Dealing With Matthew's Mistake

[RedFan]

Matthew 27:9 mistakenly attributes the story of the purchase of the potters’ field to Jeremiah rather than Zechariah. All of the extant manuscripts of his gospel reference Jeremiah (amazingly, no writing of a single copyist who bothered to correct Matthew seems to have survived). “This passage is not found in Jeremiah at all but in Zechariah,” notes Jerome. Philip Schaff: NPNF2-06. Jerome: The Principal Works of St. Jerome - Christian Classics Ethereal Library

I've heard some bizarre efforts to explain this away, some of them incredibly stupid. (My favorite: the Book of Jeremiah was the first book of the Prophets in the Hebrew Bible, and Matthew was referring to the whole set of Prophets by the title of the first book. I kid you not!)

Maybe Matthew was just having a senior moment when penning 27:9, thought he knew which OT writing contained the story, and got it wrong. Or maybe he was genuinely unsure and decided to take a wild-ass guess because he was too tired to hoof it down to the Temple and check the scrolls. Regardless, can we agree that God didn’t put those words in his pen? How does this error play into the inerrancy theory held by some Christians?

 

[Rockerduck]

Matthew 27:9 mistakenly attributes the story of the purchase of the potters’ field to Jeremiah rather than Zechariah. All of the extant manuscripts of his gospel reference Jeremiah (amazingly, no writing of a single copyist who bothered to correct Matthew seems to have survived). “This passage is not found in Jeremiah at all but in Zechariah,” notes Jerome. Philip Schaff: NPNF2-06. Jerome: The Principal Works of St. Jerome - Christian Classics Ethereal Library

I've heard some bizarre efforts to explain this away, some of them incredibly stupid. (My favorite: the Book of Jeremiah was the first book of the Prophets in the Hebrew Bible, and Matthew was referring to the whole set of Prophets by the title of the first book. I kid you not!)

Maybe Matthew was just having a senior moment when penning 27:9, thought he knew which OT writing contained the story, and got it wrong. Or maybe he was genuinely unsure and decided to take a wild-ass guess because he was too tired to hoof it down to the Temple and check the scrolls. Regardless, can we agree that God didn’t put those words in his pen? How does this error play into the inerrancy theory held by some Christians?

The Law, the writings, and the Prophets. This is the 3 divisions in the Old Testament. In Matthew's day, these were on scrolls. Each scroll started with the name of the first scrolls. Jeremiah is the first book of the Prophets scroll. I learned that Matthew is referring to the scroll, which was called the Jeremiah scroll. This contained Zechariah. Even though Zechariah 11:12 says it. It is in the Jeremiah scroll.

 

[RedFan]

The Law, the writings, and the Prophets. This is the 3 divisions in the Old Testament. In Matthew's day, these were on scrolls. Each scroll started with the name of the first scrolls. Jeremiah is the first book of the Prophets scroll. I learned that Matthew is referring to the scroll, which was called the Jeremiah scroll. This contained Zechariah. Even though Zechariah 11:12 says it. It is in the Jeremiah scroll.

By that logic, Matt. 3:3 should likewise have said "Jeremiah" rather than Isaiah!

 

[Rockerduck]

By that logic, Matt. 3:3 should likewise have said "Jeremiah" rather than Isaiah!

Yes, but Matthew copied a lot, from the Gospel of Mark. So any perceived mistake could be Mark too.

 

[RedFan]

Yes, but Matthew copied a lot, from the Gospel of Mark. So any perceived mistake could be Mark too.

Not this one. Matt. 27:9 has no analogue in Mark's gospel. (Mark has his own issues with OT quotes. Mark 1:2 attributes a quote to Isaiah that is actually an amalgam of two quotes, one from Isaiah and one from Malachi.)

 

[Mr E]

Matthew 27:9 mistakenly attributes the story of the purchase of the potters’ field to Jeremiah rather than Zechariah. All of the extant manuscripts of his gospel reference Jeremiah (amazingly, no writing of a single copyist who bothered to correct Matthew seems to have survived). “This passage is not found in Jeremiah at all but in Zechariah,” notes Jerome. Philip Schaff: NPNF2-06. Jerome: The Principal Works of St. Jerome - Christian Classics Ethereal Library

I've heard some bizarre efforts to explain this away, some of them incredibly stupid. (My favorite: the Book of Jeremiah was the first book of the Prophets in the Hebrew Bible, and Matthew was referring to the whole set of Prophets by the title of the first book. I kid you not!)

