Matthew and Malachi?

[Abram K-J]

Matthew 10:21 reads:

 

NRSV   Brother will betray brother to death, and a father his child, and children will rise against parents and have them put to death

 

NA28   Παραδώσει δὲ ἀδελφὸς ἀδελφὸν εἰς θάνατον καὶ πατὴρ τέκνον, καὶ ⸀ἐπαναστήσονται τέκνα ἐπὶ γονεῖς καὶ θανατώσουσιν αὐτούς.

 

which made me think of Malachi 4:6 (versification from English Bible):

 

NRSV   He will turn the hearts of parents to their children and the hearts of children to their parents, so that I will not come and strike the land with a curse.

 

It's as if two possible realities (choose wisely!) are being prophesied in each place... surely Jesus had Malachi in mind?

 

Maybe! The LXX does not have the parents-children-children-parents rhythm, but gives instead

 

NETS   who will restore the heart of the father to the son and the heart of a person to his neighbor so that I will not come and utterly strike the land. 

 

LXX     ὃς ἀποκαταστήσει καρδίαν πατρὸς πρὸς υἱὸν καὶ καρδίαν ἀνθρώπου πρὸς τὸν πλησίον αὐτοῦ, μὴ ἔλθω καὶ πατάξω τὴν γῆν ἄρδην. 

 

If Jesus did have the Malachi text in mind to allude to here (of course he knew it), he sure does seem to favor the Hebrew text over its Greek translation.

This itself is not shocking, as Jesus would have known the Hebrew Scriptures (in Hebrew) well, have heard them read at synagogue, etc. But as much as the NT writers seem to employ the LXX over the Hebrew (where they diverge), this was surprising to me.

[Abram K-J]

A qualification... here's T. Michael Law:

 

“[W]hile we can say the new Testament writers overwhelmingly used the ‘Septuagint,’ we must admit that the Septuagint itself was not a singular entity.”

 

So my post may oversimplify.

I also found this from R.T. France (may he rest in the good Lord's great peace!) that seems to suggest perhaps I should not be surprised (IF Jesus has Malachi in mind in the first place). It's from his excellent (and out of print?) Jesus and the Old Testament:

 

"Summarizing the results so far, we may now say that of the sixty-four Old Testament quotations in the sayings of Jesus which may be regarded as certain or virtually so, twenty are to some degree independent of the LXX, and of these twenty, twelve are closer to the MT at this point. The addition of a further ten cases of likely or possible allusions to the MT against the LXX further strengthens the impression that it is wrong to speak of the Old Testament quotations in the sayings of Jesus as basically LXX form."

[Abram K-J]

Now in today's reading, there is Matt. 10:35, which appears to quote Micah 7:6. Still, I wonder about Malachi in this context....

[EricC]

A qualification... here's T. Michael Law:

 

“[W]hile we can say the new Testament writers overwhelmingly used the ‘Septuagint,’ we must admit that the Septuagint itself was not a singular entity.”

 

So my post may oversimplify.

I also found this from R.T. France (may he rest in the good Lord's great peace!) that seems to suggest perhaps I should not be surprised (IF Jesus has Malachi in mind in the first place). It's from his excellent (and out of print?) Jesus and the Old Testament:

 

"Summarizing the results so far, we may now say that of the sixty-four Old Testament quotations in the sayings of Jesus which may be regarded as certain or virtually so, twenty are to some degree independent of the LXX, and of these twenty, twelve are closer to the MT at this point. The addition of a further ten cases of likely or possible allusions to the MT against the LXX further strengthens the impression that it is wrong to speak of the Old Testament quotations in the sayings of Jesus as basically LXX form."

Abram,

 

Does R.T. France provide a list of those 64 OT quotations? I'd love to have the references to check them out. And, was that book of his (Jesus and the Old Testament) only available in paper form, i.e. is it not available in any one of the Bible software programs?

Edited January 26, 2018 by EricC

[Abram K-J]

Sadly I have loaned that book out so cannot check. I don't think I've seen it available in any electronic format.

[EricC]

Sadly I have loaned that book out so cannot check. I don't think I've seen it available in any electronic format.

Thanks. I also only found paper copies in existence.

[Michel Gilbert]

 a list of those 64 OT quotations? 

 

Hi,

 

This probably goes without saying, but there is the "Index of Quotations," in OT and NT order, and the "Index of Allusions and Verbal Parallels" in all (?) UBS editions of The Greek New Testament, at least in the paper copies. And, of course, there is Beale and Carson's Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament, which often argues for dependence on the Hebrew Scriptures, and/or against exclusive dependence on the Greek Scriptures, at https://www.accordancebible.com/store/details/?pid=Beale-Carson%20Commentary .

 

Regards,

 

Michel

[EricC]

 

Hi,

 

This probably goes without saying, but there is the "Index of Quotations," in OT and NT order, and the "Index of Allusions and Verbal Parallels" in all (?) UBS editions of The Greek New Testament, at least in the paper copies. And, of course, there is Beale and Carson's Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament, which often argues for dependence on the Hebrew Scriptures, and/or against exclusive dependence on the Greek Scriptures, at https://www.accordancebible.com/store/details/?pid=Beale-Carson%20Commentary .

 

Regards,

 

Michel

 

 

Thanks, Michel. I also thought about Beale and Carson's Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament.

[jkgayle]

Does it make a difference that Matthew's Greek here appears verbatim in Mark or that it's likely Mark's construction here that's one of Matthew's sources?