Matthew’s superiority in his use of the Old Testament compared with other

evangelists is uncontested among scholars. His appeal to the Old Testament is well exposed
throughout from the beginning to the end of his Gospel, prompting the reader to ponder over
the Matthean interest and intent of his use of the Old Testament. Soares Prabhu states, “No
evangelist makes so much– and such explicit – use of the Old Testament as Matthew”.
Venard statistically states the superiority of Matthew’s interest in the Old Testament over the
other evangelists by comparing the number of Old Testament quotations they used in their
Gospels1. In his article Venard enumerates 42 Old Testament quotations in Matthew, a
number more than double for any of the other Gospels2. They occur all through Matthew’s
narrative: in the direct discourses of Jesus, of his disciples, of the crowds, of Jesus’ opponents,
of Satan and in the words of the narrator

Among these Old Testament citations, few particular ones are introduced by the
formula: i[na – o[pwj – to,te plhrwqh/| to. r`hqe.n [u`po. kuri,ou] dia. [VHsai<ou / VIeremi,ou] tou/
profh,tou le,gontoj. In the exegetical world, these quotations with their typical traits3 are
known as “Fulfilment Formula Quotations” Quotations introduced by the evangelist himself
in order to indicate a fulfilment of a prophesy are found only in Matthew among the
Synoptics4, except for one passage from the prophet Isaiah that is applied to John the Baptist
in all three Synoptics5. The commentators are not unanimous on their number and thus the
total number of fulfilment quotations found in the Gospel of Matthew varies from ten to
fourteen. Ten6 of them are unanimously accepted because they contain the above mentioned
formula and denote always the person or the activity of Jesus. The hesitations are with regard
to the passages which do not have this formula and do not denote the person of Jesus, nor do
they cite a particular text7. Out of ten or fourteen fulfilment quotations, four (or five8), are
found in the Infancy Narrative of the Gospel.

2
Mark and Luke have 19 each and in John there are only 14. (L. VENARD, « Citations de l’Ancien Testament
dans le Nouveau Testament, » in DBS Sup.II, Paris, Librarie Letouzey, (1934), col. 24)
3
We further explore the nature and traits of a “Fulfilment Formula Quotation” in the fourth chapter of our study.
4
It is noted that the fourteen quotations used in the Gospel of John are introduced also by a quotation formula.
5
Mt 3, 3 ; Mk 1, 3 and Lk 3, 4
6
Mt 1, 22 – 23 ; 2, 15 ; 2, 17 – 18 ; 2, 23 ; 4, 14 – 16 ; 8, 17 ; 12, 17 – 21 ; 13, 35 ; 21, 4 – 5 ; 27, 9 – 10.
7
Mt 2, 5 – 6; 3, 3; 13, 14 – 15; 26, 56. References to the Old Testament in Mt 2, 5 – 6; 3, 3; 13, 14 – 15; 26,
56 are not citations of accomplishment.
8
Mt 3, 3 (Is 40, 3). This fulfilment quotation defines the mission of John the Baptist. It does not apply to Jesus
and does not present the language of a fulfilment quotation, even in the broad sense.
1
 Some of the fulfilment quotations found in Matthew have parallels in Mark and some
others in other traditional materials. As an editor, however, Matthew himself inserted
quotations into his traditional materials. The Matthean redaction of these traditional materials
can be assumed when we compare Matthew’s Gospel with those of Mark and Luke. We can
also find certain quotations fit precisely only the setting in the Matthean Narrative. The
quotation from Is 42, 1 – 4 seems to be one of them, like Hos 11, 1 in Mt 2, 15.

At first glance, all ‘fulfilment quotations’ found in Matthew seem to be a reproduction

of the Hebrew text or the Septuagint, or even a translation of a Targum. On closer analysis,
we find that they are far from any real resemblances, differing both from the Hebrew Text and
the Septuagint. Matthew, as an ‘editor’, seemed to make many adjustments so as to fit them
into his context. We notice several types of difficulties: between the original text and the
quoted text one finds both similarities and differences and even some Matthean “creativity” in
editing these quotations. This thesis does not intend to make an exhaustive study of all the
‘fulfilment quotations’ in the first Gospel. Since Mt 12, 18 – 21, which is presented as a
quotation from Isaiah, is a unanimously accepted fulfilment quotation by the scholars, the
longest text in this category, structurally placed in the middle of the Gospel,

Almost all scholars have seen this quotation as problematic. It is well known for its
peculiar textual form: it deviates significantly from both the Septuagint and Hebrew text. One
of the major endeavours of the scholars is to observe these variations and to read into the
intention of the evangelist. And it has always been a dilemma to indicate precisely how the
quotation relates to the context.