Maybe Matthew was just having a senior moment when penning 27:9, thought he knew which OT writing contained the story, and got it wrong. Or maybe he was genuinely unsure and decided to take a wild-ass guess because he was too tired to hoof it down to the Temple and check the scrolls. Regardless, can we agree that God didn’t put those words in his pen? How does this error play into the inerrancy theory held by some Christians?

In most cases it's our understanding of scripture that is lacking, rather than "errors" that folks point to and say "Aha! Gotcha!"

This could be one of those instances. The two prophets were contemporaries.

The passage in Matthew>>

After consulting together they bought the Potter’s Field with it, as a burial place for foreigners. For this reason that field has been called the “Field of Blood” to this day. Then what was spoken by Jeremiah the prophet was fulfilled: “They took the 30 silver coins, the price of the one whose price had been set by the people of Israel, and they gave them for the potter’s field, as the Lord commanded me.”

The passage in Zechariah>>

Then I said to them, “If it seems good to you, pay me my wages, but if not, forget it.” So they weighed out my payment—30 pieces of silver. The LORD then said to me, “Throw to the potter that exorbitant sum at which they valued me!” So I took the 30 pieces of silver and threw them to the potter at the temple of the LORD.

The passage in Matt 27 that you want to attribute to Zechariah says nothing of 'a potter's field.' So why insist that Matthew is referencing Zechariah and not Jeremiah as he states?

The subject at hand is not the silver per se, rather, it's the price paid for a particular plot of land that belonged to the potter. And that particular plot of land, first called the Potter's Field, became known as the Field of Blood, because it was bought with 'blood money.' Again-- Zechariah makes no mention of any potter's field or any plot of land used as a burial place. (cemetery).

However-- Jeremiah does.

God speaks to Jeremiah like this>>> (Jer 18)

“Go down at once to the potter’s house. I will speak to you further there.” So I went down to the potter’s house and found him working at his wheel. Now and then there would be something wrong with the pot he was molding from the clay with his hands. So he would rework the clay into another kind of pot as he saw fit.

He goes on to speak of judgment to come on Israel, where 'like a potter's work' they will be broken-- shattered and scattered like potshards. Not only that.... Jeremiah tells us where the bodies are buried.... Jeremiah 19--

The LORD told Jeremiah, “Go and buy a clay jar from a potter. Take with you some of the leaders of the people and some of the leaders of the priests. Go out to the part of the Hinnom Valley that is near the entrance of the Potsherd Gate.

‘The time will soon come that people will no longer call this place Topheth or the Hinnom Valley. But they will call this valley the Valley of Slaughter!


Jeremiah prophesies a time when the place will get a name change--- “The Potsherd Gate” of Jeremiah 19:2 was the entrance/exit to a plot of land that would be for refuse. It became known in antiquity, as the city dump that was in the Hinnom Valley, and the Potsherd Gate served as the exit by which the citizens took out the garbage.... and this is the potter's field that Matthew is referencing, where those temple leaders bought a plot for the disposal of Judas's body after he hanged himself. They used their own money-- the price they paid Judas for betraying Jesus, to buy a plot in the cemetery for foreigners outside the Potshard Gate.

 

[Deborah_]

Matthew 27:9 mistakenly attributes the story of the purchase of the potters’ field to Jeremiah rather than Zechariah. All of the extant manuscripts of his gospel reference Jeremiah (amazingly, no writing of a single copyist who bothered to correct Matthew seems to have survived). “This passage is not found in Jeremiah at all but in Zechariah,” notes Jerome. Philip Schaff: NPNF2-06. Jerome: The Principal Works of St. Jerome - Christian Classics Ethereal Library

I've heard some bizarre efforts to explain this away, some of them incredibly stupid. (My favorite: the Book of Jeremiah was the first book of the Prophets in the Hebrew Bible, and Matthew was referring to the whole set of Prophets by the title of the first book. I kid you not!)

Maybe Matthew was just having a senior moment when penning 27:9, thought he knew which OT writing contained the story, and got it wrong. Or maybe he was genuinely unsure and decided to take a wild-ass guess because he was too tired to hoof it down to the Temple and check the scrolls. Regardless, can we agree that God didn’t put those words in his pen? How does this error play into the inerrancy theory held by some Christians?

