Skip to content

Matthew 2:17

“Herod's Slaughter of the Infants”Matthew 2:16–18

King James Version
Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremy the prophet, saying,

Bible text: King James Version (1769 Blayney text) · Public domain

KJV (with Strong's)
Then G5119 was fulfilled G4137 that which G3588 was spoken G4483 by G5259 Jeremy G2408 the prophet G4396, saying G3004,

Bible text: King James Version with Strong's numbers · Public domain

Berean Standard Bible
Then what was spoken through the prophet Jeremiah was fulfilled:

Bible text: Berean Standard Bible · Public domain

American Standard Version
Then was fulfilled that which was spoken through Jeremiah the prophet, saying,

Bible text: American Standard Version (1901) · Public domain

World English Bible Messianic
Then that which was spoken by Jeremiah the prophet was fulfilled, saying,

Bible text: World English Bible, Messianic edition · Public domain

Geneva Bible (1599)
Then was that fulfilled which is spoken by the Prophet Ieremias, saying,

Bible text: Geneva Bible (1599) · Public domain

Young's Literal Translation
Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremiah the prophet, saying,

Bible text: Young's Literal Translation · Public domain

King James Version — Interlinear
9 Greek words
  1. ΤότεToteThenG5119ADVAdverb
  2. ἐπληρώθηeplērōthēwas fulfilledG4137V-API-3SVerb Aorist Passive Indicative 3rd Singular
  3. τὸtothatG3588T-NSNDefinite article Nominative Singular Neuter
  4. ῥηθὲνrhēthenhaving been spokenG2046V-APP-NSNVerb Aorist Passive Participle Nominative Singular Neuter
  5. διὰdiathroughG1223PREPPreposition
  6. ἸερεμίουIeremiouJeremiahG2408N-GSM-PNoun Genitive Singular Masculine Individual
  7. τοῦtoutheG3588T-GSMDefinite article Genitive Singular Masculine
  8. προφήτουprophētouprophetG4396N-GSMNoun Genitive Singular Masculine
  9. λέγοντος·legontossayingG3004V-PAP-GSMVerb Present Active Participle Genitive Singular Masculine
English is a literal word-by-word gloss of the Greek, not the KJV's wording. Why?

This is the original text the KJV's translators worked from — each Greek word with its own literal English meaning in this verse, prepared by scholars at Tyndale House, Cambridge. The KJV translates whole sentences, not word by word, so its wording differs: one Greek word can become several English words, and the KJV may choose “charity” where the gloss reads “love”. Both are faithful — they answer different questions. For the KJV's own rendering, switch to the KJV text.

Words in [ ] are added by the English.

Translation
Details
See on the biblical-era maps
All Matthew Sites (Jerusalem)
All Matthew Sites (Jerusalem) View full PDF
Matthew 2:13-22
Matthew 2:13-22 View full PDF
The Birth of Jesus
The Birth of Jesus View full PDF

Map © Biblica Open Bible Maps · CC BY-SA 4.0

In the KJVVerse 23,187 of 31,102 · 74.6%

Study this verse

Written with AI assistance. Always check it against Scripture.

This verse

Matthew says that the massacre at Bethlehem fulfilled words spoken long before by the prophet Jeremiah, so that even this sorrow falls within what God had foretold.

“Then was fulfilled”

Tóte and plēróō: at the very time of the massacre, words spoken long before came to completion. This is one of Matthew’s fulfillment sayings, like Matthew 1:22 and 2:15.

“that which was spoken”

Rhéō, to utter. The prophecy was a word God gave through his messenger, and Matthew lines the events up with it.

“by Jeremy the prophet, saying,”

Jeremiah (Hieremías), God’s inspired prophḗtēs. Légō introduces the quotation from Jeremiah 31:15 that follows.

