Matthew Poole and continuators on Matthew 2:6

6 And thou Bethlehem in the land of Judah, art not the least amongst the Princes of Judah: for out of thee shall come a Governour that shall rule my people Israel.

It was (as it seems) so received a Tradition, and Interpretation of Micah. 5.2. that they gave him an Answer without any Hesitation, telling him. He was to be born in Bethlehem of Iudea, this they confirm by the Prophecy of the Prophet Micah ch. 5. v. 2. So confirming the Son of the Virgin Mary (at unawares) to be the Messiah from the Testimony of the Prophet Micah. The words in Micah something vary from those here mentioned, they are thus. But thou, Bethlehem Ephrata, tho thou be little amongst the Thousands of Iudah, yet out of thee shall come forth unto me, one that is to be Ruler of Israel whose goings forth have been of Old from Everlastings. We must know that the Writers of the New Testament in their Quotations out of the Old Testament, ordinarily quote only so much of them as make to their purpose, and not always in the very terms in which they are found in the Old Testament, but keeping to the Sense. 2. That it is more than probable that the Evangelist keeps to the words, in which the Priests and Scribes delivered in their Answer to the King, for in this Relation he is but reciting their Answer. The sole Question propounded to them was, What the place was where the Messiah according to their Records was to be born? They Answer in Bethlehem Iudah, they prove their Answer from the Testimony of the Prophet. If any object that the Prophet calls it Bethlehem Ephrata not Bethlehem Iudah. The answer is, that it is in Sense the same, for Bethlehem Ephrata was within the Tribe of Iudah, it should seem by Gen. 35.19. and 48.7. that it was formerly in Iacobs time called Ephrah, some think that it was a Town within Calebs portion, and called Ephratah from his second wife, whose name was Ephrah, or Ephratah, 1 Chron. 2.19.50. if it were not the same place only fortified anew. We read of another Bethlehem in Iudah builded by Rehoboam, 2 Chron. 11.6. whether it had this Addition, from its old Name, in Iacobs time, or from Calebs Wife, or to distinguish it from Bethlehem, belonging to the Tribe of Zabulon is hard to say, it is plain, that that Bethlehem is meant both by Micah and Mathew, which was in Iudah, possibly in Tract of time the Addition Epratah was lost, but say some there is a Contradiction betwixt, Micah and Mathew, Micah saith it was the least, Mathew saith it was not the least. Ans. Here is no Contradiction, consider Bethlehem it self, it was but a small City (if it were in Calebs Lot, it is not named) but in other respects it was not the least. It was of old, Famous for Ibza[illegible: 1 letter] one of the Iudges, for Elimelech, Boaz, Iesse, David, and now last of all for the Birth of Christ with respect to which the Evangelist calls it not the least, or if he reciteth the Scribes and Priests words, they might call it not the least upon the account of Boaz, Iesse and David, all which were born or dwelt there; and particularly with respect to Christ, who was born there: The Prophet calls it the least with respect to its State in his time, the Evangelist not the least with respect to its State then, its State being magnified by the Birth of Christ. Micah saith amongst the Thousands, Mathew amongst the Princes. It is the same thing for Num. 1.16. their Princes were Heads of Thousands in Israel. The Iews would by no means have their Text interpreted of Christ, but either of Zorobabel or David, but as to Zorobabel he was born in Babylon not in Bethlehem, and David was dead long before this Prophecy, neither could the following words [whose goings forth have been old even from Everlasting] agree to Zorobabel, or David: Zorobabels name tells us where he was born, and we never read that Bethlehem was thus celebrated with reference to David, tho he was born there, 1 Sam. 16.1. & 17.58. upon which account it is called the City of David, Luk. 2.4. The Prophecy certainly related to Christ, and him only, and so is interpreted by the Chaldee Paraphrast, who some think was one of this Councel called by Herod in this Cause.

Marginal references: Joh. 7.4.; Or, [illegible: 1 word].