Micah
From BibleEncyclopedia.Net
A shortened form of Micaiah, who is like YHWH?
(1.) A man of Mount Ephraim, whose history so far is introduced in Jdg_17:1-13, apparently for the purpose of leading to an account of the settlement of the tribe of Dan in Northern Palestine, and for the purpose also of illustrating the lawlessness of the times in which he lived (Judg. 18; 19:1-29; Jdg_21:25).
(2.) The son of Merib-baal (Mephibosheth), 1Ch_8:34, 1Ch_8:35.
(3.) The first in rank of the priests of the family of Kohathites (1Ch_23:20).
(4.) A descendant of Joel the Reubenite (1Ch_5:5).
(5.) “The Morasthite,” so called to distinguish him from Micaiah, the son of Imlah (1Ki_22:8). He was a prophet of Judah, a contemporary of Isaiah (Mic_1:1), a native of Moresheth of Gath (Mic_1:14, Mic_1:15). Very little is known of the circumstances of his life (Compare Jer_26:18, Jer_26:19).
Contents |
Micah (1)
mī´ka (מיכה, mīkhāh, contracted from מיכיהוּ, mīkhāyāhū, “who is like Yah?”; Codex Vaticanus, Μειχαίας, Meichaías; Codex Alexandrinus, Μιχά, Michá; sometimes in the King James Version spelled Michah):
(1) The chief character of an episode given as an appendix to the Book of Judges (Judges 17:1-13; 18). Micah, a dweller in Mt. Ephraim, was the founder and owner of a small private sanctuary with accessories for worship (Mat_17:1-5), for which he hired as priest a Judean Levite (Mat_17:7-13). Five men sent in quest of new territory by the Danites, who had failed to secure a settlement upon their own tribal allotment, visited Micah's shrine, and obtained from his priest an oracle favoring their quest (Jdg_18:1-6). They then went on until they reached the town of Laish in the extreme North, and deeming it suitable for the purpose, they returned to report to their fellow-tribesmen. These at once dispatched thither 600 armed men, accompanied by their families (Jdg_18:7-12). Passing Micah's abode, they appropriated his idols and his priest, and when their owner pursued, he was insulted and threatened (Jdg_18:13-26). They took Laish, destroyed it with its inhabitants and rebuilt it under the name of Dan. There they established the stolen images, and appointed Micah's Levite, Jonathan, a grandson of Moses (the King James Version “Manasseh”), priest of the new sanctuary, which was long famous in Israel (Jdg_18:27-31).
The purpose of the narrative is evidently to set forth the origin of the Danite shrine and priesthood. A few peculiarities in the story have led some critics - e.g., Moore, “Judges,” in ICC and “Judges” in SBOT; Budde, Richter - to regard it as composite. Wellhausen, however, considers that the peculiarities are editorial and have been introduced for the purpose of smoothing or explaining the ancient record. Most authorities are agreed that the story is nearly contemporary with the events which it narrates, and that it is of the highest value for the study of the history of Israelite worship. See also JUDGES; DAN; PRIESTHOOD.
(2) A Reubenite, whose descendant Beerah was carried into exile by Tiglath-pileser (1Ch_5:5).
(3) A son of Merib-baal (1Ch_8:34 f; 1Ch_9:40 f). See Mica, (1).
(4) A Kohathite Levite (1Ch_23:20; 1Ch_24:24 f).
(5) The father of Abdon, one of Josiah's messengers to the prophetess Huldah (2Ch_34:20). In the parallel passage (2Ki_22:12), the reading is “Achbor the son of Micaiah,” the King James Version “Michaiah.”
(6) A Simeonite mentioned in the Book of Judith (Judith 6:15).
(7) The prophet, called, in Jer_26:18 (Hebrew), “Micaiah the Morashtite.” See special article.
(8) The son of Imlah. See Micaiah, (7).
Micah (2)
(מיכה, mīkhāh; Μειχαίας, Meichaías; an abbreviation for Micaiah (Jer_26:18), and this again of the longer form of the word in 2Ch_17:7; compare 1Ki_22:8):
1. Name and Person:
The name signifies “who is like Yah?”; compare Michael, equal to “who is like El?” (i.e. God). As this name occurs not infrequently, he is called the “Morashtite,” i.e. born in Moresheth. He calls his native city, in Mic_1:14, Moresheth-gath, because it was situated near the Philistine city of Gath. According to Jerome and Eusebius, this place was situated not far eastward from Eleutheropolis. The prophet is not to be confounded with Micah ben Imla, in 1Ki_22:8, an older prophet of the Northern Kingdom.
2. Time of Micah:
According to Jer_26:18, Micah lived and prophesied in the reign of Hezekiah; according to Mic_1:1, he labored also under Jotham and Ahaz. This superscription has, it must be said, great similarity to Isa_1:1 and is probably of a later date. Yet the contents of his first discourse confirm the fact that he prophesied, not only before the destruction of Samaria, but also before the reformation of Hezekiah (compare Mic_1:5). Accordingly, Micah 1 is probably a discourse spoken already under Ahaz, and Micah 2 through 5 under Hezekiah. No mention is any longer made of Samaria in Mic_2:1-13 to 5. This city has already been destroyed; at any rate, is being besieged. Accordingly, these discourses were pronounced after the year 722 BC, but earlier than 701 BC, as the reformation of Hezekiah had not yet been entirely completed. It is impossible to date exactly these discourses, for this reason, that all the separate sentences and addresses were afterward united into one well-edited collection, probably by Micah himself. The attacks that have been made by different critics on the authenticity of Mic_4:1-13 and Mic_5:1-15 have but a poor foundation. It is a more difficult task to explain the dismal picture of the conditions of affairs as described in Micah 6 and 7 as originating in the reign of Hezekiah. For this reason, scholars have thought of ascribing them to the reigns of Jotham and Ahaz. But better reasons speak for placing them in the degenerate reign of Manasseh. There is no reason for claiming that Micah no longer prophesied in the times of this king. It is true that a number of critics declare that Micah did not write these chapters, especially the so-called psalm in Mic_7:7-20, which, it is claimed, clearly presupposes the destruction of Jerusalem (Mic_7:11)! But it is a fact that Micah did really and distinctly predict this destruction and the exile that followed this event in Mic_3:12; and accordingly he could in this concluding hymn very easily have looked even beyond this period.
