Mi 5

1) v1 has been interpreted in many different ways (for a concise summary, see Gill). Jews read v1 even with ch 4. What makes this verse appear ambiguous? 

• e.g. ‘daughter of troops’: The besieged, or the attacker? Assyrians? Babylonians? Romans? Inhabitants of Jerusalem? Faithful Israelites, or the ones to be punished? Or…? [Every opinion has been voiced in the past]
• Context: Mi 4:13 promised a time after Israel’s exile where she will thresh her enemies (never literally fulfilled in history until today). By contrast, 5:2 speaks of the birth of Messiah (cf Mt 2:5). Has v1 anything to do with either of these themes?
• Is v1 about Messiah? Or if it belongs to 4:11 as an afterthought, why then did Micah write it only after 4:14 instead? [=> placement of v1 (and its content, see below) suggests it belongs to what follows.]

• Is the militant Israel of 4:14 Christian? Why not? Jn 18:36
  • Thus, what will remain its attitude towards Jesus and his followers until that time? [Still opposed] =>
• Who then could be the ‘judge of Israel’ in v1?
  • Classic ‘preterist’ commentators see this this fulfilled in how king Zedekiah was humiliated by the Chaldeans after the conquest of Jerusalem (2 Ki 25:7). But was Z. the king of Israel? [King of Judah; kingdom of Israel by then was already conquered]
  • Others read ‘judge’ (singular) as judges (plural) who were all ‘struck by a rod’, but only metaphorically when they were shamed by the sacking of Jerusalem. Would this justify v3 that ‘Therefore…’ God shall give them up? => Why not? [This would say: “Because they will be slapped, therefore I will give them up” – which would absurdly invert cause and effect]
  • If Israel’s judge mentioned by v1 is God himself, the ‘Therefore…’ of v3 is there for a good reason: Which one? [BECAUSE Israel and its leadership oppose God and besiege his faithful servants (the “us” of v1), THEREFORE God will give them up until… => s. v3]
• v2: Readers following Micah so far would object at this point: “How can the all powerful invisible God of Israel be struck on the cheek?” What was Micah’s answer?
  • Read Mk 14:65 and 15:19 How did they see to it that He was struck even literally on the cheek?
  • What does it mean that this ruler will be from ‘ancient days’, cf Ps 90:2?
    • cf Prov 8:2-25 Who spoke in these words? [The wisdom of God, as if it were a person]
    • Read Jn 8:58 Why did Jesus say this?
• When Herod heard of Jesus’ birth and ordered the scribes to find out where, they told him to search Bethlehem (Mt 2:5): Why?
  • Why was Messiah to ‘come forth’ from Bethlehem (lit. ‘house of bred’) Ephrata (‘fruitful’)? Was this town a cultural avant-garde? Or was it in honor of the tomb of Rahel, Gen 35:19, the mother of one who prefigured Messiah (Joseph)? Or because Messiah was promised to ‘come forth’ from the line of David (and thus, in some sense, from the place where he was born), Lk 2:4?

• What does it mean to be given up by God? cf Isa 57:17. Do you think they understood or believed this? Why or why not? [Few grasped the spiritual meaning, and much later: cf Lk 2:25.34-35]
• What woman will be giving birth? cf Mi 4:9-10 [Not a reference to Mary, but to Israel: This description by Micah is picked up in the NT by Rev 12 to explain that the ‘returning’ brothers of Jesus mentioned by Micah are non-Jews; cf Jn 10:16]

• Do you think that this prophecy was fulfilled when the Assyrians conquered northern Israel and, under Sennacherib, even besieged Jersusalem (2 Ki 18:9-19:20; 2 Chr 32; Isa 36-37)? Why not?
  • v5: Did they ‘tread into their palaces’?
  • v6: Did the Jews ever ‘shepherd the land of Assyria with the sword’, or appoint any ‘princes’ against it?
    • Who was Nimrod? cf Gen 10:8-9; 1 Chr 1:10
    • Did other prophets predict that the land of Nimrod will invade Israel at a later time? [Also Isaiah foresaw at that time that the Assyrian campaign in their days foreshadowed yet another final assault on a latter ‘day of the Lord’, Isa 8:7-8; 10:20-34, a theme that inspired the later prophet Nahum to devote his entire book to describing the fall of the Assyrians in apocalyptic terms. This interpretation was confirmed later by two prophets Ez 38:8-9.16 and Dan 8:9; 11:36-45 prophesying an invasion from the same area (Meshech, or ‘king of the North’), and later again by Zech 14:1-5 and Joel 3:12-16  who similarly prophesied a final assault on Jerusalem in the ‘great day of the Lord’, even though in their time Assyria was no longer an empire. Also the New Testament writers allude to these prophecies as future events not yet fulfilled in the past, based on what Jesus said about them, Mt 24:15, and even after Jerusalem had already been destroyed by the Romans in 70AD, Rev 20:7-10]
• Since this prophecy was never literally fulfilled in history, was it only intended as metaphor? What do vv7-9 say about that?
  • v7: Is the ‘remnant of Jacob’ a name for the Jewish nation, or for a ‘spiritual Israel‘ of many nations? Hint:
    • Gen 35:10-11 why did God change Jacob’s name to Israel?
  • v8: Is Jacob’s remnant a ‘community of sheep’ (v4, a metaphor for the NT church)? Or a community who kills sheep?

• v10: Whose horses and chariots will God destroy in those days? => “Your horses…”: Who is the ‘you’, cf v9?
• So why does God until then nevertheless tolerate and even appoint (as ‘dew from the Lord’, v7) a self-reliant Jewish remnant that will ‘maul and mangle as it goes’ (v8, NIV)? v15

• What do you find helpful, and what do you consider perhaps hard to understand or to accept about this chapter? Why?
• Growing up, what did you hear where modern Israel fits into Bible propecy in general, and specifically in Micah? Do you think we don’t need to know? Why?
• Does this chapter influence how you pray for the Middle East and/or interpret the news that you hear about the conflicts in that part of the world? How?