Back in the first century, scrolls were very expensive and few people owned their own copy of any book of the Bible. But the synagogues had copies, and people learned the Scriptures by heart through hearing them read. So when Matthew (and the other NT writers) wrote down the gospels and letters, they were quoting Scripture from memory. Is it surprising that sometimes similar passages got confused with one another? (There's another example at the beginning of Mark's Gospel, where a verse from Malachi is attributed to Isaiah).

But did it matter? It's not as if those who heard the Gospels being read would be in the habit of looking up these quotes for themselves. (Unless they were Jewish, and had access to the synagogue, like the Bereans in Acts 17) Most of them would nod their heads and think to themselves, "Yes, I know that passage" - and that would be that. So there was no stimulus to correct the Gospel text.

This is only a problem if you believe that God somehow "dictated" the words of the New Testament to the writers. But if, like me (and a lot of other Christians), you believe that Matthew wrote under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit (regarding what to include) but used his own memory and his own words, it's no big deal. It's not as if he was bringing in stuff from outside and pretending that it was in the Prophets - he just got the wrong prophet.

 

[RedFan]

The passage in Matt 27 that you want to attribute to Zechariah says nothing of 'a potter's field.' So why insist that Matthew is referencing Zechariah and not Jeremiah as he states?

Because Jeremiah doesn't mention buying a potter's field either. Because the analogue to Zechariah is far stronger than to Jeremiah. 30 pieces of silver, for example, is mentioned only in Zechariah. I have to agree with Jerome here.

 

[RedFan]

Back in the first century, scrolls were very expensive and few people owned their own copy of any book of the Bible. But the synagogues had copies, and people learned the Scriptures by heart through hearing them read. So when Matthew (and the other NT writers) wrote down the gospels and letters, they were quoting Scripture from memory. Is it surprising that sometimes similar passages got confused with one another? (There's another example at the beginning of Mark's Gospel, where a verse from Malachi is attributed to Isaiah).

But did it matter? It's not as if those who heard the Gospels being read would be in the habit of looking up these quotes for themselves. (Unless they were Jewish, and had access to the synagogue, like the Bereans in Acts 17) Most of them would nod their heads and think to themselves, "Yes, I know that passage" - and that would be that. So there was no stimulus to correct the Gospel text.

This is only a problem if you believe that God somehow "dictated" the words of the New Testament to the writers. But if, like me (and a lot of other Christians), you believe that Matthew wrote under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit (regarding what to include) but used his own memory and his own words, it's no big deal. It's not as if he was bringing in stuff from outside and pretending that it was in the Prophets - he just got the wrong prophet.

I agree. It's not a big deal to me. But then, I am not an inerrantist.

 

[Mr E]

Because Jeremiah doesn't mention buying a potter's field either. Because the analogue to Zechariah is far stronger than to Jeremiah. 30 pieces of silver, for example, is mentioned only in Zechariah. I have to agree with Jerome here.

What? Jeremiah refers specifically to the potter's field.

Zechariah makes no mention of any field whatsoever. The field is what Matthew is talking about.

If that's not clear enough from Jeremiah 18 and 19, consider this from Jeremiah 32-- fields were bought with silver, and the title deeds were recorded and stored in clay pots. But you think it's simply impossible that Matthew is referencing things Jeremiah said.... umm... okay.

Who was Jeremiah? --He was one of the priests who lived at Anathoth in the territory of the tribe of Benjamin. (Jer 1:1)

So now, Jeremiah said, “The LORD’s message came to me, ‘Hanamel, the son of your uncle Shallum, will come to you soon. He will say to you, “Buy my field at Anathoth because you are entitled as my closest relative to buy it.”’ And then my cousin Hanamel did come to me in the courtyard of the guardhouse in keeping with the LORD’s message. He said to me, ‘Buy my field that is at Anathoth in the territory of the tribe of Benjamin. Buy it for yourself since you are entitled as my closest relative to take possession of it for yourself.’ When this happened, I recognized that the LORD had indeed spoken to me. So I bought the field at Anathoth from my cousin Hanamel. I weighed out seven ounces of silver and gave it to him to pay for it. I signed the deed of purchase, sealed it, and had some men serve as witnesses to the purchase. I weighed out the silver for him on a scale. There were two copies of the deed of purchase. One was sealed and contained the order of transfer and the conditions of purchase. The other was left unsealed. I took both copies of the deed of purchase and gave them to Baruch son of Neriah, the son of Mahseiah. I gave them to him in the presence of my cousin Hanamel, the witnesses who had signed the deed of purchase, and all the Judeans who were housed in the courtyard of the guardhouse. In the presence of all these people I instructed Baruch, ‘The LORD of Heaven’s Armies, the God of Israel, says, “Take these documents, both the sealed copy of the deed of purchase and the unsealed copy. Put them in a clay jar so that they may be preserved for a long time to come.”’ For the LORD of Heaven’s Armies, the God of Israel, says, ‘Houses, fields, and vineyards will again be bought in this land.’

