Miles de Libros Cristianos Gratis. Accede a nuestra Biblioteca Virtual

Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Micah 1:5

Para un estudio avanzado de: “Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Micah 1:5” utilice nuestra app.

For the transgression of Jacob [is] all this, and for the sins of the house of Israel. What [is] the transgression of Jacob? [is it] not Samaria? and what [are] the high places of Judah? [are they] not Jerusalem?

5. The cause of this awful manifestation the sin of Samaria and Jerusalem.

Jacob ] A poetic synonym for Israel. The term has a slightly different meaning in the two halves of the verse. In the first, it clearly means the whole of the chosen people, including Judah; but in the second, only the Ten Tribes, sometimes called ‘Ephraim’ (e.g. Isa 7:5), but oftener (in the historical books) ‘Israel.’

What is the transgression ] From what does it proceed? In what is it summed up? ‘Transgression’ is a weak rendering; apostasy would be nearer the Hebrew.

what are the high places of Judah? ] In order to make sense, it is necessary to assume that the term ‘high places’ is here synonymous with ‘apostasy’ in the parallel line. But have we a right to make this assumption, for which there is no analogy in Hebrew? Our present text rests on such imperfect authority, that it is more reasonable to suppose here a corruption in the reading, and to follow the three most ancient versions (the Septuagint, the Peshito, and the Targum), which presuppose the reading ‘What is the sin of Judah?’ This is also more in harmony with what we know of the prophets of this period, who do not elsewhere so emphatically denounce the ‘high places,’ or shrines scattered up and down the country (comp. on Mic 5:14). They were more concerned with principles than with the detailed application of them. Some abominations were too obvious to be passed over; other evils, less distinctly seen as evils, were tolerated, or only gently protested against. Perhaps ‘high places’ in this passage was originally a marginal note in an early manuscript, intended to explain in what the sin of Judah consisted.

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

For the transgression of Jacob is all this – Not for any change of purpose in God; nor, again, as the effect of mans lust of conquest. None could have any power against Gods people, unless it had been given him by God. Those mighty monarchies of old existed but as Gods instruments, especially toward His own people. God said at this time of Assyria Isa 10:5, Asshur rod of Mine anger, and the staff in his hand is Mine indignation; and Isa 37:26, Now have I brought it to pass, that thou shouldest be to lay waste defensed cities into ruinous heaps. Each scourge of God chastised just those nations, which God willed him to chasten; but the especial object for which each was raised up was his mission against that people, in whom God most showed His mercies and His judgments Isa 10:6. I will send him against an ungodly nation and against the people of My wrath will I give him a charge.

Jacob and Israel, in this place, comprise alike the ten tribes and the two. They still bare the name of their father, who, wrestling with the Angel, became a prince with God, whom they forgat. The name of Jacob then, as of Christian now, stamped as deserters, those who did not the deeds of their father. What, (rather who) is the transgression of Jacob? Who is its cause? In whom does it lie? Is it not Samaria? The metropolis must, in its own nature, be the source of good or evil to the land. It is the heart whose pulses beat throughout the whole system. As the seat of power, the residence of justice or injustice, the place of counsel, the concentration of wealth, which all the most influential of the land visit for their several occasions, its manners penetrate in a degree the utmost corners of the land. Corrupted, it becomes a focus of corruption. The blood passes through it, not to be purified, but to be diseased. Samaria, being founded on apostasy, owing its being to rebellion against God, the home of that policy which set up a rival system of worship to His forbidden by Him, became a fountain of evil, whence the stream of ungodliness overflowed the land. It became the impersonation of the peoples sin, the heart and the head of the body of sin.

And what – Literally, who () always relates to a personal object, and apparent exceptions may be reduced to this. So Ae. Kim. Tanch. Pococke.

Are the high places of Judah? are they not Jerusalem? – Jerusalem God had formed to be a center of unity in holiness; the tribes of the Lord were to go up there to the testimony of Israel; there was the unceasing worship of God, the morning and evening sacrifice; the Feasts, the memorials of past miraculous mercies, the foreshadowings of redemption. But there too Satan placed his throne. Ahaz brought thither that most hateful idolatry, the burning children to Moloch in the valley of the son of Hinnom 2Ch 28:3. There 2Ch 28:24, he made him altars in every corner of Jerusalem. Thence, he extended the idolatry to all Judah 2Ch 28:25. And in every several city of Judah he made high places to burn incense unto other gods, and provoked to anger the Lord God of his fathers. Hezekiah, in his reformation, with all Israel 2Ch 31:1, went out to the cities of Judah, and brake the images in pieces and bowed down the statues of Asherah, and threw down the high places and the altars out of all Judah and Benjamin, as much as out of Ephraim and Manasseh. Nay, by a perverse interchange, Ahaz took the Brazen Altar, consecrated to God, for his own divinations, and assigned to the worship of God the altar copied from the idol-altar at Damascus, whose fashion pleased his taste 2Ki 16:10-16.

Since God and mammon cannot be served together, Jerusalem was become one great idol-temple, in which Judah brought its sin into the very face of God and of His worship. The Holy City had itself become sin, and the fountain of unholiness. The one temple of God was the single protest against the idolatries which encompased and besieged it; the incense went up to God, morning and evening, from it; from every head of every street of the city Eze 16:31; 2Ch 28:24, and (since Ahaz had brought in the worship of Baalim 2Ch 28:2, and the rites of idolatry continued the same,) from the roofs of all their houses Jer 32:29, went up the incense to Baal; a worship which, denying the Unity, denied the Being of God.

Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible

Verse 5. What is the transgression of Jacob?] Is it not something extremely grievous? Is it not that of Samaria? Samaria and Jerusalem, the chief cities, are infected with idolatry. Each has its high places, and its idol worship, in opposition to the worship of the true God. That there was idolatry practiced by the elders of Israel, even in the temple of Jehovah, see Eze 8:1, &c. As the royal cities in both kingdoms gave the example of gross idolatry, no wonder that it spread through the whole land, both of Israel and Judah.

Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible

For the transgression; the singular for the plural, the many transgressions committed amongst them; but especially that flood of iniquity which, springing up in Samaria, did overflow the whole kingdom, idolatry, pride, luxury, cruelty, and oppression.

Of Jacob; the sons of Jacob: the ten tribes most likely are here meant by Jacob.

Is all this; all these, many and great, inevitable and irresistible, judgments of God foretold. and which will overtake and utterly ruin these sinners.

The house of Israel; the people of the kingdom of Judah, called here by the name of Israel. Or else this and the former phrase may comprehend the twelve tribes, which were fallen from Gods law and worship, and be an elegant ingemination to confirm the thing spoken.

What is the transgression? or, who is, i.e. the spring and cause of that overflowing transgression? who brought in the abominable idolatry?

Of Jacob: here is meant the kingdom of the ten tribes, (he head of which was Samaria, where the kings of that kingdom had their royal residence, where they worshipped idols, whence they issued out their edicts, and which became example to the rest of the Israelitish kingdom.

What are the high places? or, who is, i.e. cause of the high places, and the idolatry there practised?

Jerusalem; which was chief city of that kingdom, and place where their kings dwelt; had the same influence on that kingdom as Samaria had on the ten tribes; there was the example they imitated, thence the laws they obeyed contrary to Gods law.

Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole

5. For the transgression of Jacob isall thisAll these terrors attending Jehovah’s coming arecaused by the sins of Jacob or Israel, that is, the whole people.

What is the transgression ofJacob?Taking up the question often in the mouths of the peoplewhen reproved, “What is our transgression?” (compareMal 1:6; Mal 1:7),He answers, Is it not Samaria? Is not that city (the seat of thecalf-worship) the cause of Jacob’s apostasy (1Ki 14:16;1Ki 15:26; 1Ki 15:34;1Ki 16:13; 1Ki 16:19;1Ki 16:25; 1Ki 16:30)?

and what are the high placesof Judah?What city is the cause of the idolatries on the highplaces of Judah? Is it not Jerusalem (compare 2Ki18:4)?

Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible

For the transgression of Jacob [is] all this, and for the sins of the house of Israel,…. All this evil, all these calamities and judgments, signified by the above metaphorical phrases, these did not come by chance, nor without, reason; but were or would be inflicted, according to the righteous judgment of God, upon the people of Israel and Judah, for their manifold sins and transgressions, especially their idolatry: and should it be asked,

what [is] the transgression of Jacob? what notorious crime has he been guilty of? or what is the iniquity the two tribes are charged with, that is the cause of so much severity? the answer is,

[is it] not Samaria? the wickedness of Samaria, the calf of Samaria? as in Ho 7:1; that is, the worship of the calf of Samaria; is not that idolatry the transgression of Jacob, or which the ten tribes have given into? it is; and a just reason for all this wrath to come upon them: or, “who [is] the transgression of Jacob?” r who is the spring and source of it; the cause, author, and encourager of it? are they not the kings that have reigned in Samaria from the times of Omri, with their nobles, princes, and great men, who, by their edicts, influence, and example, have encouraged the worship of the golden calves? they are the original root and motive of it, and to them it must be ascribed; they caused the people to sin: or, as the Targum,

“where have they of the house of Jacob sinned? is it not in Samaria?”

verily it is, and from thence, the metropolis of the nation, the sin has spread itself all over it:

and what [are] the high places of Judah? or, “who [are] they?” s who have been the makers of them? who have set them up, and encouraged idolatrous worship at them?

[are] they not Jerusalem? are they not the king, the princes, and priests, that dwell at Jerusalem? certainly they are; such as Ahaz, and others, in whose times this prophet lived; see 2Ki 16:4; or, as the Targum,

“where did they of the house of Judah commit sin? was it not in Jerusalem?”

truly it was, and even in the temple; here Ahaz built an altar like that at Damascus, and sacrificed on it, and spoiled the temple, and several of the vessels in it, 2Ki 16:10.

r “quis est praevaricatio Jacobi?” De Dieu; so Pagninus, Burkius; “quis defectio Jacobi?” Cocceius; “quis scelus Jacobi?” Drusius. s “quis est excelsa Judae?” Montanus, Drusius, De Dieu; “quis cesla Judae?” Cocceius; “quis fuit causa excelsorum Jehudae?” Burkius; so Kimchi.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

This judicial interposition on the part of God is occasioned by the sin of Israel. Mic 1:5. “For the apostasy of Jacob (is) all this, and for the sins of the house of Israel. Who is Jacob’s apostasy? is it not Samaria? And who Judah’s high places? is it not Jerusalem? Mic 1:6. Therefore I make Samaria into a stone-heap of the field, into plantations of vines; and I pour her stones into the valley, and I will lay bare her foundations. Mic 1:7. And all her stone images will be beaten to pieces, and all her lovers’ gifts be burned with fire, and all her idols will I make into a waste: for she has gathered them of prostitute’s hire, and to prostitute’s hire shall they return.” “All this” refers to the coming of Jehovah to judgment announced in Mic 1:3, Mic 1:4. This takes place on account of the apostasy and the sins of Israel. (for) used to denote reward or wages, as in 2Sa 3:27 compared with 2Sa 3:30. Jacob and Israel in Mic 1:5 are synonymous, signifying the whole of the covenant nation, as we may see from the fact that in Mic 1:5 Jacob and not Israel is the epithet applied to the ten tribes in distinction from Judah. , who? – referring to the author. The apostasy of Israel originates with Samaria; the worship on the high places with Jerusalem. The capitals of the two kingdoms are the authors of the apostasy, as the centres and sources of the corruption which has spread from them over the kingdoms. The allusion to the bamoth of the illegal worship of the high places, which even the most godly kings were unable to abolish (see at 1Ki 15:14), shows, moreover, that denotes that religious apostasy from Jehovah which was formally sanctioned in the kingdom of the ten tribes by the introduction of the calf-worship. But because this apostasy commenced in the kingdom of the ten tribes, the punishment would fall upon this kingdom first, and Samaria would be utterly destroyed. Stone-heaps of the field and vineyard plantations harmonize badly, in Hitzig’s view: he therefore proposes to alter the text. But there is no necessity for this. The point of comparison is simply that Samaria will be so destroyed, that not a single trace of a city will be left, and the site thereof will become like a ploughed field or plain. is added to , a heap of ruins or stones, to strengthen it. Samaria shall become like a heap, not of ruins of building stones, but of stones collected from the field. , i.e., into arable land upon which you can plant vineyards. The figure answers to the situation of Samaria upon a hill in a very fruitful region, which was well adapted for planting vineyards (see at Amo 3:9). The situation of the city helps to explain the casting of its stones into the valley. Laying bare the foundations denotes destruction to the very foundation (cf. Psa 137:7). On the destruction of the city all its idols will be annihilated. P e slm , idols, as in Isa 10:10; not wooden idols, however, to which the expression yukkattu , smitten to pieces, would not apply, but stone idols, from pasal (Exo 34:1). By the lovers’ gifts ( ‘ethnan , see at Hos 9:1) we are to understand, not “the riches of the city or their possessions, inasmuch as the idolaters regarded their wealth and prosperity as a reward from their gods, according to Hos 2:7, Hos 2:14” (Rashi, Hitzig, and others), but the temple gifts, “gifts suspended in the temples and sacred places in honour of the gods” (Rosenmller), by which the temple worship with its apparatus were maintained; so that by ‘ethnan we may understand the entire apparatus of religious worship. For the parallelism of the clauses requires that the word should be restricted to this. are also idolatrous images. “To make them into a waste,” i.e., not only to divest them of their ornament, but so utterly to destroy them that the place where they once stood becomes waste. The next clause, containing the reason, must not be restricted to the atsabbm , as Hitzig supposes, but refers to the two clauses of the first hemistich, so that p e slm and atsabbm are to be supplied as objects to qibbatsah (she gathered), and to be regarded as the subject to yashubhu (shall return). Samaria gathered together the entire apparatus of her idolatrous worship from prostitute’s gifts (the wages of prostitution), namely, through gifts presented by the idolaters. The acquisition of all this is described as the gain of prostitute’s wages, according to the scriptural view that idolatry was spiritual whoredom. There is no ground for thinking of literal wages of prostitution, or money which flowed into the temples from the voluptuous worship of Aphrodite, because Micah had in his mind not literal (heathenish) idolatry, but simply the transformation of the Jehovah-worship into idolatry by the worship of Jehovah under the symbols of the golden calves. These things return back to the wagers of prostitution, i.e., they become this once more (cf. Gen 3:19) by being carried away by the enemies, who conquer the city and destroy it, and being applied to their idolatrous worship. On the capture of cities, the idols and temple treasures were carried away (cf. Isa 46:1-2; Dan 1:3).

Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

The Prophet teaches, in this verse, that God is not angry for nothing; though when he appears rigid, men expostulate with him, and clamor as though he were cruel. That men may, therefore, acknowledge that God is a just judge, and that he never exceeds moderation in punishments, the Prophet here distinctly states that there was a just cause, why God denounced so dreadful a judgment on his chosen people, — even because not only a part of the people, but the whole body had, through their impiety, fallen away; for by the house of Jacob, and by the house of Israel, he means that impiety had everywhere prevailed, so that no part was untainted. The meaning then is, — that the contagion of sin had spread through all Israel, that no portion of the country was free from iniquity, that no corner of the land could bring an excuse for its defection; the Lord therefore shows that he would be the judge of them all, and would spare neither small nor great.

We now then understand the Prophet’s object in this verse: As he had before taught how dreadful would be God’s vengeance against all the ungodly, so now he mentions their crimes, that they might not complain that they were unjustly treated, or that God employed too much severity. The Prophet then testifies that the punishment, then near at hand, would be just.

He now adds, What is the wickedness of Jacob? The Prophet, no doubt, indirectly reproves here the hypocrisy which ruled dominant among the people. For he asks not for his own satisfaction or in his own person; but, on the contrary, he relates, by way of imitation, ( μιμητικῶς, — imitatively) what he knew to be ever on their lips, “Oh! what sort of thing is this sin? Why! thou assumest here a false principle, — that we are wicked men, ungodly and perfidious: thou does us a grievous wrong.” Inasmuch, then, as hypocrites thought themselves pure, having wiped, as it were, their mouths, whenever they eluded reproofs by their sophistries, the Prophet borrows a question, as it were, from their own lips, “Of what kind is this wickedness? Of what sort is that transgression?” As though he said, “I know what ye are wont to do, when any one of the Prophets severely reproves you; ye instantly contend with him, and are ready with your objections: but what do you gain? If you wish to know what your wickedness is, it is Samaria; and where your high places are, they are at Jerusalem.” It is the same as if he had said, “I do not here contend with the common people, but I attack the first men: my contest then is with the princes themselves, who surpass others in dignity, and are, therefore, unwilling to be touched.”

