passages, however, which he quotes in support of his conclusion: ( Micah 3:12;  Micah 4:9, etc.;  Micah 5:5, etc.;  Micah 6:9, etc.;  Micah 7:4;  Micah 7:12, etc.) do not appear to be more suitable to that period than to the first years of Hezekiah, while the context, in many cases, requires a still earlier date. In the arrangement adopted by Wells (pref. to Micah, § 4-6), chapter 1 was delivered in the contemporary reigns of Jotham king of Judah and of Pekah king of Israel;  Micah 2:1 to  Micah 4:8 in those of Ahaz, Pekah, and Hosea;  Micah 3:12 being assigned to the last year of Ahaz, and the remainder of the book to the reign of Hezekiah.

It is remarkable that the prophecies commence with the last words recorded of the prophet's namesake, Micaiah the son of Imlah, "Hearken, O people, every one of you" ( 1 Kings 22:28). From this, Bleek (Einleitung, page 539) concludes that the author of the history, like the ecclesiastical historians, confounded Micah the Morasthite with Micaiah; while Hengstenberg (Christology, 1:409, Eng. tr.) infers that the coincidence was intentional on the part of the later prophet, and that "by this very circumstance he gives intimation of what may be expected from him, and shows that his activity is to be considered as a continuation of that of his predecessor, who was so jealous for God, and that he had more in common with him than the mere name." Either conclusion rests on the extremely slight foundation of the occurrence of a formula which was at once the most simple and most natural commencement of a prophetic discourse.

III. Contents . — But, at whatever time the several prophecies were first delivered, they appear in their present form as an organic whole, marked by a certain regularity of development. Three sections, omitting the superscription, are introduced by the same phrase, שַׁמְעוּ , "Hear ye," and represent three natural divisions of the prophecy — 1-2, 3-5, 6-7 — each commencing with rebukes and threatenings, and closing with a promise.

1. The first section opens with a magnificent description of the coming of Jehovah to judgment for the sins and idolatries of Israel and Judah ( Micah 1:2-4), and the sentence pronounced upon Samaria ( Micah 1:5-9) by the Judge himself. The prophet, whose sympathies are strong with Judah, and especially with the lowlands which gave him birth, sees the danger that threatens his country, and traces in imagination the devastating march of the Assyrian conquerors from Samaria onward to Jerusalem and the south ( Micah 1:8-16). The impending punishment suggests its cause, and the prophet denounces a woe upon the people generally for the corruption and violence which were rife among them, and upon the false prophets who led them astray by pandering to their appetites and luxury ( Micah 2:1-11). The sentence of captivity is passed upon them ( Micah 2:10), but is followed instantly by a promise of restoration and triumphant return ( Micah 2:12-13). 2. The second section is addressed especially to the princes and heads of the people; their avarice and rapacity are rebuked in strong terms; and as they have been deaf to the cry of the suppliants for justice, they too "shall cry unto Jehovah, but he will not hear them" ( Micah 3:1-4). The false prophets who had deceived others should themselves be deceived; "the sun shall go down over the prophets, and the day shall be dark over them" ( Micah 3:6). For this perversion of justice and right, and the covetousness of the heads of the people who judged for reward, of the priests who taught for hire, and of the prophets who divined for money, Zion should "be ploughed as a field," and the mountain of the temple become like the uncultivated woodland heights ( Micah 3:9-12). But the threatening is again succeeded by a promise of restoration, and in the glories of the Messianic kingdom the prophet loses sight of the desolation which should befall his country. Instead of the temple mountain covered with the wild growth of the forest, he sees the mountain of the house of Jehovah established on the top of the mountains, and nations flowing like rivers unto it. The reign of peace is inaugurated by the recall from captivity, and Jehovah sits as king in Zion, having destroyed the nations who had rejoiced in her overthrow. The predictions at the close of this section form the climax of the book, and Ewald arranges them in four strophes, consisting of seven or eight verses each ( Micah 4:1-8;  Micah 5:3-15), with the exception of the last, which is shorter, and in which the prophet reverts to the point whence he started: all objects of politic and idolatrous confidence must be removed before the grand consummation.

