The prophecy attributed to Jeremiah in Matthew 27:9 has long puzzled Bible scholars. This verse reads: “Then was fulfilled what was spoken by Jeremiah the prophet, saying, ‘And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of him on whom a price had been set by some of the sons of Israel.'” The confusion arises from the fact that this prophecy is not found anywhere in the book of Jeremiah, but rather comes from Zechariah 11:12-13. So why does Matthew attribute it to Jeremiah?
There are several possible explanations that Bible scholars have proposed:
1. It was a scribal error
The simplest explanation is that it was a scribal error made by a later copyist of Matthew’s gospel. Ancient manuscripts were all hand-copied by scribes, and errors could easily creep in. The name “Jeremiah” may have been substituted for “Zechariah” by accident. This view holds that Matthew originally wrote “Zechariah” but it was later corrupted.
Many scholars find this explanation plausible given the frequency of minor scribal errors in New Testament manuscripts. As the original autographs of the gospels do not exist, we cannot know for certain if this attribution was in Matthew’s original writing or was a later mistake.
2. Jeremiah’s writings stood first in Matthew’s Bible
Another possibility is that Jeremiah’s writings were placed first in the collection of prophetic books in Matthew’s Bible. Jewish Bibles in the first century arranged the prophets differently than modern Bibles, with Jeremiah occupying the first position. If this was the case, Matthew may have cited “Jeremiah” as shorthand for the section containing the prophets.
So Matthew would be attributing the prophecy generally to the prophetic corpus, not Jeremiah specifically. This explanation takes the attribution as more of a literary designation than a false attribution.
3. Conflation of prophetic words
Related to the previous view is the idea that Matthew is conflating words from Jeremiah with the prophecy from Zechariah due to their similarity. In Jeremiah 32:6-15, Jeremiah buys a field and in 32:9 he weighs out silver, linking it to the buying of the field. Matthew may be blending the weighing of silver in Jeremiah with the 30 pieces of silver from Zechariah 11 into one composite prophetic reference.
This view sees Matthew drawing a connection between the symbolic actions regarding silver in both prophetic books. The weighing of silver in Jeremiah provides the detail that is not in Zechariah’s prophecy.
4. Jeremiah wrote Zechariah 11:12-13
Some scholars in church history believed Jeremiah wrote the book of Zechariah, or at least portions of it. If Jeremiah was regarded as the author of Zechariah 11, then Matthew’s attribution makes sense. However, there is no solid evidence for Jeremiah’s authorship of Zechariah, so most modern scholars reject this explanation.
5. “Jeremiah” as a prophecy collection
Building on the previous explanations, some scholars argue that the name “Jeremiah” had become shorthand for the section of the Hebrew Bible containing the prophets. Just as the Psalms are referred to as the “Psalms of David,” Jeremiah’s name could have been used for the prophetic books generally. So Matthew is referring to the canonical collection of prophetic writings.
The main support for this view is that there are rabbinic sources that seem to use “Jeremiah” to designate the Prophets section of the Hebrew canon. So Matthew may be reflecting this designation that was common in Jewish circles.
6. Zechariah’s prophecy echoes Jeremiah
Another suggestion is that Matthew deliberately attributed the prophecy to Jeremiah because Zechariah’s prophecy echoes the themes and wording of Jeremiah’s temple sermon in Jeremiah 7. Both mention silver being brought into the house of the Lord and both condemn the priests and rulers for hypocrisy and wickedness.
So Matthew emphasizes Jeremiah because he is the more well-known prophet and Zechariah is elaborating on his themes. Jeremiah’s stature gives added weight to the prophecy’s fulfillment.
7. Jeremiah added material to Zechariah
Some scholars propose a more direct literary relationship between Jeremiah and Zechariah. One suggestion is that Jeremiah first uttered the prophecy but Zechariah later incorporated it and expanded on it. An alternate possibility is that Zechariah originally gave just the first half of the prophecy in Zechariah 11:12, and Jeremiah later supplied the additional details in the second half of verse 13.
Under either scenario, Jeremiah contributed significant wording to the final form of the prophecy, warranting him being cited as a source. But concrete evidence for such dependence is minimal.
8. Matthew paraphrased from memory
A simpler explanation is that Matthew was loosely quoting from memory and misattributed the prophecy to Jeremiah. Ancient writers did not have written texts in front of them as modern writers do, and it was common to quote from memory. So Matthew may have simply remembered the prophecy but attached the wrong prophet’s name.
Many find this explanation reasonable given that Matthew got other minor Old Testament details wrong elsewhere, implying he was not consulting the biblical texts directly as he wrote.
Conclusion
In the end, scholars are divided over the best explanation for this discrepancy. The possibilities include a scribal error, a literary convention, a conflated reference, and simple misattribution from memory on Matthew’s part. But the bottom line is that Matthew 27:9 is referring to the prophecy in Zechariah 11:12-13, and the attribution to Jeremiah has no bearing on the meaning or fulfillment of the prophecy in the passion narrative.
While the attribution issue remains puzzling, possible solutions have been offered. Most scholars emphasize that whatever the reason for the “Jeremiah” reference, it does not undermine Matthew’s reporting of the details surrounding Judas’ betrayal and the use of the 30 pieces of silver. The Old Testament prophecy is still rightly seen as fulfilled in the events Matthew records about the death of Jesus.
The attribution debate highlights the complexities of interpreting Scripture and the challenges in understanding the ways New Testament authors referenced and used the Old Testament. But ultimately it is just a minor Biblical puzzle surrounding an important prophecy that found its fulfillment in the atoning death of Jesus on the cross.
