Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Micah 4:8
And thou, O tower of the flock, the stronghold of the daughter of Zion, unto thee shall it come, even the first dominion; the kingdom shall come to the daughter of Jerusalem.
8 10. The revival of the Kingdom of David; misery of the preceding period
8. And thou, O tower of the flock, &c.] It is clear that the prophet intends Jerusalem, which he addresses by an enigmatical title, to arrest attention and stimulate reflexion. (Other instances of this, Isa 22:5; Isa 29:1, Jer 21:13.) But why does he select this particular title? Two answers may be given. It was either (1) suggested by the figurative description of Israel as a flock ( Mic 4:6, Mic 2:12), or (2) by the situation of a tower called ‘the tower of the flock’ between Jerusalem and Bethlehem Bethlehem, which was appointed to be the birthplace of the Messianic King (Mic 5:2). The existence of such a town in the situation described is deduced from Gen 35:21, where Auth. Vers. inaccurately renders ‘the tower of Edar’). It may be doubted however whether this particular tower is sufficiently near Jerusalem to suit the context, for the prophet clearly indicates that it was either upon or close to the hill or hill-side called Ophel (see next note): Isaiah, too, in a prophecy parallel in more ways than one with Micah’s prophecy (see on Mic 3:12), mentions in combination ‘Ophel and watch-tower’ (Isa 32:14, literally rendered) in a description of the desolation of Jerusalem. The ‘tower of the flock’ mentioned in Genesis was probably a different one. There may have been many towers with this name (see 2Ki 18:8, 2Ch 26:10), just as there was more than one hill called Ophel (see 2Ki 5:24, where Auth. Vers. renders ‘Ophel’ loosely ‘tower’). The phrase ‘tower of the flock’ simply means that the tower was designed as a shepherd’s refuge against robbers.
the strong hold of the daughter of Zion ] Literally, the height, &c. It is a particular fortified hill which is meant, the so-called Ophel according to most, the southern end of the hill Moriah between the Temple and Siloam, bounded on the east by the Kedron, and on the west by the Tyropon valley. (But this view is uncertain.) This ‘Ophel’ had its fortifications strengthened by Jotham (2 Chron. 37:3), and here becomes the representative of the power of Jerusalem.
the first dominion ] i.e. the kingdom of Israel in its widest extent. So most commentators; but the expression is peculiar.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
And thou, O tower of the flock – Tower of Ader, which is interpreted tower of the flock, about 1000 paces (a mile) from Bethlehem, says Jerome who lived there, and foresignifying (in its very name) by a sort of prophecy the shepherds at the Birth of the Lord. There Jacob fed his sheep Gen 35:21, and there (since it was hard by Bethlehem) the shepherds, keeping watch over their flocks by night, saw and heard the Angels singing, Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men. The Jews inferred from this place that the Messiah should be revealed there .
Stronghold – (Ophel ) of the daughter of Zion Ophel was a strong place in the South of Jerusalem, the last which the wall, enclosing Zion, reached, before, or as, it touched on the Eastern porch of the temple , with whose service it was connected.
We know that, after the captivity, the Nethinim, who did the laborious service of the temple, dwelt there Neh 3:26; Neh 11:21. It lay very near to the priests district Neh 3:28. It was probably, a lower acclivity, swelling out, (as its name seems to mean ,) from the mountain of the temple. In the last war, it was held together with the temple, and the adjoining parts to no slight extent, and the valley of Kedron. It was burnt before the upper city was taken. It had been encircled by a wall of old; for Jotham built greatly upon its wall 2Ch 27:3, Manasseh encircled it 2Ch 33:14, (probably with an outer wall) and raised it exceedingly, that is, apparently raised artificially the whole level.
Yet, as a symbol of all Jerusalem, Ophel is as remarkable, as the tower of the flock is as to Bethlehem. For Ophel, although fortified, is no where spoken of, as of any account . It is not even mentioned in the circuit of the walls, at their dedication, under Nehemiah Neh 12:31-40, probably as an outlying, spot. It was probably of moment chiefly, as giving, an advantage to an enemy who might occupy it.
Both then are images of lowliness. The lonely Shepherd tower, for Bethlehem, the birthplace of David; Ophel for Jerusalem, of which it was yet but an outlying part, and deriving its value probably as an outwork of the temple. Both symbols anticipate the fuller prophecy of the littleness, which shall become great in God. Before the mention of the greatness of the dominion to come, is set forth the future poverty to which it should come. In lowliness Christ came, yet is indeed a Tower protecting and defending the sheep of His pasture, founded on earth in His Human Nature, reaching to Heaven in His divine; a strong Tower; the righteous runneth into it, and is safe Pro 18:10.
Unto thee shall it come – (Literally, unto thee shall it come , and there shall arrive etc.) He saith not at first what shall come, and so raises the soul to think of the greatness of that which should come. The soul is left to fill up what is more than thought can utter. Unto thee, (literally, quite up to thee) No hindrances should withhold it from coming. Seemingly it was a great way off, and they in a very hopeless state. He suggests the difficulty even by his strength of assurance. One could not say, it shall come quite up to thee, of that which in the way of nature would readily come to any one. But amid all hindrances Gods Might makes its way, and brings His gifts and promises to their end. And there shall arrive. He twice repeats the assurance, in equivalent words, for their fuller assurance , to make the good tidings the gladder by repeating and enforcing them.
The first or former, dominion. The word often stands, as our former , in contrast with the later. It is not necessarily the first, strictly; and so here, not the dominion of David and Solomon exclusively. Rather the prophet is placed in spirit in the later times when the kingdom should be suspended, and foretells that the former dominion, that is, that of the line of David, should come to her, not in its temporal greatness, but the line itself. So the Angel said, He shall be great and shall be called the Son of the Highest, and the Lord God shall give unto Him the throne of His father David, and He shall reign over the house of Jacob forever Luk 1:32-33.
The (A) kingdom to the daughter of Jerusalem – that is, a kingdom, which should not be of her, but which should come to her; not hers by right, but by His right, who should merit it for her, and, being King of kings, makes His own, kings and priests unto God and His Father Rev 1:6.
The Jews themselves seem to have taken these words into their own mouths, just before they rejected Him, when they hoped that He would be a king, such as they wished for. Blessed be the kingdom of our father David that cometh in the Name of the Lord Mar 11:10. And in a distorted form, they held it even afterward .
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 8. O tower of the flock] I think the temple is meant, or Jerusalem; the place where the flock, the whole congregation of the people assembled to worship God. Newcome retains the Hebrew word eder, a tower in or near Beth-lehem, Ge 35:21 or, as some think, a tower near the sheep-gate in Jerusalem, I believe Jerusalem, or the temple, or both, are meant; for these were considered the strong-hold of the daughter of Zion, the fortress of the Jewish people.
