John Calvin on Micah 1:7

The Prophet goes on with the same subject, and says, that the ruin of Samaria was at hand, so that its idols would be broken, and also, that its wealth would be destroyed which she had gathered by illegitimate means, and which she thought to be the reward of her idolatry. But God mentions idols here expressly by his Prophet, in order to confirm what we noticed yesterday — that the cause of vengeance was, because Samaria had abandoned itself to ungodly forms of worship, and had departed from the Law. That the Israelites might then understand the cause for which God would so severely punish them, the Prophet here makes express mention of their graven images and idols. God is not indeed angry with stones and wood; but he observes the abuse and the perversion of them, when men pollute themselves by wickedly worshipping such things. This is the reason why God says here that the graven images of Samaria would be broken in pieces, and that its idols would be destroyed.

With regard to the wages, the Prophet no doubt designed to stamp with disgrace all the wealth of Samaria. אתנן, atanen, is properly a gift or a present. But as he twice repeats it, and says, that what Samaria possessed was the reward of an harlot, and then, that it would return to the reward of an harlot, he, in the first place, I have no doubt, upbraids the Israelites, because they, after the manner of harlots and strumpets, had heaped together their great riches: and this was done by Jeroboam, who constructed a new form of worship, in order to secure his own kingdom. The Israelites then began to flourish; and we also know how wealthy that kingdom became, and how proud they were on account of their riches. As, then, the Israelites despised the kingdom of Judah, and thought themselves in every way happy, and as they ascribed all this, as we have seen in Hosea, to their superstitions, Micah speaks here according to their view of things, when he says, Idolatry has been gainful to you, this splendor dazzles your eyes; but your rewards I have already doomed to the burning: they shall then be burnt, and thus perish. Hosea also, as we have seen, made use of the same comparison, — that the children of Israel felicitated themselves in their impiety, like a harlot, who, while she gains many presents from those who admire her beauty, seems not conscious of her turpitude and baseness: such were the Israelites. The Prophets therefore does not say, without reason, Behold, your rewards, by burning, shall perish, or, be consumed with fire. Why so? Because ye have gathered them, he says, from the reward of an harlot, and all this shall return to the reward of an harlot.

This last clause ought to be restricted to the gifts or wealth of Samaria; for it cannot properly be applied to idols or graven images. The import of the whole then is that God would be the avenger of idolatry with regard to the city of Samaria and the whole kingdom of Israel. Besides, as the Israelites boasted that their ungodly forms of worship turned out to their happiness and prosperity, God declares that the whole of this success would be evanescent, like that of the harlot, who amasses great wealth, which soon vanishes away: and we see that thus it commonly happens.

Some explain the passage thus, — that the gifts, with which the Israelites adorned their temples, would return to be the reward of an harlot, that is, would he transferred to Chaldea, and that the Babylonians would, in their turn, adorn with them their idols. But this view is not suitable to the place; for the Prophet does not say that what Samaria had gathered would be a prey or a spoil to enemies but that it would perish by fire. The view given above is the one embraced by Henderson; but the reason given here is improbable. Newcome mentions the above, and also the following, “She imputed her wealth to her spiritual idolatry, and her conquerors shall distribute it as the reward of harlots in the literal sense.” But inasmuch as it is said, that her rewards would be burnt, it is more consistent to take the last clause as a proverbial expression, signifying the destruction of all the wealth that was ascribed to idolatry as its source.

“It is common,” says Henry, “that what is squeezed out by one lust, is squandered away by another.” — Ed. He speaks therefore, proverbially when he says that the produce, from the reward of an harlot, would return to be the reward of an harlot, that is, that it would become nothing; for the Lord sets a curse on such riches as strumpets gain by their baseness, while they prostitute themselves. Since, then, the whole of such wealth is under the curse of God, it must necessarily soon pass away like smoke: and this, in my view, is the real meaning of the Prophet. It now follows —

Micah 1:8-9

8. Therefore I will wail and howl, I will go stripped and naked: I will make a wailing like the dragons, and mourning as the owls.

8. Super hoc plangam et ululabo; incedam spoliatus et nudus; faciam planctum tanquam draconum, et luctum tanquam filiarum struthionis: All the verbs in this verse are in the Septuagint in the third person, κοψεται—”she will mourn,” etc. The whole is applied to Samaria. The Hebrew will admit of this sense, if the verbs be considered to be, as they may be, in Hiphil, the omission of the ו is not uncommon. Then the rendering of the two verses will be the following:—

8. I will therefore make her to moan and howl, I will cause her to go stripped and naked; I will make her to moan like the whales, And to wail like the ostriches:

9. For grievous will be her stroke; Yea it will come even to Judah, Reaching to the gate of my people—to Jerusalem.

תגים, rendered “dragons” in our common version, and by Calvin, and by many others, is rendered “foxes” by Newcome, “wolves” by Henderson, but by Bochart, “whales,” or those species called “dolphins;” and Professor Lee, in his Notes on Job 41:1, seems to be of the same opinion. The mournful groans of the dolphins, when taken, are said to be extremely distressing; their doleful moanings, too, in the night, when at liberty, have been testified by historians. — בכית יענה, “owls” in our version, is rendered both by Calvin and Newcome, “daughters of the ostrich,” and by Henderson, “ostriches.” The Septuagint has θυγατερων σειρηνων — “the daughters of sea-monsters:” στρουθοκαμηλων — “camel-sparrows — ostriches,” is the rendering of Aquila and Symmachus. The literal expression is, “the daughters of the ostrich,” meaning evidently the females. Dr. Shaw, as quoted by Newcome, says, “During the lonesome part of the night, they often make a very doleful and hideous noise. I have often heard them groan, as if they were in the greatest of agonies; an action beautifully alluded to by the Prophet Micah.” — Ed.

9. For her wound is incurable; for it is come unto Judah; he is come unto the gate of my people, even to Jerusalem.

9. Quia acerbae sunt plagae ejus (est mutatio numeri;) quia venit usque ad Jehudam; accessit ad portam populi mei, ad Jerusalem.