Dealing With Matthew's Mistake

[St. SteVen]

@RedFan
Another writer expands this thought as follows:

"To maintain this Creator/creature distinction, theologians have used the terms
univocal, analogical, and equivocal when speaking about how we know God."

"What’s the difference? Michael Horton offers a careful explanation.
Neither being nor knowledge is ever shared univocally (i.e., identically) between God and creatures.
As God’s being is qualitatively and not just quantitatively distinct from ours, so too is God’s knowledge.
God’s knowledge is archetypal (the original), while ours is ectypal (a copy), revealed by God and therefore
accommodated to our finite capacities. Our imperfect and incomplete knowledge is always dependent
on God’s perfect and complete knowledge." Source

'

 

[Rockerduck]

Scoffers have tried to discredit the bible for 100's of years. I've encountered some folks, even my uncles who said there were too many errors. But within the last 75 years, for instance, the dead sea scrolls, and archeological finds, have pretty much silenced them. One by one all the previous perceived discrepancies disappeared. One being, that there was no evidence the Israelites existed. another was King Belshazzar didn't exist and the evidence of the Apostle Paul's missionary journeys. Evidence of all that has been found.

My point is, there is a reason Matthew wrote "Jeremiah", just because, humanly speaking, we think its wrong, evidence later might prove Matthew right.

 

[Wrangler]

"To maintain this Creator/creature distinction, theologians have used the terms

Very complicated.

When I received a revelation from God, it was accompanied by a vision.

I may have used words to describe the vision that was imprecise. I saw a Jeep with 3 military type men with a gun turret. In reality, maybe they were police or terrorists. Maybe it was not technically a gun turret but some other technical term that I still don't know.

No one needs to know. The purpose of my revelation was to warn a brother in Christ to NOT go on a mission trip to Haiti. If he went, his life would be in danger from mistaken identify by these armed men. To say God was wrong because of my word choice in describing what was revealed to me is haughty.

I was humbled to receive this message from a supernatural source. We ought to read Biblical accounts with humility not avarice.

 

[Wrangler]

My point is, there is a reason Matthew wrote "Jeremiah", just because, humanly speaking, we think its wrong, evidence later might prove Matthew right.

I think you explained beautifully in post #3.

My NRSV Cultural Bible has 10,000 notes explaining such things, which make literal translations so much more cumbersome. Getting lost in the cultural references is academically interesting but far from the main theme.

There is no way Jesus died on Friday at ~3 PM and rose by dawn Sunday constitutes any kind of 3 days in the ground. (People develop bizarre rationalizations that the Jews don't know how to count) I'm convinced Jesus died on Wednesday because math and reference to Special sabbaths. Still, this is a distraction to the main theme that Jesus was raised from the dead regardless of how long he was dead.

 

[St. SteVen]

My point is, there is a reason Matthew wrote "Jeremiah", just because, humanly speaking, we think its wrong, evidence later might prove Matthew right.

Did you read the OP? (opening post)

If Jeremiah turns out to correct (which it can't) then Zechariah is wrong. No way to win on this one.

/

 

[Mr E]

Folks do this often.... some call it 'majoring in the minor.' They get so focused upon some little thing that they don't understand and since they don't understand it and can't accept it for what it is... they turn a molehill into a mountain, as the saying goes-- and their misunderstanding then becomes a lever with which they attempt to pry verses away from scripture as examples of error.

@RedFan is right, in that this particular verse might be problematic for the biblical inerrancy crowd, but it's a rather weak example. First, it might not be an error at all, if you want to nitpick, which of course, is what they want to do-- but the verse in question references something that Jeremiah said, not anything purported to have been actually written in the book of Jeremiah.

Here's a better example-- John 7:8 It quotes Jesus as saying>>>

“If anyone is thirsty, let him come to me, and let the one who believes in me drink. Just as the scripture says, ‘From within him will flow rivers of living water.’” (Now he said this about the Spirit, whom those who believed in him were going to receive, for the Spirit had not yet been given because Jesus was not yet glorified.)

You may have been told something along the lines of--- anything in brackets (parentheses) in scripture was added and is not in the original text. That's not precisely true. In this case, the brackets are used to separate what Jesus was recorded as saying himself, and what the writer (Matthew) thought about what Jesus said. It's like an author's footnote, offered to help us better understand what might otherwise seem confusing. But here's the other thing.... you won't find any place in scripture where it says exactly what Jesus said. There is no- ‘From within him will flow rivers of living water’ verse written anywhere in scripture that he is quoting. Is this an error on John's part?