But it sometimes happens that the common people become degenerated, while some integrity remains among the higher orders: but the Prophet shows that the diseases among the people belonged to the principal men; and hence he names the two chief cities, Jerusalem and Samaria, as he had said before, in the first verse, that he proclaimed predictions against these: and yet it is certain, that the punishment was to be in common to the whole people. But as they thought that Jerusalem and Samaria would be safe, though the whole country were destroyed, the Prophet threatens them by name: for, relying first on their strength, they thought themselves unassailable; and then, the eyes of nearly all, we know, were dazzled with empty splendor, powers and dignity: thus the ungodly wholly forget that they are men, and what they owe to God, when elevated in the world. So great an arrogance could not be subdued, except by sharp and severe words, such as the Prophet, as we see, here employs. He then says, that the wickedness of Israel was Samaria; the fountain of all iniquities was the royal city, which yet ought to have ruled the whole land with wisdom and justice: but what any more remains, when kings and their counselors tread under foot all regard for what is just and right, and having cast away every shame, rise up in rebellion against God and men? When therefore kings thus fall from their dignity, an awful ruin must follow.

This is the reason why the Prophet says that the wickedness of Israel was Samaria, that thence arose all iniquities. But we must at the same time bear in mind, that the Prophet speaks not here of gross crimes; but, on the contrary, he directs his reproof against ungodly and perverted forms of worship; and this appears more evident from the second clause, in which he mentions transgressions in connection with the high places. We hence see, that all sins in general are not here reproved, but their vicious modes of worship, by which religion had been polluted among the Jews as well as the Israelites. But it might seem very unjust, that the Prophet should charge with sin those forms of worship in which the Jews laboriously exercised themselves with the object of pacifying God. But we see how God regards as nothing whatever men blend with his worship out of their own heads. And this is our principal contest at this day with the Papists; we call their perverted and spurious modes of worship abominations: they think that what is heavenly is to be blended with what is earthly. We diligently labor, they say, for this end — that God may be worshipped. True; but, at the same time, ye profane his worship by your inventions; and it is therefore an abomination. We now then see how foolish and frivolous are those delusions, when men follow their own wisdom in the duty of worshipping God: for the Prophet here, in the name of God, fulminates, as it were, from heaven against all superstitions, and shows that no sin is more detestable, than that preposterous caprice with which idolaters are inflamed, when they observe such forms of worship as they have themselves invented.

Now with regard to the high places, we must notice, that there was a great difference between the Jews and the Israelites at that time as to idolatry. The Israelites had so fallen, that they were altogether degenerated; nothing could be seen among them that had an affinity to the true and legitimate worship of God: but the Jews had retained some form of religion, they had not thus abandoned themselves; but yet they had a mixture of superstitions; such as one would find, were he to compare the gross Popery of this day with that middle course which those men invent, who seem to themselves to be very wise, fearing, forsooth, as they do, the offenses of the world; and hence they form for us a mixture, I know not what, from the superstitions of the Papacy and from the Reformation, as they call it. Something like this was the mixture at Jerusalem. We however see, that the Prophet pronounces the same sentence against the Jews and the Israelites and that is, that God will allow nothing that proceeds from the inventions of men to be joined to his word. Since then God allows no such mixtures, the Prophet here says that there was no less sin on the high places of Judea, than there was in those filthy abominations which were then dominant among the people of Israel. But the remainder we must defer until to-morrow.

Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary

THE OCCASION OF THE WRATH . . . Mic. 1:5

RV . . . For the transgression of Jacob is all this, and for the sins of the house of Israel. What is the transgression of Jacob? is it not Samaria? and what are the high places of Judah? are they not Jerusalem?
LXX . . . All these calamities are for the transgression of Jacob, and for the sin of the house of Israel. What is the transgression of Jacob? is it not Samaria? and what is the sin of the house of Jacob? is it not Jerusalem?

COMMENTS

The purifying wrath of God against the people is, in this case, occasioned by the sins of Jacob . . . and for the transgression of the house of Israel. Here in the indictment Micah uses the covenant names which treat both the kingdoms as one people.
Many times the covenant name for God is the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. The shorter form of reference to the covenant people is simply Jacob, as used here by Micah. Jacob, as the last of the patriarchs and the father of the twelve tribes, is best representative of the covenant people as a whole.
Indeed, it is his new name, Israel, given to him upon his realization that Jehovah is the universal God rather than a local deity, which came to represent the people as well as the man.

As with them, so with Jacob, the heart of the covenant was: in thy seed shall all the families of the earth be blessed. (Gen. 28:14) Some fourteen years later, following his marriage to the daughters of Laban, Jacob turned in prayer to God because of his fear that his brother Esau would seek revenge against him. Subsequently, God granted him the experience of wrestling with an angel. When he prevailed in the combat the angel said to him, thy name shall be no more called Jacob but Israel (Prince of God) for as a prince thou hast power with God and with men, and hast prevailed. Gen. 32:28)

Israel next came to apply to the nation formed of Jacobs descendants by the giving of the Law through Moses. This is significant, since Israel was the covenant name. The attachment of it to the nation points up the truth written by Paul, a covenant confirmed beforehand by God, the law, which came four hundred and thirty years after, doth not disannul, so as to make the promise of none effect. (Gal. 3:18) The purpose of God in Israel was not changed by the passing of time and development of a political commonwealth. The very name worn by the nation under the Law was intended to emphasize their covenant relationship to God, and to signify the life, character and mission that was to be theirs as His called-out people.

First the family, then the federation of tribes wore this name. In the beginning the people were held together by a sense of kinship growing out of a common ancestry and a common covenant God.
In the giving of the Law a third factor united them. The Law was, in effect, a national constitution. During the time of the judges, when the Law was applied directly by God through the judges, there was an acute awareness of the nations covenant relationship to God. Under the reign of Saul, David and Solomon, the covenant awareness waned as the people struggled for national identity among the nations of the world. By the time the kingdom was divided, the term Israel expressed almost entirely a nationalistic concept which was nearly devoid of any covenant awareness.

The name Israel was taken by the southern kingdom during the post-exilic period (following the return from Babylon). (Ezr. 6:16, Neh. 11:3) In the inter-Biblical period, from Malachi to Matthew, the term fell into disuse. In its place the nation and the people were called Jews to distinguish them from Greek, Roman, Persian, etc.

In the New Testament, Israel is used to emphasize relationship to God as a covenant people. (Mat. 9:33, Luk. 2:32, Joh. 3:10, Act. 4:10) When the nation, or race, is intended in the New Testament, the term is Jews. This is obviously a distinction vital to the understanding of the relationship of New Testament Israel to the Old Covenant and Gods people under it.

Before singling out first the northern and then the southern kingdoms to warn each of its particular punishment, Micah calls to them both in terms calculated to remind them wherein they have failed. They will be punished for more than specific sins. The punishment for these sins will be brought about by their failure to keep the covenant, Such had been the warning of Jehovah against His people at the time of the giving of the Law, and earlier at the institution of circumcision.
In both Israel and Judah, Micah equates the sins of the nation with the nature of its capital. The transgression of Jacob (Israel) is Samaria. The sin of Judah is Jerusalem.

JUDAH . . . Mic. 1:5(b)

The significance of this, as well as the rest of the blessing, (Gen. 49:8-12) is seen in the increasing strength of Judah throughout the history of the people. (See Num. 2:3, Jos. 9:1, Jdg. 1:1-2, Isa. 29:1, etc.) The capital city, Jerusalem, became the capital of the southern kingdom, with Judah as the predominant tribe, (the southern kingdom also included Benjamin and Simeon) and remained so until the coming of the Christ to the Roman province of Judea. Judea was the first century vestige of Judah, and its capital also was Jerusalem. The scepter had not passed from Judah until He came!

The capital of the northern kingdom of Israel was Samaria. Micah singles out this capital in the north as the personification of the transgression of Jacob.

Samaria was situated south of the Plain of Esdralon in the vicinity where Abraham had stayed for a while on the plains of Moreh. (Gen. 12:6) It was in the territory possessed, in the days of Joshua, by Ephraim and Manasseh. The name, Samaria, came to be applied to that general area following the time of Solomon.

Under Ahab, due in a large part to the influence of Jezebel, Baal worship came to dominate both the religion and the general culture of Samaria. (2Ki. 3:2) Idolatry, sensuality and oppression become the order of the day. (See chapter III, BAAL WORSHIP.)

