The words of Ephrath and Ephraim, and their various forms, are of the same word, they come from the same root. And they basically have the same meaning, being most commonly understood to be 'fruitful.' Even though the term 'ash heap' is included in their meaning, it must be understood from an agricultural frame of reference that a volcanic soil consisting of volcanic ash is the most productive or friutful soil in which to grow produce. Thus 'ash heap' and 'fruitful' are of most similar meanings in bring forth fruit abundantly. In terms of the multiplied fruitfulness of 'Ephraim', one cannot help but think of Ephraim and his tens of thousands as compared to Manasseh and his thousands (Deuteronomy 33:17).

Ephrath is the form of the word which is applied to a place or location. The already noted place of Rachel's death and burial was at/near Ephrath, the site of Zelzah from a Benjamin perspective and Behtlehem from a Jewish view. Ephraim is the same word but whose form is plural and applies to a person, the second son of Joseph, likely named after the site where Joseph's mother Rachel had died and was buried. A more complicated view is that some languages also have various forms of a word depending on dialect or what the word is refering to. In some cases it is the 'gender' of the word which makes the variation of its form. In other cases, such as Ephrath and Ephraim, its form varies depending upon whether it is refering to a specific individual or to a generic associated group of people, or even to a physical location.

Since Joseph had named his second son after the burial place of his mother Rachel when he named him Ephraim after Ephrath. And the tribal children of Joseph, Rachel's grandchildren, would feel very akin to the site and would naturally gravitate to it. When Joshua gave Ephraim an additional inheritance, it was just stated as 'hill country'. And whether that included the mountain range from the 'fruitful' hills of Ephrath/Bethlehem to Shechem or not ought to be considered a part of Ramah and Mount Ephraim. But whether or not, certainly members of the Rachel tribes of Benjamin, Ephraim and Manasseh should well be considered to have located themselves about 'Ephrath' or 'Ephratah', the land of their ancestor's tomb. And not only Elimelech's family could be considered to so dwell there, even if outside of Joshua's lines in the sand, but clearly Lehi, Laban and Ishmael of the Book of Mormon also may likely have had lands of inheritance round about there as Bethlehem is but a short 5 mile suburb distance from Jerusalem.`

Now we could consider that each of us have at least three such idenifying characteristics. For example, my ethnic or national origin could be said that I am English, Welsh or European. My own current 'nationality' could be said to be an 'American' or a citizen of the United States. And I am a native Utahn, born in Ogden, Weber County, but raised in Clearfield, Davis County. But each of these designations mean something different. And if I where to combine what would be important to a Hebrew, I would state that I am an Ephraimite of Clearfield-Utah. In terms of what is important to a Hebrew, I would not say that I am a Clearfieldite of Clearfield-Utah just to double state that same thing, because that would be redundant. A Hebrew would be more concerned with, first what tribe am I a member of and then where is the lands of property of my family where I was raised. Thus it would make perfect sense to state my tribal clan afiliation as 'Ephrathite', meaning of the tribe of Ephraim, and that my 'habitation' is in Bethlehem-Judah.

We will review each of the scriptural and like references where the Hebrew word of 'Ephrathite' is used, and give explanation for each of them. Now the 'tranliteration' of the Hebrew word 'Ephrathite' is 'Ephrathiy' or 'Ephrathi'. And it occurs 5 times in the Old Testament Hebrew scriptures and once in the Book of Jasher. Out side of the contrived interpretations refering to the house of David, all the other such references clearly mean being of the family of Ephraim, that is an Ephraimite. And we will first examine those references. We will start with the most 'ancient' contextual usages of the word to first derive what is meant by the word. And the very first contextual usage of the word in chronological events just happens to be from a somewhat independant source apart from the Old Testament, and that is in the Book of Jasher.

The Book of Jasher

Now the Book of Jasher, meaning 'The Book of the Upright', is the most ancient contextual usage of the word Ephrathite. There the word just happens to be used in reference to the ancestry of Joshua. And everyone knows that Joshua, who succeeded Moses, was of the tribe of Ephraim. And Joshua being from the land of Egypt of the house of Joseph, could not be stated as being a Bethlehemite. In terms of land origin or birth place, he would have to either be of Syria, where Joseph was born in the land of Laban, or to be of Egypt where everyone had been living. And if one attempts to associate Joshua with Bethlehem-Judah in any such later manner, it would only substantiate that the Bethlehemite clan of Ephrathites were of the *clan of Joshua the Ephrathite. Let's read the passage. (*note: While of the traditional scholars of Judaism and traditional Christianity tend to favor that an Ephrathite in terms of the family of Elimelech means an inhabitant of Bethlehem, there are some who would rather distinguish the 'Ephrathite' designation as being a member of some 'family clan' within the tribes of Israel. And as just stipulated, there is as much reason to that if such is tha matter, that the family of Joshua would be representative of such a clan grouping and therefore placing the family of Elimelech still within the tribe of Ephraim.)