Even the first dominion] What was this? The Divine theocracy under Jesus Christ; this former, this first dominion, was to be restored. Hence the angel called him Immanuel, God with us, ruling among us.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
O tower of the flock: some refer this to that tower Edar, in the neighbourhood of Bethlehem, built there for the shepherds more convenient watching over their flocks. The prophet may possibly allude to this. In the church, Christs flock, there is a tower built for defence of his flock, but it is that name which is a strong tower, to which the righteous run, and are safe. But there was a tower of this denomination in Jerusalem, through which tower the flocks of sheep were driven into the sheep market; this one tower, by synecdoche, put for the whole city Jerusalem.
The strong hold; Ophel, as it is in the Hebrew, and perhaps were better rendered a proper name of that impregnable fort, 2Ch 27:3; another considerable part put for the whole.
The daughter of Zion; or, O daughter of Zion; so it will be an explication of what the prophet before meant by the tower Edar and Ophel, i.e. O Zion, O Jerusalem, both in the typical and in the mystical sense.
The first dominion; the former dominion, not in outward splendour, but because the government and supreme dignity among this people was restored (after seventy years captivity) to the former royal family, and continued in it till Shiloh came. This in the type was fulfilled upon the settlement under Zerubbabel and his successors; but the whole antitype concerns the Messiahs kingdom, and the gospel Jerusalem, and is fulfilled in the spiritual glory of it. Christs kingdom is the ancient, supreme, and most glorious kingdom; and by his redeeming us from the bondage of hell, is set up, and shall be continued firm and unmovable, more than Edar, Ophel, Zion, or Jerusalem typical, as Luk 1:32,33, and more large than ever Davids or Solomons kingdom, Dan 7:14, and therefore greater in glory, for Christ is King of kings, Rev 17:14; 19:16. This spiritual kingdom came first to the Jews, Act 13:46. It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you. The gospel was to be preached first to the daughter of Jerusalem. There the preachers of repentance and remission of sins were to begin, and thence they were to publish it to all nations, Luk 24:47. This text, and such like, the blinded Jew doth take in a literal sense only, as if it promised a temporal dominion over all nations, and worldly kingdom to the Messiah, in which they expect a large share; but what is literal, and concerned the Jews alone, was limited to them that came out of the Babylonish captivity, and hath been fulfilled to them.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
8. tower of the flockfollowingup the metaphor of sheep (see on Mic4:6). Jerusalem is called the “tower,” from which theKing and Shepherd observes and guards His flock: both the spiritualJerusalem, the Church now whose tower-like elevation is that ofdoctrine and practice (So 4:4,”Thy neck is like the tower of David”), and theliteral hereafter (Jer 3:17).In large pastures it was usual to erect a high wooden tower, so as tooversee the flock. JEROMEtakes the Hebrew for “flock,” Eder or Edar,as a proper name, namely, a village near Beth-lehem, for which it isput, Beth-lehem being taken to represent the royal stock of David(Mic 5:2; compare Ge35:21). But the explanatory words, “the stronghold of thedaughter of Zion,” confirm English Version.
strongholdHebrew,“Ophel”; an impregnable height on Mount Zion (2Ch 27:3;2Ch 33:14; Neh 3:26;Neh 3:27).
unto thee shall . . . come .. . the first dominionnamely, the dominion formerly exercisedby thee shall come back to thee.
kingdom shall come to thedaughter of Jerusalemrather, “the kingdom of thedaughter of Jerusalem shall come (again)”; such as it was underDavid, before its being weakened by the secession of the ten tribes.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
And thou, O tower of the flock,…. The words “Migdal Eder” are left by some untranslated, and think that place to be intended so called, which was near to Bethlehem, Ge 35:19; and perhaps is the same which Jerom t calls the tower of Ader, about a mile from Bethlehem: this is supposed to be the place where the shepherds were watching over their flocks at the time of Christ’s birth, the tidings of which were first brought to them here; and the Jewish u doctors speak of it as near Jerusalem, and as a place of pasture; for they say, that cattle between Jerusalem and Migdal Eder, and in an equal space to every wind; the males were used for burnt offerings, and the females for peace offerings; and this place is thought to be referred to in the latter clause of this verse: others think that Bethlehem itself is meant, to which the dominion came; but rather, as in the next chapter, the ruler came out of that; others think that the gate in Jerusalem called the sheep gate is meant, Ne 3:32; and the tower at it, through which Christ is supposed to pass when he entered into Jerusalem as King, amidst the Hosannahs of the people; others take it to be the same with the tower of David, and put for Jerusalem itself, whither the tribes were gathered together three times a year, like sheep in a fold, so Kimchi and Ben Melech; here others interpret it spiritually of the church of Christ; but though that is sometimes spoken of as a strong city, and a fortified place, yet is never called a tower, or a strong hold; which phrases, when figuratively used, are always spoken of a divine person; see Ps 18:2; and here of the Messiah; and so the Targum interprets it,
“O Christ of Israel:”
the church indeed is the “flock”: the people of God are often compared to sheep for their harmlessness and innocence, and the church to a flock of them, which is Christ’s flock he feeds like a shepherd; the flock of slaughter, a little one, consisting of persons separated from the world, and under his peculiar care; and he is the tower of this flock, in allusion to a shepherd’s cottage, called a tower, as a cottage in a vineyard is in Isa 5:2; where the shepherds watch, and into which they bring the sick and lame, and take care of them; Christ is a high tower, where his people are safe out of the reach of their enemies; and a strong one, being the mighty God and mighty Saviour, who has all power and strength to defend his church and people, and may be well called their tower: and
the strong hold of the daughter of Zion; “the daughter of Zion” is the church, particularly the church of the converted Jews; Christ is the strong hold of it, into which, as prisoners of hope, they will be directed to turn, Zec 9:12; a strong refuge he is to flee unto from the avenger of blood, the justice of God; from the curses of the law; from the storm of divine wrath; from the temptations of Satan, and from the persecutions of men; a strong hold is he to dwell in, and where the saints dwell safely, pleasantly, at ease and peace, and very comfortably, and in great plenty; a strong hold for shelter from every enemy:
unto thee shall it come; not the kingdom, as follows, which our version leads to, and is the sense of Aben Ezra; for there is a considerable accent on the word “come”, which makes a large stop; and that it refers, as Jarchi observes, to “her that halteth”, c. “it” or “she” that halteth shall come, being assembled and gathered, or converted by the grace of God unto the Messiah as to her, or their tower and strong hold, where all blessings of grace, and the supplies of it, and all salvation and safety, are to be had and enjoyed. The promise respects the Jews coming to Christ upon their conversion, even such who have been the halt, the maimed, the lame, and the blind:
even the first dominion; the kingdom shall come to the daughter of Jerusalem; or rather, “and the first dominion shall come, the kingdom to the daughter of Jerusalem”: meaning, not the first notice of the Messiah’s kingdom, given by John the Baptist, Christ, and his apostles, to the Jews, in the first times of the Gospel; or the preaching of the Gospel of the kingdom first to them; but rather he who has the first or principal dominion, and to whom the kingdom belongs, he shall come to the daughter of Zion, as in Zec 9:9; though it rather respects here his coming to them at the time of their conversion, when they shall come to him, Ro 11:26; and when the first, chief, and principal kingdom in the world, and which is preferable to all others, will come unto, and be placed among them, as in Mic 4:7; and when it shall be, as some interpret it, as at the beginning, in the days of David and Solomon, and much more abundantly.