Passage studyMatthew 2:16–18

Herod’s Massacre and Rachel’s Weeping

16Then Herod, when he saw that he was mocked of the wise men, was exceeding wroth, and sent forth, and slew all the children that were in Bethlehem, and in all the coasts thereof, from two years old and under, according to the time which he had diligently enquired of the wise men. 17Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremy the prophet, saying, 18In Rama was there a voice heard, lamentation, and weeping, and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children, and would not be comforted, because they are not.

Summary

When Herod realizes that the wise men have gone home without reporting to him, he flies into a rage and has every child two years old and under killed in Bethlehem and the country around it. He takes the age limit from his careful questioning of the wise men about when the star appeared. Jesus is already gone, taken to Egypt by Joseph after an angel’s warning, so Herod’s cruelty falls on the families of Bethlehem. Matthew then says that this fulfilled the words of Jeremiah about Rachel weeping in Ramah for her children, refusing to be comforted, “because they are not.” In three verses we see how fiercely the powers of this world set themselves against God’s King from his first days, how God keeps his Son through it, and how Scripture gives a voice to grief too deep for human comfort.

Why Herod killed the children of Bethlehem

Herod had called the wise men to him privately and asked them exactly when the star appeared (Matthew 2:7). He then sent them on to Bethlehem and asked them to bring him word, so that he could come and worship the child too (Matthew 2:8). That request was the cover for a plan to murder him. God warned the wise men in a dream to stay away from Herod, and they went home by another way (Matthew 2:12). The word “Then” (tóte) at the start of verse 16 ties what follows directly to their departure.

Herod “saw that he was mocked of the wise men.” The verb empaízō, built from en (“in”) and paízō (“to play”), means to jeer at someone or make fun of them. The wise men were simply obeying God, but Herod took their failure to return as a personal insult, as though they had made a fool of him. So he “was exceeding wroth.” The verb thymóō, from thymós (passion), means to be enraged, and lían (“exceedingly”) makes it stronger still. This is a boiling fury, and it goes straight to violence.

Herod the Great reigned from 37 to 4 BC. Rome had made him King of the Jews, and he guarded that title jealously. He was a great builder who rebuilt the Temple in Jerusalem, and he was also cruel and suspicious, ready to execute members of his own family when he suspected them of plotting against him. News from foreign visitors that a King of the Jews had been born struck at his deepest fear. Bethlehem was a small town a few miles south of Jerusalem, the city of David and the place the prophet Micah had named as the birthplace of Israel’s coming Ruler (Micah 5:2). The massacre fits everything else we know of Herod’s character.

What Herod ordered

He “sent forth” his men. The verb apostéllō means to send someone out on an errand, here to carry out his decree. Then he “slew” the children. The verb anairéō means to take up, and by extension to take away by force, and so to do away with or murder. It describes a deliberate killing meant to remove a rival.

The victims were “all the children” (paîs, a child or boy), and the commentaries understand them to be the boys, since a rival king was what Herod feared. They died in Bethlehem (Bēthleém) “and in all the coasts thereof.” In the KJV “coasts” means borders or districts, hórion, so the order reached the villages and countryside around the town as well.

The age limit was “from two years old and under”, dietḗs (two years old) and kátō (below). Herod set it “according to the time which he had diligently enquired of the wise men.” Akribóō means to find something out exactly, and chrónos is time, here the time of the star’s appearing that Herod had pressed them about. The small word hós is the relative “which”. Herod cast a wide net on purpose, taking in every child who could possibly have been born when the star first appeared.

How many children died?

Matthew gives no number. Some later traditions put it in the thousands. Bethlehem was a small town, and modern scholars generally estimate that the boys of two and under in it and the surrounding district would have numbered a few dozen. The count is beside Matthew’s point. Each of those children was a son mourned by his mother, and the wickedness of the act is the same whatever the number.