1.1 The Fulfilment Formula Quotations in Matthew

In the exegetical world the term “Fulfilment Formula Quotations” is a signature

symbol of Matthew. In his article Venard enumerates 42 Old Testament quotations in
Matthew, a number more than double than that for any of the other Gospels9. Venard
statistically states the superiority of Matthew’s interest in the Old Testament over other
evangelists by comparing the number of Old Testament quotations they used in their Gospels
No other evangelists have produced so many Old Testament quotations and allusions as
9
Mark and Luke have 19 each and in John only 14. (L. VENARD, “Citations de l’Ancien Testament dans le
Nouveau Testament” in DBS Sup. II, Paris, Librarie Letouzey, (1934), col. 24) ; Jean MILER, «Le travail de
l’accomplissement: Matthieu et les Ecritures, » Cahier biblique de Foi et Vie, 40, (2001), p. 15.
2
Matthew. They occur all through Matthew’s narrative: in Jesus’ direct discourses, those of his
disciples, of the crowds, of Jesus’ opponents, of Satan and in the words of the narrato. All of
them can be omitted without a loss of flow of the story line, underlining the Matthean
insertion of these quotations into the narrative frame. The category named under fulfilment
quotations are generally introduced or concluded by a formula (i[na plhrwqh/| to. r`hqe.n u`po.
tou/ kuri,ou dia. tou/ profh,tou( le,gontoj) in order to indicate a fulfilment of a prophesy, which
puts forward some common traits of these quotations. We look into the characteristics of
these formula quotations in the later part of this chapter.

1.1.1 Origin of the Term “Fulfilment Quotation”

The term “Fulfilment Quotation” is not the first technical term used for this type of
Quotation10. Soares Prabhu goes as far as Holtzmann’s Hand–commentar (1882), to find out
the earliest term used for this type of quotations. Holtzmann called these quotations as
“Reflexionscitate11” in contrast to the “Contextcitate” taken over from Mark. By consulting
the commentaries from the second half of the 19th century12, Soares Prabhu observed that the
term “Reflexionscitate” is conspicuously absent. And the term “Formula Quotations” seems to
be more recent and first used by S. E Johnson in his article on Matthean quotations in the
Harvard Theological Review of 1943. From this point the use of this term became so
technical among the scholars and more studies appeared elucidating the nature of the text–
form of the fulfilment quotations and to find out the source, if there is one, behind these
special ‘text–type’ and their origin. Among them, Krister Stendahl is well known with his
publication of The School of St. Matthew in 1954 in which Stendahl argues for a “School of
Matthew” behind the text–form of these fulfilment quotations. From this period there seems
to be an emerging trend of studies on the Fulfilment Quotations in Matthew13. Thus these

10
The term formula quotation is an abbreviation of “Fulfilment Formula Quotation.
11
It denotes the reflex awareness of the Old Testament quotations.
12
Commentaries of Baumgarten-Crusius (1884); P. Schegg (1856); H. Lutteroth (1860), C. F Keil (1877); P.
Schanz (1879); E. Zittel (1880); T. Naville (1892).
13
Menken observes, “In the view of Robert Gundry,…all these mixed quotations ultimately go back to the
apostle Matthew, who ‘was his own targumist and drew on a knowledge of the Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek
textual traditions of the Old Testament (Robert Horton GUNDRY, The Use of the Old Testament in St.
Matthew's Gospel with Special Reference to the Messianic Hope, Leiden, Brill, 1967, p. 172). Davies and
Allison state that the evangelist Matthew knew both Greek and Hebrew, and that he was responsible for the
fulfilment quotations, which show a textual mix of LXX and Hebrew text (William David DAVIES and Dale C.
ALLISON, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel according to Saint Matthew 2. Commentary on
Matthew 8 – 18, The International Critical Commentary, Edinburgh, T & T Clark, 1991, pp. 32 – 58). According
to G. M. Soares Prabhu, the fulfilment quotations ‘are to be ascribed to Matthew, translating freely from the
Hebrew, in a community familiar with the LXX (George M. SOARES PRABHU, The Formula Quotations in
the Infancy Narrative of Matthew: An Enquiry into the Tradition History of Mt 1 – 2, Rome, Biblical Institute
Press, (AnBib 63), 1976, p. 105). Recently, Richard Beaton, after examining the fulfilment quotations from
3
fulfilment quotations prepare the reader to acknowledge how God’s previously announced
purpose has reached its due conclusion in Jesus.