t De locis Hebr. fol. 89. E. u T. Hieros. Kiddushin, fol. 63. 1. T. Ban. Kiddushin, fol. 55. 1. Misn. Shekalim, c. 7. sect. 4.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
The prophecy turns from the highest glorification of Zion to the throne of Zion, which had been founded by David, and swept away with the destruction of Jerusalem (Mic 3:12), and predicts its restoration in the future. Consequently the reign of Jehovah upon Mount Zion, promised in Mic 4:7, is still further defined as effected through the medium of the Davidico-Messianic dominion. Mic 4:8. “And thou flock-tower, hill of the daughter Zion, to thee will the former dominion reach and come, the reign over the daughter Jerusalem.” This announcement is attached primarily to Mic 4:6 and Mic 4:7. As the remnant of Israel gathered together out of the dispersion will become a strong nation, so shall the reign of the daughter Zion be also restored. The address to the flock-tower, the hill of the daughter Zion, shows that these two notions express the same thing, looked at from two sides, or with two different bearings, so that the flock-tower is more precisely defined as the “hill of the daughter Zion.” Now, as the daughter Zion is the city of Zion personified as a virgin, the hill of the daughter Zion might be understood as denoting the hill upon which the city stood, i.e., Mount Zion. But this is precluded by Isa 32:14, where hill and watch-tower ( ophel vabhachan ) are mentioned in parallelism with the palace ( ‘armon ), as places or buildings which are to serve as dens for ever. From this it is obvious that ophel was a place either at the side or at the top of Zion. If we compare with this 2Ch 27:3 and 2Ch 33:14, according to which Jotham built much against the wall of the Ophel ( haophel ), and Manasseh encircled the Ophel with a wall, and made it very high, Ophel must have been a hill, possibly a bastion, on the south-eastern border of Zion, the fortification of which was of great importance as a defence to the city of Zion against hostile attacks.
(Note: The opinion that Ophel is the whole of the southern steep rocky promontory of Moriah, from the southern end of the temple ground to its extreme point (Robinson, Schultz, Williams), viz., the Ophla or Ophlas of Josephus, as Arnold (Herzog’s Cycl.) and Winer ( Bibl. R.W.) suppose, would be in perfect harmony with this. At the same time, all that can be inferred with any certainty from the passages from Josephus which as cited in support of it (viz., Wars of the Jews, v. 6, 1; cf. vi. 6, 3 and v. 4, 2) is, that the place called Ophla was in the neighbourhood of the valley of Kidron and of the temple mountain. The question then arises, whether the Ophla of Josephus is identical with the Ophel of the Old Testament, since Josephus does not mention the Ophel in his list of the hills of Jerusalem, but simply mentions Ophla as a special locality (see Reland, Pal. p. 855). And lastly, the situation of the Ophel, upon which the Nethinim dwelt (Neh 3:26), is still a matter of dispute, Bertheau supposing it to be the habitable space to the east of the eastern side of the temple area.)
Consequently migdal – eder cannot be the flock-tower in the neighbourhood of Bethlehem, which is mentioned in Gen 35:21, but can only be a (or rather the) tower of the Davidic palace, or royal castle upon Zion, namely the town mentioned in Neh 3:25, which stood out against the upper king’s house, by the court of the prison (cf. Neh 3:26). For the prison, which also belonged to the king’s house, according to Jer 32:2, formed a portion of the royal castle, according to the custom of the East. And that it had a lofty tower, is evident from Son 4:4: “Thy neck is like David’s tower, built for an armoury: a thousand shields hang thereon, all heroes’ weapons;” according to which the tower of the royal castle was ornamented with the weapons or shields of David’s heroes (1Ch 12:1). And the tower of the king’s castle was so far specially adapted to represent the sovereignty of David, “that by its exaltation above Zion and Jerusalem, by the fact that it ruled the whole city, it symbolized the Davidic family, and its rule over the city and all Israel” (Caspari). This tower, which is most likely the one called bachan (the watch-tower) in Isaiah ( l.c.), is called by Micah the flock-tower, probably as a play upon the flock-tower by which the patriarch Jacob once pitched his tent, because David, the ancestor of the divinely-chosen royal house, had been called from being the shepherd of a flock to be the shepherd of the nation of Israel, the flock of Jehovah (Jer 13:17; cf. 2Sa 7:8; Psa 78:70). This epithet was a very natural one for the prophet to employ, as he not only describes the Messiah as a shepherd in Mic 5:3, but also represents Israel as the sheep of Jehovah’s inheritance in Mic 7:14, and the flock-tower is the place where the shepherd takes up his position to see whether any danger threatens his flock (cf. 2Ch 26:10; 2Ch 27:4). , “unto thee shall it come.”
(Note: Luther’s rendering, “thy golden rose will come,” arose from his confounding (from , unto) with , thine ornament.)
affirms more than , to thee: expressing the conquest of every obstacle that blocks up the way to the goal. is separated from what follows, and exhibited as independent not only by the athnach , but also by the change of tense occurring in : “to thee will it come,” sc. what the prophet has in his mind and mentions in the next clause, but brings into special prominence in . , the former (first) reign, is the splendid rule of David and Solomon. This predicate presupposes that the sovereignty has departed from Zion, i.e., has been withdrawn from the Davidic family, and points back to the destruction of Jerusalem predicted in Mic 3:12. This sovereignty is still more precisely defined as kingship over the daughter of Jerusalem ( before is a periphrasis of the gen. obj.). Jerusalem, the capital of the kingdom, represents as the object sovereignty over the whole kingdom. This is to be restored to the hill of Zion, i.e., to the royal castle upon the top of it.
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
| Judgments and Mercies. | B. C. 726. |
8 And thou, O tower of the flock, the strong hold of the daughter of Zion, unto thee shall it come, even the first dominion; the kingdom shall come to the daughter of Jerusalem. 9 Now why dost thou cry out aloud? is there no king in thee? is thy counsellor perished? for pangs have taken thee as a woman in travail. 10 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. 11 Now also many nations are gathered against thee, that say, Let her be defiled, and let our eye look upon Zion. 12 But they know not the thoughts of the LORD, neither understand they his counsel: for he shall gather them as the sheaves into the floor. 13 Arise and thresh, O daughter of Zion: for I will make thine horn iron, and I will make thy hoofs brass: and thou shalt beat in pieces many people: and I will consecrate their gain unto the LORD, and their substance unto the Lord of the whole earth.
