Lo, we heard of it at Ephratah: we found it in the fields of the wood.

Lo, we heard of it in Ephrathah: We found it in the field of the wood.

Behold we have heard of it in Ephrata: we have found it in the fields of the wood.

'Lo, we have heard it in Ephratah, We have found it in the fields of the forest.

We had news of it at Ephrathah: we came to it in the fields of the wood.

Lo, we heard of it as being in Ephrath; We found it in the field of athe wood.

Lo! we heard of it at Ephratha. This verse is obscure, and we need not wonder at the difficulty which interpreters have felt in ascertaining its meaning. First, the relative pronoun [1] being of the feminine gender has no antecedent, and we are forced to suppose that it must refer to the word habitation in the foregoing sentence, although there it reads habitations, in the plural number. But the principal difficulty lies in the word Ephratha, because the Ark of the Covenant was never placed there. If the reference be to past time, Shiloh should have been the place mentioned; but as it is plain the Psalmist speaks of its new residence, the question returns, why Ephratha and not Zion is specified? Some would get rid of the difficulty by resorting to a frivolous conceit, That the place had two names, and that the plat of ground which was shown to David (2 Samuel 24:18; 1 Chronicles 21:18) was called Ephratha, because it was fertile, on which account Jerome styles it karpophorian, and yet is not very consistent with himself, for in another place, when he gets into his allegories, he most absurdly interprets it to mean frenzy. I have no doubt whatever that the word comes from phrhparah, which means to bear fruit; just as Bethlehem, which is situated in the same quarter, was called for its fruitfulness "the house of bread." But any conjecture founded upon the mere name of the place is necessarily unsatisfactory, and we must seek some more probable explanation. I might begin by mentioning one which is not without force. A rumor had spread that the Ark of the Covenant was to be deposited in Ephratha, which was the place of David's nativity [2], and we may suppose at least that his native soil would seem to many the most appropriate locality for the Ark and Sanctuary. We can easily understand how such an opinion should get abroad. In that case the hearing referred to by the Psalmist alludes to the report which had been circulated. Should this be taken as the meaning, the verb would be in the pluperfect tense, we HAD heard that it was in Ephratha, but we found it in the woods, that is, in a place by no means so attractive or well cultivated. Jerusalem might be said to be woody, because we know that it was surrounded by mountains, and that it was by no means in a part of the country which was noted for fruitfulness. There is another meaning which I would submit to the judgment of the reader. Let us suppose that the faithful here say that they had heard of its being in Ephratha, because God had spoken still greater things of Ephratha than of Zion. It is true that the memorable prediction (Micah 5:2) had not yet been given, yet it may have been that God had already issued some very great and signal prophecy regarding Bethlehem. We have heard, as if they had said, of Bethlehem, but it is only as yet a dim expectation which we have in reference to that place, and in the meantime we must worship God in this place of the woods, looking forward to the fulfillment of the promise regarding Ephratha. This interpretation, however, is far fetched, nor would I venture to adopt it, or at least recommend it to others as the right one. The simpler way seems to be to understand the word Ephratha as applying to David personally, and not so much to the place of that name, the declaration of the Psalmist being to this effect that now when God had chosen a king from Ephratha, the place would necessarily at the same time be marked out for the Ark of the Covenant. It is said, have heard, for the fixing of the place of the Sanctuary depended upon the will of God; nor until this was declared could men determine it according to their own fancy. The fact that now upon David's mounting the throne this illustrious oracle concerning the permanent settlement of the Temple was to take effect, afforded good ground of thanksgiving. We have proof here that the people of God did not deposit the Ark at random in any place, but had express directions from God himself as to the place where he would be worshipped all proper worship proceeding from faith, while faith cometh by hearing. (Romans 10:17.) Mount Zion had no peculiar excellencies almost to recommend it; but having once heard that it was the object of God's choice, they show that they consider it wrong to call the matter in question.