1.1.2 The Fulfilment Quotations in the Entire Gospel.

The number varies from 10 to 14. Before the creation of the term “fulfilment formula
quotations” the number was mainly based on the citation of the Old Testament. But strictly
taking into consideration the special traits of “fulfilment formula”, all agree unquestionably
on ten quotations (1, 22f; 2, 15; 2, 17f; 2, 23; 4, 14f; 8, 17; 12, 17f; 13, 35; 21, 4f; 27, 9f)
which show without ambiguity the form and character of a fulfilment quotation. There are
four other quotations which are the subject of discussion among the scholars about their status
as formula quotations (2, 5f; 13, 14f; 26, 54; 26, 56).

Here we shall look at the ten “Fulfilment Quotations” to see the common traits of
Matthew’s Fulfilment Quotations.

Mt 1, 22 Tou/to de. o[lon ge,gonen( i[na plhrwqh/| to. r`hqe.n See the parallel form in
u`po. tou/ kuri,ou dia. tou/ profh,tou( le,gontoj( 21, 4

Mt 2, 15 i[na plhrwqh/| to. r`hqe.n u`po. tou/ kuri,ou dia. tou/

profh,tou( le,gontoj(

Mt 2, 17 To,te evplhrw,qh to. r`hqe.n u`po. VIeremi,ou tou/ Parallel formula in 27, 9

Isaiah in Mt 1, 23; 4, 15 – 16; 8, 17 and 12, 18 – 21, cautiously states that Matthew may have used and edited
various text forms, among which he also reckons revisions of the LXX (Richard BEATON, Isaiah’s Christ in
Matthew’s Gospel, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, (SNTSM, 123), 2002) And finally Menken admits
that it is not easy to determine the textual type of fulfilment quotations. Maarten J. J. MENKEN, Matthew's
Bible: The Old Testament Text of the Evangelist, Leuven/ Paris/ Dudley, Leuven University Press/ Uitgeverij
Peeters, (BETL, CLXXIII), 2004, pp. 4 – 5.
4
 profh,tou( le,gontoj( and plhrwqh/| is missing

Mt 2, 23 o[pwj plhrwqh/| to. r`hqe.n dia. tw/n profhtw/n( o[ti

Nazwrai/oj klhqh,setaiÅ

Mt 4, 14 i[na plhrwqh/| to. r`hqe.n dia. VHsai<ou tou/ See 12, 17

profh,tou le,gontoj\

Mt 8, 17 o[pwj plhrwqh/| to. r`hqe.n dia. VHsai<ou tou/

profh,tou le,gontoj\

Mt 12, 17 i[na plhrwqh/| to. r`hqe.n dia. VHsai<ou tou/ See 4, 17, and there are
profh,tou le,gontoj\ variants instead of i[na
using o[pwj as that of
Mt 8, 17

Mt 13, 35 o[pwj plhrwqh/| to. r`hqe.n dia. tou/ profh,tou

le,gontoj\

Mt 21, 4 tou/to de. ge,gonen i[na plhrwqh/| to. r`hqe.n dia. tou/ See 1, 22
profh,tou le,gontoj\

5
Mt 27, 9 to,te evplhrw,qh to. r`hqe.n dia. VIeremi,ou tou/ See 2, 17
profh,tou le,gontoj\

While we look at the Masoretic Text and the Septuagint of the above ten fulfilment
quotations, the text form of most of the quotations is remarkable. Maarten Menken’s
observation on this subject reveals the peculiarity of these quotations. Menken rightly remarks
that “Matthew’s fulfilment quotations are notorious for their peculiar textual form”. The
Matthean text–form differs substantially from the Masoretic Text and the Septuagint.
However we can notice a ‘closeness’ to one of these sources: Some are closer to the
Masoretic Text than to the Septuagint, while in some others we observe the contrary.