These verses relate to Zion and Jerusalem, here called the tower of the flock or the tower of Edor; we read of such a place (Gen. xxxv. 21) near Bethlehem; and some conjecture it is the same place where the shepherds were keeping their flocks when the angels brought them tidings of the birth of Christ, and some think Bethlehem itself is here spoken of, as ch. v. 2. Some think it is a tower at that gate of Jerusalem which is called the sheep-gate (Neh. iii. 32), and conjecture that through that gate Christ rode in triumph into Jerusalem. However, it seems to be put for Jerusalem itself, or for Zion the tower of David. All the sheep of Israel flocked thither three times a year; it was the stronghold (Ophel, which is also a name of a place in Jerusalem, Neh. iii. 27), or castle, of the daughter of Zion. Now here,
I. We have a promise of the glories of the spiritual Jerusalem, the gospel-church, which is; the tower of the flock, that one fold in which all the sheep of Christ are protected under one Shepherd: “Unto thee shall it come; that which thou hast long wanted and wished for, even the first dominion, a dignity and power equal to that of David and Solomon, by whom Jerusalem was first raised, that kingdom shall again come to the daughter of Jerusalem, which it was deprived of at the captivity. It shall make as great a figure and shine with as much lustre among the nations, and have as much influence upon them, as ever it had; this is the first or chief dominion.” Now this had by no means its accomplishment in Zerubbabel; his was nothing like the first dominion either in respect of splendour and sovereignty at home or the extent of power abroad; and therefore it must refer to the kingdom of the Messiah (and to that the Chaldee-paraphrase refers it) and had its accomplishment when God gave to our Lord Jesus the throne of his father David (Luke i. 32), set him king upon the holy hill of Zion and gave him the heathen for his inheritance (Ps. ii. 6), made him, his first-born, higher than the kings of the earth,Psa 89:27; Dan 7:14. David, in spirit, called him Lord, and (as Dr. Pocock observes) he witnessed of himself, and his witness was true, that he was greater than Solomon, none of their dominions being like his for extent and duration. The common people welcomed Christ into Jerusalem with hosannas to the son of David, to show that it was the first dominion that came to the daughter of Zion; and the evangelist applies it to the promise of Zion’s king coming to her, Mat 21:5; Zec 9:9. Some give this sense of the words: To Zion, and Jerusalem that tower of the flock, to the nation of the Jews, came the first dominion; that is, there the kingdom of Christ was first set up, the gospel of the kingdom was first preached (Luke xxiv. 47), there Christ was first called king of the Jews.
II. This is illustrated by a prediction of the calamities of the literal Jerusalem, to which some favour and relief should be granted, as a type and figure of what God would do for the gospel-Jerusalem in the last days, notwithstanding its distresses. We have here,
1. Jerusalem put in pain by the providences of God. “She cries out aloud, that all her neighbours may take notice of her griefs, because there is no king in her, none of that honour and power she used to have. Instead of ruling the nations, as she did when she sat a queen, she is ruled by them, and has become a captive. Her counsellors have perished; she is no longer at her own disposal, but is given up to the will of her enemies, and is governed by their counsellors. Pangs have taken her.” (1.) She is carried captive to Babylon, and there is in pangs of grief. “She goes forth out of the city, and is constrained to dwell in the field, exposed to all manner of inconveniences; she goes even to Babylon, and there wears out seventy tedious years in a miserable captivity, all that while in pain, as a woman in travail, waiting to be delivered, and thinking the time very long.” (2.) When she is delivered out of Babylon, and redeemed from the hand of her enemies there, yet still she is in pangs of fear; the end of one trouble is but the beginning of another; for now also, when Jerusalem is in the rebuilding, many nations are gathered against her, v. 11. They were so in Ezra’s and Nehemiah’s time, and did all they could to obstruct the building of the temple and the wall. They were so in the time of the Maccabees; they said, Let her be defiled; let her be looked upon as a place polluted with sin, and be forsaken and abandoned both of God and man; let her holy places be profaned and all her honours laid in the dust; let our eye look upon Zion, and please itself with the sight of its ruins, as it is said of Edom (Obad. 12, Thou shouldst not have looked upon the day of thy brother); let our eyes see our desire upon Zion, the day we have long wished for. When they hear the enemies thus combine against them, and insult over them, no wonder that they are in pain, and cry aloud. Without are fightings, within are fears.
2. Jerusalem made easy by the promises of God: “Why dost thou cry out aloud? Let thy griefs and fears be silenced; indulge not thyself in them, for, though things are bad with thee, they shall end well; thy pangs are great, but they are like those of a woman in travail (v. 9), that labours to bring forth (v. 10), the issue of which will be good at last.” Jerusalem’s pangs are not as dying agonies, but as travailing throes, which after a while will be forgotten, for joy that a child is born into the world. Let the literal Jerusalem comfort herself with this, that, whatever straits she may be reduced to, she shall continue until the coming of the Messiah, for there his kingdom must be first set up, and she shall not be destroyed while that blessing is in her; and when at length she is ploughed as a field, and become heaps (as is threatened, ch. iii. 12), yet her privileges shall be resigned to the spiritual Jerusalem, and in that the promises made to her shall be fulfilled. Let Jerusalem be easy then, for, (1.) Her captivity in Babylon shall have an end, a happy end (v. 10): There shalt thou be delivered, and the Lord shall redeem thee from the hand of thy enemies there. This was done by Cyrus, who acted therein as God’s servant; and that deliverance was typical of our redemption by Jesus Christ, and the release from our spiritual bondage which is proclaimed in the everlasting gospel, that acceptable year of the Lord, in which Christ himself preached liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to those that were bound,Luk 4:18; Luk 4:19. (2.) The designs of her enemies against her afterwards shall be baffled, nay, they shall turn upon themselves, Mic 4:12; Mic 4:13. They promise themselves a day of it, but it shall prove God’s day. They are gathered against Zion, to destroy it, but it shall prove to their own destruction, which Israel and Israel’s God shall have the glory of. [1.] Their coming together against Zion shall be the occasion of their ruin. They associate themselves, and gird themselves, that they may break Jerusalem in pieces, but it will prove that they shall be broken in pieces, Isa. viii. 9. They know not the thoughts of the Lord. When they are gathering together, and Providence favours them in it, they little think what God is designing by it, nor do they understand his counsel; they know what they aim at in coming together, but they know not what God aims at in bringing them together; they aim at Zion’s ruin, but God aims at theirs. Note, When men are made use of as instruments of Providence in accomplishing its purposes it is very common for them to intend one thing and for God to intend quite the contrary. The king of Assyria is to be a rod in God’s hand for the correction of his people, in order to their reformation; howbeit he means not so, nor does his heart think so, Isa. x. 7. And thus it is here; the nations are gathered against Zion, as soldiers into the field, but God gathers them as sheaves into the floor, to be beaten to pieces; and they could not have