19/04/20 – Micah 5:1-3
This passage is a difficult one to interpret while remaining consistent with the context. I do not agree with many of the commentaries, but I think a lot of that is to do with the bias that so many commentaries have toward calvinist thinking. Most readily-available commentaries were written by people who were either puritan (calvinist) or at the very least somewhat influenced by reformed thinking (as much of England has been since the days of the puritan Oliver Cromwell and even before). The established church in England since the Reformation has tended to line up with the Westminster Confession (or similar reformed documents) with those who tended to be less reformed often being ostracised, accused of lesser scholarship. Only those who gave support to the established doctrines (generally reformed) were generally recognised for their biblical scholarship, and so most of the acceptable commentaries were at least not in conflict with reformed beliefs.
Thus we get a number of commentaries which see the Church as the future Israel, with prophecies about Israel being interpreted for the Church. (Note Clarke’s Commentary on Revelation 12:1-2 quoted below.)
Much of today’s passage seems ambiguous, having multiple possible interpretations according to how you are looking at it. Perhaps Micah meant it to be like that, for a prophet could only be recognised as such if he prophesied truthfully in his lifetime (see Deuteronomy 18:15-22). So certain prophecies have two layers of fulfilment: firstly a partial fulfilment in the prophet’s lifetime or soon after, and then a second more complete fulfilment later on.
Micah 5:1 – Now gather
thyself in troops, O daughter of troops: he hath laid siege against us: they
shall smite the judge of Israel with a rod upon the cheek.
gather – to penetrate; cut;
attack; invade; penetrate; cut into, gather together.
troops – troops; marauding
bands; raiding bands; foray.
Thus “Now invade with marauding bands” or
“Now gather yourselves into marauding bands”. The latter is preferable,
suggesting that they who have caused so much violence and bloodshed (such as Micah 3:1-4 portrays) will
now have to gather together in bands to fight those who have now laid siege
against them. During Micah’s lifetime, Sennacherib would come and lay siege
against Jerusalem and fail to take it (after defeating the rest of the
country), but this verse seems to go further than that, smiting the judge
(ruling authority) with a rod (or club) upon the cheek (or jaw). This was a
gross insult which invited the other to defend or submit. Possibly it could
have applied to Nebuchadnezzar placing their last king, Zedekiah, on the throne
as his puppet king, then blinding him and killing his sons before taking him
off to Babylon, yet this verse does appear to go even further than that.
While some commentaries say that this verse
should be on the end of the previous chapter, it actually should be seen as a
transition from their current situation before the captivity to their situation
leading up to and including the times of the Romans during which Christ their
Messiah was born in Bethlehem (see next verse). It is quite possible that this
is a prophecy with 2 stages of fulfilment where the first stage may have been
before the captivity, while the next stage may have been during the Roman
conquest of Judea. This two-layer prophecy may present a transition from one
stage to the next.
So, our setting has changed once again. Last
chapter we alternated between the leadup to the Babylonian captivity and the
tribulation/millennium. We have also now switched from “daughter of Zion” (Micah 4:8, 10, 13)
to “daughter of troops”, a term more fitting to a nation of marauding bands
invading or cutting into the authority of another nation. Israel is no longer a
sovereign nation in charge of her own affairs, with a standing army to defend
that sovereignty. Now she is reduced to the status of an occupied country, no
longer permitted to retain an army for her protection, but for defence must
rely upon vigilante groups such as marauding bands of itinerant soldiers.
Jesus was born (see next verse, Vs 2 below) into an
Israel that was heavily ruled by Rome, with harsh penalties for disobedience,
from before He was born (Eg Judas Maccabeus in 167 –
160 BC) to after He had died (Eg the destruction of
Jerusalem and the temple in 70 AD). According to Josephus (a Jewish historian
during the times of the Romans), there were a number of revolutionaries during
this period, noting Judas Maccabeus as one of them. Israel by now had ceased to
be able to defend its sovereignty; instead it was reduced to a rabble of
marauding bands fighting a guerrilla warfare against the rule of the Romans.
he hath laid siege against us
– Note the siege of Jerusalem in 70 AD, and the siege
of Masada in 73-74 AD. It could of course refer to the siege and defeat of
Jerusalem before the captivity, or, quite possibly, this is another 2-stage
prophecy where what happened in Jesus’ day was a more complete fulfilment than
it was before the captivity at Babylon. Note that many circumstances are very
similar between the two periods.