"And they carried on a great and severe battle against Israel, and the Lord delivered Amalek and his people into the hands of Moses and the children of Israel, and into the hand of Joshua, the son of Nun, the Ephrathite, the servant of Moses." ~ The Book of Jasher 81:54

Here we have Joshua and his father, 'Nun', being identified as Ephrathites. Nun would have been born and raised in Egypt during the Hebrew enslavement there. And the only sense that can be made of refering to Nun as being an Ephrathite is that Nun was an Ephraimite a descendant of Ephraim, Joseph's second son born in Egypt. There is absolutely no way that Nun could be associated with being an Ephrathite, meaning that he was of the little town of Bethlehem yet to be occupied by the Israelites after their Egyptian enslavement. Only two Israelites of those that followed Moses out of Egypt ever did come to live in the land of Israel, and that was Caleb the Jew and Joshua the prophet leader, an Ephraimite. Like all the others, Nun died in the wilderness before Israel's entrance into the promised land and that includes Moses himself. Nun never even saw the promised land little alone lived in Bethlehem. Thus the first contextual usage of the word 'Ephrathite' clearly refers to and means that Nun and his son Joshua were of the tribe of Ephraim. It is also of interest to note that Joshua himself was a type foreshadowing the Messiah and the Greek word Jesus is the same name as Joshua. Might not one even consider that Joshua was to be the ancestor of the Messiah ben Joseph? And would it not be appropriate for the Son of God to be called by that same name, Joshua after his famous ancestor of that name?

Now one need not suppose that I am unaware of the tentative nature of the published Book of Jasher. I certainly am. It is but an Apocraphal writing. It is more than likely an 'interpretive' book compiled by later Jewish writers and of a Rabbinicl nature as Midrash at best. But of such writings the Prophet Joseph did himself write that truth could be found in them but needed to be tempered with spiritual guidance and couching them well within the already approved 'cannonized' or 'accepted' scriptural writings. And it is only the matter of whether Nun and his son Joshua where Ephraimites herein considered, which is well scripturally founded. And beyond that, it is the understood acceptance that Joshua and his father Nun would be called 'Ephrathites', never having seen Bethlehem little alone ever having resided there, both being born and raised in Egypt, that seems significant. This alone extends the meaning of Ephrathite solidly into the realm of meaning Ephraimite. And that whatever scholars of whatever age would use the term Ephrathite to fully imply that Joshua and his father Nun were of the clan, family and tribe of Ephraim is a significant plus beyond the single use of the Old Testament references alone.

In the Old Testament

Now the first place where the name 'Ephrathite' is used in the Old Testament is found in Judges chapter 12. It is Samuel who is given credit as the original writer of the book of Judges, the book of Ruth and the books of Samuel to the extent of the end of Samuel's life. Thus it should be consistent in Samuel's writing as to the meaning of the Hebrew word 'Ephrathiy' or Ephrathite as it does appear that Samuel is the first one who has used it in the Bible. Samuel uses the word four of the five times it is used in the Bible. It is used in Judges once, in the book of Ruth once, and in the book of 1 Samuel twice. Stated another way, it is of great interest that in the Old Testament the word, tranliterated as Ephrathite, is primarily used in those books attributed to Samuel within the range of the life of that prophet of God. Thus one might well consider that Samuel would be consistent in his use of that word, 'Ephrathi' or Ephrathite since he is aparently its primary user. The word Ephrathite is only used in the Bible one other place than the books attributed to Samuel, and there in respect to Jeroboam, and clearly means Ephraimite. Let's begin with Samuel's first usage of the word Ephrathite.