been so easily, so effectually, destroyed, if they had not gathered together against Zion. Note, The designs of enemies for the ruin of the church often prove ruining to themselves; and thereby they prepare themselves for destruction and put themselves in the way of it; they are snared in the work of their own hands. [2.] Zion shall have the honour of being victorious over them, v. 13. When they are gathered as sheaves into the floor, to be trodden down, as the corn then was by the oxen, then, “Arise, and thresh, O daughter of Zion! instead of fearing them, and fleeing from them, boldly set upon them, and take the opportunity Providence favours thee with of trampling upon them. Plead not thy own weakness, and that thou art not a match for so many confederated enemies; God will make thy horn iron, to push them down, and thy hoofs brass, to tread upon them when they are down; and thus thou shalt beat in pieces many people, that have long been beating thee in pieces.” Thus, when God pleases, the daughter of Babylon is made a threshing floor (it is time to thresh her, Jer. li. 33), and the worm Jacob is made a threshing instrument, with which God will thresh the mountains, and make them as chaff,Isa 41:14; Isa 41:15. How strangely, how happily, are the tables turned, since Jacob was the threshing-floor and Babylon the threshing instrument! Isa. xxi. 10. Note, When God has conquering work for his people to do he will furnish them with strength and ability for it, will make the horn iron and the hoofs brass; and, when he does so, they must exert the power he gives them, and execute the commission; even the daughter of Zion must arise, and thresh. [3.] The glory of the victory shall redound to God. Zion shall thresh these sheaves in the floor, but the corn threshed out shall be a meat-offering at God’s altar: I will consecrate their gain unto the Lord (that is, I will have it consecrated) and their substance unto the Lord of the whole earth. The spoils gained by Zion’s victory shall be brought into the sanctuary, and devoted to God, either in part, as those of Midian (Num. xxxi. 28), or in whole, as those of Jericho, Josh. vi. 17. God is Jehovah, the fountain of being; he is the Lord of the whole earth, the fountain of power; and therefore he needs not any of our gain or substance, but may challenge and demand it all if he please; and with ourselves we must devote all we have to his honour, to be employed as he directs. Thus far all we have must have holiness to the Lord written upon it, all our gain and substance must be consecrated to the Lord of the whole earth, Isa. xxiii. 18. And extraordinary successes call for extraordinary acknowledgments, whether they be of spoils in war or gains in trade. It is God that gives us power to get wealth, which way soever it is honestly got, and therefore he must be honoured with what we get. Some make all this to point at the defeat of Sennacherib when he besieged Jerusalem, others to the destruction of Babylon, others to the successes of the Maccabees; but the learned Dr. Pocock and others think it had its full accomplishment in the spiritual victories obtained by the gospel of Christ over the powers of darkness that fought against it. The nations thought to ruin Christianity in its infancy, but it was victorious over them; those that persisted in their enmity were broken to pieces (Matt. xxi. 44), particularly the Jewish nation; but multitudes by divine grace were gained to the church, and they and their substance were consecrated to the Lord Jesus, the Lord of the whole earth.
Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary
Micah still continues the same subject, — that the miserable calamities of the people, or even their ruin, will not prevent God to restore again his Church. Thou tower of the flock, he says, the fortress of the daughter of Zion, doubt not but that God will again restore to thee thy ancient kingdom and dignity from which thou seemest now to have entirely fallen. But interpreters take the tower of the flock in various senses. Some think that the devastation of the city Jerusalem is pointed out, because it became like a cottage, as it is said in Isaiah; and עפל, ophil, they render “obscure,” for its root is to cover. But another explanation is simpler, — that the holy city is called the tower of the flock, because God had chosen it for himself, to gather his people thence; for we know that they had there their holy assemblies. Thou, then, the tower of the flock, and then, the fortress of the daughter of Zion, to thee shall come the former kingdom (129) If, however, the former sense be more approved, I will not contend; that is, that Jerusalem is here called the tower of the flock on account of its devastation, as it was reduced as it were into a cottage. As to the main import of the passage, there is no ambiguity; for the Prophet here strengthens the minds of the godly: they were not to regard the length of time, nor to allow their thoughts, to be occupied with their present calamity, but to feel assured, that what God had promised was in his power, that he could, as it were, raise the dead, and thus restore the kingdom of David, which had been destroyed.
Do then, he says, firmly hope. — Why? because come to thee, come to thee shall the former kingdom (130) Here the breaking off of the sentence is to be noticed, when the Prophet speaks of the ancient kingdom and dignity. It is not indeed to be doubted, but that the people of God had become objects of mockery, and that hypocrites and heathens thought that what David had testified respecting the perpetuity of his kingdom was a mere delusion.
‘
Behold thy kingdom,’ he said, ‘shall continue as long as the sun and the moon,’ (Psa 72:0)
but soon after the death of Solomon, a small portion only was reserved for his posterity, and at length the kingdom itself and its dignity disappeared. This is the reason that the Prophet now says, that the former kingdom would come. Come, he says, to thee, daughter of Zion, come shall the former kingdom There is indeed no doubt, but that by the former kingdom he understands its most flourishing condition, recorded in Scripture, under David and Solomon.
The kingdom, he says, to the daughter of Jerusalem shall come He expressly mentions the daughter of Jerusalem, because the kingdom of Israel had obscured the glory of the true kingdom. Hence the Prophet testifies here that God was not unmindful of his promise, and that he would restore to Jerusalem the dignity which it had lost, and unite the whole people into one body, that they might be no more divided, but that one king would rule over the whole race of Abraham. But this was not fulfilled, we are certain, at the coming of Christ, in a manner visible to men: we must therefore bear in mind what Micah has previously taught, — that this kingdom is spiritual; for he did not ascribe to Christ a golden scepter, but a doctrine, “Come, and let us ascend unto the mount of Jehovah, and he will teach us of his ways; and then he added,” From Zion shall go forth a law, and the word of Jehovah from Jerusalem. This, then, ought ever to be remembered, — that God has not rendered Jerusalem glorious in the sight of men, as it was formerly, nor has he enriched it with influence and wealth and earthly power; but he has yet restored the sovereign authority; for he has not only subjected to himself the ten tribes which had formerly revolted, but also the whole world. Let us go on —
(129) “I think the temple is meant, or Jerusalem; the place where the flock, the whole congregation of the people assembled to worship God. Newcome retains the Hebrew word עדר, eder, a tower in or near Bethlehem, Gen 35:21, or as some think, a tower near the sheep gate in Jerusalem. I believe Jerusalem, or the temple, or both, are meant; for these were considered the stronghold of the daughter of Zion, the fortress of the Jewish people.”— Adam Clarke. What especially confirms this view is, that the two clauses are in apposition, the latter is explanatory of the former. — Ed.