Footnotes

1 - That is, the objective affix h, which appears at each of the verbs in this verse, and which is translated it. By some it is thought that the antecedent is 'rvn, aron, ark, which, although it is generally masculine, is yet sometimes feminine, as in 1 Samuel 4:17; 2 Chronicles 8:11. Such is the opinion of Dr. Lightfoot, who explains the verse thus: "We heard of it (the ark) in Ephratah, (that is, Shiloh,) a city of Ephraim; we found it in the fields of the wood, that is in Kirjath-jearim. 1 Samuel 7:1," etc. (Lightfoot's Chorogr. Cent., c. 45.) Others consider the hto refer to habitations, in the preceding verse; and though that noun is in the plural, it is, as noticed in a preceding note, put by enallage for the singular. Rosenmuller thinks this opinion which is the one adopted by Calvin the more probable and no doubt at first sight the most obvious meaning is, that the pronoun it refers to the spot which David had discovered as a suitable place on which to erect the house of God. Walford, indeed, objects that "this cannot be intended, because the site of the Temple was neither at Ephratah, nor in the fields of the wood, or of Jaar;" and he gives at some length an ingenious explanation of this difficult passage, extracted chiefly from the German writer Tilingius. This objection, it will be perceived, is removed by one of the expositions suggested by Calvin, which supposes that the allusion is first to a report of Ephratha being the place where the Temple was to be built; and next to the certain information which the people of Israel afterwards obtained that Jerusalem was the spot which God himself had selected. Whether this however is the correct explanation of the verse, it is not so easy to determine.

2 - Bethlehem, the place of David's nativity, is called Ephratha in Genesis 35:19.

Lo, we heard of it at Ephratah - Most probably this is the language of the contemporaries of David; or this is what they might be supposed to say; or this is what tradition reports that they did say. David's purpose, as referred to in the previous verses, is not recorded in the history, and the memory of the whole transaction may have been handed down by tradition. Or, this may be merely poetic language, expressing the feelings of those who, when sent out by David, or accompanying him, found the ark. Much difficulty has been felt in regard to this verse. There is no mention in the history of the fact that the ark was "heard of" at Ephrata, or that it was ever there. The name Ephrata - אפרתה 'ephrâthâh - is applied
(1) to a region of country to which was subsequently given the name Bethlehem, Genesis 35:16-19; Ruth 4:11.
(2) Properly to Bethlehem, a city of Judah, the full name of which was Bethlehem-Ephratah, Genesis 48:7; Micah 5:2.
(3) It is a proper name, 1-Chronicles 2:19, 1-Chronicles 2:50; 1-Chronicles 4:4.
(4) It may perhaps be the same as Ephraim.
Compare Judges 12:5; 1-Samuel 1:1; 1-Kings 11:26. Some have supposed the meaning to be, that they found it within the limits of the tribe of Ephraim, and that the word Ephratah is used here with reference to that; but this is a forced construction. It may have been indeed true that the ark was found within the limits of that tribe, but the word Ephratah would not naturally denote this; and, besides, the tribe of Ephraim was so large, and covered such an extent of territory, that this would convey no distinct information; and it cannot be supposed that the writer meant to say merely that they found it within the limits of a tribe. Nor can it mean that they actually found the ark at Ephrata, or Bethlehem, for this would not be true. A simple and natural interpretation of the passage has been suggested, which seems to make it plain: that, in their search for the ark, it was at Ephratah or Bethlehem that they first heard of it, but that they actually found it in the fields of the wood. It may seem strange that there should have been so much uncertainty about the ark as is here implied; that David did not know where it was; and that none of the priests knew. But, while it must be admitted that it seems to be strange, and that the fact is not of easy explanation, it is to he remembered that the ark was at one time in the possession of the Philistines; that when it was retaken it seems to have had no very permanent resting place; that it may have been removed from one spot to another as circumstances required; that it may have been committed now to one, and now to another, for safe keeping; and thus it might have occurred, in the unsettled and agitated state of affairs, that its exact situation might be unknown, and that a somewhat diligent search was necessary in order to find it We know too little of the times to enable us to pronounce upon the subject with much confidence.
We found it in the fields of the wood - Continuing our search, we found it there. Perhaps Kirjath-jearim, 1-Samuel 7:1; 1-Chronicles 13:5. It was to Kirjath-jearim that the ark was carried after it had been taken by the Philistines 1-Samuel 6:21. The literal meaning of the passage here is, "The fields of the wood" - or of Jear, where the word in Hebrew is the same as in Kirjath-jearim. The name Kirjath-jearim means Forest Town, or, city of the woods; and the allusion here is the same as in 1-Samuel 7:1. The interpretation, then, seems to be that they heard of the ark, or learned where it was, when they were at Ephrata or Bethlehem; but that they actually found it in the vicinity of Kirjath-jearim. The ignorance in the case may have been merely in regard to the exact place or house where it was at that time kept. Bethlehem was the home or city of David, and the idea is, that, when there, and when it was contemplated to remove the ark to Mount Zion, information or intelligence was brought there of its exact locality, and they went forth to bring it to its new abode or its permanent resting place.