No-- it's John's recollection of something Jesus said, so precision should neither be required, nor expected.

I think folks often forget that much of scripture records things said, and events -many years- after the fact. Most of us can't remember precisely what we did, or said last week.

 

[Rockerduck]

Did you read the OP? (opening post)

If Jeremiah turns out to correct (which it can't) then Zechariah is wrong. No way to win on this one.

/

They both may be right. Joseph was sold into slavery for 20 shekels. 30 shekels was the price of a slave too. So if Joseph had been sold for 30 it would have been a Christ like precursor. Go figure.

 

[Rockerduck]

Folks do this often.... some call it 'majoring in the minor.' They get so focused upon some little thing that they don't understand and since they don't understand it and can't accept it for what it is... they turn a molehill into a mountain, as the saying goes-- and their misunderstanding then becomes a lever with which they attempt to pry verses away from scripture as examples of error.

@RedFan is right, in that this particular verse might be problematic for the biblical inerrancy crowd, but it's a rather weak example. First, it might not be an error at all, if you want to nitpick, which of course, is what they want to do-- but the verse in question references something that Jeremiah said, not anything purported to have been actually written in the book of Jeremiah.

Here's a better example-- John 7:8 It quotes Jesus as saying>>>

“If anyone is thirsty, let him come to me, and let the one who believes in me drink. Just as the scripture says, ‘From within him will flow rivers of living water.’” (Now he said this about the Spirit, whom those who believed in him were going to receive, for the Spirit had not yet been given because Jesus was not yet glorified.)

You may have been told something along the lines of--- anything in brackets (parentheses) in scripture was added and is not in the original text. That's not precisely true. In this case, the brackets are used to separate what Jesus was recorded as saying himself, and what the writer (Matthew) thought about what Jesus said. It's like an author's footnote, offered to help us better understand what might otherwise seem confusing. But here's the other thing.... you won't find any place in scripture where it says exactly what Jesus said. There is no- ‘From within him will flow rivers of living water’ verse written anywhere in scripture that he is quoting. Is this an error on John's part?

No-- it's John's recollection of something Jesus said, so precision should neither be required, nor expected.

I think folks often forget that much of scripture records things said, and events -many years- after the fact. Most of us can't remember precisely what we did, or said last week.

About a year ago, a friend of mine, after a bible study were going at it, scripture verses scripture. We turned and saw we had an audience. They really enjoyed the depth of scripture we were talking about. On lady said she could listen to us for another hour.

 

[St. SteVen]

They both may be right. Joseph was sold into slavery for 20 shekels. 30 shekels was the price of a slave too. So if Joseph had been sold for 30 it would have been a Christ like precursor. Go figure.

If you compare times...
It might account for inflation and cost-of-living increases. - LOL

/

 

[marks]

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

Where does any recorded prophet say that the Christ would be a Nazarine? I'm not aware of a place. Yet I don't doubt that this was said by a prophet.

I don't have any issue with understanding that Jeremiah may have spoken these exact words, yet they were not necessarily written down. Nor would I have any issue were Matthew referring to a "Jeremiah scroll". Perhaps in one instance he was aware of the exact passage, and in the other instance he was aware of which scroll only.

Of all the possibilities, I don't give much credibility to, "the Bible writer was mistaken, and his mistake was recorded as part of Scripture". Hmm. I wonder what other mistakes they made? Perhaps about justification? No? Yes?

Much love!

 

[marks]

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

Can we trust the book that God gave us so we can know Him? I maintain that we can.

Much love!

 

[Behold]

Did you read the OP? (opening post)

If Jeremiah turns out to correct (which it can't) then Zechariah is wrong. No way to win on this one.

/

Still trying to deny the Bible?
Seems to be a running Thread with you... @St. SteVen

So, the Scriptures are inerrant, yet, sometimes, they are misunderstood (often related to extant text manuscript evidence misunderstanding).. and wrong conclusions are concluded thereby, falsely.

Here are 2 ways to understand this "debate"., as provided by other scholarship/sources studies.


