Micah 5:2, Matthew 2:5-6: The eternal deity of Messiah?

"But you, O Bethlehem Ephrathah, being little among the clans of Judah, from you shall come forth for me one who is to be ruler in Israel, whose origin is from of old, from ancient days."

 

וְאַתָּה בֵּית-לֶחֶם אֶפְרָתָה צָעִיר לִהְיוֹת בְּאַלְפֵי יְהוּדָה מִמְּךָ לִי יֵצֵא לִהְיוֹת מוֹשֵׁל בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל וּמוֹצָאֹתָיו מִקֶּדֶם מִימֵי עוֹלָם׃

To hear a podcast of this blog, click here.

A passage often remembered around Christmas time, Micah 5:2 is quoted in Matthew 2:5-6 to describe that Israel’s ruler would be born in Bethlehem. Some Christian expositors and laypersons see the “eternal pre-existence” of the Messiah and therefore Messiah’s deity in the words of Micah 5:2 (in Hebrew, Micah 5:1): “whose origin is from of old, from ancient days.”

However, even just a comparison of English translations reveals that “eternality” in this passage is not so cut-and-dry. Some English translations use a word like “everlasting”, while others translate the same phrase as “from ancient days”. 

 A word study and the context of the passages shows that neither Micah nor Matthew were declaring the “eternal pre-existence” of Messiah. Rather, the passages refer to the promise of God given to David centuries before.

 What are the Hebrew Words?

There are three phrases at the end of Micah 5:2 that may, or may not refer to eternality:

1.      motsa-otav  מוֹצָאֹתָיו translated “his origins” or “his goings forth”

2.      miqedem ~d<Q<åmi translated “from before” or “from old”

3.      mimei olam ~l'(A[ ymeîymi translated “from ancient days” or “from eternity”

A word study shows that these words and phrases in Micah 5:2 (Hebrew 5:1) are not referring to "eternity past" but rather refer to past times and events in Israel’s history. I will first have us look at some passages with the phrases “from before” and “from ancient days”. Beginning with another passage from Micah himself:

·         Micah 7:14 Shepherd your people with your staff, the flock of your inheritance, who dwell alone in a forest in the midst of a garden land; let them graze in Bashan and Gilead as in the days of old (~l'(A[ ymeîy the same phrase used in Micah 5:2).

Israel didn’t graze flocks in Gilead and Bashan in eternity past. Rather, the passage refers to a time in Israel’s history, as in Moses’s days, when God’s people first conquered and grazed flocks in Bashan and Gilead (cf. Micah 7:15) or perhaps Davidic times, when the kingdom of David extended to Gilead and Bashan. The point is: the idiom refers to former events in Israel’s past.

Here are some more examples:

·         Psalm 77:6 (in Hebrew, 77:5) and Psalm 77:12 (Hebrew, 77:11) I consider the days of old (~d<Q<+mi ~ymiäy"), the years long ago (~ymi(l'A[ tAn©v.÷)…I will remember the deeds of Yahweh; yes, I will remember your wonders of old (miqedem ~d<Q<åmi)…. You, with your arm redeemed your people, the children of Jacob and Joseph…You led your people like a flock by the hand of Moses and Aaron (cf. Psalm 77:15, 20).

·         Isaiah 63:9 In all their affliction he was afflicted, and the angel of his presence saved them; in his love and in his pity he redeemed them; he lifted them up and carried them all the days of old (~l'(A[ ymeîyi). See also ~d<q, ymeyK and ~ymil'A[ tArDo in Isaiah 51:9-10.

·         Isaiah 63:11 Then he remembered the days of old (~l'ÞA[-yme(y>), of Moses and his people. Where is he who brought them up out of the sea with the shepherds of his flock?

·         Amos 9:11 In that day I will raise up the booth of David that is fallen and repair its breaches, and raise up its ruins and rebuild it as in the days of old (ימי עולם).

 

·         Malachi 3:4 Then the offering of Judah and Jerusalem will be pleasing to the LORD as in the days of old (~l'êA[ ymeäy) and as in former years (tAY*nImod>q; ~ynIßv').

·         Nehemiah 12:46 For long ago in the days of David and Asaph (~d<Q<+mi @s"ßa'w> dywI±d" ymeîybi) there were directors of the singers, and there were songs of praise and thanksgiving to God.