3. In the last section (6, 7) Jehovah, by a bold poetical figure, is represented as holding a controversy with his people, pleading with them in justification of his conduct towards them and the reasonableness of his requirements. The dialogue form in which chapter 6 is cast renders the picture very dramatic and striking. In  Micah 6:3-5 Jehovah speaks; the inquiry of the people follows in  Micah 6:6, indicating their entire ignorance of what was required of them; their inquiry is met by the almost impatient rejoinder, "Will Jehovah be pleased with thousands of rams, with myriads of torrents of oil?" The still greater sacrifice suggested by the people, "Shall I give my first-born for my transgressions?" calls forth the definition of their true duty, "to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with their God." How far they had fallen short of this requirement is shown in what follows ( Micah 6:9-12), and judgment is pronounced upon them ( Micah 6:13-16). The prophet acknowledges and bewails the justice of the sentence ( Micah 7:1-6), the people in repentance patiently look to God, confident that their prayer will be heard ( Micah 7:7-10), and are reassured by the promise of deliverance announced as following their punishment ( Micah 7:11-13) by the prophet, who in his turn presents his petition to Jehovah for the restoration of his people ( Micah 7:14-15). The whole concludes with a triumphal song of joy at the great deliverance, like that from Egypt, which Jehovah will achieve, and a full acknowledgment of his mercy and faithfulness to his promises ( Micah 7:16-20). The last verse is reproduced in the song of Zacharias ( Luke 1:72-73).

The predictions uttered by Micah relate to the invasions of Shalmaneser ( Micah 1:6-8;  2 Kings 17:4;  2 Kings 17:6) and Sennacherib (1:9-16;  2 Kings 18:13), the destruction of Jerusalem ( Micah 3:12;  Micah 7:13), the captivity in Babylon ( Micah 4:10), the return ( Micah 4:1-8;  Micah 7:11), the establishment of a theocratic kingdom in Jerusalem ( Micah 4:8), and the Ruler who should spring from Bethlehem ( Micah 5:2). The destruction of Assyria and Babylon is supposed to be referred to in  Micah 5:5-6;  Micah 7:8;  Micah 7:10. According to many,  Micah 4:13 refers to the heroic deeds of the Maccabees, and their victories over the Syrians or Syro-Macedonians, called Assyrians in Micah 5, as well as in  Zechariah 10:11.

There is no prophecy in Micah so interesting to the Christian as that in which the native place of the Messiah is announced ( Micah 5:2), which is cited by the evangelist ( Matthew 2:6) with slight verbal variations, but substantially the same import (see Kuinil, Comment. ad loc. Mat.). In Micah emphasis is laid on the actual smallness of Bethlehem to enjoy such an honor; in Matthew the prominent idea is the honor itself, and its ideal grandeur — the converse side of the statement. Pocock cuts the knot by adopting rabbi Tanchum's odd opinion that the term צָעַיר means both little and great, the prophet selecting the one sense and the evangelist the,other. It is evident that the Jews in the time of Jesus interpreted this passage of the birthplace of the Messiah ( Matthew 2:5;  John 7:41-42). The Targum gives the reference formally to the Messiah. The later rabbinical writers, however, such as Kimchi, Aben-Ezra, Abrabanel, etc., have maintained that it had only an indirect reference to the birthplace of the Messiah, who was to be a descendant of David, a Bethlehemite, but not of necessity himself born in Bethlehem. Others, however, as David Ganz (B. Zemach David), expressly mention Bethlehem as the birthplace of the Messiah.