Lo, we have heard of it at Ephratah - This may be considered as a continuation of David's vow, as if he had said: As I had determined to build a temple for the ark, and heard that it was at Ephratah, I went and found it in the fields of Jaar, יער; - not the wood, but Kirjath Jaar or Jearim, where the ark was then lodged; - and having found it, he entered the tabernacle, Psalm 132:7; and then, adoring that God whose presence was in it, he invited him to arise and come to the place which he had prepared for him.

Lo, we heard of it at (d) Ephratah: we found it in the fields of the wood.
(d) The common instinct was that the ark should remain in Ephratah, that is, in Bethlehem a plentiful place: but later we perceived that you would place it in Jerusalem, which was barren as a forest and compassed about only with hills.

Lo, we heard of it at Ephratah,.... Either of the ark which David and others had heard of, that it formerly was at Shiloh, Joshua 18:1; here called Ephratah, as some think; so the Ephraimites are called Ephrathites, Judges 12:5; and Elkanah of Ramathaimzophim, of Mount Ephraim, is said to be an Ephrathite, 1-Samuel 1:1; but this tribe the Lord chose not, but the tribe of Judah, for his habitation; and rejected the tabernacle of Shiloh, and removed it from thence, Psalm 78:60;
we found it in the fields of the wood; at Kirjathjearim, which signifies the city of woods; being built among woods, and surrounded with them: here the ark was twenty years, and here David found it; and from hence he brought it to the house of Obededom, and from thence to Zion, 1-Samuel 7:1. Or else the place where the temple was to be built; which was not known till the times of David, who was of Ephratah or Bethlehem: here he was born and brought up; and here he was, as Arama supposes, when it was revealed to him where the temple should be built. According to R. Moses, the sense is, We have heard of it by the hand of David, who was of Ephratah: but Aben Ezra thinks the meaning is, that in former times men used to say, We have heard from the mouths of the prophets that the chosen place was near to Bethlehem Ephratah; only the precise place was not known, whether to the east or west, or north or south, of Bethlehem. Some think that not any particular city is intended, but a country, even all the neighbourhood of Bethlehem Ephratah; and took in Jerusalem, where the temple was built, it being but a few miles from the place; so Adrichomius (u) says, the country round about Ephratah had its name from thence; see 1-Kings 11:26. Now the place found for the building of the temple was "the fields of the wood", or the threshingfloor of Araunah the Jebusite, and was on Mount Moriah; David found by the order he had to build an altar here, and by the acceptance of his sacrifices, that this was the place for the house of God, 1-Chronicles 22:1; and here Solomon built the temple, 2-Chronicles 3:1; and which was formerly a woody place, as mountains generally are; and this seems to have been when Abraham offered his son on it, who then spied a ram caught in the thickets, Genesis 22:2. The Targum is,
"we found it in the field of the forest of Lebanon, the place where the ancient fathers prayed;''
the temple being built of the wood of Lebanon. But all this is to be understood of the Lord, the mighty God of Jacob, who was heard of at Ephratah; the Shechinah, of divine Majesty; so Kimchi, Arama, and Ben Melech. And indeed the Messiah is meant, the antitype of the ark and temple; of whom the saints or believers in him, a chorus of which is here introduced, had heard that he should be born at Ephratah, which is Bethlehem; see Genesis 35:19. And if this psalm was written by the captives in Babylon, they might have heard of this from the prophecy of Micah, Psalm 5:2; the shepherds heard from the mouths of the angels that Christ was born there; and we Christians have heard the same, and know and believe it, Luke 2:4. And he has been "found in the fields of the wood"; in a low, mean, abject state, as this phrase signifies; Ezekiel 16:5. The shepherds found him rejected from being in the inn, there being no room for him, and lying in a manger, Luke 2:7; the angels found him in the wilderness, among the wild beasts of the field, Mark 1:13; nor had he the convenience even of foxes, and birds of the air; had no habitation or place where to lay his head, Matthew 8:20; And he is to be found in the field of the Scriptures, where this rich treasure and pearl of great price lies hid, Matthew 13:44; and being preached among the Gentiles, after his incarnation, sufferings, death, resurrection, and ascension, who are compared to wildernesses, and desert places, was found by many of them, Isaiah 35:1; and which serves to set off with a foil his glory; being like the apple tree among the trees of the wood, Song 2:3.
(u) Theatrum Terrae Sanct. p. 41.