It is clear from these occurrences in the Bible of the same words that Micah uses (miqedem מקדם and yemei olam ימי עולם) that these words in Micah do not mean “eternity past” but refer to events and acts of God in Israel’s days long ago. As an idiom, olam עולם combined with “days of ימי” means “days of long ago, days of a previous historical era, or "years (שנות / שנים) of an ancient historical era”. The words "days" and "years" especially restrict the meaning to historical (human) time. The time of the Exodus from Egypt and conquest (Psa. 44:2-3) are especially thought of as “days/years of long ago” when Yahweh led his people like a shepherd by the hand of Moses, Aaron and Joshua. David's days are also specifically recalled (Amos 9:11).

 

When or What are Micah’s “days long ago”?

Micah has in mind not a nebulous eternity past, but God's ancient promise to David (2 Sam. 7, 1 Chron. 17, Psalm 2) who was from Bethlehem (Micah 5:2, in Hebrew 5:1). Micah lived in the middle of the 700s BC. David lived around 1000 BC. The promise to David was made some 250 years before Micah lived, מִקֶּדֶם מִימֵי עוֹלָם “from before, from days long ago”.

 

Yahweh, the God of Israel, made a promise to David that one of David’s descendants would rule over Israel. But in Micah’s days things looked grim because the greatest superpower the world had yet seen, Assyria, was making its way toward Judah. Micah knew that according to Yahweh’s promise made long ago, Yahweh would raise up a king from the Davidic line. Even if centuries passed Yahweh would make good on His promise. Micah’s “from before, from days long ago” may also relate to God’s promises of blessing to Israel through Abraham some 1000 years before Micah lived (Gen. 12:2-3, Psa. 105:8-11). But Micah’s mention of Bethlehem shows that his focus is on the divinely ordained monarchy of David who was of the tribe of Judah and from the town of Bethlehem (1 Sam. 16:1, 13). Israel’s hope was in Yahweh through the Yahweh-promised ruler-shepherd descended from David.

 

The NET Bible translation, a conservative evangelical translation, agrees. The NET note on these two phrases says, “Elsewhere (in the Bible) both phrases refer to the early periods in the history of the world or of the nation of Israel” and then a number of examples like those given above are listed.

 

 

“his origins”

The word translated as “origins” or “goings forth” (motsa’ot, wyt'îaoc'Am) is derived from the Hebrew root word yatsa יצא “go out”. The form in Micah 5:2 occurs only here in the Bible as feminine noun (and only in plural), with one additional possible textual variant in 2 Ki. 10:27. The masculine form (motsa מוצא) has various meanings including “a place or act of going forth, a word, an exit, an issue, a source, a spring of water, east” (e.g., Deu. 8:3, Hos. 6:3, Isa. 58:11, Ezek. 43:11).

 

All these meanings are all related to the root word yatsa יצא, “to go or come out.” Importantly, the word in its verbal form occurs in our verse in the phrase “from you will come forth יֵצֵא for me”. The ruler designated by Yahweh will “come forth, go out” from Bethlehem, of the clans of Judah.

 

One possibility is that the word refers to the ruler’s activities - what he would do when he goes out. This is why some English translations render the phrase “his goings out”.

 

But more likely the word means, as other English translations take it, “his origins”, relating to the ancestry of the promised ruler. From the same Hebrew root is the word “descendant” צאצא  (e.g. Job 5:25, Isa. 44:3) and later Hebrew the word for “ancestry” ממוצא. In association with miqedem, mimei olam “from before, from days of long ago” which relate to Israel's historical past (see above), the feminine plural form in Micah 5:2 (5:1 Hebrew) most likely relates to physical ancestry, especially David’s and/or Abraham’s. The coming ruler’s origins, his ancestry, is in the promise of God of a literal, physical descendant to come from the family and dynasty of David.

 

Context, context, context

In addition to misunderstanding the meaning of “from before, from days of long ago”, the “eternality” interpretation of Micah 5:2 ignores both the literary and historical context of Micah’s prophecy.

 

Literary Context

In Micah 5:2 it is Yahweh (the LORD) speaking via the prophet Micah (cf. Micah 4:6). Yahweh says that a ruler will come forth from Bethlehem of Judah for me. That is, the coming ruler is distinguished from Yahweh. The coming ruler from Bethlehem is not Yahweh himself, but is Yahweh’s designated human vice-regent who, like David, will rule for Yahweh.