Considering the placing of these fulfilment quotations in the outline of the Gospel,
they are spread over the Gospel, in a peculiarly unbalanced way. We can find almost half of
them (four) in the first two chapters of Matthew, which are named after the Infancy Narrative
(Mt 1, 22 – 23 = Is 7, 14; Mt 2, 15 = Hs 11, 1; Mt 2, 17 – 18 = Jr 31, 15; Mt 2, 23 [Judg. 13,
5. 714]). The next four occur during Jesus’ public ministry outside Jerusalem (Mt. 4, 14 – 16 =
Is 8, 23 –9, 1; Mt 8, 17 = Is 53, 4; Mt 12, 17 – 21 = Is 42, 1 – 4; 13, 35 (Ps. 78, 2)); and the
last two cover the Passion Narrative by their presence in the beginning and at the end of the
Passion Narrative (Mt 21, 4 – 5 = Is 62, 11; Zech. 9, 9; 27, 9 –10 [Zech. 11, 12 – 13; Jr 18, 3;
59,6 – 9]). Closely observing this uneven placing of these fulfilment quotations, we can
assume along with Menken that Matthew added the fulfilment quotations at strategic points in
his Gospel: Infancy Narrative – the beginning, Public Ministry in Galilee – the middle, and
the passion Narrative – the end.

1.1.3 Characteristics of a Fulfilment Quotation

14
This quotation apparently cannot be found in the Old Testament. While Menken regards Judg. 13, 5. 7 as the
primary source of the quotation (Maarten J. J. MENKEN, “Fulfilment of Scripture as a Propaganda Tool in Early
Christianity,” in Pieter W. VAN DER HORST, Maarten J. J. MENKEN, Joop F.M. SMIT and Geert Van
OYEN, (eds.), Persuasion and Dissuasion in Early Christianity, Ancient Judaism, and Hellenism, Leuven,
Peeters, [BibET, 33], 2003, p. 177)
6
1.1.3.1 i[na – – o[pwj – – to,te

According to Menken “the function of the fulfilment quotations is best determined on

the basis of the formula with which Matthew introduces them. When we look at the above 10
fulfilment quotations, it’s quite clear that each quotation commences with one of these three
terms i[na – o[pwj – to,te . Considering the difference between the three terms Soares Prabhu
observes in line with Schanz, McNeile and Gnilka “ the replacement of i[na by to,te is a
deliberate attempt to avoid the impression that the calamity (narrated) is to be imputed to the
divine purpose. It is not ‘in order’ to fulfil the word of the prophet (i[na plhrwqh) that the
event occurs; rather, it is through the occurrence of the event that the prophecy is in fact
fulfilled (to,te evplhrw,qh)”. The term to,te occurs only twice in 2, 17 and 27, 9. All other
instances use the term i[na – o[pwj (1, 22; 2, 15; 2, 23; 4, 14; 8, 17; 12, 17; 13, 35; 21, 4). This
change of terms seems to be deliberate and suggests that that fulfilment formulas in Matthew
are artificial literary constructions, fashioned with great care. According to Zahn, in the Old
Testament quotations which are fulfilled by single events or episodes in the life of Jesus we
find i[na plhrwqh (1, 22; 2, 15; 4, 14; 21, 4) and o[pwj plhrwqh introduces those which refer
rather to the activity of Jesus as a whole (8, 17; 13, 35). This observation of Zahn is
contestable on the basis of the fulfilment quotation 12, 17 – 21, where the quotation is
introduced by i[na plhrwqh, which seems to refer to more than one event. However Zahn is
silent about this fulfilment quotation.

1.1.3.2 dia. tou/ profh,tou – tou dia. VHsai<ou – – dia. VIeremi,ou

In all the fulfilment quotations one or two among these three phrases are present: dia.
tou/ profh,tou – tou dia. VHsai<ou – dia. VIeremi,ou. These three nouns always preceded by the
preposition dia. Matthew quotes from different Old Testament books namely Isaiah,
Jeremiah, Hosea, Zechariah and Psalms. But Matthew gives only the names of two sources
although he quotes from a minimum of five. He quotes Isaiah three times (4, 14; 8, 17; 12, 17)
and he uses the name Jeremiah twice15. Among the two quotations from Jeremiah, only in one