 

[RedFan]

Where does Jeremiah mention purchase of the potter's field?

 

[RedFan]

I neglected to mention that Augustine, The Harmony of the Gospels, Book 3, ch. 7, rejects the copyist error theory, but does agree with Jerome that Matthew's proper reference should have been Zechariah rather than Jeremiah:

"Now, if any one finds a difficulty in the circumstance that this passage is not found in the writings of the prophet Jeremiah, and thinks that damage is thus done to the veracity of the evangelist, let him first take notice of the fact that this ascription of the passage to Jeremiah is not contained in all the codices of the Gospels, and that some of them state simply that it was spoken “by the prophet.” It is possible, therefore, to affirm that those codices deserve rather to be followed which do not contain the name of Jeremiah. For these words were certainly spoken by a prophet, only that prophet was Zechariah. In this way the supposition is, that those codices are faulty which contain the name of Jeremiah, because they ought either to have given the name of Zechariah or to have mentioned no name at all, as is the case with a certain copy, merely stating that it was spoken “by the prophet, saying,” which prophet would assuredly be understood to be Zechariah. However, let others adopt this method of defence, if they are so minded. For my part, I am not satisfied with it; and the reason is, that a majority of codices contain the name of Jeremiah, and that those critics who have studied the Gospel with more than usual care in the Greek copies, report that they have found it stand so in the more ancient Greek exemplars. I look also to this further consideration, namely, that there was no reason why this name should have been added [subsequently to the true text], and a corruption thus created; whereas there was certainly an intelligible reason for erasing the name from so many of the codices. For venturesome inexperience might readily have done that, when perplexed with the problem presented by the fact that this passage could not be found in Jeremiah."

Philip Schaff: NPNF1-06. St. Augustine: Sermon on the Mount; Harmony of the Gospels; Homilies on the Gospels - Christian Classics Ethereal Library

ccel.org

 

[L.A.M.B.]

In dealing with the religious of his day, Jesus words still are the power of truth for today!

In the recourse of proclaiming their righteousness bc they had Mose's Law to follow, Jesus stated this about their corrupting even that which they claimed.

Mark 7:10-13​

10 For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death:
11 But ye say, If a man shall say to his father or mother, It is Corban, that is to say, a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; he shall be free.
12 And ye suffer him no more to do ought for his father or his mother;
13 Making the word of God of NONE EFFECT through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye

We still find the Judaizers of today trying to discount the authority of the word of God, and I'm marking them and will avoid.

 

[RedFan]

We still find the Judaizers of today trying to discount the authority of the word of God, and I'm marking them and will avoid.

I am not trying to discount the Word of God, I'm just trying to ascertain just what IS the word of God -- and errors in Matthew figure into this.

Let me give another example. In Matt. 23:25 the author confuses two Zechariahs, the prophet Zechariah who was the son of Berechiah (Zech. 1:1) and another who was the son of Jehoiada, and was stoned (2 Chron. 24:20-22):

Therefore I send you prophets, sages, and scribes, some of whom you will kill and crucify, and some you will flog in your synagogues and pursue from town to town, so that upon you may come all the righteous blood shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah son of Barachiah, whom you murdered between the sanctuary and the altar (NRSV).

Clearly it was not Zechariah the prophet, son of Barachiah, who was killed in the court of the temple, but as 2 Chron. 24:20-22 plainly states, Zechariah the son of Jehoiada. Matthew was just careless here -- again. (Alternatively, I suppose we could conclude that Matthew accurately quoted Jesus’ words, and it was Jesus who was mistaken. That opens a different can of worms.)

You see the problem. Scripture is occasionally tainted with human error. That's just an unavoidable fact we need to deal with.

 

[Big Boy Johnson]

Yes, but Matthew copied a lot, from the Gospel of Mark. So any perceived mistake could be Mark too.