God kept his Son safe

By the time Herod’s men reached Bethlehem, the child they were sent to kill was out of their reach. An angel had warned Joseph in a dream, and Joseph had already taken Mary and Jesus to Egypt (Matthew 2:13–15). For all his inquiries and all his soldiers, the king was too late for the one child he wanted. Herod’s triumph was empty, because God had acted first.

Psalm 2 speaks of this very thing, when the rulers of the earth rage against the LORD and his King, and “he that sitteth in the heavens” laughs at them (Psalm 2:4). Revelation lets us see the war behind the scenes, picturing a dragon that waits to devour a child as soon as he is born (Revelation 12:4). The hostility that meets Jesus in Bethlehem follows him through his ministry and comes to its height at the cross, where God’s purpose wins out once again.

The flight into Egypt also echoes Israel’s own history. Matthew applies the words “Out of Egypt have I called my son” to Jesus (Matthew 2:15, quoting Hosea 11:1). Jesus is the true Israel, the Son whom God brings out of Egypt, and he will lead his people out of the bondage of sin and death.

Why did God allow it?

This is the question that rises first for many who read these verses. Herod’s act came from his own fear and wickedness, and the guilt is his. The verse does not say that God caused the massacre. God gives human beings real choices, and in a fallen world those choices can be terribly evil. What Matthew does say is that the event fulfilled what God had spoken long before, so it lay within his knowledge and could not overturn his purposes. Even as Herod raged, God’s plan for his Son’s safety was already in motion.

We may be unable to grasp why God permitted this particular sorrow, and Scripture lets us grieve honestly over it. It also tells us that God works all things together for good to them that love him (Romans 8:28). A world where such things happen shows how deeply sin has wounded it and how much it needs a Savior, whose victory over sin and death will bring true justice and redemption.

Then was fulfilled: Matthew and Jeremiah

Verse 17 is Matthew’s own comment on what has just happened. “Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremy the prophet” is one of the fulfillment sayings that run through his Gospel. He uses them of the virgin birth (Matthew 1:22) and of the return from Egypt (Matthew 2:15), and each time he shows a moment in Jesus’ life matching words God gave in the Old Testament. Matthew writes with Jewish readers especially in view, and these sayings show them that Jesus is the Messiah their own Scriptures foretold, the one for whom all of Israel’s story had been preparing.

The verb plēróō means to fill something up, the way a net is crammed full or a hollow is levelled, and so to complete, to carry out, or to coincide with what was predicted. “Then” (tóte) points to the time of the massacre as the moment those words came to pass. “Spoken” is rhéō, to utter. Jeremiah is called a prophḗtēs, one who foretells and speaks under God’s inspiration, which is why his words carry God’s authority. “Jeremy” is the KJV’s spelling here of Jeremiah, Hieremías in Greek, and “saying” (légō) opens the quotation in the next verse.

How Jeremiah’s words were fulfilled

In Jeremiah 31:15 the prophet pictures Rachel weeping for her children as the exiles were led away through Ramah into Babylonian captivity, one of the great sorrows of Israel’s history. Matthew hears that same lament again in Bethlehem. The earlier grief of the exile foreshadows the later grief of the massacre, as a type foreshadows what it points to, and in both Israel’s children are lost and a mother of the nation mourns. This way of reading the prophets, in which God’s earlier dealings with his people foreshadow later ones, was common in Jewish thought and in the early church. Jeremiah’s words describe a real moment in his own day, and they find a deeper fulfillment as the suffering of Israel’s past is repeated when her Messiah comes.

The setting of the quotation matters too. Jeremiah 31 is a chapter of hope, in which God promises, “I will turn their mourning into joy” (Jeremiah 31:13). Rachel’s weeping sits inside that promise of comfort and restoration.

Rachel weeping in Ramah

“In Rama was there a voice heard.” The verb akoúō means to hear, and it often carries the sense of listening and taking in what is heard. This grief rang out where everyone could hear it. Matthew piles up three words for it, “lamentation, and weeping, and great mourning,” and the three together show how deep and widespread the sorrow was. The word for weeping, klauthmós, means loud, audible sobbing, the open wailing with which Israel mourned its dead.

