This verse gives a brief introduction to and summary of the whole prophecy of Micah. It was probably added after the rest of the book was complete, and is similar in form to the opening verses of other prophetic books, especially Hosea and Amos. It has three purposes: (1) to give a date for the prophecy, (2) to give background information about Micah, and (3) to state the main subjects of his prophecy.
(1) The prophecy is dated by the reigns of kings, just as the prophecies of Hosea, Amos, and Isaiah are. In Hos 1.1 and Amos 1.1, the kings of both the northern kingdom of Israel and the southern kingdom of Judah are mentioned. But here in Micah, as in Isa 1.1, the names mentioned are only those of kings of Judah.
(2) The background information about Micah is limited to the fact that he came from the town of Moresheth.
(3) The main topics of his prophecy are stated very briefly as Samaria and Jerusalem. These two cities were the capitals of the northern kingdom of Israel and the southern kingdom of Judah respectively, and in this verse they represent the two kingdoms.
During the time that Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah were kings of Judah: the words During the time are a way of expressing the idea that Micah’s ministry took place at some part of the time that each of these kings was ruling. It is literally “in the days” (Revised Standard Version [Revised Standard Version]) of these kings. This expression comes at the beginning of the sentence in Good News Translation, but in the translator’s languages it should be placed at any point where it sounds natural.
The translator should be careful not to suggest that all three kings ruled at the same time. There may be a term in the language meaning “one after the other” or “one at a time” that would be helpful here.
Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah: Jotham reigned approximately 740-736 B.C., Ahaz 734-716 B.C., and Hezekiah 716-687 B.C. In Jer 26.18-19 there is a reference to Micah prophesying in the reign of King Hezekiah, and scholars today believe that most of Micah’s prophecy is to be dated in the period 715-700 B.C. There is no need to go into further detail, since exact dating is rarely of importance to a translator.
For languages that do not have a word for kings, an expression like “great chiefs” or “the ones who command” may be the closest equivalent.
Judah is of course a country, and in many languages it would be helpful to identify the type of place that a name refers to, at least the first time that it is used; for example, “the country of Judah” or “the land called Judah.” The book of Micah will usually be printed only as part of a whole Bible, and it may be right to assume that most readers will have a certain amount of Bible background when they begin to read Micah. However, it is still helpful to treat each Bible book as a unit of its own, and not to assume that all readers will remember everything they have read in other parts of the Bible.
The LORD gave this message to Micah: Good News Translation restructures “The word of the LORD that came to Micah” (Revised Standard Version) to make the LORD the subject. Micah’s message carried authority as “The word of the LORD” (Revised Standard Version). In Hebrew, these words are the opening words of the book and so have more prominence than they do in Good News Translation, where the LORD gave this message to Micah comes in the middle of the sentence. If a language has a way of marking or bringing into focus the most important part of a sentence, then in this sentence, this the part that should be marked. In many languages this will mean it should come at the beginning of the verse, as in Revised Standard Version.
It may seem best to translate the LORD by some expression meaning “lord” or “master,” or in some parts of the world “boss,” rather than by trying to give the personal name of God (as “Yahweh” in the Jerusalem Bible [Jerusalem Bible]) or an expression with some other meaning (as Moffatt’s [Moffatt] “the Eternal”). The reasons for this are given in more detail in A Handbook on the Book of Ruth, page 10, and in this Handbook’s comments on The Book of Jonah, pages 50 and following, and page 62. See also the comments on Obadiah verse 1a. Many English versions have chosen to use small capital letters to mark the place where “Lord” translates the personal name of God, as in Good News Translation Micah 1.1, in order to distinguish it from places where the Hebrew word for “Lord” itself is used, as in Good News Translation Amos 9.1. It will not be necessary to follow this example in other languages unless there are enough readers who will understand the significance of the distinction, and who will want to have it marked in their own language. If only a few seminary students and pastors are interested, and if they are all familiar with Bibles in English or some other languages, it may be best to avoid these small capital letters.
In some languages it may sound odd to talk about a lord or master without saying whose lord he is. In this verse “our Lord” would be appropriate, but it will be necessary to use different pronouns in other verses, according to the sense of the verse.
This message: the Hebrew term used here means literally a single “word” (Revised Standard Version), but this does not imply that everything in the book was revealed to Micah on a single occasion. In some languages the form of the verb can show that this happened over a period of time, but it may also be helpful to say “these words.” Whatever expression is used, it should clearly refer to the whole book, and not only to the words that come right after this sentence.
Micah, who was from the town of Moresheth: Moresheth was a small and obscure place in the foothills of southwestern Judah, and this probably means that Micah himself was a peasant farmer typical of the area. He would thus be one of the poor and oppressed groups who were ill-treated by the rich. This helps to explain why he complains so sharply about their fate, for instance in 2.2, 8-9; 3.1-3.
This is the end of the first sentence in Good News Translation, but in Revised Standard Version and most English translations, verse 1 as a whole is not a complete sentence. The Hebrew begins with “The word of the LORD” (Revised Standard Version) and then adds various descriptive phrases to it, but does not complete the sentence. This verse is thus probably to be understood as something like a title for the whole book. However, it is better in translation to make the verse into one or more complete sentences. One way to do this is to follow the sense of the New English Bible (New English Bible), “This is the word of the LORD.” Another way is to make the Lord the subject of the sentence, as Good News Translation has done.
The LORD revealed to Micah: the Revised Standard Version translation “The word of the LORD that came to Micah … which he saw…” may be puzzling, since one does not normally see a word but rather hears it. The prophets of Israel often received visions through which they learned the Lord’s message (see Isa 6; Amos 7.1-9; 8.1-3, for examples), and thus they came to speak of seeing a word. The exact way in which The LORD revealed his message to Micah is not stated. We are not told that Micah had visions, though the use of the word “saw” could imply this, and some English translations (including Jerusalem Bible and New English Bible) use the word “visions” in the verse. The basic idea is that Lord used some spiritual experience to show Micah what he wanted him to say. The Hebrew form of expression (“to see a word”) should not be carried over into languages in which it is unnatural. In Good News Translation, for instance, the meaning of this phrase is divided between the two words gave and revealed.
All these things about Samaria and Jerusalem: in some languages it may be necessary to say something about the content of the message rather than simply that it concerned Samaria and Jerusalem. Good News Translation has added all these things in order to fill out the sense. Another possibility would be to say “what would happen to Samaria and Jerusalem.” The expression used should be as general as possible.
Samaria and Jerusalem were the capital cities of Israel and Judah respectively, and some translators may wish to make this explicit. If a languages has not word for “capital,” then it can be translated as “largest town.” Israel and Judah together made up the whole of God’s people, and Micah’s message thus reflects the LORD’s interest in all his people. It is not surprising that Micah took more interest in the affairs of Judah, both because he himself was a Judean citizen, and because Israel no longer existed after Samaria was destroyed by the Assyrians in 722 B.C.
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 .
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.