15
“According to Rothfuchs, Matthew wanted Isaiah’s name associated with the salvific work of Jesus to the lost
house of Israel (4, 14; 8, 17; 12, 17; 13, 35), just as he wished to associate the opposition of the Jewish
authorities against the Messiah and the resultant rejection with the prophet Jeremiah (2, 17; 27, 9)” William
David DAVIES and Dale C. ALLISON, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel according to
Saint Matthew vol. 1. Introduction and Commentary on Matthew I – VII, The International Critical Commentary,
Edinburgh, T & T Clark, 1988, p. 212. When we consider Mt 12, 17 – 21, where the conflict with and rejection
by the Pharisees and the Nations/Gentiles will hope on his name, seems to be in line with the observation of
Rothfuchus.
7
instance is it correct (2, 17); but in 27, 9 the quotation is from Zech 11, 13. It is not quite
clear why Matthew used the name of prophet Jeremiah instead of Zechariah or otherwise why
he used the precision dia. VIeremi,ou when it is possible to use dia. tou/ profhtou. The phrase
dia tou/ profh,tou is found thirteen times and only in Matthew does he point to it as Matthean
vocabulary. Outside the fulfilment quotations, this word is found in the introductory formulas
(2, 5; 3, 3 and 24, 15) which seem to be redacted by Matthew himself. The plural dia. tou/
profh,tou through the prophets (Mt. 2, 23; 13, 35) indicates that Matthew probably was not
able to identify the quotation which he received. Possibly a copy of the Minor Prophets was
not accessible to the evangelist. Pointing to this situation, Luz’ observation on the current
situation of the community that no longer belongs to in the Synagogue community seems to
be plausible. In addition, the term le,gontoj which follows these expressions (dia. tou/
profh,tou – tou dia. VHsai<ou – dia. VIeremi,ou) is found in nine out of ten fulfilment
quotations, and thus cannot be taken as one of the common characterestics of in all the
Matthean fulfilment quotations.

1.1.3.3 plhrwqh/|

This verb is used in Matthew fouteen times to indicate the fulfilment of Scripture. It is
found in all ten of our fulfilment formula quotations and in Mt 26, 54 and 26, 56. Among the
Synoptics, Matthew is first in the list using it 16 times, while in Marc and Luke; it appears 2
and 9 times consecutively. This verb is used in the passive implying God’s activity ‘what God
foretold by the mouth of the prophets…he thus fulfilled’ (cf. Acts 3, 18)16. The consistent
occurrence of this term in all the fulfilment quotations, and even where there are instances of
Old Testament citations, proves to be something significant for Matthean redaction.

1.1.3.4 to. r`hqe.n u`po. kuri,ou

The verb le,gw is used in the aorist passive participle17. The word is truly spoken by
God through the prophets18 of the latter days of the Evangelist. This word occurs thirteen

16
William David DAVIES and Dale C. ALLISON, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel
according to Saint Matthew vol. 1, Introduction and Commentary on Matthew I – VII, The International Critical
Commentary, Edinburgh, T & T Clark, 1988, p. 211.
17
Menken observes, “Nineteen times Matthew make use of the aorist passive of le,gein , elsewhere in the NT, we
find it only five times (three times in Paul’s letters, twice in Revelation). The participe r`hqei,j does not occur in
the NT outside Matthew’s Gospel; Matthew has it not only in introductory formulae to the ten fulfilment
quotations, but also in 3, 3; 22, 31; 24, 15,” Maarten J. J. MENKEN, Matthew’s Bible: The Old Testament Text
8
times and is only found in Matthew. Besides the ten fulfilment quotations we find this term in
3, 3; 22, 31 and in 24, 15. Considering their parallel text in the Synoptics19, we can assume
that Matthew redacted this term by himself. The phrase “u`po. kuri,ou” does not occur in all the
fulfilment quotations. We can find this phrase in two fulfilment quotations, before the phrase
dia. tou profh,tou in Mt 1, 22 and in 2, 15. Soares Prabhu’s observation on the presence of the
phrase only in two fulfilment quotations based on the arguments of McNeile and Pesch points
to the theologically motivated insertion by Matthew: ku,rioj without an article, as McNeile
points out, is a quasi–proper name, and refers the words quoted directly to Yahweh. But the
u`po. kuri,ou of the formula does more than draw explicit attention to the divine origin of the
words quoted – already suggested by the passive to. r`hqe.n, and implicit in the instrumental
dia. tou profh,tou. Pesch has brilliantly demonstrated a Christological point. The two speak of
ui`o,j – who is emphatically identified by the u`po. kuri,ou of the introductory formula as ui`o,j
qeou/. In Mt 2, 15 to. r`hqe.n u`po. tou/ kuri,ou unanimously points to ui`o,j mou ; while in 1, 22
the ui`o,j of the quotation, though not expressly described as ui`o,j mou, is designated as such
by the context which speaks of his birth as from the Holy Spirit (1, 18. 20)”. Allison–Davies
also follows the same observation stating that the argument given by Pesch is plausible:
Matthew wants ‘Son’ to be associated with God. Meanwhile the fulfilment quotation of Mt
12, 17 – 21, seems to present Jesus clearly as ui`o,j qeou, while the formula u`po. kuri,ou is
lacking in the quotation. Thus the observation given by Soares Prabhu and Allison–Davies
seems to lack precision.