The interpretation which considered this prophecy as intimating only that the Messiah was to be a descendant of David, was that current among the Jews in the time of Theodoret, Chrysostom, Theophylact, and Euthymius Zigabenus, from whom we learn that it was maintained to have been fulfilled in Zerubbabel, the leader of the Jews on their return from Babylon, of which, and not of Bethlehem, he was a native. (See Sozomen, 7:729; Carpzov, Introd. 3:374 sq.; Jerome, Ep. ad Eustach. 1:704.) This interpretation was held among Christians by the celebrated Theodore of Mopsuestia (as we learn from his condemnation by the council at Rome under pope Vigilius), and afterwards by Grotius (Comment.), who, however, regarded Zerubbabel as a type of Christ, and considered Christ's birthplace at Bethlehem as an outward representation of his descent from the family of David. Many of the moderns have been attached to this interpretation of the prophecy, referring it to the general idea of the Messiah rather than to Zerubbabel, while some among them have, after the example of some Jews, ventured to assert that the account of the birth of Christ at Bethlehem was not to be depended on. Some have asserted, after Jerome (Comm. in Micah), that the citation in  Matthew 2:6 is that of the Sanhedrim only, not of the evangelist (Hengstenberg's Christology). Jahn (Append. Hermeneut.) observes that it is evident that the Jews in the time of Christ expected the Messiah's birth to take place at Bethlehem; and although he admits that the prophecy may be understood tropically in the sense applied to it by Grotius, he contends that the context will not admit of its applicability either to Hezekiah or any other monarch than the Messiah; nor is it possible to apply the prophecy fully and literally to any but him who was not only of the house and lineage of David, but was actually born at Bethlehem, according to the direct testimony of both Matthew's and Luke's gospels. The plain meaning is that the Messiah, as David's son, should be born in David's town (Hofmann, Weiss. u. Erf. page 249). Tertullian also presses the argument that the Messiah has come, for Bethlehem was deserted — "Neminem de genere Israel in civitate Bethlehem remansisse" (Adv. Judeos, volume 13; Opera, 2:734, ed. Oehler). To give the vague sense of Davidic extraction, and yet to deny that the words point out the place of birth, was thus a necessary but feeble Jewish subterfuge. Ronan admits the usual interpretation of the prophecy, though he affirms that Jesus was really not of the family of David, and was born at Nazareth (Vie de Jesus, chapter 2). (See generally, Eichhorn, Einleit. 4:369 sq.; Bertheau, Einl. 4:1633 sq.; Knobel, Prophet. 3:199 sq.) (See Messiah).

IV. The Genuineness of the book has not. been called in question. Only Ewald, in his Jahrb. 11:29, is disposed to maintain that the two concluding chapters are the work of a different author. His objections, however, have no force against the universal opinion. The language of Micah is quoted in  Matthew 2:5-6, and his prophecies are alluded to in  Matthew 10:35-36;  Mark 13:12;  Luke 12:53;  John 7:42.

V. The Style of Micah is rich, full, and musical — as nervous, vehement, and bold, in many sections, as Hosea, and as abrupt, too, in transitions from menace to mercy. He presents, at the same time, no little resemblance to Isaiah in grandeur of thought, in richness and variety of imagery, and in roundness and cadence of parallelism. The similarity of their subjects may account for many resemblances in language with the latter prophet, which were almost unavoidable (comp.  Micah 1:2 with  Isaiah 1:2 :  Micah 2:2 with  Isaiah 5:8;  Micah 2:6;  Micah 2:11 with  Isaiah 30:10;  Micah 2:12 with  Isaiah 10:20-22;  Micah 1:6-8 with  Isaiah 1:11-17). The diction of Micah is vigorous and forcible, sometimes obscure from the abruptness of its transitions, but varied and rich in figures derived from the pastoral ( Micah 1:8;  Micah 2:12;  Micah 5:4-5;  Micah 5:7-8;  Micah 7:14) and rural life of the lowland country ( Micah 1:6;  Micah 3:12;  Micah 4:3;  Micah 4:12-13;  Micah 6:15), whose vines, and olives, and figtrees were celebrated ( 1 Chronicles 27:27-28), and supply the prophet with so many striking allusions ( Micah 1:6;  Micah 4:3-4;  Micah 6:15;  Micah 7:1;  Micah 7:4) as to suggest that, like Amos, he may have been either a herdsman or a vine-dresser who had heard the howling of the jackals ( Micah 1:8; A.Vers. "dragons") as he watched his flocks or his vines by night, and had seen the lions slaughtering the sheep ( Micah 5:8). The sudden changes are frequently hidden from the English reader, because our version interprets as well as translates; the simple connective 1 being often rendered by some logical term, as "therefore" ( Micah 1:6), "then" ( Micah 3:7), "but" ( Micah 4:1), "notwithstanding" ( Micah 7:13), etc. Concise and pointed questions are put suddenly; persons are changed rapidly; the people are spoken of, and then in a moment spoken to; the nation is addressed now as a unit, and now edged appeals are directed to individuals. The language is quite pure and classical-intercourse with northern countries had not yet debased it. An under-tone of deep earnestness pervades the book; everywhere are discerned the workings of an intensely honorable and patriotic soul. Micah is successful in the use of the dialogue, and his prophecies are penetrated by the purest spirit of morality and piety (see especially 6:6-8; and 7:1-10). One peculiarity which Micah has in common with Isaiah is the frequent use of paronomasia; in  Micah 1:10-15 there is a succession of instances of this figure in the plays upon words suggested by the various places enumerated (comp. also  Micah 2:4), which it is impossible to transfer to English, though Ewald has attempted to render them into German (Propheten Des A. B. 1:329, 330).