1.) . The Hebrew Bible is divided into three sections called the Law, Writings, and Prophets. Jesus refers to these divisions in Luke 24:44. The collection of the Prophets began with the book of Jeremiah. The scrolls were sometimes referred to by the name of the first book, which in the case of the Prophets would be Jeremiah. So, when Matthew says that “Jeremiah says,” he means that the prophecy was found in the Jeremiah Scroll.


2.) Matthew, had previously worked as a tax collector..., So, he would have been very familiar with monetary transactions and likely well aware of the purchase price of the Field of Blood, which he immediately connected with Zechariah’s prophecy of 30 pieces of silver. Matthew used this connection to show one of the ways the coming of Jesus fulfilled numerous predictions in the Old Testament, affirming Jesus as Messiah.

Reader.

You can trust the Bible. ( a real one).
What you can't trust are people who try to cause you to lose faith in God's Word, as that is the Devil's work.

 

[Jericho]

It seems to me that Matthew 27:9 quotes Zechariah 11:12-13 while Matthew 27:10 alludes to Jeremiah 32:6-9.

Matt 27:9 Then was fulfilled what was spoken by Jeremiah the prophet, saying, “And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the value of Him who was priced, whom they of the children of Israel priced,
Matt 27:10 “and gave them for the potter’s field, as the LORD directed me.” (NKJV)

Zec 11:12 Then I said to them, “If it is agreeable to you, give me my wages; and if not, refrain.” So they weighed out for my wages thirty pieces of silver.
Zec 11:3 And the LORD said to me, “Throw it to the potter”—that princely price they set on me. So I took the thirty pieces of silver and threw them into the house of the LORD for the potter. (NKJV)

Zechariah mentions thirty pieces of silver and a potter, but nothing about buying a field. Jeremiah, on the other hand, visits a potter's house (Jer 18), buys a potter's jar and smashes in the Valley of Slaughter (Jer 19), and then buys a field from his cousin Hanamel for seventeen shekels of silver (Jer 32) (makes you wonder if Hanamel was a potter). Zechariah's prophecy and Jeremiah's actions both foreshadowed the death of Judas. So, Matthew 27:9–10 seems to be an amalgamation of Zechariah and Jeremiah. For reasons that are not clear, Matthew attributed it solely to Jeremiah, perhaps because Jeremiah preceded Zechariah, but who knows.

On a side note, the Old Syric translation of Matthew 27:9 (circa 5th century) doesn't mention Jeremiah or Zechariah but simply says, "Then was fulfilled what had been spoken by the prophet, who said, And I took the thirty (pieces) of silver, the price of him who was precious, whom the sons of Isroel bargained for." Make of that what you will.

 

[RedFan]

On a side note, the Old Syric translation of Matthew 27:9 (circa 5th century) doesn't mention Jeremiah or Zechariah but simply says, "Then was fulfilled what had been spoken by the prophet, who said, And I took the thirty (pieces) of silver, the price of him who was precious, whom the sons of Isroel bargained for." Make of that what you will.

My guess is that the Syriac copyist just deleted "Jeremiah" and left "prophet" in. because (1) the copyist recognized the error, and (2) didn't want to substitute "Zechariah" for "Jeremiah" because adding words is shmaltzier than deleting them.

 

[Jericho]

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.)

I've given this some more thought and research, and there is another plausible explanation. There is something called "citation formula" (sometimes quotation formula) or "ascription." It's basically a literary device where a writer may attribute a quote or idea to someone else. For example, in Stephen's speech in Acts 7, he appears to blend or summarize several Old Testament passages. In Acts 7:42–43, Stephen attributes a statement about Israel's idolatry to the book of Amos. However, the wording closely resembles a passage from the book of Isaiah (Isaiah 66:17). I believe this is what Matthew was doing. He was quoting Zacheriah, but doing it within the larger context of Jeremiah. I think this site explains it better than I can:

What then is the solution? It would appear that, while quoting primarily from Zechariah, Matthew was pointing the reader to a key passage (or theme) in Jeremiah as well, one that tied in with the point he wanted to make. Thus, to draw this to the reader’s attention, he made reference to Jeremiah, since the reference to Zechariah would be obvious. Similar, although not identical to this, is Mark’s citation from both Isaiah and Malachi, but the introductory comment in Mark 1:2a says, “It is written in Isaiah the prophet,” the next verses then citing Isaiah and Malachi in succession (Mark 1:2b–3)...