1.2 Conclusion

Basing our research on the above analysis, we concur with Menken and Miler who
argue for the number of ten. The text type of the above defined formula is found in each of
these ten fulfilment quotations. The phrase dia tou/ profh,tou and to. r`hqe.n occur only in
Matthew. And the sentence i[na – o[pwj – to,te plhrwqh/| to. r`hqe.n [u`po. kuri,ou] dia. [VHsai<ou /
VIeremi,ou]tou/ profh,tou le,gontoj is a Matthean innovation and whose parallel can be found
nowhere else. Soares Prabhu therefore observes it as thoroughly redactional. And Matthew is
certainly responsible for the various modifications of the Grundform, all of which are
intentional changes adapting the formula to its context. Mt 12, 17 which reads i[na plhrwqh/|

of the Evangelist, Leuven/ Paris/ Dudley, Leuven University Press/ Uitgeverij Peeters, (BETL, CLXXIII), 2004,
pp. 2 – 3.
18
Prophets are the instruments of God : Ezek 38, 17; Dan. 9, 10.
19
Mt 3, 3 = Mk 1, 2 = Lk 3, 4; Mt 22, 31 = Mk 12, 26 = Lk 20, 37; Mt 24, 15, Mk 13, 14 = Lk 21, 20
9
to. r`hqe.n dia. VHsai<ou tou/ profh,tou( le,gontoj( demonstrates all the text–forms required to
be called a fulfilment formula quotation20. Here we have the precise reference to the prophet
VHsai<ou. But we lack the phrase u`po. kuri,ou which calls into question the remark of Allison–
Davies and Pesch. And in certain manuscripts this fulfilment quotation commences with o[pwj
(L W Q f 130233 ) instead of i[na : here Zahn’s observation on the difference in the use of
i[na and o[pwj and therefore o[pwj seems to be plausible on the ground of indicating the
activity of Jesus as a whole instead of a single event. At the same time we cannot simply
neglect i[na considering the frequently cited first order manuscripts (a B C D 0281 f1 33. 1424
pc) and therefore it seems to be the original reading.

Through these four chapters, we have created a ‘platform’ for our passage under
study: we placed this passage in the wider structure of chapters 11 and 12, where the theme of
rejection and reception of Jesus is well highlighted. Furthermore passage 12, 17 – 21 is placed
in the midst of conflict and confrontation, rejection and reception, stubbornness and mercy,
violence and nonviolence. Here Matthew ‘creates’ his fulfilment quotation, by taking a
citation from Isaiah 42. For Isaiah, it was essential to exhort Israel, who were in a historical
context of losing their Promised Land and Temple and were suffering under the unbearable
‘yoke of slavery’ without any hope of the future. Isaiah foretold a suffering ‘Servant’ in order
to give them hope. While Matthew uses this fulfilment quotation to present his Jesus, who is a
meek “Son–Servant” in the midst of conflict and controversies. At the beginning of the
chapter 11, Matthew addresses the response of the people to his words (chapters 5 – 7) and
deeds (chapters 8 – 9) and to the Messiah and his mission (chapter 10). The responses are then
narrated in the chapters 11 and 12. The section is preceded by the rejection of Jesus by the
Pharisees and by Israel, culminating in the announcement of a new community of those who
do God’s will and are thus Jesus’ “family” (12, 22 – 50). After creating a ‘platform’ for the
fulfilment quotation 12, 18 – 21, with the above factors, we shall enter into the rigorous
exegetical analysis of the text.

