11. Ephrath and Bethlehem
"And they journeyed from Beth-el; and there was but a little
way to come to Ephrath: and Rachel travailed, and she had hard labour."
~ Genesis 35:16
This is the first time that the name Ephrath appears in the Bible. Jacob was
on the last leg of his journey returning from the house of Laban in Haran.
He had already had his encounter and reconciliation with his brother Esau
and with his herds he was coming down into the lands of Hebron to establish
his home in a land which could so seasonaly graze his animals. Rachel had
been expecting for most of the journey and was near her time. Ephrath perhaps
marked the beginning of the hill grazing lands of Hebron, and Jacob's party
was just a little distance from that place so named Ephrath. Ephrath is given
to us to mean 'fruitful' or 'fruitfulness' and in some cases also 'ash heap'.
The two meanings seem to have the uniting concept of 'volcanic soil', 'ash
soil', which is most productive in 'fruitfully growing of plants'.
To make a long story short, Joseph had been commanded in his visitation from
the Lord with that instruction, as was also Ezekiel, to write or keep a record
(see JST Genesis 50:31 & Ezekiel 37:16). The record of Joseph had been kept,
that is the plates of brass, and it was made available to the capital seat of
Israel, Jerusalem, up until and near to that last great destruction of
Jerusalem in the days of King Zedekiah. That record of Joseph had been kept
by those of the house of Joseph (1 Nephi 5:16) and was made available to the
princes, rulers and elders of Israel, the Sarim or Sanhedrin, the judges
established by Moses; in the days of Zedekiah as explained in the Book of
Mormon through the Chief Captain of the Sarim, the Sanhedrin's 'police chief',
Laban as he would as occassion dictated made them available to the 'elders of
the church' (1 Nephi 4:20-27) whenever they wished to reference a matter of
the Law of Moses. Now the record of Joseph had been taken by Nephi and Lehi
to their land of promised in the Americas.
And as the record of Joseph had been taken away, during the Babylonian
captivity the Lord gave to the prophet Ezekiel the commandment that he should
so prepare a 'Record of the Jews' from those various records and writings of
the Jews into one records of Judah. Scholars readily agree that it was not
until the Babylonian captivity that the Old Testament record was so compiled.
This would mean that the various records would be transcribed and made into
a consistant form. During that transcription, whether as I belive, primarily
by the hand of Ezekiel or others, these Jewish scholars took it upon themselves
to edit, select, clarify, annotate and add such 'commentary' to the record
as they deemed appropriate. One such added annotation of clarification which
one transcriber took upon himself was to and what such as Ephrath was. And
thus in the following second use of the word Ehrath in the Old tesament we
such a more modern explanitory notation made by the Babylonian contempory
scribe in respect to Ephrath.
"And Rachel died, and was buried in the way to Ephrath, which
is Bethlehem." ~ Genesis 35:19
Now Ephrath was the name of the place in the days of Jacob and since that
time the 'more modern' name of Bethlehem had been introduced to the area of
Ephrath, likely to distinguish it from the name of Ephrath's ties to the
name of Ephraim. Now in Northern Utah we do a similar of parallel thing. I
might state to someone that some such place as 'Sandy' or even 'Magna' is the
same as Salt Lake City, when in reality such commuities or cities in their
own right are but a part of the greater Salt Lake Ciy metropolitan area. Yet
they are not technically the same place as was the relationship to Bethlehem
and Ephrath as later uses of the name Ephrath will point out.
The third scriptural occurrence of the term Ephrath ought to quite such as
who suggest such things as Ephrath being named after the second wife of
Caleb who was named Ephrath. Caleb and his wife Ephrath lived after the
Egyptian enslavement while Jacob obviously lived before it. The following
is as close to a direct quote of someone's statement as you find in the
scriptures. This is Jacob speaking in the first person as so transcribed
by a later Jewish scriptural scholar. Jacob is speaking to Joseph during
that meeting with Joseph and his two son and Jacobs blessing of Mansseh
and Ephraim. He is telling them a part of the story of his journey from
Padan, Haran and of Rachel's death. Jacob is speaking in first person:
"'And as for me, when I came from Padan, Rachel died by me in
the land of Canaan in the way, when yet there was but a little way to come
unto Ephrath: and I buried her there in the way of Ephrath'; the same is
Bethlehem." ~ Genesis 48:7
Now long before Caleb's second wife lived did Jacob speaking in the first
person. So there is no real possiblity that Ephrath was named after Caleb's
wife, as she wasn't even born in the days that Jacob lived in. Notice here
that the here again the scribe of transcription takes it upon himself clarify
to the reader that, like Sandy being the same as Salt Lake City, that Ephrath
was in at least one perspective 'the same [as] is Bethlehem.
