Why does Jesus misquote the Old Testament in some passages? Introduction The question of why Jesus appears to misquote the Old Testament arises when readers compare certain Gospel passages with the original Hebrew text (or the standard modern translations derived from it). Yet, a closer look reveals that these differences often result from Jesus’ (or the Gospel writers’) intended emphasis, use of common Jewish interpretive methods, or reliance on the Greek Septuagint (LXX) translation. Below is a thorough exploration of these passages and the broader considerations surrounding them. I. Defining the Question There are a handful of places in the Gospels where Jesus’ quotation of the Old Testament looks different from modern translations of the Hebrew text. This leads some to suggest that He, or the writers, “misquoted” Scripture. A few of the passages in question include: • Matthew 2:6 vs. Micah 5:2 • Mark 1:2–3 vs. Isaiah 40:3 and Malachi 3:1 • Luke 4:18–19 vs. Isaiah 61:1–2 While the wording may differ, the key point remains that Jesus and the biblical authors consistently convey the true meaning and message of the Old Testament passages, often through the strongest textual traditions existing in their day. II. The Role of the Septuagint (LXX) In many instances, Jesus (as recorded by the Gospel writers) quotes from the Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures, commonly known as the Septuagint (LXX). This translation was widely used by Greek-speaking Jews in the first century. The Septuagint sometimes employs phrasing that diverges slightly from the Hebrew text familiar in modern translations. 1. Matthew’s Use of Micah 5:2 In Matthew 2:6, we read: “But you, Bethlehem, in the land of Judah, are by no means least among the rulers of Judah…” Compare this to Micah 5:2 in our standard English Bibles: “But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are small among the clans of Judah…” The sense of the passage is the same: Bethlehem, though seemingly humble, will bring forth a ruler. Matthew’s text aligns more closely with a Greek rendering and a typical Jewish interpretive expansion that highlights Bethlehem’s significance. 2. Mark’s Conflation of Isaiah 40:3 and Malachi 3:1 Mark 1:2–3 states: “As it is written in Isaiah the prophet: ‘Behold, I will send My messenger ahead of You, who will prepare Your way.’—‘A voice of one calling in the wilderness, “Prepare the way for the Lord, make straight paths for Him.”’” The phrase “Behold, I will send My messenger ahead of You…” actually parallels Malachi 3:1, while the following line is from Isaiah 40:3. In many early manuscripts, the heading reads “in the prophets” instead of “in Isaiah.” Even where it says “Isaiah,” ancient Jewish practices of quotation often grouped prophetic texts under a primary reference. The main point stands: John the Baptist fulfills OT prophecy announcing the coming Messiah. III. Jewish Interpretive Methods and Expansions Beyond the Septuagint, a variety of interpretive methods were employed in first-century Judea: 1. Targums (Aramaic Paraphrases) In synagogues where many spoke Aramaic, readings of the Hebrew Bible often came with paraphrased explanations (Targums) that clarified meaning. These could rearrange or amplify phrases but kept the central truth intact. 2. Midrashic and Pesher Interpretation Jewish teachers frequently connected or merged passages to highlight thematic points. The Gospels sometimes do this, showing Jesus fulfilling multiple prophetic strands in a single statement. 3. Emphasis on Fulfillment At times, a quotation might adapt the verb tense or slightly adjust the wording to stress that Jesus is the living fulfillment of a promise. Luke 4:18–19, quoting Isaiah 61:1–2, is an example of Jesus reading and applying the prophecy directly to Himself: “The Spirit of the Lord is on Me, because He has anointed Me to preach good news to the poor…” In each instance, the scriptural meaning is preserved and sometimes further illuminated. IV. Accuracy and Inspiration From the perspective of biblical manuscripts and historical evidence: 1. Manuscript Tradition The Dead Sea Scrolls, the Masoretic Text, and the Septuagint all demonstrate that slight variations in wording can coexist with a uniform core message. These ancient sources show the Old Testament text as extremely well-preserved overall, and any slight variations do not undermine key doctrines. 2. Consistency of Message Jesus, recognized in Scripture as the incarnate Word (John 1:1), upheld the Old Testament fully. In His teaching, there is no contradiction but rather authentic clarification: “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.” (Matthew 5:17) 3. Historical and Prophetic Coherence Research—from archaeology confirming biblical sites to fulfilled prophecy verified by data from ancient records—affirms the overarching reliability of both the Old and New Testaments. Jesus’ quotations are one more demonstration of the united testimony of Scripture. V. Harmonizing Difficult Passages When a passage seems misquoted: 1. Check the Septuagint or Other Ancient Versions Often, the wording matches an older or equally authoritative tradition used by the first-century audience. 2. Consider the Literary Purpose If a Gospel narrative merges multiple passages, it underscores a thematic point. This was acceptable and common in ancient rhetorical practices. 3. Acknowledge Summary or Emphasis Sometimes, Jesus adapts slightly in order to stress the application. The final meaning always aligns with the Old Testament’s intent, showing no conflict. 4. Illustrate Fulfillment The Gospels emphasize that what was proclaimed centuries earlier is “fulfilled” in the life, ministry, death, and resurrection of Jesus. The sense of fulfillment can lead to slight verbal variations that highlight Jesus’ identity as Messiah. VI. United Witness of Scripture In these examples, Scripture remains coherent and authoritative. The process of quoting is not haphazard but guided by the same Spirit who inspired the original texts (2 Timothy 3:16). Each time Jesus references the Old Testament, He does so in a way that unveils prophetic truth, emphasizes the divine plan, and invites deeper understanding of God’s redemptive work. Conclusion Jesus does not misquote the Old Testament in a way that compromises meaning or truth. Differences in Gospel quotations most often stem from reliance on the Septuagint, recognized Jewish interpretive methods, purposeful merging of texts, or paraphrasing to highlight fulfillment. Far from diminishing confidence in Scripture, these examples showcase the living continuity between the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament. They confirm that God’s message of redemption—ultimately accomplished through the death and resurrection of Christ—remains consistent, reliable, and powerfully relevant. |
    |