Micah is, then, a younger contemporary of Isaiah, and, like the latter, he prophesied in Judah, perhaps also in Jerusalem. To the writings of this great prophet his book bears a close resemblance both in form and in contents, although he did not, as was the case with Isaiah, come into personal contact with the kings and make his influence felt in political affairs.
3. Relation to Isaiah:
The statement in Mic_4:1 ff is found almost literally in Isa_2:2 ff. Opinions differ as to who is to be credited with the original, Isaiah or Micah. In the latter, the passage seems to suit better into the connection, while in Isa 2 it begins the discourse abruptly, as though the prophet had taken it from some other source. However, Mic_4:4 f is certainly a sentence added by Micah, who, accordingly, was not the first to formulate the prophecy itself. It is possible that both prophets took it from some older prophet. But it is also conceivable that Isaiah is the author. In this case, he placed this sentence at the head of his briefer utterances when he composed his larger group of addresses in Micah 2 - 4, for the purpose of expressing the high purposes which God has in mind in His judgments.
4. Contents of the Prophecies:
Micah combats in his discourses, as does Isaiah, the heathenish abuses which had found their way into the cult, not only in Samaria, but also in Judah and Jerusalem, and which the reformation of Hezekiah could counteract only in part and not at all permanently (compare Mic_1:5-7; Mic_5:11-13; Mic_6:7, Mic_6:16). Further, he rebukes them for the social injustice, of which particularly the powerful and the great in the land were guilty (Mic_2:1 ff; Mic_3:2 f.10 f); and the dishonesty and unfaithfulness in business and in conduct in general (compare Mic_6:10 ff; Mic_7:2 ff). At all times Micah, in doing this, was compelled to defend himself against false prophets, who slighted these charges as of little importance, and threatened and antagonized the prophet in his announcements of impending evil (compare Mic_2:5 ff, 11 ff). In pronounced opposition to these babblers and their predictions of good things, Micah announces the judgment through the enemies that are approaching, and he even goes beyond Isaiah in the open declaration that Jerusalem and the temple are to be destroyed (Mic_3:12; Mic_4:10; Mic_5:1). The first-mentioned passage is also confirmed by the event reported in Jer_26:17 ff. The passage Mic_4:10, where in a surprising way Babylon is mentioned as the place of the exile, is for this reason regarded as unauthentic by the critics, but not justly. Micah predicts also the deliverance from Babylon and the reestablishment of Israel in Jerusalem, and declares that this is to take place through a King who shall come forth from the deepest humiliation of the house of David and shall be born in Bethlehem, and who, like David, originally a simple shepherd boy, shall later become the shepherd of the people, and shall make his people happy in peace and prosperity. Against this King the last great onslaught of the Gentiles will avail nothing (Mic_4:11-13; Mic_5:4 ff). As a matter of course, he will purify the country of all heathen abuses (Mic_5:9 ff). In the description of this ruler, Micah again agrees with Isaiah, but without taking the details from that prophet.
5. Form of the Prophecies:
The form of the prophecies of Micah, notwithstanding their close connection with those of his great contemporary, has nevertheless its unique features. There is a pronounced formal similarity between Mic_1:10 ff and Isa_10:28 ff. Still more than is the case in Isaiah, Micah makes use of the names of certain places. Witty references, which we can understand only in part, are not lacking in this connection; e.g. Lachish, the “city of horses,” is made the object of a play on words. (Recently in the ruins of this city a large wall has been unearthed.) The style of Micah is vigorous and vivid. He loved antitheses. It is a peculiarity of his style that he indulges in dramatic interruptions and answers; e.g. Mic_2:5, Mic_2:12; Mic_3:1; Mic_6:6-8; Mic_7:14 f. He also loves historical references; as e.g. Mic_1:13, Mic_1:15; Mic_5:5; Mic_6:4 f, 6, 16; Mic_7:20. He makes frequent use of the image of the shepherd, Mic_2:12; Mic_3:2 f; Mic_4:6; Mic_5:3 ff; Mic_7:14. The fact that these peculiarities appear in all parts of his little book is an argument in favor of its being from one author. He is superior to Isaiah in his tendency to idyllic details, and especially in a deeper personal sympathy, which generally finds expression in an elegiac strain. His lyrical style readily takes the form of a prayer or of a psalm (compare Mic 7).
Literature.
C. P. Caspari; Ueber Micha den Morasthiten, 1851; T.K. Cheyne, Micah with Notes and Introduction, 1882; V. Ryssel, Untersuchungen uber Textoeatalt und Echtheit des Buches Micha, 1887. See the commentaries on the 12 minor prophets by Hitzig, Ewald, C. F. Keil, P. Kleinert, W. Nowack, C. v. Orelli, K. Marti; Paul Haupt, The Book of Micah, 1910; Pusey, The Minor Prophets, 1860.