And yet there is more, and this is where we need to give Matthew the credit he is due. Why did he make reference to Jeremiah? Wasn’t this prophecy close enough, especially given its somewhat cryptic nature, even in its original context? Obviously, any reader familiar with the Scriptures would have known that the verse itself was drawn from Zechariah, not Jeremiah, so, as we pointed out, above, there must be something else to which Matthew was pointing.

It would seem then, in light of all the potential texts in Jeremiah, that Matthew was most likely pointing to Jeremiah 19:1–13, where the prophet is commanded by the Lord to “buy a clay jar from a potter” (yotser) and to take it, in the presence of the elders and the priests, “to the Valley of Ben Hinnom, near the entrance of the Potsherd Gate,” proclaiming a word of solemn judgment on Jerusalem: “This is what the Lord Almighty, the God of Israel, says: Listen! I am going to bring a disaster on this place that will make the ears of everyone who hears of it tingle” (19:1–3). Jeremiah was then to smash the potter’s jar and say: “This is what the Lord Almighty says: I will smash this nation and this city just as this potter’s jar is smashed and cannot be repaired” (Jer. 19:11).

Tragically, Jeremiah lived to see this prophecy fulfilled, with the Temple of the Lord and the city of Jerusalem demolished by the Babylonians. And note carefully 19:4: Not only would God destroy Jerusalem because of its idolatry, but also because “they have filled this place with the blood of the innocent”—the very phrase on Judas’s lips in Matthew 27:4: “I have betrayed innocent blood.”

And it was this blood money that was used to buy the potter’s field, henceforth called the Field of Blood. And to whom did Judas make this confession, and who was it that decided to use the blood money to buy the potter’s field? It was “the chief priests and the elders” (27:3b). Shades of Jeremiah 19:1! Notice also that Jeremiah, after breaking the potter’s jar, declares, “They will bury the dead in Topheth [in the Valley of Ben Hinnom] until there is no more room” (Jer. 19:11b), while the potter’s field in Matthew 27 became used “as a burial place for foreigners” (27:7).

Matthew 27:9–10 prophecy from Zechariah or Jeremiah? - Apologetics Team

Matthew 27:9–10 prophecy from Zechariah or Jeremiah?

difa3iat.com

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.

The Greek Septuagint, the one New Testament authors often quote from, doesn't mention anything about a potter in Zechariah 11:13. It only says, "And the Lord said to me, Drop them into the furnace, and I will see if it is good , as I was proved for their sakes. And I took the thirty pieces of silver, and cast them into the furnace in the house of the Lord." So, while Matthew 27:9 does quote Zechariah, it's reasonable to conclude Matthew 27:10 is a reference to Jeremiah 32:6–9, as Zechariah's prophecy doesn't mention anything about purchasing a field.

 

[Big Boy Johnson]

Sounds like some think the Lord lacked the power to put out His Word without contradictions being put in by the devil.

If God was unable to control what went in to His canon then it cannot be trusted and should be thrown in the trash!

This all sounds like a trick of the devil to get people to believe God's Word is not pure.

Good luck standing before the Lord with this!

 

[BarneyFife]

Sounds like some think the Lord lacked the power to put out His Word without contradictions being put in by the devil.

If God was unable to control what went in to His canon then it cannot be trusted and should be thrown in the trash!

This all sounds like a trick of the devil to get people to believe God's Word is not pure.

Good luck standing before the Lord with this!
View attachment 39465

I so thought I was gonna be able to give this post a until that last remark. Can't you be nice, Big Boy? Would it kill ya?

.

 

[Big Boy Johnson]

Can't you be nice, Big Boy?

You want me to not say nuthin when the claim is being floated that God's Word has errors in it???

I'm sure those that believe their are errors will just skip over anything I say about it.

 

[BarneyFife]

You want me to not say nuthin when the claim is being floated that God's Word has errors in it???

I'm sure those that believe their are errors will just skip over anything I say about it.

Honestly, sometimes it's like you don't even read the posts you're replying to.

Or do you really not know what "that last part" means?

Come on, BB. I think you're better than what you seem to be portraying.

.

 

[Big Boy Johnson]

The title of this thread is "Dealing With Matthew's Mistake"

Implying that the Apostle Matthew missed the leading of the Holy Ghost causing a portion of God's canon to be in error.

I'm not one who believes the Lord would allow errors in His canon, you know with Jesus being all powerful and the risen Lord of Glory and all.