Verse 2 is a development of the idea that the rich can do as they please. If they want fields or house, they simply help themselves, with never a care for the people whom they drive out.
The Hebrew word for want in this verse is the same word used for “desire” (Revised Standard Version “covet”) in the tenth commandment (Exo 20.17; Deut 5.21). Its use here emphasizes that the behavior of the rich is directly contrary to the will of God as expressed in his Law.
Fields refers to the cultivated land that people owned, while houses were the people’s own homes. The exact way in which these rich people seize or take the fields and houses is not stated. It probably involved taking over property from people who were in debt to them, and using various other means that had the appearance of being legal. They did not simply come in with a number of armed men and drive the owners off their property. The use of seize and take, however, suggests that from a moral point of view the actions of the rich were just as bad as if they had actually seized the property by force. Seize and take are synonyms, and many translators may prefer to combine these ideas into one sentence: “If they want someone else’s fields and houses, they simply take them.”
Such behavior leads to the breakup of society (see also verse 9), so that No man’s family or property is safe. Good News Translation here combines the repetition of the Hebrew into a single clause (see Revised Standard Version for a literal translation). The expression “a man and his house” (Revised Standard Version) is understood by some to be another reference to the houses that people own, repeating the idea of the previous line. It is more likely here to mean “household,” or as Good News Translation says, family. People who were in debt were often forced to sell themselves as slaves, and this may be what is in mind here.
The word translated as “inheritance” (Revised Standard Version) means primarily the family land inherited from one’s ancestors. Good News Translation translates it as property.
The evil men, then, were wrongly taking the property and even taking the owners themselves with their families. This idea is not different from what is said in the first part of this verse. Translators who try to follow the emphasis of the Hebrew may find it difficult to word this in a way that does not sound like simple repetition. It may help to put in an extra clause and say “In this way these men rob a man of his family lands and even of his family itself.”
The Good News Translation wording gives another alternative. By focusing on the victims, the same thing can be said with quite a different effect. It may be difficult to find an equivalent for is safe in some languages. Another possibility is to say “No man can be sure that they will not take his family and property.”
Quoted with permission from Clark, David J. et al. A Handbook on Micah. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1978, 1982, 1993. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .