ards the grammatical exposition of [Greek: ge Iouda],
it stands for: Bethlehem situated in the land of Judah,--a short mode
of expression which is common in geographical and other similar
designations, just as in the Old Testament also we find [Hebrew:
bit-lHM ihvdh], for: Bethlehem situated in the land of Judah. The
assertion of many interpreters, that [Greek: ge] has here the
signification "town," is as objectionable as the attempt to change the
text, made by _Fritzsche_, who advances nothing on the whole verse that
can stand examination. The Evangelist here as little follows the LXX.
as he does the Hebrew text. The former has here: [Greek: kai su
Bethleema, oikos Ephratha] (thus without an article. _Cod. Vatic._).
_Fritzsche_ thinks that [Greek: oikos] had been brought into the text
from the margin. But the translator evidently considered "Ephratah" to
be the proper name of Caleb's wife (1 Chron. ii. 19, 50, iv. 4), from
whom others also, _e.g._, _Adrichomius_ (compare _Bachiene_ ii. 2, Sec.
190), derived the name of the place, and did nothing else than express
more definitely, by the subjoined [Greek: oikos], the relation of
dependence which, as he supposed, was indicated by the Genitive. The
apparent contradiction, that the prophet calls Bethlehem small, whereas
the Evangelist speaks of it as by no means small, has already been so
satisfactorily explained by ancient and modern interpreters (compare,
_e.g._, _Euthymius Zigabenus_ _l. c._ p. 59: "Although in appearance
thou art small, yet, truly, thou art by no means the least among the
principalities of the tribe of Judah;" _Michaelis_: "Micah, looking to
the outward condition, calls it small; Matthew, looking to the birth of
the Messiah, calls it by no means small, inasmuch as, by that birth,
that town was in a wonderful manner adorned and exalted"), that
we need not dwell upon it. We only remark, that the supposition of
_Paulus_, that the members of the Sanhedrim understood the verse
interrogatively--"Art thou, perhaps, too small," etc.--receives no
confirmation from the passage in _Pirke Eliezer_, c. 3, which he quotes
in favour of it, but which he saw only in the Latin translation of
_Wetzstein_; for, in the original text, the verse is quoted in literal
agreement with the Hebrew original; compare _Eisenmenger_, i. p. 316. A
comparison with the Chaldee, who with similar liberty paraphrases,
"Thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, shalt soon be numbered," clearly shows
that the