In these verses there is also vivid grouping, as place after place is challenged along the line of the conqueror's march. Each town is seen to carry its doom in its very name. That doom is told in many ways either to them or of them; either in the prophet's name or as a divine burden; either as an event about to come or as a judgment which will certainly overtake them. Perhaps in  Micah 7:18 there is an allusion to the meaning of the prophet's own name. The divine name which appears with greatest frequency is, as is usual with the prophets, Jehovah; but we also meet with Adonai and Adonai Jehovah ( Micah 1:2), also "the Lord of the whole earth" ( Micah 2:13), and "Jehovah of hosts" ( Micah 4:4). Elohim is used distinctively of the divine as opposed to the human in  Micah 3:7. Allusions to the past history of the people are found in many places. There are also several expressions which are found in the Mosaic writings, though it might be rash to say that Micah takes them directly from the Pentateuch. Nor would we endorse all the instances in which, as Caspari affirms, later prophets, as Jeremiah and Ezekiel, Habakkuk and Zephaniah, have adopted the language of Micah (Micha, page 449, etc.). The poetic vigor of the opening scene, and of the dramatic dialogue sustained throughout the last two chapters, has already been noticed.

VI. Commentaries . — The following are the especial exegetical helps on the whole book alone, to a few of the most important of which we prefix an asterisk: Ephrem Syrus, Explanatio (in Opp. 5:272): Theophylact, Commentarius (in Opp. volume 4); Luther, Commentarius (ed. Theodore, Vitemb. 1542, 8vo; also in his Works, both Germ. and Lat.); Brentz, Conmnentaria (in Opp. volume 4): Gerlach, Commentarius (Aug. Vind. 1524, 8vo); Bibliander, Commentarius (Tigur. 1534, 8vo); Phrygio, Commentarius (Argent. 1538, 8vo); Gilby, Commentary (Lond. 1551, 1591, 8vo); Chytraeus, Explicatio [includ. Nehemiah] (Vitemb. 1565, 8vo); Draconis, Explicatio [includ. Joel and Zechariah] (Vitemb. 1565, 8vo); Graxar, Comnzentarius (Salmant. 1570, 8vo); Selnecker, Anmersckunqen (Leips. 1578, 4to); Bang, Fontium trias [includ. Jonah and Ruth] (Hafn. 1631, 8vo); Graver, Expositio (Jen. 1619, 1664, 4to); *Pocock, Commentary (Oxf. 1677, fol.; also in Works); Van Toll, Vitleyginge (Utrecht, 1709; 4to); Schnurrer, Animadversiones (Tibing. 1783, 4to); Buer, Aninadversiones [on chapter 1, 2] (Altorf, 1790,4to); Grosschopff Uebersetzung (Jena, 1798, 8vo); *Justi, Erlauterung (Leips. 1799, 8vo); *Hartmann, Erlauterung (Lemgo, 1800,8vo); Wolf, טְהוֹרָה מַנְחָה (Dessau, 1805, 8vo); Gliemann, Illustratio (Hall. 1842, 4to); *Caspari, Micha der Morasthiter (Marb. 1852, 8vo); Roorda, Commentarius (Leyd. 1869, 8vo). (See Minor Prophets).

6. The father of Abdon ( 2 Chronicles 34:20); elsewhere called MICHAIAH, the father of Achbor ( 2 Kings 22:12).

7. A Levite of the descendants of Asaph ( 1 Chronicles 9:15); elsewhere properly called MICHA( Nehemiah 11:17;  Nehemiah 11:22).