scripts omit the word “ Jeremiah” ; so the apparent mistake here may be due to the error o f a copyist. However, all the best textual critics accept the reading “ Jeremiah” in this passage, and it seems to the writer that this is probably the correct reading. If, in the Gospel of Matthew, as original ly written, Matthew used the word “Jeremiah,” was it not a mistake? Not at all necessarily. That these words, or words very similar to them, are found in the prophecy which in our Old Testament bears the name of Zechariah is unquestionably true, but it does not follow at all from this that Jere miah did not speak them, for it is a well-known fact that the later prophets o f the Old Testament often quote the predictions o f earlier prophets. For example, Zechariah himself, in 1:4 quotes a prophecy known to be Jeremiah’s (cf. Jeremiah 18:11), and in the passage which we are now con sidering Zechariah may also have quoted from the prophecy of Jeremiah. There is no record in the Book of Jeremiah as we now have it in the Old Testament of Jeremiah’s having uttered the prophecy, but there is no reason whatever to think we have in the Book o f Jere miah all the prophecies that Jeremiah uttered, and Zechariah may easily have had access to prophecies of Jeremiah not recorded in the Book of Jeremiah. Furthermore, it is to be noted that Zechariah him self says in Zechariah 7 :7, “ Should ye not hear the words which the Lord hath cried by the former prophets . . . ?” ; so it is evident that Zechariah regarded it as part of his mission to recall the prophets that had gone before him. He would be especially inclined to recall the prophecies of Jere miah, for it was a saying among the Jews that “ the spirit of Jeremiah was upon Zechariah,” so we see that this much-vaunted mistake o f Matthew does not appear to have been a mistake at all. Perhaps it ought to be added that there has been much question by the critics as to whether the closing chapters of the Book of Zechariah were really a portion of the prophecies of Zechariah. There is nothing in the chapters themselves to indicate that they were. It is true that for cen turies they have been attached to the prophecies of Zechariah, but nowhere in the Bible does it state that they were by Zechariah, and it has been held that they were in reality not by Zechariah but by Jeremiah. This, however, is a question for the critics. If it should prove to be so, it would simply be an additional confirmation of the accuracy o f Mat thew’s statement; but even if it is not so, if Zecha riah is the author o f the prophecy (Zech. 11 ¡ I l l s ) as we find it in the Bible, it does not at all prove that Jeremiah may not have utter a similar prophecy to which Zechariah referred and which Matthew has accurately quoted. The critics will have to search further if they wish to prove Mat thew to have been in error.
t O R K e y M EM OR IA L B IB LE c o D F G R G n c e s p e a k e r s
BIBLE DIFFICULTIES: Its so-called “Mistakes” by It. A. Torrey O NE OF THE mistakes most constantly re ferred to by destructive critics is found in Matthew 27:9, 10 (RV) : “ Then was fulfilled that which was spoken through Jeremiah the prophet, saying, And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of him that was priced, whom certain o f the children of Israel did price; and they gave them for the potter’s field, as the Lord appointed me.” Now the passage here referred to by Matthew is found in the prophecy ascribed in the Old Testament to Zechariah (Zech. 11:11- 13). At first sight, it appears that Matthew had made a mistake and ascribed to Jeremiah a proph ecy that was really made to Zechariah. Even John Calvin seems to have thought that Matthew made a mistake. He says, “ How the name of Jeremiah crept in, I confess I do not know, nor do I give myself much trouble to inquire. The pas sage itself plainly shows the name o f Jeremiah has been put down by mistake instead of Zechariah; for in Jeremiah we find nothing o f this sort, nor anything that even approaches it.” This passage has been pressed as proof that the Gospel narra tives are not necessarily “historical accounts of what actually occurred.” Must we admit that Mat thew was mistaken? In the first place, in some manuscripts the word Jeremiah does not appear, but the passage reads, “ Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by the prophet,” without any mention as to who was the prophet. In still another reading, Zechariah ap pears instead of Jeremiah. Westcott and Hort do not accept the reading without Jeremah, nor the reading which substitutes Zechariah for Jeremiah, but they do mention these readings, especially the first, as “ noteworthy rejected readings.” Mrs. Lewis says that some of the earliest and best manu
THE KING'S BUSINESS
14
Made with FlippingBook - professional solution for displaying marketing and sales documents online