 

Also, two verses after the famous Bethlehem promise, Micah 5:4 declares that the promised shepherd-ruler will shepherd his flock “in the strength of Yahweh, in the majesty of the name of Yahweh his God.” Like Moses and David, the coming shepherd-ruler is not God, but has a God, and is empowered by his God, Yahweh.

 

Historical Context

The historical context of the passage is “This (or this one) will be our peace when the Assyrian comes into our land, and treads in our palaces…” (Micah 5:5-6). Micah’s words were spoken when the mighty nation of Assyria threatened to conquer both the northern Kingdom of Israel and southern Kingdom of Judah. The Northern Kingdom of Israel would be destroyed by Assyria, but Judah, incredibly, survived.

 

Micah's prophecy had a certain fulfillment in the days of a descendant of David, Hezekiah (Isa. 37:15-38). Yahweh was keeping His promise to David by setting David’s descendant Hezekiah on the throne. Micah knew (as did his contemporary, Isaiah) that God would stop mighty Assyria in its tracks (2 Chron. 32:20-22, Isa. 37:35). Judah would survive in the strength of his God, Yahweh. The origins or ancestry wyt'îaoc'Am of the faithful Hezekiah, who became “ruler in Israel” when the Assyrians were in the land, was “from before, from long ago”, in David and the promise of Yahweh to David.

 

Both the literary and historical context distinguish between Yahweh and Yahweh’s appointed human vice-regent. The shepherd-ruler that Micah foresees has a God and is empowered by Yahweh his God.

 

Hezekiah is only a sample or paradigm of the great salvation Yahweh has worked and will yet work through that greater descendant of David, Jesus the Messiah. Jesus’ birth in Bethlehem relates to the “long ago” promise of the “days of old” - the promise Yahweh made to David.

 

Matthew’s quote

Now let’s turn to the Gospel of Matthew’s quote of our passage from Micah, in Matthew 2:5-6. It should be noted that Matthew didn’t quote this passage from Micah as a “fulfillment” passage. Matthew simply recorded the words of the Jewish scribes who believed that the Messiah would be born in Bethlehem because of the Davidic promise.

 

Next, neither the Jewish scribes nor Matthew make any reference to the “eternality” of the Messiah. In fact, the passage quoted in Matthew does not even include the words analyzed above that some Christians claim show the Messiah’s eternality! Matthew simply recorded the Jewish scribes’ answer to Herod’s question about where Messiah would be born: "In Bethlehem of Judea, for so it is written by the prophet: "'And you, O Bethlehem, in the land of Judah, are by no means least among the rulers of Judah; for from you shall come a ruler who will shepherd my people Israel'" (Matthew 2:5-6).

 

There is no declaration from either the Jewish scribes or Matthew of the “eternal pre-existence” of the Messiah. As mentioned, the words that some interpret in Micah as showing “eternality” don’t even appear in Matthew. Instead Matthew, like Luke 2:4, associates the birth of Jesus in Bethlehem with the promise of God that Messiah would be a descendant of David. Like David, the greater Son of David will be empowered by Yahweh his God to rule and shepherd God’s flock, Israel.

 

Not a New Testament Exercise

Finally, it should be emphasized that neither Jesus nor any other author of the New Testament went back into the Old Testament (Tanach) to find proofs or hints that Jesus is God. Such efforts are totally foreign to the New Testament. Finding proofs of Jesus’ deity or “eternal pre-existence” in the Old Testament is not a New Testament exercise. It is not a biblical exercise. Finding hints or proofs of Jesus’ deity in a passage like Micah 5:2 is an activity of men beginning in the centuries after the New Testament was written. Jesus and the Apostles never appealed to the Old Testament to show Messiah’s eternal deity. Never. Rather, Jesus and the apostles appealed to the Old Testament to show the suffering, death, burial, resurrection and exaltation - of the man descended from David, Jesus of Nazareth, the Messiah - to the right hand of God Almighty (Luke 24:26-27, 44-46; Acts 2:22-36, 3:18, 10:30, 17:2, 31, etc.).

 

Christians who appeal to a passage in the Old Testament to “prove” the deity of Christ should ask themselves this question. “Neither Jesus nor any apostle or author of a New Testament book ever went to an Old Testament passage to prove the deity of Jesus. Why am I?”

