Listen to what the Lord says: “Stand up, plead my case before the mountains; let the hills hear what you have to say. Hear, you mountains, the Lord’s accusation; listen, you everlasting foundations of the earth. For the Lord has a case against his people; he is lodging a charge against Israel."
“My people, what have I done to you? How have I burdened you? Answer me. I brought you up out of Egypt and redeemed you from the land of slavery. I sent Moses to lead you, also Aaron and Miriam. My people, remember what Balak king of Moab plotted and what Balaam son of Beor answered. Remember your journey from Shittim to Gilgal, that you may know the righteous acts of the Lord.”
With what shall I come before the Lord and bow down before the exalted God? Shall I come before him with burnt offerings, with calves a year old? Will the Lord be pleased with thousands of rams, with ten thousand rivers of olive oil? Shall I offer my firstborn for my transgression, the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul? He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God - Micah 6:1-8
To my mind, the "he said, she said" type of argument is the worst. Two people are involved in a disagreement, but there is no one else who can testify to what was said and what was done. Using the sublest of indicators, the jury is asked to estimate who is more likely to be truthful, especially in a case when one party claims egregious injury.
Israel has come before God and claimed injury by his hand. God throws up his hands and says, "My people, what have I done to you?" God searches for witnesses and asks Micah to question both sides: "Stand up, plead my case before the mountains; let the hills hear what you have to say. Hear, you mountains, the Lord’s accusation; listen, you everlasting foundations of the earth" The mountains and the hills are called upon to listen to both sides--God and his people--and to adjudicate between them.
It isn't initially clear what the charges are, but they along the lines of "you place such a heavy burden for forgiveness." The accuser stands up and says, "With what shall I come before the Lord and bow down before the exalted God? Shall I come before him with burnt offerings...Shall I offer my firstborn for my transgression, the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul?" In essence, the accuser is asking how much he has to pay to get forgiveness and have God ignore the way they have been living.
But God isn't playing a quid pro quo game with his people. He isn't looking for a bigger paycheck from his people. Instead he says, in his defense, that he hasn't asked for complicated rituals and big payoffs. His asks from his people were simple: "He has shown you, O man, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God." He will spend the rest of the chapter testifying how his people have avoided doing exactly these things: it was never about offerings. It was about respecting God as God.
I think this is a good metric for any Christian: if we start finding and justifying a way of acting that is not just, that is not merciful or is not humble it is a red flag that we have gone off the path and whatever reasoning we used to get there is wrong and damaging to our soul. Any red flags in my life?