(130) Calvin observes the order of the original, which is not done in our version. The whole verse may be thus rendered, —
And thou tower of the flock, The fortress of the daughter of Zion! To thee it shall return; Yea, come shall the former dominion, The kingdom to the daughter of Jerusalem.
The verb אתה, which I render “return,” means mostly, to come, to come near, to approach, to happen. — Ed.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(8) O tower of the flock.Israel having been compared to a flock, Jerusalem is called its tower, or protection; and in Messiah the ancient dominion shall return to the Holy City. This is a more satisfactory interpretation than that which makes the tower of the flock Migdol-Edah (Gen. 35:21), a place near Bethlehem.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
Zion Established Throughout the Earth
v. 8. And thou, O tower of the flock, v. 9. Now, why dost thou cry out aloud? v. 10. Be in pain and labor to bring forth, O daughter of Zion, like a woman in travail, v. 11. Now also, v. 12. But they know not the thoughts of the Lord, v. 13. Arise and thresh, O daughter of Zion,
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
Mic 4:8. And thou, O tower, &c. And thou, O tower of Eder, O fortress of the daughter of Sion, thy time shall come: and the former dominion shall return, even the kingdom, to the daughter of Jerusalem. See Vitringa an Isa 32:14. The prophet, says Houbigant, changes the name of Jerusalem, and uses a topographic name, tower of the flock; which tower, perhaps, was near the sheep-pool;and the name of clift; opel, to signify that he now pro-phesies of a future state, and that temporal, of the city of Jerusalem itself; for, after he had foretold that the new law should take its beginning from Jerusalem; here, and to the end of the chapter, he foretels what changes of affairs should happen in the republic and kingdom of the Jews, till the future light of the Gospel should break forth. He had said at the end of the foregoing chapter, that Jerusalem should be plowed as a field; he now adds, resuming the order of time, that the ancient kingdom should return to the daughter of Jerusalem. Instead of, Unto thee shall it come, Houbigant reads, Thou shalt be clothed with thy ornament; for he observes, that unto thee shall it come, has no meaning; neither is there in the Hebrew any nominative case to the verb shall come.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
If, as some have supposed, that the word Migdol-Eder, which we translate Tower, means Bethlehem, and the very place where the Jewish shepherds were keeping their flocks by night, when the angels announced to them the birth of Christ. Luk 2:8-9 . there is an uncommon beauty in this passage in reference to Christ. Certain it is that the Church is Christ’s flock, and Christ himself as a tower of defense, See Zec 9:12 and Eze 34:31 . And it may be truly said, that Christ’s kingdom began from thence, when Christ was born in Bethlehem king of the Jews, Mat 2:2 . Here also, in the travailing pains spoken of, is an allusion to the Church’s first going into Babylon, and from thence being delivered.
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Mic 4:8 And thou, O tower of the flock, the strong hold of the daughter of Zion, unto thee shall it come, even the first dominion; the kingdom shall come to the daughter of Jerusalem.
Ver. 8. And thou, O tower of the flock ] That is, O Church of Christ, who is often compared to a shepherdess in the Canticles; here to a Migdaleder, or tower of the flock (that flock of Christ which hath golden fleeces, precious souls), in reference either to that tower, Gen 25:21 , built for the safety and service of shepherds, or else to the sheep gate in Jerusalem (whereof read, Neh 3:1 ; Neh 12:39 ), so called from the sheep market, which, for the couvenience of the temple, was near to it; as was also the sheep pool, called Bethesda, Joh 5:2 , where the sacrifices were washed. The world is a field, the Church a fold in that field; and a strong fold (strong as a tower), yea, a stronghold, ophel, as it is styled in the next words; and that of the daughter of Zion, that is, of the Christian Church, the inviolable security whereof is here noted.
Unto thee shall it come, even the first dominion
The kingdom shall come to the daughter of Jerusalem
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
tower of the flock. Hebrew tower of ‘Eder. Reference to Pentateuch (Gen 35:21; nowhere else). Used here of Bethlehem (compare Gen 35:19 with Mic 5:2); coupled here with “Ophel” in next clause, “David’s birth-place” and “David’s city”.
the stronghold. Hebrew ‘Ophel. See App-68and App-54, line 21, “citadel”, p. 78. See note on 2Ch 27:3.
first = former. For this rendering compare Exo 34:1 (tables). Num 21:26 (kings). Deu 4:32; Deu 10:10, &c. (days). 2Ch 9:29; 2Ch 16:11; 2Ch 20:34 (acts).
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
O tower: The Targumist applies these words to the Messiah: “But thou, O Messiah, who art hidden because of the sins of the congregation of Zion, the kingdom shall come unto thee.” Psa 48:12, Psa 48:13, Isa 5:2, Mat 21:33, Mar 12:1
the flock: or, Edar, Gen 35:21
the strong: 2Sa 5:7, Isa 10:32, Zec 9:12
the first: Num 24:19, Dan 2:44, Dan 7:18, Oba 1:21, Zec 9:10, Eph 1:21, Rev 22:5
Reciprocal: 2Ki 19:21 – the daughter Son 3:5 – General Isa 16:1 – the mount Zep 3:14 – O daughter of Jerusalem Joh 12:15 – Fear
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Mic 4:8. Tower is also rendered “castle and is here used to designate Jerusalem ais a watchtower for the kingdom the Lord promised to make out of the remnant. First dominion denotes that God had a dominion over the same people and at this same place long before. Daughter of Zion and daughter of Jerusalem are terms of endearment used frequently to represent Gods people whose headquarters were in Jerusalem.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Mic 4:8. And thou, O tower of the flock Or, of Eder, as Archbishop Newcome and many others translate the word, considering it as a proper name; a tower in or near Beth-lehem; see Gen 35:21. Or, as some think, a tower near the sheep-gate in Jerusalem, (Neh 3:1; Neh 3:32,) put here for the whole city. The word signifies a flock; the strong hold of the daughter of Zion Hebrew, Ophel, a strong fort. Both expressions seem to be put for the whole city. Unto thee shall it come, even the first dominion This was intended to signify the great honour coming to mount Zion, that the former dominion, the government, after seventy years captivity, should return to the former royal family, the house of David, and continue in it till Shilo came. This, in the type, was fulfilled after the restoration of the Jews to their own land under Zerubbabel and his successors; but the whole antitype concerns the Messiahs kingdom.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
4:8 And thou, O {i} tower of the flock, the strong hold of the daughter of Zion, unto thee shall it come, even {k} the first dominion; the kingdom shall come to the daughter of Jerusalem.
