(C) F. Lokot 2007. All rights reserved
Continuing our observation of the Old Testament prophesies concerning the coming of our Savior, this week’s verse is found in the book of the minor prophet, Micah. This verse speaks to the location in which our Lord was to come as an infant…quite fascinating, actually. Even more fascinating is when we will read verses in the New Testament that show the fulfillment of Old Testament prophesies. I digress, enjoy this week’s verse and be sure to stop by during the week with your thoughts.
Micah 5:2
But you, O Bethlehem Ephrathah,
who are too little to be among the clans of Judah,
from you shall come forth for me
one who is to be ruler in Israel,
whose coming forth is from of old,
from ancient days.
This verse is also timed perfectly for this week’s Christmas article. On Friday we will be studying the significance of the town of Bethlehem. Be sure to subscribe via email below so that you don’t miss it!
Aaron Aiken 
I love how congruent the OT is with the NT, these verses are a timely reminder of the significance of Christ!
Brian, couldn’t agree more. Thanks for stopping by!
I’m going to go ahead and comment on this week’s verse just because I like how this verse is related to the past two weekly verses. Obviously, I haven’t memorized it yet, but after researching, these are just some things that I’ve read that I’d like clarification on.
The contents of Chapter 5 in the book of Micah, discuss the birth and
rejection of Christ foretold. It also hints on His ultimate eternal kingdom after His rejection. Concluding from Chapter 5, Christ, who existed from eternity as Son of God, was born into
the world to be our Savior. He was rejected, except by a remnant
(See: Micah 5:7).
When I looked at the verse and different commentaries, Verse 2 of Micah referenced Isaiah 7:13-14, 9:6-7. Through those verses, the “child” was born in Bethlehem, but the “Son” was from
“everlasting.” So is this saying that Christ was pre-existent before the son?
This is where the past verses relate here and the last part of my above
sentence is what throws me off. Are the “Son” and “Child” separate?
Isaiah, 9:6-7:
For a child is born to us,
a son is given to us.
The government will rest on his shoulders.
And he will be called:
Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God,
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
What’s the difference between the “child” and “son” being born and given?
Any insight would be helpful.
To us, he came as a child. To God, he gave him as his son. They are one in the same, just different perspectives. And your question about the Christ being pre-existent before the son…again, they are the same. Jesus (his name) was and is the Christ (his “office”), and has always been God’s Son. These are all contained in the second person of the trinity. He is one person. Does this make sense? Answer your question?
The smallest of humans – a baby – becomes the greatest in heaven and earth. So ironic and logic-defying!
Agreed. The incarnation is something that is extremely difficult for our limited minds to fully comprehend.
Thanks for stopping by!