Who Rachel was

Rachel was one of the two wives of Jacob and the mother of Joseph and Benjamin (Genesis 30:22–24, Genesis 35:16–18). She died giving birth to Benjamin and was buried on the way to Bethlehem (Genesis 35:19–20). Jeremiah speaks of her as the mother of her people, weeping for all her descendants, and so she stands for every grieving mother in Israel. Her own story was one of longing for children and of dying in childbirth, and her tomb lay near Bethlehem, so Matthew’s picture of Rachel weeping over Bethlehem’s children joins the town’s present loss to the old sorrows of the nation.

Ramah was a town in the territory of Benjamin, north of Jerusalem, and a place through which exiles passed. In Israel children were deeply prized, sons above all, and the loss of a whole town’s young boys was a grief beyond measure.

“Because they are not”

Rachel “would not be comforted.” The verb parakaléō, from para (“alongside”) and kaléō (“to call”), means to call someone to your side, and so to urge, encourage or console. Rachel refuses every consolation, because the cause of her grief is final. “They are not” is a gentle way of saying that her children are dead. Scripture records her refusal of comfort and lets it stand, acknowledging that some losses are so devastating that human comfort feels too small for them.

Christ and the sorrow of Bethlehem

The innocent children who died for the sake of the newborn King point ahead to the innocent Lamb of God, who would “take away the sin of the world” (John 1:29). Jesus himself would know exile, rejection and deep sorrow, and his road runs from Bethlehem through Egypt to the cross. He wept over Jerusalem (Luke 19:41), and he carried our griefs and sorrows as the suffering Servant of Isaiah, wounded for our transgressions (Isaiah 53:3–5, Isaiah 53:4–6). Because he shared our flesh and our pain, he is a merciful and faithful High Priest who can help those who suffer (Hebrews 2:17–18). In becoming man, God himself has entered into human grief and loss.

Herod’s attempt on the child’s life is part of the spiritual battle Jesus came to win. Through his death he destroyed the devil, who had the power of death, and set free those who lived in fear of it (Hebrews 2:14–15). His resurrection answers the “they are not” of Rachel’s lament. Jesus is “the resurrection, and the life” (John 11:25–26), and he promises eternal life and the resurrection of the body. For now the whole creation groans, and we groan with it as we wait for the redemption of our body (Romans 8:22–23). The day is coming when “God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying” (Revelation 21:4). Jesus is the one who brings true comfort to those who mourn, and in him the hope already present in Jeremiah’s prophecy of restoration comes true.

Weeping that God hears

These verses keep the grief of Bethlehem’s mothers in the Word of God for every generation to read. God heard the voice in Ramah, and he hears his people’s lament today. Mourning a terrible loss honestly is a faithful response, and you are free to bring that kind of sorrow to him without hiding it.

The passage also shows how evil can strike at the most vulnerable when power answers to nobody but itself. It calls us to value and protect every human life and to stand against injustice and cruelty. Christ met hostility from his first days, and those who follow him may meet resistance too. Through all of it the God who kept his Son from Herod’s sword is still in control, and the King whom Herod tried to kill now reigns and will one day turn all our mourning into joy.

Last revised

Public-domain commentary

Matthew Henry

From his Commentary on the Whole Bible. Henry wrote on whole passages, and this entry covers Matthew 2:16–18. He set out his notes in a two-level outline, kept here as he numbered it.

1662–1714 · 3 verses
Passage under commentMatthew 2:16–18
I. II. Main points1. 2. Sub-points

Here is, I. Herod's resentment of the departure of the wise men. He waited long for their return; he hopes, though they be slow, they will be sure, and he shall crush this rival at his first appearing; but he hears, upon enquiry, that they are gone off another way, which increases his jealousy, and makes him suspect they are in the interest of this new King, which made him exceedingly wroth; and he is the more desperate and outrageous for his being disappointed. Note, Inveterate corruption swells the higher for the obstructions it meets with in a sinful pursuit.

