The interpretation timeline

Mic 7:2

How this passage has been read — the sources, oldest to newest.

From the early Church Fathers to now.

1 Patristic · 1 Jewish · 1 Catholic · 1 Reformed · 1 Lutheran

Mic 7:2 · Douay-Rheims
“The holy man is perished out of the earth, and there is none upright among men: they all lie in wait for blood, every one hunteth his brother to death.”
Patristic before A.D. 750
386
A.D.
Cyril of Jerusalem Patristic
A.D. 313–386
“Cain and Abel followed in the generation of humankind, and Cain was the first murderer. Afterwards a deluge engulfed the earth because of exceeding wickedness of humanity. Fire came down from heaven upon the people of Sodom because of their corruption. Subsequently God chose out Israel, but even Israel became perverse and the chosen race was wounded. For, while Moses stood on the mountain before God, the people worshiped a calf in place of God. In the days of their lawgiver Moses, who said, "You shall not commit adultery," a man dared to enter a brothel and be wanton. After Moses, prophets were sent to heal Israel, but in their exercise of healing they deplored the fact that they could not overcome evil, so that one of them [Micah] says, "The faithful are gone from the earth, among men the upright are no more!" The psalmist says, "All alike have gone astray; they have become perverse; there is not one who does good, not even one." And again, "Cursing, and theft, and adultery, and killing have overflowed" upon the land. "They sacrificed their sons and daughters to demons." They engaged themselves in auguries and enchantments and divinations; and again, "They fastened their garments with cords and hung veils next to the altar."”
Source
719 years pass — nothing from this stretch is hosted yet
Scholastic c. 1100 – 1500
1105
A.D.
Rashi Jewish
1040–1105
“and there is no upright among men—There is no upright man among men. each one hunts his brother with a net—They hunt with their net and with their trap.”
744 years pass — nothing from this stretch is hosted yet
Post-Reformation c. 1650 – 1900
1849
A.D.
1774–1849
“Holy man. Hebrew chasid, (Haydock) “the pious” Assidean, 2 Machabees xiv. 6. The disorder of Israel was great, though some were religious. (Calmet) — Such expressions only mean that few could be found, and that the far greatest number rejected the prophet’s advice. (Worthington)”
1871
A.D.
1871
“The Hebrew expresses "one merciful and good in relation to man," rather than to God. is perished out of the earth-- (Psa 12:1).”
1875
A.D.
Keil & Delitzsch Lutheran
1861–1875
“"The godly man has disappeared from the earth, and there is no more a righteous man among men. All lie in wait for blood, they hunt every man his brother with the net. Mic 7:3. Their hands are after evil, to make it good. The prince asks, and the judge is for reward; and the great man, he speaks the evil of his soul: and they twist it together." The grape and the early fig signify the good and the righteous man. חסיד is not the God-fearing man, but, according to the context, the man who cherishes love and fidelity. אבד, not "to have perished," but to be lost, to have disappeared. מן הארץ, not "out of the land," but, as the parallel בּאדם shows, from the earth, out of the world. For the fact itself, compare Psa 12:2 and Isa 57:1. They all lie in wait for blood, i.e., not that they all go about committing murder, but simply that they set their minds upon quarrels, cheating, and treachery, that they may rob their neighbour of his means of existence, so that he must perish (cf. Mic 3:2-3; Mic 2:1-2); at the same time, even murderous thoughts are not excluded. The same thing is implied in the hunting with the net. אח, the brother, is the fellow-countryman (for this figure, compare Psa 10:9; Psa 35:7-8, etc.). In Mic 7:3 the words from על הרע to להיטיב are not to be joined to what follows so as to form one sentence. Such a combination is not only opposed to the accents, but is at variance with the structure of the whole verse, which consists of several short clauses, and it does not even yield a natural thought; consequently Ewald proposes to alter the text (שׁואל). הרע is hardly the inf. hiph. "to do evil," but most likely a noun with the article, "the evil;" and the thought is therefore either "both hands are (sc., busy) with evil," or "both hands are stretched out to evil," to make it good, i.e., to carry out the evil well (היטיב as in Jer 2:33), or to give evil such a form that it shall appear to be good, or right. This thought is then made special: the prince, the judge, and the great man, i.e., the rich man and mighty man (Lev 19:15; Sa1 25:2), weave a thing to make evil good. עבּת, to weave, to twist together, after עבות, twist or string. The subject to ויעבּתוּה is to be found in the three classes already named, and not merely in the judge and the great man. There is just as little reason for this limitation as for the assumption that the great man and the prince are one person. The way in which the three twist the thing or the evil plan together is indicated in the statements of the three previous clauses. The prince asks, sc. for the condemnation of a righteous or innocent man; and the judge grants this for recompense against compensation; and the rich man co-operates by speaking havvath napshō. Havvâh in most passages is universally allowed to signify hurt, mischief, destruction; and the only question is, whether this meaning is to be traced to הוה = אוה, to breathe (Hupfeld on Psa 5:10), or to הוה, to occur, an occurrence, then specially an evil occurrence (Hengstenberg, Diss. on the Pentateuch, vol. i. p. 252). Only in Pro 10:3 and the passage before us is havvâh said to signify desire in a bad sense, or evil lust. But, as Caspari has shown, the meaning is neither necessary nor established in either of these two passages. In Pro 10:3 the meaning aerumna activa aliisque inferenda is quite sufficient; and C. B. Michaelis has adopted it for the present passage: "The great man speaks the mischief of his soul," i.e., the injury or destruction of another, for which he cherishes a desire. Nephesh, the soul as the seat of desire. הוּא is not introduced to strengthen the suffix attached to נפשׁו, "of his, yea of his soul" (Ewald, Hitzig, Umbreit); for not only are the accents against this, but also the thought, which requires no such strengthening. It is an emphatic repetition of the subject haggâdōl. The great man weaves evil with the king and judge, by desiring it, and expressing the desire in the most open manner, and thereby giving to the thing an appearance of right.”
Source
Modern · 1953 →

The in-app commentary runs from the Fathers to the early-modern record, then stops — that's where the public-domain sources end, not where the reading does. For the modern reading, follow the sources directly.