Modern archeological excavations at Samaria reveal seven Israelite levels. The first and second, or lowest, levels date from the time of Omri and Ahab. The seventh, or highest, level marks the destruction of Samaria by the Assyrians following the three year siege begun by Shalamaneser in the seventh year of Hosheas reign. The siege was concluded under Sargon II in 722.
It was this destruction of which Micah warns in our text. Sargon claims to have carried away only 27,290 from the entire nation of Samaria (Israel). No doubt, as with Judah later, these were the most powerful and influential citizens.
The sin with which Samaria is particularly identified, when Micah calls her the transgression of Jacob, is idolatry, particularly the worship of Baal. As Halley puts it, God had sent Elijah, Elisha and Amos to turn them (the Samaritans) back from idols. But in vain. They were about ripe for the death blow.

JERUSALEM . . . SIN OF JUDAH . . . Mic. 1:5(c)

Manuscript evidence here seems to indicate as the correct reading, . . . . what are the high places of Judah . . . rather than what is the sin of Judah.
If this be true, the sin of Judah is but a variation of the idolatry of Samaria. However, the high place of Jerusalem would be the temple and its immediate surroundings as the center of worship. The worship conducted there, rather than being out and out Baal worship, was, during this period, Jehovah worship polluted with Baalism.
It is interesting to note that both Je (in Jehovah) and Baal literally mean Lord. It is often difficult to tell, in some passages, whether the prophets are denouncing Baal worship per se or a corruption of Jehovah worship.

The Bible reader is first introduced to the site of Jerusalem some one thousand years before the time of David. We are told (Genesis 14) that Abraham stopped there shortly after the slaughter of the kings. (Hebrews 7) The ancient name of the place was Salem, an abbreviated form of yeru-Shalem foundation, or city, of peace.

It was here that Abraham met and paid tithes to Melchezedek. The name means literally my king is Zedek. He was priest to the God El-Elyon, God of Peace, whom Abraham identified with Yaweh (Jehovah). Gen. 14:18-20)

It is probable that this also marks the site of the sacrifice of Isaac by his father, Abraham, The land of Moriah, (Gen. 22:2) has not been positively identified. The Septuagint reads, the highland, while the Syriac has land of the Amorites. Local tradition, however, identifies Moriah with the mountain on which the temple was built. (2Ch. 3:1)

The Scriptures do not identify the exact location of Isaacs sacrifice, but both Jewish and Arab (Moslem) tradition locate it at the present site of the Dome of the Rock. This second most sacred shrine in Islam stands where the Biblical temple once stood.
(Incidentally, it is the possession of this sacred site which furnishes much of the fuel for the present inferno in the Middle East.)

At the time of Joshua, Jerusalem was the domain of Adom-Zedek, the Amorite who, in alliance with four other kings, attempted to prevent the Israelite conquest of southern Canaan. (Joshua 10) It was then the home of the Jebusites. (Gen. 10:15 and Num. 13:29) The city was on the border between the lands assigned to Benjamin, on the north, and Judah, on the south (Jos. 15:7-8; Jos. 18:10) It was never occupied by the Israelites until the time of David, by which time it was at least a thousand years old!

First, Jerusalem was more centrally located than Hebron, and hence more accessible from both north and south.
Second, and perhaps more significant, the city belonged to no tribe. Being situated on the line between Benjamin to the north and Judah to the south, it could be made the seat of government for the federation without disturbing the status quo of any tribe, in much the same way that Washington D.C. was made our national capital without being part of any state.

Jerusalem is one of two cities called, in Scripture, city of David. The other is Bethlehem. (Luk. 2:11) The latter was his home town by birth, (1Sa. 1:16) the former became his city by force of arms. (2 Samuel 5)

After making Jerusalem his political capital, David determined to make it the religious capital also. He brought the Ark of the Covenant from Shiloh to Jerusalem and placed it with careful preparation. (2Sa. 6:12-14) He also purchased the threshing floor of Araunah as the site upon which a permanent housing for the Ark would be built and later erected an altar of burnt offerings upon the site. (2Sa. 24:25)

The traditional tomb of David may be seen today on the southwestern slopes of the hill upon which Jerusalem sits. Most scholarship discounts the authenticity of the site, however.

(Readers of the English Bible are frequently misled concerning Adonijah by the unfortunate King James translation of 1Ki. 1:6, he was a very goodly man. Rotherham more accurately renders this passage, he was of exceedingly handsome appearance.

A part of the sun worship during the festivities of the winter solstice (December 24-25) centered around the burning of a log. (See Chapter III Baal Worship) The log represented the sun god cut down in the midst of his strength. Around the stump of the tree was pictured a serpent, symbol of his reviving life. After the burning of the log on the evening of December 24, the evergreen fir appeared next morning in its place symbolizing the reviving of the slain god. The serpent which twined around the stump was also worshipped as a minor deity. It was at an altar to this pagan god that Adonijah offered sacrifices.
Since Adonijah offered his sacrifices on the eve of an abortive attempt to seize the throne of his father, David, he could scarcely do so in the proper place. It is highly probable that he was attempting to sacrifice to Jehovah. If so, his worship of God at a pagan altar is a good example of the pollution of Jehovah worship by Baalism in Jerusalem.

This pollution was multiplied several-fold by Solomons compromise with paganism. (1Ki. 11:4-8) Ashtoreth, Chemosh and Moloch, named in connection with Solomons unfaithfulness are names associated with the unholy trinity of the sun god. (See again Chapter III BAAL WORSHIP).

During the first hundred years following the division of the kingdom, Jerusalem was in a state of decline. At this time, Baalism increased.
After a period of restoration, from Jehosaphat to Joash (B.C. 871-789), Jerusalem was humiliated again by Jehoash (B.C. 798-789). It was during this period that Ahab and Jezebel, of the Omri dynasty in the northern kingdom, seized the throne of Judah. The temple was laid waste and the priesthood of Baal was supported from the royal treasury.
Jerusalem was revived again under Uzziah, but the worship of Jehovah was never quite completely purified of the influence of Baalism prior to the Babylonian captivity.

It is quite obvious that the sinfulness of both Samaria and Jerusalem and their subsequent destruction are directly related to the insidious influence of Baal. Babylon, the mother of harlots, (Rev. 17:5) had succeeded, through her daughter, the religion of Baal, in seducing Israel the prince of God.

It was this spiritual immorality between the people of God and the religion of men that was the object of Gods warning to them through the prophets, and the target of His wrath when they refused to repent.

POLLUTED AND FALSE RELIGION OF SAMARIA AND JERUSALEM RESULT IN MORAL AND SOCIAL EVILS . . .

The insatiable drive for status symbols (Amo. 4:1; Amo. 3:15; Amo. 6:4) coupled with an intense pre-occupation with entertainment (Amos 6) left the people unconcerned for their national welfare.

False confidence in a false god produced a false sense of security from divine judgment. (Amo. 5:14; Amo. 9:10)

As might be expected, the moral fiber of the people was totally rotten. Amos speaks of father and son committing fornication with the same girl. (Amo. 2:7)

The peculiar sins of Judah were personified in Jerusalem. Micah lists the peculiar sins of the southern kingdom. They vary slightly from those of the north, and the variation may be due in part to the degree of Baal influence. Nevertheless, Judahs sins are heinous and the prophets warning is sharp just as against Israel. The absence of righteousness noted by Micah (Mic. 7:2) is reminiscent of Abrahams futile search for one righteous man in Sodom. (Gen. 18:23 -ff)

(2) There were lovers of evil in high office. (Mic. 3:1-4) In their activities, bribery rather than justice decided civil cases (Mic. 7:3) so that the little man had no effective recourse against the grabbing of the rich and powerful.

(3) False preachers, who were more concerned with their income than with the truth or with right and wrong, preached what their wealthy listeners wanted to hear.

(4) Hireling priests added to the practice of the false prophets. (Mic. 3:11) Idolatry was allowed to pollute the worship of the people. (Mic. 5:11-12 and Mic. 3:7) As a result of such unholy clergy, the people believed that their national identity as Gods People insured them against destruction (Mic. 3:11) and that Gods favor could be bought with sacrifice. (Mic. 6:5-7) They could have profited greatly by reading their own Bible. (e.g. Psalms 50)

No thinking American Christian can read the minor prophets and fail to sense the parallels between Israel and Judah just prior to their downfall and America in the second half of the twentieth century. The sins are the same . . . their causes are the same . . . the public apathy is the same . . . the false sense of security is the same . . . and, because God deals with men in every age on the basis of the same eternal ethic, the danger of destruction is the same. If our nation should fall due to this moral dry rot resulting from polluted and false religion, it would be no strange thing when viewed in the light of history, And if God should use a godless power to bring about this destruction, this also would be in keeping with the lessons of history. God is still on His throne exercising authority over nations!