"And the Gileadites took the passages of Jordan before the Ephraimites: and it was so, that when those Ephraimites which were escaped said, Let me go over; that the men of Gilead said unto him, Art thou an Ephraimite? If he said, Nay;" ~ Judges 12:5

This is when the men of Gilead contented with Israel and slew 42,000 Ephramites. The story is in the full chapter. But for our purpose of determining what the Hebrew word 'Ephrathiy' meant, this one verse is all that is needed. And it becomes clear, and it was even translated as such, that it meant Ephramite or being of the tribe of Ephraim. Thus from this single reference we might conclude that when Samuel uses the Hebrew word 'Ephrathiy', it means Ephriamite if Samuel's use of the word is to be a consistant use. We will address Samuel's other three referred uses of the word later, but for now we will turn to the last use of the word in the Old Testament.

Jeroboam Was an Ephriamite of the tribe of Ephraim

Samuel uses the word Ephrathite four times but we will wait to review the other three usages including those which are used in conjuction with the family of the house of David until after we next look at the consistentcy patern of the very last usage of the word Ephrathite in the Old Testament, for it also clearly establishes without question that the word did mean to others, beside Samuel, being of the family, clan, or tribe of Ephraim, that is an Ephriamite. Now this fifth and last use of the Hebrew word 'Ephrathiy' is found in 1 Kings. And it is used in reference to Jeroboam. Jeroboam is the first king of the northern kingdom which is known to have been under the leadership of Ephraim. And the LDS Dictionary clearly states that Jeroboam was of the tribe of Ephraim. Yet there is no statement of this fact other than in 1 Kings 11:26 and the direct inference of such as Jeroboam was made by Solomon ruler over all the charge of the house of Joseph in 1 Kings 11:28..

"And Jeroboam the son of Nebat, an Ephrathite of Zereda, Solomon's servant, whose mother's name was Zeruah, a widow woman, even he lifted up his hand against the king.
. . .
And the man Jeroboam was a mighty man of valour and Solomon seeing the young man that he was industrious, he made him ruler over all the charge of the house of Joseph." ~ 1 Kings 11:26 & 28

Now the Hebrew word 'Ephrathiy' is here translated as 'Ephrathite' as are the other 3 remaining times the word in used in the Hebrew Old Testament. And while it is translated as 'Ephrathite' it is of well known general concenses that it is in fact stating the Jeroboam was an Ephraimite of the tribe of Ephraim. Thus here too, it means 'Ephramite' or being of the tribe of Ephraim.

So with the first use of the word 'Ephrathite' in the Old Testament, by Samuel, clearly means Ephraimite and is even translated in the KJV of the Bible as such. And the last use and only use of the word by other than Samuel in the Old Testatment also clearly means Ephraimite. So now then we are ready to consider the other three uses of the word as used by Samuel. In the book of Ruth, Samuel used the word to refer to Elimelech, Mahlon, Chilion and aslo likely Naomi also. He later used it to identify David's father Jesse as being an Ephrathite. And he also used the word Ephrathite in reference to his own family, the family of Samuel.

Samuel Was an Ephrathite, Meaning of the Family of Ephraim

Let's look at this use of the word by Samuel in refering to his own family next. This is the third use of the word Ephrathite in the Old Testament and it is found at the very beginning of the I Samuel. Now most all consider Samuel and his family to be of the tribe of Levi, being Levites. And thus Samuel was not only a prophet but also a priest of the Aaronic Priesthood. Yet Samuel refers to his own family as being of the grouping of being 'Ephrathite'. Lets read that statement and then we will discuss it.

"Now there was a certain man of Ramathaimzophim, of mount Ephraim, and his name was Elkanah, the son of Jeroham, the son of Elihu, the son of Tohu, the son of Zuph, an Ephrathite:" ~ 1 Samuel 1:1

Now a bit of preparation should be laid before we further discuss the fact that Samuel's reference to his own family was that they were Ephrathite. The common understanding is that Samuel's father was a Levite whose genealogy is stated in 1 Chronicles 6:33-38 as being of the line of Kohath, the son of Levi. Given that this is the true genealogy of the father of Shamuel, then it is to the 'line of Kohath' to which we may now turn for our understanding how it is that Samuel's family could be considered as being of the family of Ephraim. the only definition we have set forth by fact to the word Ephrathite.

Three points of fact must be understood to understand how it is that Samuel and his family where considered Ephrathite as meaning of the family of Ephraim. First, the Levites had no set land of habitation given them by Joshua. They were to serve as priests through out the entire land of all of Israel and thus they were only given cities in which to dwell. There were 48 such cities and as stated in Joshua 21:5, 'a portion of the children of Kohath had by lot of the tribe of Ephraim'. This meant that they did dwell in the land of the Ephraimites as being priests to the tribe of Ephraim.