(i) Meaning Jerusalem, where the Lord’s flock was gathered.
(k) The flourishing state of the kingdom, as it was under David and Solomon, which thing was accomplished for the Church by the coming of Christ.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
Micah returned to contemplate again Mt. Zion in the future (cf. Mic 4:1). It would become like a watchtower to the flock of God’s people Israel and a stronghold to her descendants then. Israel’s former dominion over her world under David and Solomon would return then, even the kingdom of the descendants of Jerusalem.
Only if we spiritualize the meaning of "the daughter of Jerusalem" to mean the church can we get away from the clear promise of Israel’s restoration here (cf. Rom 11:26). Reference to restoration of the glory of the former Davidic kingdom strongly suggests the revival of the Davidic kingdom (cf. Isa 9:7; Hos 3:5; Amo 9:11).
One writer counted 11 characteristics of the future messianic kingdom in Mic 4:1-8. These are the global prominence of the temple (Mic 4:1 a) and its attraction of people worldwide (Mic 4:1 b). Jerusalem will function as teacher of the world (Mic 4:2 a) and as the disseminator of revelation (Mic 4:2 b). The Lord will judge the world from Jerusalem (Mic 4:3 a), and peace will be universal (Mic 4:3 b). Israel will experience peace and security (Mic 4:4), spiritual sensitivity (Mic 4:5), regathering to the land (Mic 4:6), strength (Mic 4:7), and dominion (Mic 4:8). [Note: Martin, pp. 1483-84.]
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
THE KING TO COME
Mic 4:8 – Mic 5:1-15
WHEN a people has to be purged of long injustice, when some high aim of liberty or of order has to be won, it is remarkable how often the drama of revolution passes through three acts. There is first the period of criticism and of vision, in which men feel discontent, dream of new things, and put their hopes into systems: it seems then as if-the future were to come of itself. But often a catastrophe, relevant or irrelevant, ensues: the visions pale before a vast conflagration, and poet, philosopher, and prophet disappear under the feet of a mad mob of wreckers. Yet this is often the greatest period of all, for somewhere in the midst of it a strong character is forming, and men, by the very anarchy, are being taught, in preparation for him, the indispensableness of obedience and loyalty. With their chastened minds he achieves the third act, and fulfills all of the early vision that Gods ordeal by fire has proved worthy to survive. Thus history, when distraught, rallies again upon the Man.
To this law the prophets of Israel only gradually gave expression. We find no trace of it among the earliest of them; and in the essential faith of all there was much which predisposed them against the conviction of its necessity. For, on the one hand, the seers were so filled with the inherent truth and inevitableness of their visions, that they described these as if already realised; there was no room for a great figure to rise before the future, for with a rush the future was upon them. On the other hand, it was ever a principle of prophecy that God is able to dispense with human aid. “In presence of the Divine omnipotence all secondary causes, all interposition on the part of the creature, fall away.” The more striking is it that before long the prophets should have begun, not only to look for a Man, but to paint him as the central figure of their hopes. In Hosea, who has no such promise, we already see the instinct at work. The age of revolution which he describes is cursed by its want of men: there is no great leader of the people sent from God; those who come to the front are the creatures of faction and party; there is no king from God. How different it had been in the great days of old, when God had ever worked for Israel through some man-a Moses, a Gideon, a Samuel, but especially a David. Thus memory, equally with the present dearth of personalities, prompted to a great desire, and with passion Israel waited for a Man. The hope of the mother for her firstborn, the pride of the father in his son, the eagerness of the woman for her lover, the devotion of the slave to his liberator, the enthusiasm of soldiers for their captain-unite these noblest affections of the human heart, and you shall yet fail to reach the passion and the glory with which prophecy looked for the King to Come. Each age, of course, expected him in the qualities of power and character needed for its own troubles, and the ideal changed from glory unto glory. From valor and victory in war, it became peace and good government, care for the poor and the oppressed, sympathy with the sufferings of the whole people, but especially of the righteous among them, with fidelity to the truth delivered unto the fathers, and, finally, a conscience for the peoples sin, a bearing of their punishment and a travail, for their spiritual redemption. But all these qualities and functions were gathered upon an individual-a Victor, a King, a Prophet, a Martyr, a Servant of the Lord.
Micah stands among the first, if he is not the very first, who thus focused the hopes of Israel upon a great Redeemer; and his promise of Him shares all the characteristics just described. In his book it lies next a number of brief oracles with which we are unable to trace its immediate connection. They differ from it in style and rhythm: they are in verse, while it seems to be in prose. They do not appear to have been uttered along with it. But they reflect the troubles out of which the Hero is expected to emerge, and the deliverance which He shall accomplish, though at first they picture the latter without any hint of Himself. They apparently describe an invasion which is actually in course, rather than one which is near and inevitable; and if so they can only date from Sennacheribs campaign against Judah in 701 B.C. Jerusalem is in siege, standing alone in the land, like one of those solitary towers with folds round them which were built here and there upon the border pastures of Israel for defense of the flock against the raiders of the desert. The prophet sees the possibility of Zions capitulation, but the people shall leave her only for their deliverance elsewhere. Many are gathered against her, but he sees them as sheaves upon the floor for Zion to thresh. This oracle (Mic 4:11-13) cannot, of course, have been uttered at the same time as the previous one, but there is no reason why the same prophet should not have uttered both at different periods. Isaiah had prospects of the fate of Jerusalem which differ quite as much. Once more (Mic 5:1) the blockade is established. Israels ruler is helpless, “smitten on the cheek by the foe.” It is to this last picture that the promise of the Deliverer is attached.
The prophet speaks:-
“But thou, O Tower of the Flock, Hill of the daughter of Zion, To thee shall arrive the former rule, And the kingdom shall come to the daughter of Zion. Now wherefore criest thou so loud? Is there no king in thee, or is thy counselor perished, That throes have seized thee like a woman in childbirth? Quiver and writhe, daughter of Zion, like one in childbirth: For now must thou forth from the city, And encamp on the field (and come unto Babel); There shalt thou be rescued, There shall Jehovah redeem thee from the hand of thy foes”!
“And now gather against thee many nations, that say, Let her be violate, that our eyes may fasten on Zion! But they know not the plans of Jehovah, Nor understand they His counsel, For He hath gathered them in like sheaves to the floor. Up and thresh, O daughter of Zion For thy horns will I turn into iron, And thy hoofs will I turn into brass; And thou will beat down many nations, And devote to Jehovah their spoil, And their wealth to the Lord of all earth”.