 

Summary

In summary, the “eternal pre-existence” and “deity of Christ” claims from Micah 5 are based on presuppositions that force a wrong understanding of Hebrew words. The words (miqedem ~d<Q<åmi and mimei olam ~l'(A[ ymeîym) do not mean “eternal pre-existence” but refer to events in Israel’s past.  Specifically, Micah 5:2 refers to the promise God made to David long ago, centuries before Micah’s day.

 

The “eternality” interpretation also ignores both the literary and historical context of the passage which speaks of a descendant of David who was to rule for Yahweh by the strength of Yahweh his God when the Assyrians came into the land.

 

The “eternality” interpretation also misses the meaning of the passage. Micah is trusting completely on God’s promise of peace and salvation through a king who would descend from David. There was an amazing, observable sample of that promised victorious peace in David’s descendant Hezekiah (see Isaiah 37:15-38), a sample which gives us concrete evidence and confidence that Yawheh our God fulfills His promises.

The ultimate fulfillment of God’s promise to David is in Jesus. In an even greater fashion than in the days of David or Hezekiah, Jesus the descendant of David will shepherd and rule God’s people for God  in the strength of Yahweh his God, and in the majesty of the name of Yahweh his God.

 

The Gospel of Matthew mentions nothing about the pre-existence of Jesus in quoting Micah’s passage. Neither Jesus nor any New Testament author ever appealed to the Old Testament to reveal the eternal pre-existence or deity of Messiah. Jesus and the New Testament authors did appeal to the Old Testament to show the suffering, death and subsequent glory of Messiah.

 

 

Check out the One God Report Podcast

Additional notes on the Hebrew phrases מקדם and מימי עולם

The phrase miqedem מקדם “from before” in Scripture often relates to space, meaning “in front of, east” (e.g., Gen. 2:8, Josh. 7:2) because ancient orientation was to the east. In some instances, as in our Micah passage, the phrase relates to time, meaning “before” (e.g., Psa. 77:12, Isa. 45:21). To the Hebrew mind, past time was before or in front while the future is behind or after (אחרית הימים, אחרי, אחר).

The phrase mimei olam מימי עולם is literally “from days of age”. Without the preposition (from מ) the idiom ימי עולם yemei olam is two words 1) the plural noun “days” and, 2) the singular noun “age/eternity.” The different meanings of the word עולם olam “age” is perhaps the main reason why some expositors have found eternality in the Micah passage. By itself olam עולם can mean a “period of long duration”, “in perpetuity”, “forever”, or “ancient”. As an idiom combined with “days of” or “years of”, as shown in the passages quoted above, the phrase refers to human historical time, and means “days of long ago, days of a previous historical era, years of an ancient historical era”.

The Greek LXX Old Testament translates עולם olam with αἰών aeon, from which we get the English word eon/aeon. In later Jewish history and Hebrew, the word עולם olam came to express not only time, but space/place. Olam עולם came to mean “world” in addition to time “age/eon”. The idea of the Olam HaBa, the “World/Age to Come, עולם הבא” is prominent in the New Testament, Mishnah, Talmud and Gomorrah. For Jews, including New Testament authors, the promise of life after death is not a nebulous “heaven” but bodily resurrection into a concrete “World/Age to Come” (Matt. 12:32, 19:28; Luke 18:30, 20:34-35; Eph. 1:21, 2:7; Hebrews 2:5, 6:5).

English Translations

Disagreement as to how to understand the last phrase of Micah 5:2 is reflected in the different English translations. Some English translations of Micah 5:2 imply eternality, while others do not. Compare the King James Version (KJV) with the English Standard Version (ESV):

KJV But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.

ESV But you, O Bethlehem Ephrathah, who are too little to be among the clans of Judah, from you shall come forth for me one who is to be ruler in Israel, whose origin is from of old, from ancient days.

These two translations show the typical differences in English translations. The KJV “from everlasting” may imply eternality. The ESV “from ancient days” does not. In this case the ESV is the better reading.

William (Bill) Schlegel

Above: Bethlehem in the Hill Country of Judah, from the northwest. David is from this town and would have grazed flocks as a shepherd to the east. The Church of the Nativity, traditional location of the birth of Jesus, is in the cluster of buildings in the center-right. 

Micah was from Maresha, a town in the foothills (Shephelah) of Judah, some 20 miles southwest of Jerusalem and Bethlehem. Micah saw trouble coming to Judah from mighty Assyria, but took confidence in the promise of God that a ruler for Israel would descend from David of Bethlehem.