Now, second, this was the precise case of the family of Samuel. As quoted, and in many places so stipulated concerning Samuel, Samuel's family's lands of dwelling where in Ramah of Mt. Ephraim. Samuel even rules and governs from these ancestrial lands in Ephraim as is well set out throughout all the books of Samuel. And Samuel even dies and is buried in this land of Ephraim. And this leads right into the thrid point. Levites having no set tribal home lands were considered as belonging to the tribe in which they lived. Samuel's family lived in the land of Ephraim, thus they where Ephrathites or of the family of Ephraim. This is stated as such in 'The Holy Bible Darby's Translation - Darby's Notes on 1 Samuel, verse 1. And it is varified as being the case by just such a quote in the Old Testament which substanciates the fact.

"ķAnd there was a young man out of Bethlehem-judah of the family of Judah, who was a Levite, and he sojourned there." ~ Judges 17:7

Now was this young man a Jew or a Levite? The answer is clearly 'yes'. He was both. His linage was of the tribe of Levi, but he lived in the city of Bethlehem as a serving priest there, thus he was thus considered as being of the family of Judah. In much the same way all the Jews of the land of Israel are so called 'Jews' though some are known to have linage of the tribe of Levi. Even the Book of Mormon refered to Lehi's family as being of the Jews, as that was with whom they did live and from whence they came, though they were of the tribe of Manasseh and descendants of Joseph.

And thus it clearly established that in refering to Samuel's family, the word Ephrathite did mean that they were considered of the family of Ephraim, being Levites serving in the land of Ephraim. Certainly dwelling in Ramah of Mt. Ephraim, living and ruling from thence, the land of his family's inheritence, could not ever mean that Samuel was an inhabitant of Bethlehem. That is not what Ephrathite did mean. Samuel's family were of the family of Ephraim, though they were Levites. just as the young man out of Bethlehem-judah was of the family of Judah though he was a Levite.

The Family of Elimelech Were Ephrathites Also

We now turn to the last two references by Samuel in which he used the word Ephrathite. These are those which refer to them that are associated with the house of David. In the Book of Ruth is found the second usage of the word Elimelech in the Old Testament according to the KJV arrangement of the Bible. We have left our coverage of it until now as it is associated with the contrived meaning of the word Ephrathite which is not consistent with any of the other usages of the word and the facts of the matter.

The family of Elimelech did hold ancestral lands in and/or about Bethlehem-judah. And thus they are understandably refered to as being 'of Bethlehem-judah'. Now there are those who seem to take great stock in lines drawn in the sand. For they consider that if one lives in the lands of the Jews, then they must be of the linage of Judah. This is not the facts of the matter as the Bible atests that many of the other tribes did live in the lands of Jerusalem. And this is confirmed by the Book of Mormon which places such families of the house of Joseph such as Lehi, Laban, and Ishmael in the lands of the Jews during the days as late as King Zedekiah. And what would be more understandable than to having those of the house of Joseph holding lands within the land of Judah surrounding and about the site of their ancestral mother's burial at Bethlehem? Lets read this first reference to the family of Elimelech.

"And the name of the man was Elimelech, and the name of his wife Naomi, and the name of his two sons Mahlon and Chilion, Ephrathites of Bethlehemjudah. And they came into the country of Moab, and continued there." ~ Ruth 1:2

Now prior to this reference in Ruth we have seen in the Book of Jasher that Nun and Joshua were Ephrathite which obviously meant that they where of the tribe of Ephraim. Then from the from the first and last usage of the Hebrew word by two different authors in the Old Testament in the book of Judges chapter 12 and in the book of 1 Kings chapter 11 we did see that the word Ephrathite did mean and refer to those who where Ephraimites of the family of Ephraim, And we have further clarified in just what manner the Levite family of Samuel in 1 Samuel chapter 1 was called Ephrathite, by serving in the land of Ephraim as priests of Levi to the tribe of Ephraim, thus being of the family of Ephraim also. Thus all uses of the word Ephrathite to that point have clearly shown that the meaning of the word Ephrathite to be that of being of the family and tribe of Ephraim, being Ephraimite. Thus with all these other uses of the word Ephrathite meaning being of the family of Ephraim, it would seem logical to consider that in the Book of Ruth in reference to the Family of Elimelech it also means that they are of the tribe of Ephraim.