These may be the "words of David" and his pious friends, who,
at Ephratah--or Beth-lehem (Genesis 48:7), where he once lived, may have heard of the ark, which he found for the first time
in the fields of the wood--or, Jair, or Kirjath-jearim ("City of woods") (1-Samuel 7:1; 2-Samuel 6:3-4), whence it was brought to Zion.

In Psalm 132:6 begins the language of the church, which in this Psalm reminds Jahve of His promises and comforts itself with them. Olshausen regards this Psalm 132:6 as altogether inexplicable. The interpretation nevertheless has some safe starting-points. (1) Since the subject spoken of is the founding of a fixed sanctuary, and one worthy of Jahve, the suffix of שׁמענוּה (with Chateph as in Hosea 8:2, Ew. ֗60, a) and מצאנוּה refers to the Ark of the covenant, which is fem. also in other instances (1-Samuel 4:17; 2-Chronicles 8:11). (2) The Ark of the covenant, fetched up out of Shiloh by the Israelites to the battle at Ebenezer, fell into the hands of the victors, and remained, having been again given up by them, for twenty years in Kirjath-Jearim (1-Samuel 7:1.), until David removed it out of this Judaean district to Zion (2-Samuel 6:2-4; cf. 2-Chronicles 1:4). What is then more natural than that שׂדי־יער is a poetical appellation of Kirjath-Jearim (cf. "the field of Zoan" in Psalm 78:12)? Kirjath-Jearim has, as a general thing, very varying names. It is also called Kirjath-ha-jearim in Jeremiah 26:20 (Kirjath-'arim in Ezra 2:25, cf. Joshua 18:28), Kirjath-ba'al in Joshua 16:1-10 :50, Ba'alah in Joshua 15:9; 1-Chronicles 13:6 (cf. Har-ha-ba'alah, Joshua 15:11, with Har-Jearim in Joshua 15:10), and, as it seems, even Ba'al Jehudah in 2-Samuel 6:2. Why should it not also have been called Ja'ar side by side with Kirjath-Jearim, and more especially if the mountainous district, to which the mention of a hill and mountain of Jearim points, was, as the name "city of the wood" implies, at the same time a wooded district? We therefore fall in with Khnl's (1799) rendering: we found it in the meadows of Jaar, and with his remark: "Jaar is a shortened name of the city of Kirjath-Jearim."
The question now further arises as to what Ephrathah is intended to mean. This is an ancient name of Bethlehem; but the Ark of the covenant never was in Bethlehem. Accordingly Hengstenberg interprets, "We knew of it in Bethlehem (where David had spent his youth) only by hearsay, no one had seen it; we found it in Kirjath-Jearim, yonder in the wooded environs of the city, where it was as it were buried in darkness and solitude." So even Anton Hulsius (1650): Ipse David loquitur, qui dicit illam ipsam arcam, de qua quum adhuc Bethlehemi versaretur inaudivisset, postea a se (vel majroibus suis ipso adhuc minorenni) inventam fuisse in campis Jaar. But (1) the supposition that David's words are continued here does not harmonize with the way in which they are introduced in Psalm 132:2, according to which they cannot possibly extend beyond the vow that follows. (2) If the church is speaking, one does not see why Bethlehem is mentioned in particular as the place of the hearsay. (3) We heard it in Ephrathah cannot well mean anything else than, per antiptosin (as in Genesis 1:4, but without כּי), we heard that it was in Ephrathah. But the Ark was before Kirjath-Jearim in Shiloh. The former lay in the tribe of Judah close to the western borders of Benjamin, the latter in the midst of the tribe of Ephraim. Now since אפרתי quite as often means an Ephraimite as it does a Bethlehemite, it may be asked whether Ephrathah is not intended of the Ephraimitish territory (Khnl, Gesenius, Maurer, Tholuck, and others). The meaning would then be: we had heard that the sacred Ark was in Shiloh, but we found it not there, but in Kirjath-Jearim. And we can easily understand why the poet has mentioned the two places