Jesus was born into this time of social unrest amid
the cruel rule of the Romans who ruled with the force of iron (note
Nebuchadnezzar’s vision where the Roman empire was characterised by iron).
The “judge of Israel” becomes Christ their Messiah,
who is struck with a rod upon the cheek by those against whom the marauding
bands were fighting.
Matthew 27:30 – And they spit
upon him, and took the reed, and smote him on the head.
Isaiah 50:6 – I gave my back to
the smiters, and my cheeks to them that plucked off
the hair: I hid not my face from shame and spitting.
Christ (as their judge) is the one who actually
bears the iniquities of us all, thus fulfilling this as a prophecy. He is born
in Bethlehem (see Vs 2 below), which is a probable connection with the tower of
the flock (migdal-eder) (Micah 4:8)
with much of Micah 4 dealing with the future Christ their Messiah. Therefore the context best allows for Micah 5:1
to be about the time of Christ’s birth, during Roman overrule and oppression.
And, while we think of the pharisees and other Jewish leaders being responsible
for putting Jesus on the cross, in fact this is somewhat incorrect, for the
truth is that it was the Romans who actually authorised and carried out the
crucifixion.
And when they
(all the chief priests and elders of the people) had bound
him, they led [him] away, and delivered him to Pontius Pilate the
governor. (Matthew 27:2) and when he
(Pilate) had scourged Jesus, he delivered [him]
to be crucified. (Matthew 27:26)
Extra thoughts on Micah 5:1
– It could be either about the days leading up to the captivity, or the times
of the Romans in Judea, but probably not events future to us today. In Micah's
day Israel had rebelled and by the time Micah died (probably during Hezekiah's
reign), things were looking very grim for Israel (= Judah here). It was during the
reign of wicked Manasseh (son of Hezekiah) when God finally said enough's enough and foretold their captivity etc (see 2 Kings 21:10-16).
Even the reign of the last good king (Josiah, Manasseh’s grandson) wasn't
enough to turn the tide away from captivity. The enemy did indeed control
Israel toward the end, with Nebuchadnezzar taking the 2nd last king off to
Babylon and appointing Zedekiah in his place (whom he also took off to Babylon).
No doubt small bands of marauding troops roamed the country in a guerrilla
warfare (cf "daughter of troops"), their
king was blinded (smitten on the cheek with a rod??) and the people of
Jerusalem survived another month before being beaten and taken off into
captivity.
The Babylonian captivity was designed to discipline
Judah who had been somewhat less evil than Israel, at least until Manasseh
onward. This was their second chance to demonstrate their obedience to God.
They should have come back from Babylon purified through their trials (cf Zechariah 13:8-9 which was actually for endtimes testing and purifying), but instead they came back
to even worse sin, bringing mystery Babylon (the esoteric Talmud) back with
them. So when Jesus was born, they were again going
through the same (yet more severe) oppression, by Rome this time. Marauding
Judean troops roamed the countryside, the king was appointed by authority of
Rome, and the country was told repeatedly to keep the peace with Rome or else.
By 70AD Jerusalem was again laid siege to and destroyed,
just as it was by Nebuchadnezzar, except that this time they weren't going into
captivity for a season; instead they were to be dispersed throughout the world
for maybe 2000 years. There was no second chance this time! This had already
happened to Israel before Judah's captivity; Israel has been dispersed for
maybe 500 years longer than Judah. Israel was also the 10 tribes of the north
who never had even one good king, and set up their own false worship from the
beginning, and thus didn't have the option of a chance to redeem themselves
through captivity, but were destined to never return as Judah did after their
captivity. But Judah, after failing to get their act together after the
captivity, fell as far as Israel, maybe further, by the time Jesus was born.
Their only hope was to accept their Messiah after the resurrection but here
they missed the boat completely. They were so opposed to God by now that they
failed to recognise their Messiah.
