Q: In Matthew 27:9, Matthew says, Then was fulfilled what was spoken by Jeremiah the prophet, saying, And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of him who was valued, whom they of the children of Israel did value. However, this is not a quotation from the book of Jeremiah. It is based on Zechariah 11:12-13! Isnt this a contradiction?
A: Some apologists resort to conjectural emendation here, by positing that Matthew wrote Jeremiah or a tachygraphical abbreviation for Jeremiah, but a very early copyist misread this as Zechariah and the copyists change affected all successive manuscripts. Others resort to a different emendation: the idea that originally, Matthew did not name the prophet being quoted, but merely wrote That which was spoken by the prophet, and some copyist inserted a name which he thought was correct.
But if one wishes to take the extant text as it stands, then a solution may be found in the idea that Matthew is making a conflate-reference. A conflate-reference is a citation in which which material is drawn from two or three prophecies combined, but instead of being cited as a statement found in books A, B, and C, it is attributed to the most well-known of the (two or) three sources.
Consider Mark 1:2-3. Mark cites the prophetic passage Behold, I send My messenger before your face, who will prepare your way before you. The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare the way of the Lord, make His paths straight." Theres a text-critical issue here, because the Majority Text says that Mark was quoting what was written In the prophets, while the Alexandrian Text-type says that Mark was quoting what was written In Isaiah the prophet. Hopefully I will look into that question in more detail later; today I just wish to notice that *somebody* -- either Mark, or a copyist -- didnt have a problem attributing to Isaiah what was actually a combination of material from Malachi 3:1 and Isaiah 40:3 (and possibly Exodus 23:20). This may seem imprecise to modern readers, but it wasnt a particularly rare citation-method back then.
In Matthew 27:9-10, Matthew takes this a step further. He uses material from Zechariah, but he also wants to remind his readers about the theme of Jeremiah 32:6-15, wherein Jeremiah purchases a field for a small price (like what is done in Zechariah 11). The theme in Jeremiah is in play: as the land of Israel was to be conquered, but then restored, likewise Jesus was to be put to death, but restored to life.
I think that solution is satisfactory, but theres another one that is also appealing. Matthew refers to this as something which was spoken by Jeremiah. Some scholars, including some conservative ones, think that the book of Zechariah is a composite-work; chapters 1-8 form one coherent piece, but the rest consists of odds and ends, which may be sub-divided between chapters 9-11 and 12-14. The oracle in Zechariah 11 may have originally been delivered by Jeremiah, even though it has found a home in what is commonly known as the book of Zechariah. Definite affinities between Zechariah 11 and some passages in the book of Jeremiah seem undeniable. Compare the following:
Zechariah 11:3 and Jeremiah 25:34-38.
Zechariah 11:9 and Jeremiah 43:11.
Zechariah 11:17 and Jeremiah 23:1-2.
So it may be that, rather than making a conflate-citation and relying on his readers to grasp the thematic relevance of the purchases-with-silver mentioned in both Zechariah 11 and Jeremiah 32, Matthew meant exactly what he said throughout 27:8-10, and was better informed about the origin of the passage than we are.
Yours in Christ,
Waterrock
A: Some apologists resort to conjectural emendation here, by positing that Matthew wrote Jeremiah or a tachygraphical abbreviation for Jeremiah, but a very early copyist misread this as Zechariah and the copyists change affected all successive manuscripts. Others resort to a different emendation: the idea that originally, Matthew did not name the prophet being quoted, but merely wrote That which was spoken by the prophet, and some copyist inserted a name which he thought was correct.
But if one wishes to take the extant text as it stands, then a solution may be found in the idea that Matthew is making a conflate-reference. A conflate-reference is a citation in which which material is drawn from two or three prophecies combined, but instead of being cited as a statement found in books A, B, and C, it is attributed to the most well-known of the (two or) three sources.
Consider Mark 1:2-3. Mark cites the prophetic passage Behold, I send My messenger before your face, who will prepare your way before you. The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare the way of the Lord, make His paths straight." Theres a text-critical issue here, because the Majority Text says that Mark was quoting what was written In the prophets, while the Alexandrian Text-type says that Mark was quoting what was written In Isaiah the prophet. Hopefully I will look into that question in more detail later; today I just wish to notice that *somebody* -- either Mark, or a copyist -- didnt have a problem attributing to Isaiah what was actually a combination of material from Malachi 3:1 and Isaiah 40:3 (and possibly Exodus 23:20). This may seem imprecise to modern readers, but it wasnt a particularly rare citation-method back then.
In Matthew 27:9-10, Matthew takes this a step further. He uses material from Zechariah, but he also wants to remind his readers about the theme of Jeremiah 32:6-15, wherein Jeremiah purchases a field for a small price (like what is done in Zechariah 11). The theme in Jeremiah is in play: as the land of Israel was to be conquered, but then restored, likewise Jesus was to be put to death, but restored to life.
I think that solution is satisfactory, but theres another one that is also appealing. Matthew refers to this as something which was spoken by Jeremiah. Some scholars, including some conservative ones, think that the book of Zechariah is a composite-work; chapters 1-8 form one coherent piece, but the rest consists of odds and ends, which may be sub-divided between chapters 9-11 and 12-14. The oracle in Zechariah 11 may have originally been delivered by Jeremiah, even though it has found a home in what is commonly known as the book of Zechariah. Definite affinities between Zechariah 11 and some passages in the book of Jeremiah seem undeniable. Compare the following:
Zechariah 11:3 and Jeremiah 25:34-38.
Zechariah 11:9 and Jeremiah 43:11.
Zechariah 11:17 and Jeremiah 23:1-2.
So it may be that, rather than making a conflate-citation and relying on his readers to grasp the thematic relevance of the purchases-with-silver mentioned in both Zechariah 11 and Jeremiah 32, Matthew meant exactly what he said throughout 27:8-10, and was better informed about the origin of the passage than we are.
Yours in Christ,
Waterrock