II.His political contrivance, notwithstanding this, to take off him that is born King of the Jews.

If he could not reach him by a particular execution, he doubted not but to involve him in a general stroke, which, like the sword of war, should devour one as well as another. This would be sure work; and thus those that would destroy their own iniquity must be sure to destroy all their iniquities. Herod was an Edomite, enmity to Israel was bred in the bone with him. Doeg was an Edomite, who, for David's sake, slew all the priests of the Lord. It was strange that Herod could find any so inhuman as to be employed in such a bloody and barbarous piece of work; but wicked hands never want wicked tools to work with. Little children have always been taken under the special protection, not only of human laws, but of human nature; yet these are sacrificed to the rage of this tyrant, under whom, as under Nero, innocence is the least security. Herod was, throughout his reign, a bloody man; it was not long before, that he destroyed the whole Sanhedrim, or bench of judges; but blood to the blood-thirsty is like drink to those in a dropsy; Quo plus sunt potae, plus sitiuntur aquae - The more they drink, the more thirsty they become. Herod was now about seventy years old, so that an infant, at this time under two years old, was not likely ever to give him any disturbance. Nor was he a man over fond of his own children, or of their preferment, having formerly slain two of his own sons, Alexander and Aristobulus, and his son Antipater after this, but five days before he himself died; so that it was purely to gratify his own brutish lusts of pride and cruelty that he did this. All is fish that comes to his net.

Observe, What large measures he took, 1. As to time; He slew all from two years old and under. It is probable that the blessed Jesus was at this time not a year old; yet Herod took in all the infants under two years old, that he might be sure not to miss of his prey. He cares not how many heads fall, which he allows to be innocent, provided that escape not which he supposes to be guilty. 2. As to place; He kills all the male children, not only in Bethlehem, but in all the coasts thereof, in all the villages of that city. This was being overmuch wicked, Ecclesiastes 7:17. Hate, an unbridled wrath, armed with an unlawful power, often transports men to the most absurd and unreasonable instances of cruelty. It was no unrighteous thing for God to permit this; every life is forfeited to his justice as soon as it commences; that sin which entered by one man's disobedience, introduced death with it; and we are not to suppose any thing more than that common guilt, we are not to suppose that these children were sinners above all that were in Israel, because they suffered such things. God's judgments are a great deep. The diseases and deaths of little children are proofs of original sin. But we must look upon this murder of the infants under another character: it was their martyrdom. How early did persecution commence against Christ and his kingdom! Think ye that he came to send peace on the earth? No, but a sword, such a sword as this, Matthew 10:34, Matthew 10:35. A passive testimony was hereby given to the Lord Jesus. As when he was in the womb, he was witnessed to by a child's leaping in the womb for joy at his approach, so now, at two years old, he had contemporary witnesses to him of the same age. They shed their blood for him, who afterwards shed his for them. These were the infantry of the noble army of martyrs. If these infants were thus baptized with blood, though it were their own, into the church triumphant, it could not be said but that, with what they got in heaven, they were abundantly recompensed for what they lost on earth. Out of the mouths of these babes and sucklings God did perfect his praise; otherwise, it is not good to the Almighty that he should thus afflict.