Chapter VIQuestions

First Cycle

What evidence does Micah give in the early verses of his book concerning Gods universal concern for all men?

The term the people is used frequently to designate ____________.

The term the nations indicates ____________ in contrast to the people.

What long precedent does Micah have for his use of earth and all that therein is to call the whole world to listen to Gods indictment of His covenant people?

____________, Micahs contemporary, uses the same phrase.

What two reasons are apparent for Gods concern that the earth and all that is in it hear His charge?

Who is the star witness for the prosecution against Gods unfaithful people?

Show how Stephens defense (Acts 7) seconds the accusation of Micah against the people.

Discuss, in connection with Mic. 1:2(c) – Mic. 1:3(a), God is not an absentee God.

10.

What is signified by the term high places (Mic. 1:3(b))?

11.

Discuss Micahs statement that the mountains shall melt and the valleys melt like wax. Mic. 1:4

12.

The purifying wrath of God against the people is to be occasioned by ____________ and ____________.

13.

Trace the eight ways in which the name Israel is used historically in the Bible.

14.

What is meant by pre-exilic? by post exilic?

15.

Trace the Biblical history of the name Judah and its development into the word Jew.

16.

Describe the situation of the city of Samaria.

17.

How is Samaria the transgression of Jacob?

18.

How is Jerusalem the sin of Judah?

19.

Both Je and Baal mean ____________.

20.

Compare the sins of the northern and southern kingdoms.

21.

Why was Samaria to be first to feel Gods wrath?

22.

Discuss the significance of Samarias graven images.

23.

How is spiritual harlotry an apt allegory of idolatry?

24.

How does the lament of Mic. 1:8 relate to our understanding that the God of the Old Testament is the same loving God as that of the New Testament?

25.

What is the purpose of the punishment promised by Micah?

26.

The warning of Micah to Judah is ____________.

27.

List the cities of the Philistine plains mentioned by Micah. Locate them on a map.

28.

Micahs home town was ____________.

29.

Why did Sargon carry off the social, political and cultural leaders of Israel?

30.

Self-inflicted baldness by the worshippers of Baal was a symbol of ____________.

Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series

(5) The transgression of Jacob . . . the sins of the house of Israel.The corruption of the country came from the capital cities. Samaria, on her hill, set an example of idolatry, drunkenness, and all the evils of a most profligate society; and even Jerusalem, the city set on an hill, gave a home in the Temple of Jehovah to heathen deities.

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

5. In this instance the judge of all the earth comes for a specific purpose, to execute judgment upon Israel.

Jacob Israel Some suppose that Jacob means the whole of the chosen people, including Judah, while Israel is thought to refer to the northern kingdom only; but there seems to be insufficient warrant for this differentiation. In view of the distinction between north and south in 5b it would be natural to expect the same distinction in 5a. Since “Jacob” designates the northern kingdom in 5b, it can hardly be used of Judah in 5a. Hence the question suggests itself, whether in the place of “Israel” the text did not read originally “Judah.” If the present text is correct “Israel” and “Jacob” in 5a should probably be regarded as synonyms, both denoting the whole nation, which only in 5b is divided into north and south, called Jacob and Judah respectively.

Transgression A weak reproduction of the original. The rendering “rebellion,” or “apostasy,” which implies taking a determined hostile attitude, comes nearer the original.

High places The technical Old Testament term for the local sanctuaries scattered throughout the land; they were so called because they were commonly located on natural or artificial elevations. Nominally the worship practiced there was in honor of Jehovah, but it became so permeated with immoral, heathenish elements that it threatened the very life of the Jehovah religion. As a result the prophets hurl the severest condemnation against this cult; and finally, under Josiah (621 B.C.), worship at the local sanctuaries was abolished (compare also 2Ki 18:4). Instead of “high places” three of the most important ancient versions present a different reading; Peshitto reads “sin”; LXX. and Targum, “sin of the house of.” If either of these is accepted as original, the parallelism between the two parts of 5b will resemble more closely that between the two parts of 5a. If the present Hebrew text is followed, “high places” must be understood as practically equivalent to “transgression.”

The suggestion that 5b is a later marginal gloss to 5a is without sufficient warrant.

What is the transgression Literally, Who is. Transgression, the abstract, is here equivalent to the concrete transgressor, or better, originator of transgression. The thought is that the apostasy of the people is due to the influence that went out from the two capitals. Here the court and nobility were to be found; and it is the teaching of all the eighth century prophets that these were in a large measure responsible for the sins of the people.

The indictment is followed by the announcement of judgment; Mic 1:6-7 deal with Samaria, the rest of the chapter with Judah. The former will be destroyed.

As an heap Literally “into an heap.” It will become like a heap of stones in a field. The prophet seems to think of stones gathered out of the field by the husbandman. The emendation “into jungle,” favored by some, is not needed.

As plantings of a vineyard R.V., “as places for planting vineyards.” Again better, into. If the city was allowed to remain in ruins, in time people would plant vineyards on the sides of the fertile hill upon which Samaria was located. The rest of Mic 1:6 presents a picture of complete ruin. Houses and walls will be broken down to their very foundations (Psa 137:7); and since the land is to be cultivated, the stones are removed by hurling them down the hill on which the city was built (1Ki 16:24). Cheyne quotes from a report describing the ruins of Samaria in modern times as follows: “There is every appearance of the ancient buildings having been destroyed, and their materials cast down from the brow of the hill, in order to clear the ground for cultivation; masses of stones are thus seen hanging on the steep sides of the hill, accidentally stopped in the progress of their descent by the rude dykes and terraces separating the fields. The materials of the ruins are piled up in large heaps, or used in the construction of rude stone fences; many of these heaps of stones are seen in the plains at the foot of the hill.” A later destruction of Samaria by John Hyrcanus is described by Josephus ( Antiquities, 13: 10, 3).

With the city the images of the gods will be destroyed, which will prove their impotence and nothingness (Isa 2:20; Isa 30:22).

Graven images Representations of deities made of stone; the expression “shall be beaten to pieces” would hardly be applicable to wooden idols (compare Mic 5:13).

Hires Refers to the love gifts offered by the worshipers to the illegitimate deities, in order to secure their favor; “gifts suspended in temples and sacred places in honor of the gods.” These along with the idols and graven images will be swept away in the impending judgment. This will happen because they have gathered it R.V., “them.” This word is not in the original, but the context makes it clear that the images, votive offerings, idols, etc., are meant.

Of the hire of an harlot Not to be understood literally of wages of prostitution; nor is the expression to be connected with the licentious practices at the local sanctuaries (Deu 23:17-18); it is to be explained rather in the light of Hos 2:5 ff. Israel had prospered; the prosperity she regarded as the gift of her lovers, the Baalim; it could be called the hire of a harlot, because it allured the pure wife Israel from her faithful husband Jehovah, to run after illegitimate paramours, the gods of the land. The things made of the harlot’s hire will return “unto the hire of a harlot.” If the preceding figure is continued this must mean that the things will be regarded by the enemies who will despoil the city as gifts from their deities, given in order to increase the love of the worshipers. It is not necessary, however, to suppose that the same figure is retained. The prophet may intend to change it and mean that the things carried away will be used by the captors in their idolatrous worship; they will present them to the deities to secure their favor. If so, the second “hire of a harlot” is equivalent in meaning to “hire” earlier in the verse. It was customary in ancient times, when a city was captured, to carry away its idols and temple treasures (Joe 3:5; Hos 10:6; Isa 46:1-2; Dan 1:3).

The suggestion of Wellhausen, favored by other scholars, to read “her Asherahs” (Mic 5:14) for “her hires” is worthy of notice. The emendation is based upon the opinion that in view of the expressions “her graven images” and “her idols” in the two parallel lines we should expect a similar expression in the third line.

