1:1

This is the word of the LORD that came to Micah the Moreshite in the days of Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, kings of Judah—what he saw regarding Samaria and Jerusalem: This book contains the words spoken by Micah. Because of that, some translators have translated this verse using the pronouns “I” or “me.” For example:

I am Micah from Moresheth. And this is the message about Samaria and Jerusalem that the Lord gave to me when Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah were the kings of Judah. (CEV)

This translation is not recommended, because some scholars believe that an editor added this verse after Micah’s messages had been written down. For more details, see “The author, the date, and Micah’s audience” in the introduction.

1:1a

This is the word of the LORD that came to Micah the Moreshite: This verse part indicates that Micah’s messages were from the LORD. In Hebrew, the phrase the word of the LORD is emphasized by its position at the beginning of the verse.UBS (page 124). Try to keep this emphasis in your translation.

In the Hebrew, this clause is more literally, “the word of the LORD which was to Micah the Moreshite.” In some languages, it may be more natural to translate this verse as a complete sentence, as in the BSB. Here are some other ways to translate this:

The Lord spoke his word to Micah, who was from Moresheth… (GW)

This is the prophetic message that the Lord gave to Micah of Moresheth. (NET)

word: In some languages, it may be more natural to use plural forms.Although the book is presented as a single message from the LORD, it is clear from 1:1 that Micah prophesied during the reigns of three different kings of Judah. Scholars agree that he gave a series of different prophecies and that he spoke to more than one group of people. For example:

These are the words of the Eternal One (Voice)

The Lord gave these messages to Micah of Moresheth… (NLT96)

LORD: The word LORD represents the Hebrew word “Yahweh,” the personal name of God. In Hebrew, this is a proper name, not a title or general noun. See the discussion of Yahweh, the LORD, in the Introduction.

came: In Hebrew, this word is a form of the verb “to be.” It is more literally “became” or “happened.”TWOT (#491), NIDOTTE (#2118). It indicates here that Micah experienced messages from the LORD as powerful events that occurred in his life.WBC (page 14) says that “the Hebrew language is action-oriented. Therefore the force here is that the word ‘happened,’ ‘came in power’ to Micah.” According to NAC (page 43), when the “word-event formula” occurs “in reference…to the coming of the Lord’s word,” it emphasizes the nature of that word as a historical event. In some languages, it may be possible to translate this idea with a word or expression other than came, “gave,” or “spoke.” For example:

happened to Micah

Micah experienced

Micah: This is the name of the prophet who spoke these messages to the people. Micah is a shortened form of Micaiah, which means “Who is like the LORD?” in Hebrew.The prophet Micah is also mentioned in Jeremiah 26:18–19, but there his name is spelled “Micaiah.” Most English versions spell his name as “Micah” in both places. There were several people named Micah in the Old Testament. There was another prophet who was named Micaiah (I Kings 22:8–28; 2 Chronicles 18:4–27). Most English versions spell that other prophet’s name “Micaiah.”

the Moreshite: Micah’s home town is named Moresheth. Most scholars think that it was a small town about 35 kilometers southwest of Jerusalem. Translate this phrase in a way that is natural in your language. For example:

Micah, who was from the town of Moresheth (GNT)

Micah the Moresheth person.

1:1a–c

1:1b

in the days of Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, kings of Judah: Micah proclaimed messages from the LORD at various times during the rule of these three kings.Hezekiah was the son of Ahaz, and Ahaz was the son of Jotham. It is difficult to know the exact dates when these three kings ruled, because sometimes before a king died his son began to rule as king together with his father. According to UBS (page 124), Jotham ruled as king from about 740 B.C. until 736 B.C. Ahaz ruled from 734 B.C. until 716 B.C. And Hezekiah ruled from 716 B.C. until 687 B.C. In 1:6–7, Micah predicted that the city of Samaria would be destroyed. Samaria was destroyed in 722 B.C. or 721 B.C., during the time that Ahaz was king in Judah. So we know that the LORD gave this message to Micah before that time. But we do not know the exact time that Micah received and delivered most of the messages in this book. He was probably a prophet for at least 20 years (the end of Jotham’s reign until the beginning of Hezekiah’s reign). But he may have been a prophet for longer than 50 years (from the beginning of Jotham’s reign until the end of Hezekiah’s reign). Waltke 2007 (page 34), whose dates differ slightly from UBS, suggests 53 years as the maximum limit. They ruled one after the other. They did not rule at the same time. If this is not clear in your translation, you may want to make this information explicit. For example:

He told/spoke these messages during the time that King Jotham ruled in Judah, until the time that King Ahaz ruled, and then during the time that King Hezekiah ruled.

in the days of: In this context, the Hebrew phrase in the days of refers to the period of time during which these particular kings ruled. In some languages, it may be necessary to make this information clearer. Here are some possible ways to do this:

• Use a noun other than days. For example:

  …during the reigns/governing of Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, kings of Judah.

  …during the time of…

  …during the years of….

• Use a verb. For example:

  …when kings Jotham, Ahaz and Hezekiah ruled/reigned in Judah.

Use an expression that is natural in your language.

Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, kings of Judah: If it is more natural in your language, you can use the title “king” with each name, “King Jotham, King Ahaz, and King Hezekiah in Judah.”The story of these kings is written in the book of 2 Kings. For the story of King Jotham, see 2 Kings 15:32–38. For King Ahaz see 2 Kings 16:1–19. For King Hezekiah, see 2 Kings 18:1–20:20. The stories of these kings are also told in 2 Chronicles and in other parts of the Old Testament.

Judah: The name Judah here refers to the southern kingdom of Judah.In some parts of the Bible, the name “Judah” refers to one of Jacob’s twelve sons. In other parts of the Bible, the name “Judah” refers to the Jewish tribe that was descended from Judah. In the books of 1 and 2 Kings, 1 and 2 Chronicles, and in some books written by prophets such as Micah, the name “Judah” refers to the southern kingdom. In some languages, it may be helpful to identify Judah more explicitly. For example:

land of Judah

country of Judah

1:1c

what he saw: There are two ways to interpret the referent of this relative clause:

1. The words what he saw refer to “The word of the LORD that came to Micah.” (1:1a).WBC (page 13). According to A&F (page 118), the strong consensus among translations and commentaries is that “the word of the LORD” is the antecedent of “which he saw.” A&F, however, prefer the view that Micah is the antecedent, which would result in “the word of the LORD” came to Micah “who had a vision (or visions).” This (referring back) is what Micah saw concerning Samaria and Jerusalem. For example:

   he received it in visions about Samaria and Jerusalem (REB) (BSB, CEV, ESV, KJV, NAB, NASB, NET, NIV, NRSV, REB, GNT)

2. The words what he saw refer forward to Micah’s vision about Samaria and Jerusalem. There is no explicit connection with “The word of the LORD…” For example:

   The visions he saw concerned both Samaria and Jerusalem. (NLT) (GW, NCV, NJB, NJPS)

It is recommended that you follow interpretation (1) along with most versions and commentaries.Commentaries that support interpretation (1) include WBC, Waltke 2007, TOTC, NAC, and Hillers. Commentaries that support interpretation (2) include A&F and perhaps NICOT, whose translation (page 264) has “received by revelation concerning…”

It is important to understand the sense in which Micah saw the word that came to him from the LORD. There are different ways to interpret the meaning of the word in this context:

1. The word saw indicates that Micah saw the messages in the form of visions.The Hebrew word for saw (ḥazah) is related to the Hebrew words for “vision” (ḥazon) and “seer” (ḥoze). All three come from the same root (ḥzh). TOTC (page 165) prefers the auditory (hearing) interpretation, but states that the experience “could be accompanied by visions as well.” EBC (page 501) do not use the term “vision” here, but describe a type of prophecy “in which the prophet describes future events as though they are unfolding before his eyes.”

   “…the vision he saw concerning Samaria and Jerusalem.” (NIV)

   His visions about Samaria and Jerusalem. (NJB) (GW, NAB, NCV, NIV, NJB, NLT, REB)In addition to these versions, all of which specify “vision(s),” the BSB, ESV, KJV, NASB, and NRSV all have “saw.” In the context of “seeing” the “word of the LORD,” the verb “saw” probably implies a vision or similar experience. The LXX also has “he saw.”

2. The word saw indicates in a general way that Micah received the messages. In other words, the LORD revealed them to Micah in some way that is not stated.According to NICOT (page 265), the verb “see” is used as a technical term for prophecy. It refers “not only to visions but to the wider perception of divine revelation.” NAC (page 44) acknowledges that “the verb ‘saw’ by itself can occasionally mean ‘saw in a vision’” but prefers “the more general sense of receiving a divine revelation or a prophecy from the inspiring Spirit of the Lord.”

   “The Lord revealed to Micah all these things about Samaria and Jerusalem.” (GNT)

   These words/messages were made known to Micah about Samaria and Jerusalem. (GNT)

3. The word saw indicates that Micah “prophesied.”This third interpretation is supported by the Targum, which translates Micah 1:1c as “…who prophesied concerning….” A&F (page 118) think that the translation “who prophesied” (NJPS) is correct.

   “…who prophesied concerning Samaria and Jerusalem.” (NJPS) (NET, NJPS)

4. The word saw indicates that Micah “heard” the messages. No versions follow this interpretation, but it supported by several commentaries.CBC quotes NICOT (page 265), who comments that “see” is “a technical term of prophecy which developed to refer not only to visions but to the wider perception of divine revelation. In Micah’s case it was evidently of an auditory nature.” Waltke 1993 (pages 614–615). also interprets Micah’s experience as “auricular” (having to do with hearing). His reason is that “the Hebrew associates diverse sorts of vivid sensations with the eyes.”

The Display will follow interpretation (1) along with most versions. You may follow either interpretation (1) or (2). There is little difference in meaning between them.

regarding Samaria and Jerusalem:

• Micah talked about those two cities. He said that Samaria would be destroyed (1:6–7). He said that Jerusalem would be destroyed (3:12).

• Micah also talked to the people who lived in those two cities. He accused them of sinning. He warned them that the LORD would punish them. He also told them that the LORD would bless them again in the future.

• Samaria was the capital of Israel (the northern kingdom). Jerusalem was the capital of Judah (the southern kingdom). So Micah’s message was for all the people in those two countries.

You will probably want to translate the names Samaria and Jerusalem literally. For example:

about Samaria and Jerusalem

the cities of Samaria and Jerusalem