The tradition of the Greek church (and we have it in the Aethiopic missal) is, that the number of the children slain was 14,000; but that is very absurd. I believe, if the births of the male children in the weekly bills were computed, there would not be found so many under two years old, in one of the most populous cities in the world, that was not near a fortieth part of it. But it is an instance of the vanity of tradition. It is strange that Josephus does not relate this story; but he wrote long after St. Matthew, and it is probable that he therefore would not relate it, because he would not so far countenance the Christian history; for he was a zealous Jew; but, to be sure, if it had not been true and well attested, he would have contested it. Macrobius, a heathen writer, tells us, that when Augustus Caesar heard that Herod, among the children he order to be slain under two years old, slew his own son, he passed this jest upon him, That it was better to be Herod's swine than his son. The usage of the country forbade him to kill a swine, but nothing could restrain him from killing his son. Some think that he had a young child at nurse in Bethlehem; others think that, through mistake, two events are confounded - the murder of the infants, and the murder of his son Antipater. But for the church of Rome to put the Holy Innocents, as they call them, into their calendar, and observe a day in memory of them, while they have so often, by their barbarous massacres, justified, and even out - one Herod, is but to do as their predecessors did, who built the tombs of the prophets, while they themselves filled up the same measure.

Some observe another design of Providence in the murder of the infants. By all the prophecies of the Old Testament it appears that Bethlehem was the place, and this the time, of the Messiah's nativity; now all the children of Bethlehem, born at this time, being murdered, and Jesus only escaping, none but Jesus could pretend to be the Messiah. Herod now thought he had baffled all the Old Testament prophecies, had defeated the indications of the star, and the devotions of the wise men, by ridding the country of this new King; having burnt the hive, he concludes he had killed the master bee; but God in heaven laughs at him, and has him in derision. Whatever crafty cruel devices are in men's hearts, the counsel of the Lord shall stand.

III.The fulfilling of scripture in this (Matthew 2:17, Matthew 2:18); Then was fulfilled that prophecy (Jeremiah 31:15), A voice was heard in Ramah.

See and adore the fulness of the scripture! That prediction was accomplished in Jeremiah's time, when Nebuzaradan, after he had destroyed Jerusalem, brought all his prisoners to Ramah (Jeremiah 40:1), and there disposed of them as he pleased, for the sword, or for captivity. Then was the cry in Ramah heard to Bethlehem (for those two cities, the one in Judah's lot, and the other in Benjamin's, were not far asunder); but now the prophecy is again fulfilled in the great sorrow that was for the death of these infants. The scripture was fulfilled,

1.In the place of this mourning. The noise of it was heard from Bethlehem to Ramah; for Herod's cruelty extended itself to all the coasts of Bethlehem, even into the lot of Benjamin, among the children of Rachel. Some think the country about Bethlehem was called Rachel, because there she died, and was buried. Rachel's sepulchre was hard by Bethlehem, Genesis 35:16, Genesis 35:19. Compare 1 Samuel 10:2. Rachel had her heart much set upon children: the son she died in travail of she called Benoni - the son of her sorrow. These mothers were like Rachel, lived near Rachel's grave, and many of them descended from Rachel; and therefore their lamentations are elegantly represented by Rachel's weeping.

2.In the degree of this mourning. It was lamentation and mourning, and great mourning; all little enough to express the sense they had of this aggravated calamity. There was a great cry in Egypt when the first-born were slain, and so there was here when the youngest was slain; for whom we naturally have a particular tenderness. Here was a representation of this world we live in. We hear in it lamentation, and weeping, and mourning, and see the tears of the oppressed, some upon one account, and some upon another. Our ways lie through a vale of tears. This sorrow was so great, that they would not be comforted. They hardened themselves in it, and took a pleasure in their grief. Blessed be God, there is no occasion of grief in this world, no, not that which is supplied by sin itself, that will justify us in refusing to be comforted! They would not be comforted, because they are not, that is, they are not in the land of the living, are not as they were, in their mothers' embraces. If, indeed, they were not, there might be some excuse for sorrowing as though we had no hope; but we know they are not lost, but gone before; if we forget that they are, we lose the best ground of our comfort, 1 Thessalonians 4:13. Some make this grief of the Bethlehemites to be a judgment upon them for their contempt of Christ. They that would not rejoice for the birth of the Son of God, are justly made to weep for the death of their own sons; for they only wondered at the tidings the shepherds brought them, but did not welcome them.