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

Mic 1:5. What is the transgression of Jacob? Who [makes] transgression in Jacob? Is it not Samaria? And who the high-places of Judah? Is it not Jerusalem? But Houbigant prefers the translation of the LXX, and reads the latter words, What is the sin of Judah? by which means the two clauses aptly correspond to each other. The transgression, and sin, mean, the cause of sin and transgression, which Samaria and Jerusalem gave, as the whole nation followed their ill example.

Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke

Mic 1:5 For the transgression of Jacob [is] all this, and for the sins of the house of Israel. What [is] the transgression of Jacob? [is it] not Samaria? and what [are] the high places of Judah? [are they] not Jerusalem?

Ver. 5. For the transgression of Jacob is all this ] Lest they should think, either that these things were threatened in terrorem in fear only, and would never be inflicted; or else that they had not deserved such severity, but that God should pour out his wrath rather upon the heathen, that knew him not, and upon the families that called not on his name. The prophet here showeth that Jacob was become a just object of God’s indignation, by his transgressions or rebellions, and the whole house of Israel by their sins; there was a general defection, and therefore they must expect a general destruction. For what reason? the just Lord is in the midst thereof: he will not do iniquity, he will not acquit the guilty: morning by morning doth he bring his judgments to light, he faileth not: but the unjust knoweth no shame, will take no warning, which is a just both presage and desert of his ruin.

What is the transgression of Jacob? ] Say they in a chatting way; like those miscreants in Malachi, that so worded it with God, Mal 1:1-14 ; Mal 3:1-15 .

Is it not Samaria? ] Saith the prophet, in answer to that daring demand of theirs. So,

what are the high places of Judah? ] viz. the superstitious and carnal confidences thereof? Is it not Jerusalem? saith the prophet. Are not their capital cities become their capital sins? Read we not of the calf of Samaria, Hos 8:5 , and did not her kings set up idols at Dan and Bethel, and Gilgal and Beersheba? As for Jerusalem, had she not turned the very temple into a high place, by resting in her ceremonial services and sacrifices? Did not some of her best kings wink at the high places? And Ahaz, that stigmatic Belialist, shut up God’s temple and set up strange worships? How then could these frontless fellows ask “What is the transgression?” and “What are the high places?” The prophet goes not behind the door to tell them that the best of them were no better than a rabble of rebels against heaven; and their chieftains were most in fault, though they least liked to hear of it. Samaria is a very Poneropolis, and Jerusalem is little better; they both are even transformed into sin’s image; the prophet here speaks of them as if they were not only sinful, but sin itself; as Cicero saith of one Tubulus, a Roman praetor, that he was so desperately wicked, ut eius nomen non hominis sed vitii esse videretur; that he passed not for a man, but for a vice, so flagitious were his practices; or, as Austin saith of this present evil world, that it is nothing else but a sty of filthy hogs, or a kennel of mad dogs, Hara porcorum, vel colluvies rabidorum canum (Aug.).

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

transgression = rebellion. Hebrew. pasha’. App-44.

sins. Hebrew. chata’. App-44. Aram, and Syriac read singular.

What = Whose.

is it not Samaria? = is it not Samaria’s [idolatry]? Figure of speech Erotesis. App-6.

high places. Compare 1Ki 12:31; 1Ki 14:23. Eze 6:6. These existed in Jerusalem (Jer 32:35); hence the mention of them in the further question. Figure of speech Erotesis. Compare 2Ki 16:4.

are they not Jerusalem? = is it not Jerusalem’s [idol altars]?

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

Mic 1:5

THE OCCASION OF THE WRATH . . . Mic 1:5

The purifying wrath of God against the people is, in this case, occasioned by the sins of Jacob . . . and for the transgression of the house of Israel. Here in the indictment Micah uses the covenant names which treat both the kingdoms as one people. Many times the covenant name for God is the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. The shorter form of reference to the covenant people is simply Jacob, as used here by Micah. Jacob, as the last of the patriarchs and the father of the twelve tribes, is best representative of the covenant people as a whole. Indeed, it is his new name, Israel, given to him upon his realization that Jehovah is the universal God rather than a local deity, which came to represent the people as well as the man.

Israel was first the name of the man, Jacob. Following his dream on the way to Haran from Beersheba, Jacob awoke to the realization that surely the Lord is in this place, and I knew it not, (Gen 28:16) It was during the dream that God reaffirmed to him the everlasting covenant which He had made with Abraham and confirmed previously with Jacobs father, Isaac. As with them, so with Jacob, the heart of the covenant was: in thy seed shall all the families of the earth be blessed. (Gen 28:14) Some fourteen years later, following his marriage to the daughters of Laban, Jacob turned in prayer to God because of his fear that his brother Esau would seek revenge against him. Subsequently, God granted him the experience of wrestling with an angel. When he prevailed in the combat the angel said to him, thy name shall be no more called Jacob but Israel (Prince of God) for as a prince thou hast power with God and with men, and hast prevailed. Gen 32:28)

To understand the meaning of the name Israel in any given passage, one must keep in mind the various uses of it throughout the Old and New Testaments. The exact meaning must be determined by the specific context in which it appears. As we have seen, Israel was first the covenant name given to Jacob upon his realization of the universal nature of God. It next came to apply to the whole family descended from this man, then to the twelve tribes into which the family grew, i.e. the direct descendants of the twelve sons of Jacob. Israel next came to apply to the nation formed of Jacobs descendants by the giving of the Law through Moses. This is significant, since Israel was the covenant name. The attachment of it to the nation points up the truth written by Paul, a covenant confirmed beforehand by God, the law, which came four hundred and thirty years after, doth not disannul, so as to make the promise of none effect. (Gal 3:18) The purpose of God in Israel was not changed by the passing of time and development of a political commonwealth. The very name worn by the nation under the Law was intended to emphasize their covenant relationship to God, and to signify the life, character and mission that was to be theirs as His called-out people.

First the family, then the federation of tribes wore this name. In the beginning the people were held together by a sense of kinship growing out of a common ancestry and a common covenant God. In the giving of the Law a third factor united them. The Law was, in effect, a national constitution. During the time of the judges, when the Law was applied directly by God through the judges, there was an acute awareness of the nations covenant relationship to God. Under the reign of Saul, David and Solomon, the covenant awareness waned as the people struggled for national identity among the nations of the world. By the time the kingdom was divided, the term Israel expressed almost entirely a nationalistic concept which was nearly devoid of any covenant awareness.

The ideal which runs through both the pre-exilic and post-exilic prophets is the restoration of covenant awareness through obedient faith in God. Micahs prophecy is addressed to pre-exilic Israel. The outlook of the people at this time was strongly nationalistic. Covenant awareness was at perhaps its lowest ebb, yet the prophet uses the ancient covenant name Israel in such a way as to remind his readers of its real meaning. The name Israel was taken by the southern kingdom during the post-exilic period (following the return from Babylon). (Ezr 6:16, Neh 11:3) In the inter-Biblical period, from Malachi to Matthew, the term fell into disuse. In its place the nation and the people were called Jews to distinguish them from Greek, Roman, Persian, etc.

In the New Testament, Israel is used to emphasize relationship to God as a covenant people. (Mat 9:33, Luk 2:32, Joh 3:10, Act 4:10) When the nation, or race, is intended in the New Testament, the term is Jews. This is obviously a distinction vital to the understanding of the relationship of New Testament Israel to the Old Covenant and Gods people under it. Before singling out first the northern and then the southern kingdoms to warn each of its particular punishment, Micah calls to them both in terms calculated to remind them wherein they have failed. They will be punished for more than specific sins. The punishment for these sins will be brought about by their failure to keep the covenant, Such had been the warning of Jehovah against His people at the time of the giving of the Law, and earlier at the institution of circumcision.

In both Israel and Judah, Micah equates the sins of the nation with the nature of its capital. The transgression of Jacob (Israel) is Samaria. The sin of Judah is Jerusalem.

Zerr: Mic 1:5. This verse gives the key to the figures of the preceding one. The two kingdoms of the Jews are meant by Jacob (or Israel) and Judah. The same is meant by Samaria and Jerusalem because they were the capitals of those kingdoms. They are named in direct connection with sins and transgressions because the kings and other leaders of nations are located in their capitals. High places identifies the particular corruption of these kingdoms to have been idolatry.