And so they were
dispersed, Jerusalem destroyed, and both Judah and Israel were to wait until
the times of the Gentiles were fulfilled before they could have another chance
at demonstrating their obedience to God (Romans 11:25-27). This time of rejection
by God for 2000+ years would be the furnace of affliction which would see who
was purified and who was burnt up like chaff. At the end of the tribulation (that
extreme furnace of affliction), most of Israel is destroyed and only a remnant
remains in Jerusalem for the battle of Armageddon. At this time
they will finally recognise their Messiah whom they have pierced (Zechariah 12:9-12;
Revelation 1:7),
and they are therefore the remnant who become the children of Israel for the
millennium.
Micah 5:2 – But thou, Beth–lehem Ephratah, [though] thou
be little among the thousands of Judah, [yet] out of thee shall he come
forth unto me [that is] to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth [have
been] from of old, from everlasting.
Bethlehem – house of bread (or food) from bayith (house) and lechem (bread; food; grain)
Ephratah – ash-heap;
place of fruitfulness. From a root word meaning “fruitful”.
Some manuscripts have Beth-Ephratah
or “house of Ephratah”, the family from which King
David came. If this is so, then it could be interpreted as David’s family,
though insignificant, yet from his family would come the Ruler of Israel from
eternity past to eternity future.
1 Samuel 17:12 – Now David [was]
the son of that Ephrathite of Beth–lehem–judah, whose name [was] Jesse;
and he had eight sons: and the man went among men [for] an old man in
the days of Saul.
little among the thousands of Judah
– Bethlehem was a small and insignificant town in Judah (although it could also
refer to David’s family which was insignificant among others in Judah).
thousands – This word could suggest
large family groups or clans such as in Joshua 22:14 – And with him ten princes, of each chief house a prince
throughout all the tribes of Israel; and each one [was] an head of the house of their fathers among the thousands of
Israel.
Bethlehem was unimportant in the history of Israel
except for one thing: it was the birthplace of King David whose ancestor
(Jesus) would be their future Messiah King. (It’s because Mary and Joseph were
of David’s family that they had to go to Bethlehem to be registered.) Without
this one single fact, Bethlehem would have remained as insignificant as many of
the other unnamed (and unknown today) settlements in Israel. Literally David
put Bethlehem on the map. The book of Ruth would have had little relevance in
the Bible except for the fact that Ruth would be the grandmother of King David,
upon whose throne Christ the Messiah of Israel would sit forever. It’s
astounding just how much impact just one single fact can have, a far greater
influence than anything else in all of history, ever.
For out of this one little insignificant village would
come the greatest ruler of Israel, ever.
Luke 1:35 – And the angel
answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power
of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also
that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.
Just how many other places can lay claim to being
the birthplace of the Son of God?
Isaiah 9:6-7 – 6For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the
government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful,
Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. 7Of
the increase of [his] government and peace [there shall be] no
end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to
establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The
zeal of the Lord of hosts will perform this.
goings forth –
origins; origin; place of going out from.
He who has been their ruler from the beginning will again
be ruler in Israel. His rule will not be a new rule but a continuation of His
rule over them in the past.
Micah 5:3 – Therefore will
he give them up, until the time [that] she which travaileth
hath brought forth: then the remnant of his brethren shall return unto the
children of Israel.
Therefore – or “Nevertheless”
That is, even
though God will bring forth one who is to be their Messiah, this will not be of
great benefit to Israel until their troubles are over. God will still give them
up (or over) to punishment first. He is the one who judges Israel and punishes
them for their rebellion. So, even though God has promised to redeem them one
day (Micah 4:6-7; 10), He
will still give them up to chastisement for their rebellion, until she who
travails (labours to bring forth a child) has brought forth (the birth of the
“child”).
This could
apply to when Jesus their Messiah was born, when the fulness (pleroma)
of time had come.
Galatians 4:4-5 – 4But when the fulness (pleroma) of the
time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, 5To
redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of
sons.
Also note the
following which clearly portrays Christ’s birth to Israel, which some commentators
interpret instead as the coming to fulness of the Christian Church.
Revelation 12:1-2; 5 – 1And there appeared a great wonder in heaven; a woman
clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of
twelve stars: 2And she being with child cried, travailing in birth,
and pained to be delivered.
5And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all
nations with a rod of iron: and her child was caught up unto God, and [to] his
throne.