The quoting of this prophecy might serve to obviate an objection which some would make against Christ, upon this sad providence. "Can the Messiah, who is to be the Consolation of Israel, be introduced with all this lamentation?" Yes, for so it was foretold, and the scripture must be accomplished. And besides, if we look further into this prophecy, we shall find that the bitter weeping in Ramah was but a prologue to the greatest joy, for it follows, Thy work shall be rewarded, and there is hope in thy end. The worse things are, the sooner they will mend. Unto them a child was born, sufficient to repair their losses.

Historical interpretation

Eight Centuries of Reception

12 surviving comments on this verse. Each one is dated, so this reads as a timeline rather than a list.

12 quotes · AD 367–1150
Ante-NicenePost-NiceneEarly MedievalMedieval
40050060070080090010001100

Select a marker to jump to its quote. Markers stagger vertically where authors wrote within a few decades of each other.

Pseudo-Augustineas quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274SourceCatena Aurea by Aquinas
(Hil. Quæst. N. and V. Test. 9. 62.) Or, The sons of Benjamin, who were akin to Rachel, were formerly cut off by the other tribes, and so extinct both then and ever after. (see Judg. 20.) Then therefore Rachel began to mourn her sons, when she saw those of her sister cut off in such a cause, that they should be heirs of eternal life; for he who has experienced any misfortune, is made more sensible of his losses by the good fortune of a neighbour.
d. AD 367Hilary of Poitiersas quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274Post-NiceneSourceCatena Aurea by Aquinas
It could not be that they were not who seemed now dead, but by glorious martyrdom they were advanced to eternal life; and consolation is for those who have suffered loss, not for those who have reaped a gain. Rachel affords a type of the Church long barren now at length fruitful. She is heard weeping for her children, not because she mourned them dead, but because they were slaughtered by those whom she would have retained as her first-born sons.
d. AD 407John Chrysostomas quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274Post-NiceneSourceCatena Aurea by Aquinas
(Hom. ix.) The Evangelist by this history of so bloody a massacre, having filled the reader with horror, now again sooths his feelings, showing that these things were not done because God could not hinder, or knew not of them; but as the Prophet had foretold.
"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."

Thus having filled the hearer with horror by relating these things: the slaughter so violent and unjust, so extremely cruel and lawless; he comforts him again, by saying, Not from God's wanting power to prevent it did all this take place, nor from any ignorance of His, but when He both knew it, and foretold it, and that loudly by His prophet. Be not troubled then, neither despond, looking unto His unspeakable providence, which one may most clearly see, alike by what He works, and by what He permits.
But what, it may be said, hath Rachel to do with Bethlehem? For it saith, "Rachel weeping for her children." And what hath 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 saith, "she would not be comforted because they are not."