JUDAH . . . Mic 1:5(b)

Following the rebellion of the ten northern tribes and the division of the kingdoms, the northern kingdom became known as Israel and the southern as Judah. While the rebellious northern tribes seem to have usurped the family name of Gods people, it was the southern kingdom through whom the fulfillment of the covenant finally came. Originally, the name Judah designated the fourth son of Jacob and Leah, born in Mesopotamia during the time when his father served his uncle Laban. Judah, the great-grandson of Abraham, became the head of and gave his name to the most powerful of the twelve tribes. In the blessing of Judah, Jacob promised that, . . . the scepter shall not depart from Judah, nor a law-giver from between his feet, until Shilo come; and unto him shall be the obedience of the people. (Gen 49:10) The significance of this, as well as the rest of the blessing, (Gen 49:8-12) is seen in the increasing strength of Judah throughout the history of the people. (See Num 2:3, Jos 9:1, Jdg 1:1-2, Isa 29:1, etc.) The capital city, Jerusalem, became the capital of the southern kingdom, with Judah as the predominant tribe, (the southern kingdom also included Benjamin and Simeon) and remained so until the coming of the Christ to the Roman province of Judea. Judea was the first century vestige of Judah, and its capital also was Jerusalem. The scepter had not passed from Judah until He came!

In the occupation of the land of Canaan under Joshua, Judah, the tribe, had occupied the southern section from the Jordan to the Mediterranean as far north as the southern boundaries of Dan and Benjamin. (Joshua 15) With the division of the kingdom, it was this territory, along with the greater part of that of Benjamin to the north and Simeon to the south, that formed the southern kingdom. Samaria . . . transgression of Jacob . . . Mic 1:5(b) The capital of the northern kingdom of Israel was Samaria. Micah singles out this capital in the north as the personification of the transgression of Jacob. Samaria was situated south of the Plain of Esdralon in the vicinity where Abraham had stayed for a while on the plains of Moreh. (Gen 12:6) It was in the territory possessed, in the days of Joshua, by Ephraim and Manasseh. The name, Samaria, came to be applied to that general area following the time of Solomon.

The city from which the territory of Samaria took its name was situated on a hill some forty miles north of Jerusalem. In 880 B.C., Omri moved his capital there from Tirzah. The hill upon which it sits is located adjacent to the fertile wady esh-Shair, and towers some 300 feet above the valley which extends from Shechem (Sychar) westward to the coast. The Mediterranean is clearly visible from this vantage point. Under Ahab, due in a large part to the influence of Jezebel, Baal worship came to dominate both the religion and the general culture of Samaria. (2Ki 3:2) Idolatry, sensuality and oppression become the order of the day. (See chapter III, BAAL WORSHIP.)

Modern archeological excavations at Samaria reveal seven Israelite levels. The first and second, or lowest, levels date from the time of Omri and Ahab. The seventh, or highest, level marks the destruction of Samaria by the Assyrians following the three year siege begun by Shalamaneser in the seventh year of Hosheas reign. The siege was concluded under Sargon II in 722. It was this destruction of which Micah warns in our text. Sargon claims to have carried away only 27,290 from the entire nation of Samaria (Israel). No doubt, as with Judah later, these were the most powerful and influential citizens. The sin with which Samaria is particularly identified, when Micah calls her the transgression of Jacob, is idolatry, particularly the worship of Baal. As Halley puts it, God had sent Elijah, Elisha and Amos to turn them (the Samaritans) back from idols. But in vain. They were about ripe for the death blow.

JERUSALEM . . . SIN OF JUDAH . . . Mic 1:5(c)

It is interesting to note that both Je (in Jehovah) and Baal literally mean Lord. It is often difficult to tell, in some passages, whether the prophets are denouncing Baal worship per se or a corruption of Jehovah worship. The Bible reader is first introduced to the site of Jerusalem some one thousand years before the time of David. We are told (Genesis 14) that Abraham stopped there shortly after the slaughter of the kings. (Hebrews 7) The ancient name of the place was Salem, an abbreviated form of yeru-Shalem foundation, or city, of peace. It was here that Abraham met and paid tithes to Melchezedek. The name means literally my king is Zedek. He was priest to the God El-Elyon, God of Peace, whom Abraham identified with Yaweh (Jehovah). Gen 14:18-20)

It is probable that this also marks the site of the sacrifice of Isaac by his father, Abraham, The land of Moriah, (Gen 22:2) has not been positively identified. The Septuagint reads, the highland, while the Syriac has land of the Amorites. Local tradition, however, identifies Moriah with the mountain on which the temple was built. (2Ch 3:1) The Scriptures do not identify the exact location of Isaacs sacrifice, but both Jewish and Arab (Moslem) tradition locate it at the present site of the Dome of the Rock. This second most sacred shrine in Islam stands where the Biblical temple once stood. (Incidentally, it is the possession of this sacred site which furnishes much of the fuel for the present inferno in the Middle East.)

At the time of Joshua, Jerusalem was the domain of Adom-Zedek, the Amorite who, in alliance with four other kings, attempted to prevent the Israelite conquest of southern Canaan. (Joshua 10) It was then the home of the Jebusites. (Gen 10:15 and Num 13:29) The city was on the border between the lands assigned to Benjamin, on the north, and Judah, on the south (Jos 15:7-8; Jos 18:10) It was never occupied by the Israelites until the time of David, by which time it was at least a thousand years old!

The most historic transaction ever to take place in this ancient city took place when David made it his capital. Following the death of Saul at Gilboa, David reigned over Judah from Hebron (2Sa 2:1-4) When the death of Isbosheth opened the way for David to unite the northern and southern tribes, Jerusalem was a more appealing location for two primary reasons. First, Jerusalem was more centrally located than Hebron, and hence more accessible from both north and south. Second, and perhaps more significant, the city belonged to no tribe. Being situated on the line between Benjamin to the north and Judah to the south, it could be made the seat of government for the federation without disturbing the status quo of any tribe, in much the same way that Washington D.C. was made our national capital without being part of any state.

Jerusalem is one of two cities called, in Scripture, city of David. The other is Bethlehem. (Luk 2:11) The latter was his home town by birth, (1Sa 1:16) the former became his city by force of arms. (2 Samuel 5) After making Jerusalem his political capital, David determined to make it the religious capital also. He brought the Ark of the Covenant from Shiloh to Jerusalem and placed it with careful preparation. (2Sa 6:12-14) He also purchased the threshing floor of Araunah as the site upon which a permanent housing for the Ark would be built and later erected an altar of burnt offerings upon the site. (2Sa 24:25) The traditional tomb of David may be seen today on the southwestern slopes of the hill upon which Jerusalem sits. Most scholarship discounts the authenticity of the site, however.

Evidence of early pagan influence in Jerusalem, capital of Jehovah worship, is seen in such activity as the sacrifice offered by Adonijah by the stone of Zoheleth, which is beside En-rogel. (1Ki 1:9) Zoheleth is associated with Baal worship. (Readers of the English Bible are frequently misled concerning Adonijah by the unfortunate King James translation of 1Ki 1:6, he was a very goodly man. Rotherham more accurately renders this passage, he was of exceedingly handsome appearance. A part of the sun worship during the festivities of the winter solstice (December 24-25) centered around the burning of a log. (See Chapter III Baal Worship) The log represented the sun god cut down in the midst of his strength. Around the stump of the tree was pictured a serpent, symbol of his reviving life. After the burning of the log on the evening of December 24, the evergreen fir appeared next morning in its place symbolizing the reviving of the slain god. The serpent which twined around the stump was also worshipped as a minor deity. It was at an altar to this pagan god that Adonijah offered sacrifices.

Since Adonijah offered his sacrifices on the eve of an abortive attempt to seize the throne of his father, David, he could scarcely do so in the proper place. It is highly probable that he was attempting to sacrifice to Jehovah. If so, his worship of God at a pagan altar is a good example of the pollution of Jehovah worship by Baalism in Jerusalem. This pollution was multiplied several-fold by Solomons compromise with paganism. (1Ki 11:4-8) Ashtoreth, Chemosh and Moloch, named in connection with Solomons unfaithfulness are names associated with the unholy trinity of the sun god. (See again Chapter III BAAL WORSHIP). During the first hundred years following the division of the kingdom, Jerusalem was in a state of decline. At this time, Baalism increased.