Clarke’s
Commentary says: Therefore wilt he give them
up - Jesus Christ shall give up the disobedient and rebellious Jews into the
hands of all the nations of the earth, till she who travaileth
hath brought forth; that is, till the Christian Church, represented Revelation
12:1, under the notion of a woman in travail, shall have had the fullness of
the Gentiles brought in. Then the remnant of his brethren shall return; the
Jews also shall be converted unto the Lord; and thus
all Israel shall be saved according to Romans 11:26.
Micah 5:3 could refer to the birth of the Messiah (as Revelation
12:1-2 should be seen),
noting that Micah 5:2 points to the birthplace and future reign of the Messiah.
Or the birth
pains and bringing forth could apply to the redemption of Israel once
the fulness (pleroma) of the Gentile Church was come.
Romans 11:25-27 – 25For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of
this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in
part is happened to Israel, until the fulness (pleroma) of the Gentiles be come in. 26And so all
Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the
Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: 27For this [is]
my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.
The term
“travail” can be used for a physical birth or it can metaphorically represent
the agony that may be associated with labouring to bear a child.
Romans 8:18-23 – 18For I reckon that the sufferings of this present time [are]
not worthy [to be compared] with the glory which shall be revealed
in us. 19For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God. 20For
the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him
who hath subjected [the same] in hope, 21Because the creature
itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious
liberty of the children of God. 22For we know that the whole
creation groaneth and travaileth
in pain together until now. 23And not only [they], but
ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the
Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, [to
wit], the redemption of our body.
[where “travaileth in pain
together” is sunodino – a synthesis where many act
as one, and can mean metaphorically to undergo agony (like a woman in
childbirth) together (as one) with others]
Clearly “he” (as per “Therefore
will he give them up”) must refer to their Messiah who is born in
Bethlehem and will rule one day as He did in the past. But it is not clear who
is giving birth and who or what is being brought forth, only that He (their
Messiah) will give them up until this time of giving birth or bringing forth.
At this time of travail and birth (bringing forth), the rest of the brethren
(of the Messiah, or of that which is brought forth?) will return (turn back) to
Israel.
However, Micah 4:10 says Be in pain, and labour to bring
forth, O daughter of Zion, like a woman in travail: for now shalt thou go forth
out of the city, and thou shalt dwell in the field, and thou shalt go [even]
to Babylon; there shalt thou be delivered; there the Lord shall redeem thee
from the hand of thine enemies. This does seem to apply it to Babylon, yet Micah 5:3 seems to take it
a step further and apply it to the final deliverance at and after the battle of
Armageddon. Note also Joel 2:31-32.
remnant – yether
(remainder; excess; rest; remnant; excellence; other part; residue; excess;
abundance; superiority) This is the only time Micah uses this term for
“remnant” (translated “rest” or “the rest” 63 times, “remnant 14 times,
“residue” 8 times, out of 101 occurrences). Translated “the rest” in Ezekiel 48:23
(As for the rest of the tribes, …..)
For Micah’s other 5 occurrences of “remnant” he
uses shᵉ’eriyth
(rest; residue; remainder; remnant; what is left; descendants), in Micah 2:4; 4;7; 5:7;
5:8; 7:18 (translated “remnant” 44 times, “residue” 13
times, out of 66 times).
Joel uses a different word again for
“remnant” in Joel 2:32 – And
it shall come to pass, [that] whosoever shall call on the name of the
Lord shall be delivered: for in mount Zion and in Jerusalem shall be
deliverance, as the Lord hath said, and in the remnant whom the Lord shall
call.
“remnant” here is sariyd (survivor; remnant;
that which is left; remain/ing) Translated “remain”
12 times; “remaining” 9 times, “left” 3 times, “remnant” 2 times, “rest” 1
time, out of 28 occurrences.
Different writers do tend to use different
terms but it is notable that Micah actually uses 2 different terms, both of
which have been translated “remnant”. In fact, it is possible that Micah might
have meant “the rest” in Micah 5:3, thus rendering it as “then the rest of his brethren shall
return…” whereas Joel may have meant “the survivors whom the Lord shall
call.”