Yet scholars have in relation to the references to those associated with the house of David, chosen to contrive a meaning which has no support in the facts of the scripture other than that of personal interpretation apart from that which everwhere else points directly to the word Ephrathite meaning to be of the house and family of Ephraim. Now not everyone holds to this contrived and altered definition of the word Ephrathite. Some do accept that it does mean that the family of Elimelech was an Ephraimite family as having them being identified as Ephrathites.

And one such instance will be expressed in another item about Chilion being an Ephraimite. And it does suit the purpose of the presentation to have it so mean Ephraimite or of the tribe of Ephriam. But in fairness to others of differing points of view, it should be stated than many of the 'traditional Christian viewpoint' and those of the Jewish world would likely prefer another meaning. And that being that it refers to a citizen of Bethlehem, And by the later compilers, commentators and editors of the Old Testament records, Ephrath and Bethlehem have been recorded in the Jewish Bible as being the same place, which they are if not at least within the same general geographical area.

But the logic that the word Ephrathite means an inhabitant of Bethlehem seems flawed in the 'redundancy' of the verse that it would repeat itself and state that the family of Elimelech is of a certain place, is of a that same certain place being so repeated. Thus stateing their place of origin twice, once right after another by saying 'Ephrathites (Bethlehemites) of Bethlehem'. And there are numerous items in this presentation which will further corroborate that the family of Elimelech was indeed of the house of Joseph and of the tribe of Ephraim.

Before we procede to the last reference in the Old Testament which uses the word Ephrathite, let's consider for a moment a hypothetical, Elimelech, Mahlon and Chilion traveling by way of the questionig men of Gilead of Joshua chapter 12. Certainly the family of Elimelech did live during the days of the Judges, and let's suppose that the time of their traveling to Moah took Elimelech's family by way of Gilead.. When stopped and asked, 'Art thou an Ephrathiy?' What would Elimelech, Mahlon and Chilion reply? They would reply 'Yes we are Ephrathiy.' And they would be considered as Ephraimites and have been killed and died amoung the 42,000 Ephraimites slain as recorded in Judges chapter 12. And rightfully so, as in the context of that day and age of the days of the Judges in which Elimelech and family lived, being an 'Ephrathiy' or an Ephrathite did mean being an Ephraimite. Would the men of Gilead have even stopped to consider what it may have meant otherwise even if stated that Elimelech's family were 'Ephrathites of Bethlehem-judah? Fancy trying to explain the 'redundant' double statement as meaning what the contrivers of interpretation says that it means other than that Elimelech and family where of the family of Ephriam and thus Ephraimites.

Jesse, Son of Obed, and Father of David Is Also an Ephrathite.

Now we will turn to the last use of the Hebrew word 'Ephrathiy' in the Old Testament. It is the fourth such reference of the five in the Old Testament. It is in 1 Samuel. And while the books of Samuel are considered to be compiled by the Jewish Bible compilers from the writings of Samuel, Nathan, and Gad, it would be during the 'Samuel' authorship time frame that this reference is considered to be taken. This reference refers to Jesse and David. It is David who Samuel anoints to be the king of Israel to replace Saul in chapter 16, thus we are still within the writings of Samuel, who does not die until chapter 25, being alive until then. Let us read this reference.

"Now David was the son of that Ephrathite of Bethlehemjudah, whose name was Jesse; and he had eight sons: and the man went among men for an old man in the days of Saul." ~ 1 Samuel 17:12

Now either Samuel is stating that Jesse is of Bethlehem of Bethlehem according to the contrived redundancy meaning of the word Ephrathite. or he is making a clear and concise association of Jesse, the son of Obed with the legal and rightful house of Mahlon and Elimelech who were Ephrathites, thus making Jesse and David and even Jesus Christ Ephrathites also. In the one case it is awkward phraseology to repeat one's self this way given the supposed meaning of Ephrathite to be Bethelemite thus making it 'that Bethlehemite of Bethlehem. Remember the only reason for the 'judah' at the end of Bethlehem to to distinguish it from that other Bethlehem in Zebulun.

It certainly seems more informative, better sentence structure, and more true to the established facts of the records to be emphasizing that Jesse is of the same legal and rightful house as Mahlon and Elimelech, to whom Boaz was by proxy 'raising up seed to the dead' under the Law of Moses. This performance of the Law of Moses will be covered in greater detail as another item which points to the fact that Obed is of the house of Elimelech legally and by right of law and only associated with Boaz as the vicarious performing 'redeemer' of the family of the house of Elimelech and Mahlon.