After a period of restoration, from Jehosaphat to Joash (B.C. 871-789), Jerusalem was humiliated again by Jehoash (B.C. 798-789). It was during this period that Ahab and Jezebel, of the Omri dynasty in the northern kingdom, seized the throne of Judah. The temple was laid waste and the priesthood of Baal was supported from the royal treasury. Jerusalem was revived again under Uzziah, but the worship of Jehovah was never quite completely purified of the influence of Baalism prior to the Babylonian captivity. It is quite obvious that the sinfulness of both Samaria and Jerusalem and their subsequent destruction are directly related to the insidious influence of Baal. Babylon, the mother of harlots, (Rev 17:5) had succeeded, through her daughter, the religion of Baal, in seducing Israel the prince of God. It was this spiritual immorality between the people of God and the religion of men that was the object of Gods warning to them through the prophets, and the target of His wrath when they refused to repent.

POLLUTED AND FALSE RELIGION OF SAMARIA AND

JERUSALEM RESULT IN MORAL AND SOCIAL EVILS

The peculiar sins of Israel were personified in Samaria. The moral and social abuses against which Micah prophesied are the same as those listed by Amos, who preached and wrote during the same period. Amos speaks of Gods faithful being sold into slavery. (Amo 2:6-7) The poor were oppressed. (Amo 5:7) Graft in high places was the order of the day (Amo 5:12) as was dishonesty in business dealings. The insatiable drive for status symbols (Amo 4:1; Amo 3:15; Amo 6:4) coupled with an intense pre-occupation with entertainment (Amos 6) left the people unconcerned for their national welfare.

False confidence in a false god produced a false sense of security from divine judgment. (Amo 5:14; Amo 9:10) As might be expected, the moral fiber of the people was totally rotten. Amos speaks of father and son committing fornication with the same girl. (Amo 2:7) The peculiar sins of Judah were personified in Jerusalem. Micah lists the peculiar sins of the southern kingdom. They vary slightly from those of the north, and the variation may be due in part to the degree of Baal influence. Nevertheless, Judahs sins are heinous and the prophets warning is sharp just as against Israel. The absence of righteousness noted by Micah (Mic 7:2) is reminiscent of Abrahams futile search for one righteous man in Sodom. (Gen 18:23 -ff)

In denouncing this unrighteousness, Micah focuses on four principal kinds of evil-doers: (1) There were the land grabbers whom the prophet pictures as lying awake at night and scheming how they may do the small farmer out of his holdings. (Mic 2:1) Their concern was not for the moral right or wrong of what they were doing, but only for whether or not they would be found out. (Mic 2:9) This avarice was practiced even at the expense of ones own relatives. (Mic 7:5-7) (2) There were lovers of evil in high office. (Mic 3:1-4) In their activities, bribery rather than justice decided civil cases (Mic 7:3) so that the little man had no effective recourse against the grabbing of the rich and powerful. (3) False preachers, who were more concerned with their income than with the truth or with right and wrong, preached what their wealthy listeners wanted to hear. (4) Hireling priests added to the practice of the false prophets. (Mic 3:11) Idolatry was allowed to pollute the worship of the people. (Mic 5:11-12 and Mic 3:7) As a result of such unholy clergy, the people believed that their national identity as Gods People insured them against destruction (Mic 3:11) and that Gods favor could be bought with sacrifice. (Mic 6:5-7) They could have profited greatly by reading their own Bible. (e.g. Psalms 50)

Questions

First Cycle

1. What evidence does Micah give in the early verses of his book concerning Gods universal concern for all men?

2. The term the people is used frequently to designate ____________.

3. The term the nations indicates ____________ in contrast to the people.

4. What long precedent does Micah have for his use of earth and all that therein is to call the whole world to listen to Gods indictment of His covenant people?

5. ____________, Micahs contemporary, uses the same phrase.

6. What two reasons are apparent for Gods concern that the earth and all that is in it hear His charge?

7. Who is the star witness for the prosecution against Gods unfaithful people?

8. Show how Stephens defense (Acts 7) seconds the accusation of Micah against the people.

9. Discuss, in connection with Mic 1:2(c) – Mic 1:3(a), God is not an absentee God.

10. What is signified by the term high places (Mic 1:3(b))?

11. Discuss Micahs statement that the mountains shall melt and the valleys melt like wax. Mic 1:4

12. The purifying wrath of God against the people is to be occasioned by ____________ and ____________.

13. Trace the eight ways in which the name Israel is used historically in the Bible.

14. What is meant by pre-exilic? by post exilic?

15. Trace the Biblical history of the name Judah and its development into the word Jew.

16. Describe the situation of the city of Samaria.

17. How is Samaria the transgression of Jacob?

18. How is Jerusalem the sin of Judah?

19. Both Je and Baal mean ____________.

20. Compare the sins of the northern and southern kingdoms.

21. Why was Samaria to be first to feel Gods wrath?

22. Discuss the significance of Samarias graven images.

23. How is spiritual harlotry an apt allegory of idolatry?

24. How does the lament of Mic 1:8 relate to our understanding that the God of the Old Testament is the same loving God as that of the New Testament?

25. What is the purpose of the punishment promised by Micah?

26. The warning of Micah to Judah is ____________.

27. List the cities of the Philistine plains mentioned by Micah. Locate them on a map.

28. Micahs home town was ____________.

29. Why did Sargon carry off the social, political and cultural leaders of Israel?

30. Self-inflicted baldness by the worshippers of Baal was a symbol of ____________.

Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary

the transgression of Jacob: 2Ki 17:7-23, 2Ch 36:14-16, Isa 50:1, Isa 50:2, Isa 59:1-15, Jer 2:17, Jer 2:19, Jer 4:18, Jer 5:25, Jer 6:19, Lam 5:16, 1Th 2:15, 1Th 2:16

is it: 1Ki 13:32, Hos 7:1, Hos 8:5, Hos 8:6, Amo 6:1, Amo 8:14

they: 2Ki 16:3, 2Ki 16:4, 2Ki 16:10-12, 2Ch 28:2-4, 2Ch 28:23-25

Reciprocal: Jer 17:3 – and thy Eze 16:46 – elder Hos 10:8 – the sin Mic 1:1 – concerning

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

Mic 1:5. This verse gives the key to the figures of the preceding one. The two kingdoms of the Jews are meant by Jacob (or Israel) and Judah. The same is meant by Samaria and Jerusalem because they were the capitals of those kingdoms. They are named in direct connection with sins and transgressions because the kings and other leaders of nations are located in their capitals. High places identifies the particular corruption of these kingdoms to have been idolatry.

Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary

Mic 1:5. For the transgression of Jacob That is, of the sons of Jacob; for the many transgressions committed among them; is all this All these many, great, and irresistible judgments of God foretold and executed. What is the transgression of Jacob Where is the chief cause of Israels sin and apostacy? Is it not Samaria Is it not in that city, the chief seat of the kingdom, the residence of the king and his princes, who have set up the idolatry of the golden calves, and made it the established religion of the kingdom? What are the high places of Judah, &c. Doth not the idolatrous worship, practised in the high places of Judah, receive its chief encouragement from the city of Jerusalem, even from Ahaz, and the great men who there join with him in that idolatry?

Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

1:5 For the transgression of Jacob [is] all this, and for the sins of the house of Israel. What [is] the transgression of Jacob? [is it] not {d} Samaria? and what [are] the high {e} places of Judah? [are they] not Jerusalem?

(d) Samaria, which should have been an example to all Israel of true religion and justice, was the dirty pool and the tank that all idolatry and corruption was kept alive in, and who prided themselves in their father Jacob, and boasted of him.

(e) That is, the idolatry and infection.

Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes

The Lord’s intervention was due to the Israelites’ sins and rebellion against their sovereign lord. Samaria personified the rebellion of the Israelites, and Jerusalem had become a high place for idolatry rather than for holy worship. These capital cities had become leaders in wickedness rather than in holiness.

Micah liked to use "Jacob" as a title for all Israel (Mic 2:7; Mic 2:12; Mic 3:1; Mic 3:8-9; Mic 4:2; Mic 5:7-8), though he also used it to describe the Northern Kingdom (here) and the patriarch Jacob (Mic 7:20). This name recalls the rebelliousness that marked the patriarch for most of his early life and that had subsequently marked his descendants. Micah used the name "Israel" to describe both the Northern and the Southern Kingdoms. Several of the prophets referred to the Southern Kingdom as "Israel," especially after the fall of Samaria in 722 B.C., because that kingdom represented the true Israel under the Davidic kings and the Aaronic priesthood. They referred to the Northern Kingdom as "Israel" in contrast to the Southern Kingdom of Judah.

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

Disfruta de miles de canciones cristianas en exclusiva sólo en Bibles