The word Micah uses could imply that once that
which is to be brought forth is brought forth, then the rest (or those left) of
them shall return to the children of Israel. The context could suggest
that it is the Messiah who is to be brought forth (especially noting Micah 5:4),
and that the rest of his brethren are His people, Israel who will return (or
turn back) to Israel. (Or, as one commentary suggests, do they also include the
Gentiles as God’s people while Israel is blinded in part? Or is this a
calvinist influence?)
Or it could suggest that what she travails
to bring forth is the Gentile church; when it has been brought forth (reached
fulness), then the rest of blinded Israel shall return to their fold once more
(Romans 11:25-27).
Or it could mean the end of Israel’s
rejection and blindness after the Gentile church has been fulfilled (Romans 11:25-27).
Note in Romans 11 that Israel (the natural branches) has been pruned
off her olive tree and the Gentiles (as wild branches) grafted on. Once the
times of the Gentiles is fulfilled, the Church is removed again and Israel then
becomes the natural branches on her own olive tree.
My view is that their Messiah will
give Israel up (over) to the consequences of their iniquities until they have
been punished for their sins against God. Then, when their labour pangs are
over, they are brought forth purified, refined in the fire of suffering. This could
have happened when they returned from Babylon, but that did not purify them for
they were no better, instead maybe worse, than they had been before Babylon. Therefore this giving up of them ultimately applies until
the end times when Israel is subjected to intense persecution, with a remnant ending
up defending Jerusalem from the armies of Armageddon, and being delivered by
their Messiah and entering the millennium, having been brought forth purified.
Zechariah 13:8-9 – 8And it shall come to pass, [that] in all the land, saith
the Lord, two parts therein shall be cut off [and] die; but the third
shall be left therein. 9And I will bring the third part through the
fire, and will refine them as silver is refined, and will try them as gold is
tried: they shall call on my name, and I will hear them: I will say, It [is]
my people: and they shall say, The Lord [is] my God.
Most of
Israel will not survive the purifying process, but those who do survive, those
who are left (“the remnant of His brethren”), will return to the sheepfold known
as “the children of Israel”.
Those of
Micah’s time were soon to be given over to the enemy and taken captive to
Babylon to be tested and tried, and to return to their country again one day.
If they had been truly purified by then, they should have received their
Messiah with joy, but instead they received Him with anger and rebellion,
finally rejecting Him with His gospel which was then given over to the Gentiles
instead (Acts 13:44-48). Israel
failed to be brought forth at this time (because they were not yet purified!),
so were blinded in part and rejected, with God calling the Gentile Church as a
replacement for Israel until the times of the Gentiles should be fulfilled (Romans 11), after which Israel would go through
the testing and purifying of the great tribulation, then finally (in part only;
the remnant only) turning back to their God as a cleansed Israel, becoming the
Israel that God had desired of them from the beginning.
They had
thought with false pride that because they were Israel (Jews) God would never
turn away from them. (This is largely what Romans 9 addresses.) Yet Paul in his letter to
the Romans told them clearly that just because they were physically born Jews
did not automatically qualify them to be spiritual Jews (or Israel) in God’s
eyes.
Romans 2:28-29 – 28For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither [is
that] circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: 29But he [is] a
Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision [is that] of the heart, in the
spirit, [and] not in the letter; whose praise [is] not of men, but of God.
Thus that
which is brought forth is the process by which Israel is tested, tried and
purified. Those who come through the purifying will come forth as pure as gold.
Job 23:10 – But he knoweth
the way that I take: [when] he hath tried me, I shall come forth as
gold.
Many of
Israel will not come forth, though. Those who survive, those who remain, are
the remnant of Christ’s brethren who will return to the fold as spiritual Jews,
spiritual children of Abraham (Romans 4). Many will fail and fall in the testing, especially during the great
tribulation; the rest will come forth as gold, turning back to Israel as God’s
people and He will be their God.
Those who
interpret this as the Church (as do calvinists in general) are trying to write
Israel out of God’s plan, but it is impossible to see this as the Church taking
over Israel’s future role. Israel one day will be brought forth, purified as
gold, to take their place as the Israel of the future millennium.
To Messages and Teachings page
List of all my posts on this site
Hoppers Crossing
Christian Church homepage