Could have been that the KJV translators were not literally perfect as some claim.

 

[Rockerduck]

Could have been that the KJV translators were not literally perfect as some claim.

Nope, the translators only translated what was written and they feared the Lord and dared not change the words. Although they added interpolations to explain verses.

 

[Lambano]

I agree. It's not a big deal to me. But then, I am not an inerrantist.

The question then becomes, Can we trust the Jesus Christ to whom the Bible points without believing in inerrancy?

I maintain that we can. Life is about making critical decisions on insufficient data.

@St. SteVen

 

[St. SteVen]

How does this error play into the inerrancy theory held by some Christians?

Interesting question. Great topic, thanks.

I recently encountered an interesting description that offers an angle to look at this issue.
The word is "univocal". Meaning, from one voice.

Here's an interesting quote:
"For many potential Bible readers, that expectation that the Bible is univocal is paralyzing.
You notice what seem to be contradictions or tensions between different voices in the text.
You can’t find an obvious way to reconcile them. You figure that it must be your problem.
You don’t know how to read it correctly, or you’re missing something.
If the Bible is God’s perfect, infallible Word, then any misunderstanding or ambiguity
must be the result of our own depravity." Source

/

 

[Wrangler]

Matthew 27:9 mistakenly attributes the story of the purchase of the potters’ field to Jeremiah rather than Zechariah.
...
How does this error play into the inerrancy theory held by some Christians?

Redfan, this is a great topic for discussion. I suspect that most members will ignore your question and jump right into doubling down on defending the premise that the Bible is inerrant.

The Law, the writings, and the Prophets. This is the 3 divisions in the Old Testament. In Matthew's day, these were on scrolls. Each scroll started with the name of the first scrolls. Jeremiah is the first book of the Prophets scroll. I learned that Matthew is referring to the scroll, which was called the Jeremiah scroll. This contained Zechariah. Even though Zechariah 11:12 says it. It is in the Jeremiah scroll.

This is plausible.

One thing I've observed about those whose faith is weak is to hold the Bible to an overly precise standard.

At some level of precision, it is our invented standard of precision that can be wrong. My favorite example is abusing the science of astronomy. The Bible says the sun stayed in the sky so they could finish the battle. We know the sun does not move in the sky - from an astronomical level of precision - but the Earth revolves around the sun. Ergo, the Bible is in error.

But is this the context and precision intended by the authors? Was the author making an astronomical point with such scientififc precision? I think not.

By that logic, Matt. 3:3 should likewise have said "Jeremiah" rather than Isaiah!

False analogy. OT was in scrolls. Are you sure the Gospel of Jesus Christ according to Matthew was put in an OT scroll?

In most cases it's our understanding of scripture that is lacking, rather than "errors" that folks point to and say "Aha! Gotcha!"

Agreed.

The Bible says to seek and you will find. One wonders why one seeks to find Biblical error? What profit is there? (I believe it is the fleshy part of our nature that does such things).

The question then becomes, Can we trust the Jesus Christ to whom the Bible points without believing in inerrancy?

Exactly right!

A pastor once equated the Bible to an old man pointing to a full moon. Rather than gaze on the glory of the heavenly body, we criticize, condemn and complain about how the old man has body odor, wrinkled skin, arthritic bent fingers and his clothes are old, out of fashion, worn and tattered.

We are not saved because of the Bible. The Bible is not our God. Too many Christians succumb to IDOLATRY. In this case, idolatry of parchment (and even a particular translation of parchment).

 

[Wrangler]

Matthew 27:9 mistakenly attributes the story of the purchase of the potters’ field to Jeremiah rather than Zechariah.

Too many Christians succumb to IDOLATRY. In this case, idolatry of parchment (and even a particular translation of parchment).

In looking into this, I went to one of the more deeply academic translations and found that other ancient authorities read Zechariah or Isaiah rather than Jeremiah. We could delve into exactly what these 'other ancient authorities' are if you think it would be profitable @RedFan ?

Matthew 27:9

New Revised Standard Version Updated Edition

​

9 Then was fulfilled what had been spoken through the prophet Jeremiah,[a] “And they took[b] the thirty pieces of silver, the price of the one on whom a price had been set,[c] on whom some of the people of Israel had set a price,
Read full chapter

Footnotes​

1. 27.9 Other ancient authorities read Zechariah or Isaiah
2. 27.9 Or I took
3. 27.9 Or the price of the precious One