Skeptic: Blunders About Jesus and Bethlehem

by Terry Wane Benton

"Further, other claimed 'fulfilled prophecies' falter under scrutiny: Micah 5:2 ("born in Bethlehem") addresses a contemporary Davidic ruler from the 8th century BCE, whereas Matthew appears to adapt the narrative to make Jesus’ origin fit this prophecy, despite other Gospel accounts indicating his roots in Nazareth."

The prophecy of Micah 5:2 reads as follows: “But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are little among the thousands of Judah, Yet out of you shall come forth to Me the One to be Ruler in Israel, Whose goings forth are from of old, From everlasting.”

‭ ‬‬The skeptic said that “other Gospel accounts” indicate Jesus’ roots in Nazareth. It seems evident to me that this particular skeptic conveniently forgot that the same writers who mentioned Jesus was born in Bethlehem also agreed that later he was raised in Nazareth. So, this was a glaring mistake on his part. Jesus was not made to fit the prophecy by some twisting of Micah 5:2, but rather Micah 5:2 told something that could only be fulfilled by someone who lived before He was born. Jesus was “from of old, from everlasting” and was born in the flesh in Bethlehem. There is no way to twist this verse and make it fit someone else. The skeptic offered no other candidate and couldn't.

The skeptic admits it was written in the 8th century BC but overlooks the prophecy that the house of God would change from being a war learning people to a people that would come from all nations and “learn war no more” when the Law of the Lord went forth from Jerusalem (Micah 4:2-3). It would now become a peaceful house. So, that never happened in the 8th century BC, but it did happen in connection with Jesus. His house is not a war-learning house. It is a house of peace for all nations. Furthermore, Jesus is the only one born in Bethlehem who is also “from of old, from everlasting” and brought about a kingdom and a house of teaching that teaches peace, not the ways of war. Jesus is the only one who fits the prophecy. He does not “retrofit” something that has already been fulfilled by someone else. He is the only one who fulfills this prophecy.

Matthew was made more credible, not less credible, when he pointed to Micah 5:2 and showed the circumstances under which Jesus was born there. But he also went on to point out that Jesus moved around and then settled in “Nazareth” (Matthew 2:23). Luke also said Jesus was born in Bethlehem (Luke 2) and later returned to Nazareth (Luke 2:39-40). So, are we to believe that all the history read and tested by Christians from the first century to now got it wrong, and now this skeptic comes to the rescue with new unknown before truth? I register my strongest doubts.

The Bible not only claims to be the word of God but demonstrates it is the word of God by registering prophecy that no man could predict and force into fulfillment. People need to get their heads into the book and stop listening to liberals who make such imaginative efforts to explain away clear prophecy. We have “the prophetic word made more sure,” and we would do well to give respectful attention to it (II Peter 1:16-21). It is a light that shines in a dark world of hopelessness!