Why Rachel and not Leah

[Paul Cowan]

I am reading the Evangelistarion concerning the prophesy of Jeremiah,

Jeremiah 31:15 This is what the LORD says:
"A voice is heard in Ramah,
mourning and great weeping,
Rachel weeping for her children
and refusing to be comforted,
because her children are no more."

In the endnotes of Matthew 2:18 it says that Rachel was from the tribe of Benjamin surrounding Bethelhem while Leah was from the tribe of Judah in Bethlehem. Christ was born in Bethelehem and then fled to Egypt. Herod killed all the male children in and around Bethelehem.

My question is why is Rachel referred to when Leah is the descendent of this place. Or why are they not both mentioned?

Also I had read someplace the antichrist will come from the tribe of Benjamin. If this is the case, does this prophesy not still hold true? Or possibly the antichrist version is more applicable to the prophesy than the killings of Herod?

Paul

[Nina]

I am reading the Evangelistarion concerning the prophesy of Jeremiah,


In the endnotes of Matthew 2:18 it says that Rachel was from the tribe of Benjamin surrounding Bethelhem while Leah was from the tribe of Judah in Bethlehem. Christ was born in Bethelehem and then fled to Egypt. Herod killed all the male children in and around Bethelehem.

My question is why is Rachel referred to when Leah is the descendent of this place. Or why are they not both mentioned?

Also I had read someplace the antichrist will come from the tribe of Benjamin. If this is the case, does this prophesy not still hold true? Or possibly the antichrist version is more applicable to the prophesy than the killings of Herod?

Paul

I will venture but it is just that - venture - because I have no idea with a Patristic basis in this case. Maybe because Joseph was born from Rachel? And she was promised to be married to Jacob but Leah was given to him instead.

Was the source of the info about the tribe of Benjamin reliable? Some write the antiChrist will come from Dan's etc.

[Paul Cowan]

I will venture but it is just that - venture - because I have no idea with a Patristic basis in this case. Maybe because Jacob was born from Rachel?

Was the info about the tribe of Benjamin reliable? Some write will come from Den's etc.

I think you are right about being from Dan instead of Benjamin.

I don't understand the Jacob reference.

[Nina]

I think you are right about being from Dan instead of Benjamin.

I don't understand the Jacob reference.

Sorry I mixed up Joseph and Jacob! :) For real! I corrected it.

[Paul Cowan]

I am sorry, I still don't understand why Leah would not be mentioned either in place of or at least along with Rachel in this prophesy. I kow Jacob loved Rachel more than Leah, but Leah bore him children first. Why would her descedants not be affected?

[Nina]

I am sorry, I still don't understand why Leah would not be mentioned either in place of or at least along with Rachel in this prophesy. I kow Jacob loved Rachel more than Leah, but Leah bore him children first. Why would her descedants not be affected?

:) Ok do not take it personal! :) I was always on Rachel's side.

Ah yes! Now I remember (because I really wanted to help you not get worried about Leah) to have read that Rachel's grave is in the area where the killings occurred. Where I read it? No idea.

[Michael Stickles]

Ah yes! Now I remember (because I really wanted to help you not get worried about Leah) to have read that Rachel's grave is in the area where the killings occurred. Where I read it? No idea.

Might have been in the sermons of John Chrysostom. Here is his take on this passage, from his ninth homily on Matthew (http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/200109.htm):



"Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremy the prophet, saying, In Rama was there a voice heard, Rachel weeping for her children, and would not be comforted, because they are not." Matthew 2:17-18

...

But what, it may be said, has Rachel to do with Bethlehem? For it says, "Rachel weeping for her children." And what has Rama to do with Rachel? Rachel was the mother of Benjamin, and on his death, they buried her in the horse-course that was near this place. The tomb then being near, and the portion pertaining unto Benjamin her infant (for Rama was of the tribe of Benjamin), from the head of the tribe first, and next from the place of her sepulture, He naturally denominates her young children who were massacred. Then to show that the wound that befell her was incurable and cruel, He says, "she would not be comforted because they are not."


In Christ,
Mike

[Father David Moser]

In the endnotes of Matthew 2:18 it says that Rachel was from the tribe of Benjamin surrounding Bethelhem while Leah was from the tribe of Judah in Bethlehem. Christ was born in Bethelehem and then fled to Egypt. Herod killed all the male children in and around Bethelehem.

It would be more accurate to say that from Leah the tribe of Judah was descended as Leah was the mother of Judah while from Rachel the tribe of Benjamin was descended as she was the mother of Benjamin.



My question is why is Rachel referred to when Leah is the descendent of this place. Or why are they not both mentioned?

Bethlehem was the central city near the historic area alloted to the tribe of Benjamin after the return, however, the city itself was part of Judah and as Joseph was of the tribe of Judah, he returned there to be counted in the census. When Herod ordered the innocents to be killed it was the children (descendants) of Rachael that were killed (those living around Bethlehem), thus she weeps through her daughters (their mothers). I think that this prophetic reference is not literal in the sense that only children of the tribe of Benjamin were killed, but rather points to a general locale - the area historically allotted to Benjamin.

Also the only two tribes that could still be identified were Judah and Benjamin since other ten tribes had been scattered by the Assyrians (I think) when the Northern Kingdom was done away with. Judah, was, of course the dominant tribe and thus if Leah had been mentioned in the prophecy it would have indicated that the killing took place throughout the whole kingdom not simply limited to the locale around Bethlehem. Thus by mentioning Rachael and not Leah here the locale affected by the prophecy was more closely pinpointed.

Fr David Moser

[Theodore Janiszewski]

Well done, Fr. Moser – you've struck at the heart of it.

And it was the Assyrians who scattered the ten northern tribes. But they weren't completely lost. There were some survivors of the northern tribes who took refuge in Judah – remember that the prophetess Anna is of the tribe of Asher (Luke 2:36).