Now one point of relavent interest to the topic of this text, I make mention
here relative to Ephrath and Ephraim though it will be discussed in more
detail in another item. Joseph as a lad had lost his mother at the birth of
his brother Benjamin near Ephrath, so that name and its meaning would have
stuck with him. And by inspiration, Joseph named his second son Ephraim after
that location and its meaning, 'fruitfulness'. In Joseph's 'pariarchal
blessing' unto the hand of Jacob recorded in Genesis 49, Joseph was told that
his or one of his branches and bough would be a fruitful branch running over
the wall. And that has been fulfilled in both those of Ephraim and Manasseh
both reaching over the wall of the ocean to come to and inhabit the lands
of America. And as Moses would further so state, between Manasseh and
Ephraim it would comparedly be Manasseh and his thousands and Ephraim and his
ten thousands (Deuteronomy 33:17). It is important to grasp this direct
relationship between the term Ephrath 'fruitful' and Epharim 'fruitful
multiplied' as the plural form of the name Ephra-(im) denotes. For though
Ephra-th and Ephra-im are of the same word, name and meaning, Ephraim is the
plural or multiplied form of the singular for of just being 'fruitful'. And
that though Ephraim is magnified fruitfulness compared to the singular
fruitfulness of Ephrath, they are essentially of the same word and meaning.
Understanding the significance of the fourth use of the word Ephrath in the
scriptures is based upon this now present and important relationship between
Ephraim and Ephrath, that they are he same. This reference is from the Book
of Ruth and it is speaking of Ruth's son Obed and his noted 'duel ancestry'
as pointed out in this text.
"And all the people that were in the gate, and the elders, said,
We are witnesses. The LORD make the woman that is come into thine house like
Rachel and like Leah, which two did build the house of Israel: and do thou
worthily in Ephratah, and be famous in Bethlehem:" ~ Ruth
4:11
Here the elders and the people are particularly noting Obed's dual ancestry
of being of Rachel and of Leah. And they through some degree of understanding
and inspiration are accounting that his house and seed need be worthy and do
worthily in that ever lasting covenant of the fathers through Obed's
inheritance in, through and of Ephraim/Ephratah and Rachel; and also to be of
great fame and notorietry as being of Judah, that is of Bethlehem so aligned
with Leah. To the Jewish scribe's perspective, it is important that Judah be
included, as by Boaz the Jew, was the surogate parenting of the heir of the
covenant accomplished.
Now, it has been well established that the name and usage of the term
Ephrath was existant well before that of the second wife of Caleb. Yet the
next four uses of the term Ephrath are in regard to this wife of Caleb and
Caleb's being noted as 'the father of Bethlehem', by who likely the name of
Bethlehem became existent in regard to the same land region as where Ephrath
the place was already present.
"Azubah died, and Caleb took to him Ephrath, who bore him Hur.
. . . After that Hezron was dead in Caleb Ephrathah, then Adijah Hezron's
wife bore him Ashhur the father of Tekoa. . . . These were the sons of Caleb,
the son of Hur, the firstborn of Ephrathah: Shobal the father of Kiriath
Jearim, . . . and Penuel the father of Gedor, and Ezer the father of Hushah.
These are the sons of Hur, the firstborn of Ephrathah, the father of
Bethlehem." ~ 1 Chronicles 2:19, 24, 50 & 1 Chronicles
4:4
Now this pertains to the genealogy of Caleb, his wife Ephrath and their son
Hur. Nothing here effects anything relative to the prior status of the
location of Ephrath and it being the relative source of the name of the
second son of Joseph, Ephraim. That the separte site name of Bethlehem may
have originated from the genealogy has likely more to do with Caleb's wife
Ephrath, being of Ephrath, that is an Ephraimite herself, for it was common
for a wife to be taken of another tribe. So it was that Jesus of David was
a cousin of John who was of Levite priestly descent, that some maternal
marriage between the house of David and the tribe of Levi. And so also it
is and was that Boaz was 'near', though not closest, kinsman of Elimelech,
a maternal cousin of Jewish descent to Elimelech the Ephrathite of descent
from Ephraim.
Now again, what is of importance to be noted is that Joseph of Egypt had long
since so named his second son Ephraim, after and in conjunction with that
place of his mother Rachel's death and burial. That is long before there was
a Caleb and his wife Ephrath and there being a site so named in relation to
her descendants that Bethlehem of neighboring existence with that of Ephrath
the place of Rachel's death and burial. And when one studies the use of
Ephrath and Bethlehem together, such references become redundant in their
nature except that they be two separate places of twin or next-door alignment.
And yet, due to the Jewish commentary added to Moses' book of Genesis about
Bethlehem being Ephrath, these two place locations are confused as being
one and the same though the scriptural reading in many cases does become
quite noticably redundant and awkward if they are so forced into being so.
In fact, Ephrath was the ancient site, which was associated with the death
and burial site of Rachael the mother of Joseph and Benjamin. And the house
of Rachael was the ruling house over Israel, not the house of Leah. And it
was and is by that fact, that David was by the Law of Moses, of the house
of Rachel, that is of Joseph, Ephraim, Elimelech and Mahlon, that David was
rightful heir of the covenant to be the ancestor of the promise, even the
very promised seed of the covenant, the Messiah.
Ephrath and Ephraim are forms of the same word, as are Ephratah and
Ephrathite. They all mean 'fruitful' which the house of Joseph and then
Ephraim were stated to be. Ephrath as the site of Rachael's burial is
actually just outside the town or city of Bethlehem but within the same close
land regions subburbian realm as Sandy or Sugar House is to Salt Lake. Thus if
I was actually born in say Sugar House, Cotton Wood or Highland, I might still
state the same is Salt Lake City. But just like they technically are really
not the same, so was Ephrath not precisely the same as the formal city of
Bethlehem. And Bethlehem was not the only or even perhaps the first name so
associated with Ephrath as there was Zelzah (1 Samuel 10:2) and/or Zelah which
did also border Ephrath and the tomb of Rachel mother of Benjamin, that is a
Benjamite perspective upon Rachel's tomb.
In its most formal sense, Ephrath was separate from Bethlehem. Ephrath was without the city of Bethlehem though Behtlehem was the city it was near to just as Rachael's grave was without the city a distance from it. And the sight of the burial of the house of Joseph was properly land and inheritance of the house of Joseph despite the fact that Judah was given the city of Bethlehem. And just as Lehi and Ishmael held lands in that region, being of the house of Joseph, so did Elimelech and his family hold out lying lands from the city of Bethlehem as their inheritance.
Jesse was a raiser of flocks as was his ancestors before him. Jesse was father
of David and he was that Ephrathite, that is Ephraimte of Ephrath, of or
near to or even also a part of Bethlehem. And though he did not dwell right
in the city or town of Bethlehem, Bethlehem was but the township near to
where he lived and David did tend his father's sheep in the land of his
fathers that being Ephrath, which was also that land where the sheperds did
watch their sheep by night at the time of the birth of Jesus of Mary.
And so also was Lehi's lands of inheritance of Joseph located outside the
city of Jerusalem though near in general vicinity to that city and perhaps of
nearer distance to the tomb of Rachel and Ephrath also. And this is not to
mention the likelihood that Ishmael's family which Lehi had his sons retrive
for wives, so also likely of that vacinity of Jerusalem and Bethlehem and
Ephrath. The land of Ramah, the hills of Ephraim which Ephraim held by right
as an extention to his land, it being his right in have such a nearness of
location to the tomb of his mother Rachel as well.
Now the ninth reference to Ephrath in the scriptures:
"Lo, we heard of it at Ephrath: we found it in the fields of the
wood." ~ Psalms 132:6
Interestingly, in building up the case for a separate Messiah ben Joseph,
Jewish traditions often breach the gap right back into what is clearly that
which pertains unto Messiah ben David. Here according to 'Zevechim
54b', this reference of Psalms 132:6 'refers to Joshua from the
tribe of Efraim' [Ephraim]. Of course the whole of Psalms 132 is that song
of David's promise that he would be the ancestor to the coming Messiah. But
here the Jewish perspective is the 'Efrata' or Ephrath means the same as
Ephraim. And they have so associated that with their point of there being
a Messiah ben Joseph.
So that is nine references to Ephrath in the Old Testament. But yet there is
a tenth reference also which is even more likely telling. And so it is also
in Micah which states that the Messiah would come out of 'Bethlehem Ephratah'
or that which is of Ephraim, Bethlehem being the 'town' site of Rachel's
burial near to the pasture land of Ephrath as discussed also elsewhere.
"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." ~ Micah 5:2
First, when one considers that there was a 'remnant of Ephraim' within
Judah as presented even in conjunction with the Book of Mormon, and that
this remnant would be so associated with the place of Rachel's burial is to be
understandable; it should not be far from coming to an understanding that
the 'little among the thousands of Judah' is not of necessrily of Judah, but
merely 'among the thousands of Judah' as were Lehi, Laban and Ishamael of
their day being of instead descendants of of Ephraim and Manasseh though even
as being thought of by themselves as being Jews of the civic realm of
Jerusalem. 'Bethlehem Ephratah' was a villege of Ephraimites amid the
Jews. So was the house of David of Bethlehem an island of descendants who
rightfully and legally pertained unto Ephraim being Ephrathites of Bethlehem
Ephratah. And thus when so understood, Micah 5:2 actually states that
Christ comes out of that 'little' group of Ephraimites in Bethlehem of Ephraim
and that he would be the 'ruler of Israel' NOT the ruler of
Judah. Here Israel would mean that kingdom of Israel under the name of Israel
as assigned to Ephraim by the mouth and hand of Jacob (Genesis 48 (JST)). And
this is the Messiah 'of old', even he from 'everlasting' meaning he who was
selected by the Father before the foundation of the world.