6 But the chief priests took the silver pieces and said, “It is not lawful to put them into the treasury, because they are the price of blood.” 7 And they consulted together and bought with them the potter’s field, to bury strangers in. 8 Therefore that field has been called the Field of Blood to this day. 9 Then was fulfilled what was spoken by Jeremiah the prophet, saying, “And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the value of Him who was priced, whom they of the children of Israel priced, 10 and gave them for the potter’s field, as the Lord directed me.”
The chief priests disposed of Judas’ blood money (27:6-10).
27:6
But the chief priests took the silver pieces and said, “It is not lawful to put them into the treasury, because they are the price of blood.”
It was not legal to put money into the temple treasury because it was the wages of murder. All of a sudden now the chief priests had a conscience as to how they should use temple money. They were very punctilious about the law now!
27:7
And they consulted together and bought with them the potter’s field, to bury strangers in.
The Jewish leaders decided together to use Judas’ betrayal money to buy a potter’s field to bury strangers (Gentiles). A potter’s field was where the potter threw broken pieces of pottery.
27:8
Therefore that field has been called the Field of Blood to this day.
This event took place 30 years before Matthew wrote his book.
27:9
Then was fulfilled what was spoken by Jeremiah the prophet, saying, “And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the value of Him who was priced, whom they of the children of Israel priced,
This is a quotation from Zechariah 11:12-13. It is important to keep in mind that the Jews divided the Old Testament into three sections: the Law, the Writings, and the Prophets. Jeremiah was always first in order of the prophetic books. Sometimes the entire category of prophetic books was called “Jeremiah.”
27:10
and gave them for the potter’s field, as the Lord directed me.”
The event in this section was fulfillment of God’s prophetic Word.
PRINCIPLE:
Suicide is self-murder.
APPLICATION:
More people commit suicide than kill others. Many commit suicide as an act of retaliation. Teens often kill themselves for this reason. Some kill themselves as retribution against themselves. Judas killed himself over guilt for betraying the Messiah. All suicide operates on feeling rather than reason.
Sometimes the entire category of prophetic books was called "Jeremiah"
Could you please share some sources for this claim? Like an example from the Talmud or something like that?
I guess my other question would be, why did Matthew name Isaiah exclusively when he quoted him? (e.g. 3:3, 4:14, 8:17, 12:17) I mean, why he never named Jeremiah in those passages? Was Isaiah another special name/category?
Another question is, why didn't Matthew name Jeremiah in the other places? Where he quoted Micah, Hosea, Zechariah, he just mentioned "spoken/written by the prophet". The only other prophecy that he said "was spoken by the prophet Jeremiah" was in 2:17-18, where it actually was from Jeremiah 31:15.
I gues I'm just wondering, if Jeremiah is used as the representative, why in the whole New Testament, Isaiah is by far the prophet that was named specifically? Why not Jeremiah? Why is Jeremiah's name only mentioned in Matthew and nowhere else?
Jus,
There is much information in Introductions to the Bible. Note these quotes from The General Introduction to the Bible by Geisler and Nix.
"Jeremiah 31:15 is quoted in Matthew 2:17–18, and the new covenant of Jeremiah 31:31–34 is quoted twice in Hebrews (cf. 8:8–12 and 10:15–17).[1]
[1] Geisler, N. L., & Nix, W. E. (1996). A general introduction to the Bible (Rev. and expanded.) (85). Chicago: Moody Press.
"The Writings
Twofold division at the time of canonization The present Jewish arrangement of the Old Testament is threefold: Law, Prophets, and Writings. However, that was not the oldest Old Testament format. There is no intimation of it in the Old Testament itself, and only one possible allusion to it in the New Testament (Luke 24:44). Some books of the Prophets did not fit neatly into the continual sequence of the history of the prophets, such as the four books of hymns and the precepts for human conduct” mentioned by Josephus.16 That apparently led to a very early (possibly 200 b.c. or earlier) classification of books into the later widely accepted threefold division of Law, Prophets, and Writings (see chap. 1). The earliest mention of a third group of books is in the “Prologue to Ecclesiasticus” (c. 132 b.c.), but it does not enumerate the books. Josephus (a.d. 37–100) is more explicit, saying that there were only four books in the third section.17 No doubt he considered Esther to be with the other prophetic histories, whereas Ruth and Lamentations were counted with Judges and Jeremiah respectively, which accounts for his numbering twenty-two books in the Hebrew canon. That would also mean that Daniel was listed with the prophets.18 Whatever the origin or status of the threefold classification,19 the Septuagint (LXX) (c. 250 b.c.) reflects no compunction whatever to follow it. Moreover, Origen (third century a.d.), who claimed to derive his list from the Jews, does not follow the threefold arrangement of books. Likewise, Melito (late second century a.d.), the earliest LXX manuscripts (Vaticanus, Sinaticus, and Alexandrinus), the lists of Epiphanius of Salamis (c 315–403) and others do not follow the threefold arrangement.20 Hence, it would seem best to agree with Robert Dick Wilson and R. Laird Harris that, so far as canonization is concerned, there were only two groups of books: the Law (five books) and the Prophets (seventeen books).21[1]
16 16. Josephus Against Apion 1.8.
17 17. These books were probably Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Song of Solomon. See Beckwith, p. 253.
18 18. See Harris, p. 140.
19 19. See Beckwith, pp. 110–66.
20 20. Ibid., pp. 181–222. See also Sid. Z. Leiman, The Canonization of Hebrew Scripture: The Talmudic and Midrashic Evidence, pp. 37–50, 131–55, and 156 n. 195.
21 21. Harris modified his earlier view to permit an early threefold arrangement, perhaps as a variant practice: “Was the Law and the Prophets Two-Thirds of the Old Testament Canon?” p. 170.
[1] Geisler, N. L., & Nix, W. E. (1996). A general introduction to the Bible (Rev. and expanded.) (243–245). Chicago: Moody Press.
Many of the prophets also quote from or refer to the inspired writings of their predecessors. Daniel had a collection that he called the books,” which apparently included books from Moses (Dan. 9:13) to his contemporary Jeremiah (Dan. 9:2), and “the prophets” in between, who had spoken to the kings, princes, fathers, and all the people of the land (Dan. 9:6). Jeremiah 26:18 quotes Micah 3:12, and Micah 4:1–3 cites Isaiah 2:2–4 (or vice versa). There is also a dependence between Isaiah 2:4 and Joel 3:10; between Joel 3:16 and Amos 1:2; Obadiah 17 and Joel 2:32, and many other instances. The prophets reflect a clear knowledge of Psalms; Jonah 2:2–9, for example, is filled with references from Psalms. Jonah 2:3, “All Thy breakers and billows passed over me,” is from Psalm 42:7. Jonah 2:4 reflects a knowledge of Psalm 5:7, “I will look again toward Thy holy temple” (cf. also Jonah 2:5 with Ps. 8:4–6).
It could not be expected that every book of the Old Testament would be referred to by succeeding prophets; the New Testament as a whole does not refer to every book in the Old Testament. It is no more necessary for there to be an explicit reference to every book being added to the canon than to have an explicit claim for its own inspiration (e.g., Esther). However, there is substantial evidence to support the concept of a growing canon: books that were written by a man of God, accredited by acts of God to tell the truth about God, were then and there received by the people into the canon and preserved. Later the people of God universally came to recognize their canonicity.[1]
Thanks so much Grant for your reply!