Quotations

QUOTA'TIONS from the O.T. in the N.T. are very numerous, but vary both with respect to the method of quoting and with respect to the application of the words quoted. The Greek translation, the Septuagint, is generally used, and how widely diffused and how closely followed this version was among the Jews of the time of our Lord may be seen from the circumstances that, in cases in which no fault of meaning is involved, even its incorrectnesses are retained in the quotations such as Matt 15:9; Luke 4:18; Acts 13:41; Deut 15:7-10; Rom 15:10, etc.; in Heb 1:6 is found a quotation from Deut 32:43 which is an interpolation of the Septuagint. In cases, however, in which the errors of the version involve a discrepancy of meaning, the N.T. writers invariably correct the Septuagint by the Hebrew, such as Matt 21:5; 1 Cor 3:19, etc. Often the quotations are directly from the Hebrew without any reference to the Septuagint, such as Matt 4:15-16; John 19:37; 1 Cor 15:54. In Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27; Rom 12:19, the Septuagint and the Hebrew are combined. Besides these direct quotations, the books of the N.T. are crowded with allusions to and suggestions from the O.T., both conscious, with appropriate adjustment, and unconscious. To this difference in the method of quoting corresponds a different method of application. When the N.T. writer ascribes something prophetical or typical to the passage quoted, he generally introduces it with the word " fulfil," such as Matt 2:15, 1 Sam 30:18, Heb 12:23, etc., and the application is authoritative. But in other cases the application may be considered optional, referring to the generally prophetical and typical character of the O.T. in its relation to the N.T., and a natural result of the force with which the O.T. book had impressed the minds of the N.T. writers. The precise relation of the N.T. quotations to the Hebrew Scriptures and to the (Greek Septuagint is not yet sufficiently cleared up, but has been much investigated of late. Mr. D. C. Turpie, in his book, The Old Testament in the New (Lond., 1868), establishes the following result: Passages in which the Septuagint version is correctly accepted 53 Passages in which the Septuagint version is correctly altered 10 Passages in which the Septuagint version is incorrectly accepted 37 Passages in which the Septuagint version is incorrectly altered 76 Passages in which the Hebrew, the Septuagint, and the New Testament all differ 99 Many of the differences are, however, exceedingly minute, and "correct" and "incorrect" merely mean accurate agreement or disagreement with the original Hebrew. Prof. Bohl of Vienna, in his books Forschungen nach einer Volksbibel zur Zeit Jesu (Wien, 1873) and Die Alttestamentliche Zitate im N.T. (Wien, 1878), maintains that the N.T. writers quoted directly and correctly from a current Aramaic version, which has indeed perished, but which was in Christ's day read and memorized by all classes among the Jews as the people's Bible. Hence the N.T. quotations are incorrect in the same way and to the same degree as are the quotations from the present A. V.