Conclusions: Matthew “Targumist”

Thus Matthew well inserts this first ‘Servant Song’, which conveyed a strong hope for
the people of God under the burdensome ‘yoke’ of exile, in order to inculcate the same strong
hope to a ‘group’ who are in a context of controversies and under the burdensome ‘yoke’ of

20
Mt 12, 17 never caused any problem as it was considered as a fulfilment formula quotation amongst scholars.
10
the law. However, the above analysis revealed that the Matthean text differs obviously from
the Septuagint and the Masoretic texts. The changes and differences appear to be the result of
an editorial work. The Christian editor of Is 42, 1 – 4 worked on older versions of the text
with a method called “midrashic” which we have tried to describe in the above section.

The results of this analysis can be summarized thus: the text cited by Matthew does
not perfectly match with the Masoretic text nor the Septuagint, but it resembles them. Then it
is possible that Matthew made a choice among the existing textual traditions. Moreover, he
translated himself according to the “targumic” methodsof his time, but always adapting the
textual form of the citations to the evangelical context. Without being quite unique in this
case, Matthew proved great originality in his method of writing, especially through his use of
fulfilment quotations. Some of the techniques employed to present the mystery of Christ,
come directly from the Jewish way of reading the Scriptures. And other methods are an
original extension designed to highlight the novelty of Christianity.

The Evangelist thus gives himself the right to modify the texts of the Old Testament
basing himself on the context of the Gospel narrative. From the above analysis, certain
features of the “sitz im leben” of this text are obvious: 1. simultaneous presence of a mixed
community with Jewish and Gentile elements, which faces a crisis on the mission to the
Gentiles. 2. Knowledge of the Scriptures in Hebrew and Greek. 3. A demand to live the
‘weightier matters of the Law’, and rather not to be prejudiced by mere practices and
traditions of the Law 4. Presentation of his Jesus and his Church as a continuation and
fulfilment of the Scriptures.

Thus, Matthew chooses between the Hebrew text, the Septuagint and targumic
translations – and even creates his own translation suited for his milieu, opting for that which
is best fitted for the fulfilment of the prophecies in Jesus Christ21. So, the author of the text of
Mt 12, 18 – 21, as an editor, marked by the interpretative process of his milieu, constitutes a
method of fulfilment quotations, richer than a static comparison of the literary data alone. It is
within the old Jewish exegesis and in continuity with it that Matthew elaborates his project of
the Redaction of Scripture. And it seems to classify his originality as the “Scribe become
disciple of the Kingdom of heaven..., who brings forth out of his treasure, things new and old”
(Mt 13,52).

21
Claude TASSIN, « Matthieu ‘Targumiste ?’ L’exemple de Mt 12, 18 (= Is 42, 1), » EstB 48 (1990), p. 213.
11
 Thus as Matthew as ‘Targumist’ took over Old Testament passages already known in
Christian usage, he reproduced the familiar wording. But when he was the first to apply the
Old Testament as being fulfilled in the life of Jesus, he adapted the wording to best fit his
purpose22. Even though the alteration and modification made to Isaiah’s text could be justified
by this special Matthean ‘style’ of redaction, adapting it to ‘his context, there remain some
prevalent issues: What is the significance of this quotation in the context of conflict and
controversy over the practice of the law between Jesus and the Pharisees? Three reactions
resulting from these controversies also are very relevant: the Pharisees’ plot to destroy Jesus,
Jesus’ withdrawal, the crowd following Jesus and His healing them ‘all’. Jesus’ response and
that of crowd are further underlined in the Isaian quotation such as I will announce
justice/judgment to toi/j e;qnesin to the Gentiles/Nations(12, 18). And the e;qnh
Gentiles/Nations will hope in his name (12, 21). It provokes another issue, why the Gentile
‘factor’ is an essential element in Matthean Christology and Ecclesiology?

22
Graham Norman STANTON, “The Origin and Purpose of Matthew’s Gospel: Matthean Scholarship from
1945 to 1980, in Hildegard TEMPORINI and Wolfgang HAASE, (eds.), Aufstieg und Niedergang de römischen
Welt, Teil II, Band 25, Teilband 3, New York/ Berlin, Walter de Gruyter, p. 1933
12
13