Hence again we are taught this, which I mentioned before, never to be confounded when what is happening is contrary to the promise of God. Behold, for instance, when He was come for the salvation of the people, or rather for the salvation of the world, of what kind were His beginnings. His mother, first, in flight; His birth-place is involved in irremediable calamities, and a murder is perpetrated of all murders the bitterest, and there is lamentation and great mourning, and wailings everywhere. But be not troubled for He is wont ever to accomplish His own dispensations by their contraries, affording us from thence a very great demonstration of His power.
d. AD 420JeromePost-NiceneSourceCommentary on Matthew
(Vers. 17 seqq.) Then was fulfilled what was spoken by the prophet Jeremiah, saying: A voice was heard in Ramah, sobbing and loud lamentation; Rachel weeping for her children, and she would not be consoled, since they are no more (Jerem. XXXI, 15). But when Herod died, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared in a dream to Joseph in Egypt, saying: Rise, take the child and his mother, and go to the land of Israel. From Rachel was born Benjamin, in whose tribe Bethlehem is not (Genes. XXXV). Therefore, it is asked how Rachel mourns the sons of Judah, that is, Bethlehem, as if they were her own. We will answer briefly, because she is buried near Bethlehem in Ephrath, and from the maternal womb, she received the name of the mother's lodging. Whether because Judah and Benjamin were two joined tribes, and Herod had ordered not only the killing of children in Bethlehem, but also in all its borders. By the slaughter of Bethlehem, we understand that many from Benjamin were also killed. But she wept for her children, and she did not receive consolation, according to a twofold interpretation. Either because she considered them dead for eternity, or because she did not want to console herself about those whom she knew would survive. But what is said in Rama, let us not think that this is the name of a place, near Gabaa, but 'rama' is interpreted as 'an elevated place', so the meaning is: A voice was heard in an elevated place, that is, far and wide dispersed.
d. AD 420Jeromeas quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274Post-NiceneSourceCatena Aurea by Aquinas
(In Hierem. 31:15.) This passage of Jeremiah has been quoted by Matthew neither according to the Hebrew nor the LXX version. This shows that the Evangelists and Apostles did not follow any one's translation, but according to the Hebrew manner expressed in their own words what they had read in Hebrew.

By Ramah we need not suppose that the town of that name near Gibeah is meant; but take it as signifying 'high.' A voice was heard 'aloft,' that is, spread far and wide.'

Rachel's son was Benjamin, in which tribe Bethlehem is not situated. How then does Rachel weep for the children of Judah as if they were her own? We answer briefly. She was buried near Bethlehem in Ephrata, and was regarded as the mother, because her body was there entertained. Or, as the two tribes of Judah and Benjamin were contiguous, and Herod's command extended to the coasts of Bethlehem as well as to the town itself, we may suppose that many were slain in Benjamin.

This may be understood in two ways; either she thought them dead for all eternity, so that no consolation could comfort her; or, she desired not to receive any comfort for those who she knew had gone into life eternal.
AD 500Pseudo-Chrysostomas quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274Post-NiceneSourceCatena Aurea by Aquinas
Or, it was heard on high, because uttered for the death of the innocent, according to that, The voice of the poor entereth into the heavens. (Ecclus. 35:21.) The 'weeping' means the cries of the children; 'lamentation,' refers to the mothers. In the infants themselves their death ends their cries, in the mothers it is continually renewed by the remembrance of their loss.
d. AD 533Remigius of Rheimsas quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274Post-NiceneSourceCatena Aurea by Aquinas
The sacred Evangelist adds, to show the greatness of the mourning, that even the dead Rachel was roused to mourn her sons, and would not be comforted because they were not.
d. AD 856Rabanus Maurusas quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274Early MedievalSourceCatena Aurea by Aquinas
Or, The Church weeps the removal of the saints from this earth, but wishes not to be comforted as though they should return again to the struggles of life, for they are not to be recalled into life.

Rachel is well set for a type of the Church, as the word signifies 'a sheep' or 'seeing;' (vid. note i, p. 19.) her whole thought being to fix her eye in contemplation of God; and she is the hundredth sheep that the shepherd layeth on his shoulder.
d. AD 1107Theophylact of OhridMedieval
Lest anyone think that the slaying of the children took place against the will of God, the evangelist shows that God both knew of it beforehand and foretold it.
AD 1150Glossa Ordinariaas quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274MedievalSourceCatena Aurea by Aquinas
(ord.) She will not be comforted in this present life, for that they are not, but transfers all her hope and comfort to the life to come.
Source: Quotations drawn from early Church Fathers and historical Christian theologians (AD 100–1500). Some quotes address the surrounding passage context rather than this verse alone.

Continue studying Matthew 2:17 across the web’s major study libraries — every link below opens this exact verse, chapter, or book on the destination site.

TrulyRandomVerse is not affiliated with these sites and doesn’t control their content. They’re linked because they’re genuinely useful.

Related study articles8