just in this way. Ephrāth, according to its etymon, is fruitful fields, with which are contrasted the fields of the wood - the sacred Ark had fallen from its original, more worthy abode, as it were, into the wilderness. But is it probable, more especially in view of Micah 5:1, that in a connection in which the memory of David is the ruling idea, Ephrathah signifies the land of Ephraim? No, Ephrathah is the name of the district in which Kirjath-Jearim lay. Caleb had, for instance, by Ephrath, his third wife, a son named Hr (Chr), 1-Chronicles 2:19, This Hr, the first-born of Ephrathah, is the father of the population of Bethlehem (1-Chronicles 4:4), and Shobal, a son of this Hr, is father of the population of Kirjath-Jearim (1-Chronicles 2:50). Kirjath-Jearim is therefore, so to speak, the daughter of Bethlehem. This was called Ephrathah in ancient times, and this name of Bethlehem became the name of its district (Micah 5:1). Kirjath-Jearim belonged to Caleb-Ephrathah (1-Chronicles 2:24), as the northern part of this district seems to have been called in distinction from Negeb-Caleb (1-Samuel 30:14).
But משׁכּנותיו in Psalm 132:7 is now neither a designation of the house of Abinadab in Kirjath-Jearim, for the expression would be too grand, and in relation to Psalm 132:5 even confusing, nor a designation of the Salomonic Temple-building, for the expression standing thus by itself is not enough alone to designate it. What is meant will therefore be the tent-temple erected by David for the Ark when removed to Zion (2-Samuel 7:2, יריעה). The church arouses itself to enter this, and to prostrate itself in adoration towards (vid., Psalm 99:5) the footstool of Jahve, i.e., the Ark; and to what purpose? The ark of the covenant is now to have a place more worthy of it; the מנוּחה, i.e., the בּית מנוּחה, 1-Chronicles 28:2, in which David's endeavours have through Solomon reached their goal, is erected: let Jahve and the Ark of His sovereign power, that may not be touched (see the examples of its inviolable character in 1-Samuel 5:1-12, 1 Sam 6, 2-Samuel 6:6.), now enter this fixed abode! Let His priests who are to serve Him there clothe themselves in "righteousness," i.e., in conduct that is according to His will and pleasure; let His saints, who shall there seek and find mercy, shout for joy! More especially, however, let Jahve for David's sake, His servant, to whose restless longing this place of rest owes its origin, not turn back the face of His anointed one, i.e., not reject his face which there turns towards Him in the attitude of prayer (cf. Psalm 84:10). The chronicler has understood Psalm 132:10 as an intercession on behalf of Solomon, and the situation into which we are introduced by Psalm 132:6-8 seems to require this. It is, however, possible that a more recent poet here, in Psalm 132:7-8, reproduces words taken from the heart of the church in Solomon's time, and blends petitions of the church of the present with them. The subject all through is the church, which is ever identical although changing in the persons of its members. The Israel that brought the sacred Ark out of Kirjath-Jearim to Zion and accompanied it thence to the Temple-hill, and now worships in the sanctuary raised by David's zeal for the glory of Jahve, is one and the same. The prayer for the priests, for all the saints, and more especially for the reigning king, that then resounded at the dedication of the Temple, is continued so long as the history of Israel lasts, even in a time when Israel has no king, but has all the stronger longing for the fulfilment of the Messianic promise.

It - Of the ark. Ephratah - In the tribe of Ephraim, which was called also Ephratah. Found it - Afterwards we found it in Kirjath - jearim, which signifies a city of woods, in the territory whereof the ark was seated for twenty years.