Condemnation, Religious Conflict and Restoration (Micah 2)

The condemnation (vv. 1-5)

Part of a sermon by Micah is recorded in these verses. His message concerns those whose aim in life was to increase in wealth. During the years of the kings mentioned at the start of the book, those practices had been taking place. Certain powerful people spent each night thinking about how to increase their wealth and when the morning came they enacted the plans they had made. Because they had power, no one could stop them (vv. 1-2).

What was wrong with their plans? We might assume that Micah would highlight lack of natural justice or a failure to be neighbourly, but that was not Micah’s perspective. For him, the problem was abuse of religious benefits. Those men were taking what did not belong to them. The land that they coveted had been given to their owners by God as an inheritance. Perhaps we think of the story of Ahab and Naboth and how Ahab coveted Naboth’s vineyard. Naboth refused to sell it because the Lord had given it to him as his family’s inheritance (v. 3).

This behaviour had been allowed in Judah. Those who engaged in it had sinned against the Lord, and he sent his prophet Micah with a message of future divine punishment. His message was that they would go into captivity and would walk to the place of exile with boards or chains round their necks, one after another. At other times, they may have strutted about, but on this walk to exile they would be in great distress (v. 3).

When that time would come, a song would be sung which summarised the actions of the men who amassed illegal property. The lyrics would state what a disinherited person had thought when he lost his land (v. 4). Now it was being sung to those who had stolen the land, perhaps by those people themselves or by onlookers of what had happened.

A further judgement is pronounced on those land-stealers (v. 5). When the time comes for the land to be restored at a future assembly of the Lord’s people after the exile, those who stole the land would not have any descendants to claim what they had taken illegally. From one point of view, that reality was not surprising because we know that the exile in Babylon lasted seventy years. Yet while it is a promise of judgement on those land-robbers, it is also a promise of hope and recovery for the godly in Israel.

Conflicting messages (vv. 6-10)

In this section, we have a debate. Micah comments about prophets who were declaring a different message from him and his colleagues. The alternative prophets, when rejecting Micah’s message, speak to more than him, as stated in verse 6 (a plural number are addressed, so Micah is not alone). Those prophets thought that his message was wrong because they assumed a common idea, which was that God would not let his people suffer such disaster. They also assumed that those who amassed lands that belonged to others were doing nothing wrong.

In verse 7, Micah responds by asking a straightforward question to the people: ‘Should this be said, O house of Jacob?’ The people may have wanted to sit on the fence in this prophetic disagreement. But they couldn’t. They were challenged to decide who was right.

The opponents of Micah, whether false prophets or the people, respond in verse 7: ‘Has the Lord grown impatient? Are these his deeds?’ They did not believe that God would ever punish them with exile.

Micah responds in verses 7-9. First, he asks if his message does good for those who live righteously. Second, he points out further sins that are taking place in the land. Travellers on the roads are attacked; women (widows) and children are deprived of their spiritual privileges. In these verses, Micah speaks on behalf of God (note ‘my people’ and ‘my splendour’, which refers to the great gift God had given to them when giving them land as an inheritance).

Third, Micah urges his opponents to leave the land they had accumulated (he is referring to them going into exile). They had imagined that such growth in possessions would give them rest, but their actions had made it an unclean country, and for those sins it would be destroyed.

Fourth, Micah challenges the people about the kind of preacher they wanted to hear. He says that they would be happy with a preacher who taught that it would be good for them to get drunk. Of course, he is being sarcastic about them and their choice of prophets.

Promise of restoration (vv. 12-13)

Micah now informs the people of a divine promise. He quotes a message from God who likens himself to a shepherd gathering his flock (v. 12), with the flock being the remnant of Israel who will be return from captivity. They will be given sustenance and security in the divine place of pasture.

Another picture of the return is given in verse 13. The people will march through the gates of the city as victorious soldiers, with the victory being given to them by their God.

While there is a reference to the return that took place after the exile in Babylon, the greater fulfilment is seen in Jesus, the ultimate shepherd king who will bring restore his people, look after them as a shepherd and lead them to a great and permanent victory.

Applications

One application of this passage is to observe that it is essential to work out what it is that God disapproves of. It would be easy to assume that what Micah condemned was accumulation of wealth. Yet that is not what he condemned. Rather he condemned powerful people taking what did not belong to them. He insisted that the possessions God had given to his people had to be recognised by all.

A second application is to beware of the sin of coveting. Coveting is desiring what one should not have, as we can see from the details mentioned in the tenth commandment. Coveting can be defined as inner stealing, of wanting what belongs to others. Such coveting can exist even when it is not possible to get what is wanted.

A third application concerns what we believe about God? The prophets that opposed Micah were not false prophets in the sense that they advocated idolatry. Instead, what made them false was what they said about the true God. They chose to ignore the threats that he had included in his covenant agreement with Israel about punishing them for their sins. The fact is, God will judge unrighteousness wherever he finds it, even when he finds it among his people.

A fourth application is that we should be careful about who we listen to, and end up not taking sides. Micah challenged the crowd to stop sitting on the fence with regard to the messages they heard. Of course, those who sit on the fence never stand on the right side, even if they don’t appear on the wrong side. Sitting on the fence is a dangerous position because the person makes no progress. No doubt, if the crowd who sat on the fence when Micah disputed with the prophets had another chance to do so, they would rush to do it, but they will never get that opportunity. Their time has gone.

A fifth application is that God’s plan for the future is what keeps us going in the present. That was the encouragement that Micah gave to his hearers. Don’t forget the promises, is what he says. Realise what God has promised to do. The exile was not endless, and restoration would come.

A sixth application is that small Old Testament restorations were pictures of the great restoration that Jesus would bring about. That was the case with the Exodus and with the return from the captivity in Babylon. He is the final shepherd King, the One who will lead his people to the fountains of the waters of life while he reigns from the throne in glory.