“Now press thyself together, thou daughter of pressure: The foe hath set a wall around us, With a rod they smite on the cheek Israels regent! But thou, Beth-Ephrath, smallest among the thousands of Judah, From thee unto Me shall come forth the Ruler to be in Israel! Yea, of old are His goings forth, from the days of long ago! Therefore shall He suffer them till the time that one bearing shall have born. (Then the rest of His brethren shall return with the children of Israel.) And He shall stand and shepherd His flock in the strength of Jehovah, In the pride of the name of His God. And they shall abide! For now is He great to the ends of the earth. And Such a One shall be our Peace.”
Bethlehem was the birthplace of David, but when Micah says that the Deliverer shall emerge from her he does not only mean what Isaiah affirms by his promise of a rod from the stock of Jesse, that the King to Come shall spring from the one great dynasty in Judah. Micah means rather to emphasize the rustic and popular origin of the Messiah, “too small to be among the thousands of Judah.” David, the son of Jesse the Bethlehemite, was a dearer figure than Solomon son of David the King. He impressed the peoples imagination, because he had sprung from themselves, and in his lifetime had been the popular rival of an unlovable despot. Micah himself was the prophet of the country as distinct from the capital, of the peasants as against the rich who oppressed them. When, therefore, he fixed upon Bethlehem as the Messiahs birthplace, he doubtless desired, without departing from the orthodox hope in the Davidic dynasty, to throw round its new representative those associations which had so endeared to the people their father-monarch. The shepherds of Judah, that strong source of undefiled life from which the fortunes of the state and prophecy itself had ever been recuperated, should again send forth salvation. Had not Micah already declared that, after the overthrow of the capital and the rulers, the glory of Israel should come to Adullam, where of old David had gathered its soiled and scattered fragments?
We may conceive how such a promise would affect the crushed peasants for whom Micah wrote. A Savior, who was one of themselves, not born up there in the capital, foster-brother of the very nobles who oppressed them, but born among the people, sharer of their toils and of their wrongs!-it would bring hope to every broken heart among the disinherited poor of Israel. Yet meantime, be it observed, this was a promise, not for the peasants only, but for the whole people. In the present danger of the nation the class disputes are forgotten, and the hopes of Israel gather upon their Hero for a common deliverance from the foreign foe. “Such a One shall be our peace.” But in the peace He is “to stand and shepherd His flock,” conspicuous and watchful. The country folk knew what such a figure meant to themselves for security and weal on the land of their fathers. Heretofore their rulers had not been shepherds, but thieves and robbers.
We can imagine the contrast which such a vision must have offered to the fancies of the false prophets. What were they beside this? Deity descending in fire and thunder, with all the other features of the ancient Theophanies that had now become much cant in the mouths of mercenary traditionalists. Besides those, how sane was this how footed upon the earth, how practical, how popular in the best sense!
We see, then, the value of Micahs prophecy for his own day. Has it also any value for ours-especially in that aspect of it which must have appealed to the hearts of those for whom chiefly Micah arose? Is it wise to paint the Messiah, to paint Christ, so much a workingman? Is it not much more to our purpose to remember the general fact of His humanity, by which He is able to be Priest and Brother to all classes, high and low, rich and poor, the noble and the peasant alike? Is not the Man of Sorrows a much wider name than the Man of Labor? Let us answer these questions.
The value of such a prophecy of Christ lies in the correctives which it supplies to the Christian apocalypse and theology. Both of these have raised Christ to a throne too far above the actual circumstance of His earthly ministry and the theatre of His eternal sympathies. Whether enthroned in the praises of Heaven, or by scholasticism relegated to an ideal and abstract humanity, Christ is lifted away from touch with the common people. But His lowly origin was a fact. He sprang from the most democratic of peoples. His ancestor was a shepherd, and His mother a peasant girl. He Himself was a carpenter: at home, as His parables show, in the fields and the folds and the barns of His country; with the servants of the great houses, with the unemployed in the market; with the woman in the hovel seeking one piece of silver, with the shepherd on the moors seeking the lost sheep. “The poor had the gospel preached to them; and the common people heard Him gladly.” As the peasants of Judea must have listened to Micahs promise of His origin among themselves with new hope and patience, so in the Roman empire the religion of Jesus Christ was welcomed chiefly, as the Apostles and the Fathers bear witness, by the lowly and the laboring of every nation. In the great persecution which bears His name, the Emperor Domitian heard that there were two relatives alive of this Jesus whom so many acknowledged as their King, and he sent for them that he might put them to death. But when they came, he asked them to hold up their hands, and seeing these brown and chapped with toil, he dismissed the men, saying, “From such slaves we have nothing to fear.” Ah but, Emperor! it is just the horny hands of this religion that thou and thy gods have to fear! Any cynic or satirist of thy literature, from Celsus onwards, could have told thee that it was by men who worked with their hands for their daily bread, by domestics, artisans, and all manner of slaves, that the power of this King should spread, which meant destruction to [flee and thine empire] “From little Bethlehem came forth the Ruler,” and “now He is great to the ends of the earth.”
There follows upon this prophecy of the Shepherd a curious fragment which divides His office among a number of His order, though the grammar returns towards the end to One. The mention of Assyria stamps this oracle also as of the eighth century. Mark the refrain which opens and closes it.
“When Asshur cometh into our land, And when he marcheth on our borders, Then shall we raise against him seven shepherds And eight princes of men. And they shall shepherd Asshur with a sword, And Nimrods land with her own bare blades. And He shall deliver from Asshur, When he cometh into our land, And marcheth upon our borders.”
There follows an oracle in which there is no evidence of Micahs hand or of his times; but if it carries any proof of a date, it seems a late one.
“And the remnant of Jacob shall be among many peoples Like the dew from Jehovah, Like showers upon grass, Which wait not for a man. Nor tarry for the children of men. And the remnant of Jacob (among nations,) among many peoples, Shall be like the lion among the beasts of the jungle, Like a young lion among the sheepfolds, Who, when he cometh by, treadeth and teareth, And none may deliver. Let thine hand be high on thine adversaries, And all thine enemies be cut off!”
Finally in this section we have an oracle full of the notes we had from Micah in The first two chapters. It explains itself. Compare Mic 2:1-13 and Isa 2:1-22.
“And it shall be in that day-tis the oracle of Jehovah-That I will cut off thy horses from the midst of thee, And I will destroy thy chariots; That I will cut off the cities of thy land, And tear down all thy fortresses, And I will cut off thine enchantments from thy hand, And thou shalt have no more soothsayers; And I will cut off thine images and thy pillars from the midst of thee, And thou shalt not bow down any more to the work of thy hands; And I will uproot thine Asheras from the midst of thee, And will destroy thine idols. So shall I do, in My wrath and Mine anger, Vengeance to the nations, who have not known Me.”