Does the New Testament Misquote the Old Testament?

Does the New Testament misquote the Old Testament?
Greg Beale-professor of New Testament and biblical theology at Westminster Theological Seminary-answers this common question.

[@Ancient_Oracle]

This makes me smile... Amen

[@lawrencestanley8989]

According to Gleason L. Archer and Gregory C. Chirichigno's work, "Old Testament Quotations in the New Testament: A Complete Survey," pp. 25-32, Jesus and the Apostles chose to quote MUCH more from the Septuagint than they did from the Hebrew Text (340 times from the Septuagint to just 33 from the Hebrew Text) and that accounts for the differences that we see in our English Bibles. This can be seen in passages like Hebrews 8:9 and Jeremiah 31:32. Why we still use the Masoretic text as a basis for our modern English Bibles is beyond me...

[@ribsybrown510]

So Jesus whom christians claim is god or the son of god and the apostles whom christians claim were inspired by god's holy spirit had to quote from a translation. So God does not know Hebrew the language He created. Jesus was not the Messiah and the Christian bible(wrongfully called the new testament) was not inspired by our Creator. That is why there are so many discrepancies in it. And in some cases the writers of the christian bible changed Hebrew/Jewish bible scriptures to support christianity. Hebrews 10:5 is supposed to be quoting Psalms 40:6. Hebrews 8:9 is supposed be quoting Jeremiah 31:32.

[@Hebrew42Day]

@@ribsybrown510 They have not yet been given eyes to see...

[@Migger_29]

@@Hebrew42Day what if you are the victim of cult-like programming in that what you perceive to be spiritual eyes is simply you being duped.

[@StudioGalvan]

The Holy Spirit Erred when speaking to Mark!? 😲 😵Impossible. Isaiah was the first and greatest book of the Nevaim (The Writings of The Prophets). That entire section was called "The Prophets" and was sometimes any writing in it was referred to in this way. That's why some early translators (who did not wish to confuse us) and Mark (and the Holy Spirit) ARE ALL CORRECT!

[@sponge6171]

the new testament doesnt reinterpret the old testament, it appropriates it (not in a bad way) to communicate to its second temple audience.

[@rocketmanshawn]

The likes refute the comments

[@Hebrew42Day]

0:31 -> "Scripture does say it is fully divinely inspired." This comment from "Paul" (And scholars debate on that for this epistle) could _NOT_ have been self-referential as Protestants believe. He is pointing you toward what they believed scripture _WAS_ before the Romans compiled the NT, and declared these 27 books canon. Let's review as the answer is also in scripture. Luke 24:27, what does Jesus say is "Scripture"? The law of Moses, and the Prophets. Acts 24:14, what does Paul say is "Scripture"? The law of Moses, and the Prophets. This in itself should make you wonder, "Am I actually reading the same thing as Paul and my Savior?" The answer is resoundingly _NO_ 0:59 -> "usually what you find aligns" If only that were actually true. Here's but _ONE_ example. Paul quoting "Isaiah" Rom 11:26 NKJV - And so all Israel will be saved, as it is written: "The Deliverer will come out of Zion, And He will turn away ungodliness from Jacob; Rom 11:27 NKJV - For this [is] My covenant with them, When I take away their sins." Isaiah quoting YHVH: Isa 59:20 NKJV - "The Redeemer will come to Zion, And to those who turn from transgression in Jacob," Says the LORD. Isa 59:21 NKJV - "As for Me," says the LORD, "this [is] My covenant with them: My Spirit who [is] upon you, and My words which I have put in your mouth, shall not depart from your mouth, nor from the mouth of your descendants, nor from the mouth of your descendants' descendants," says the LORD, "from this time and forevermore." The context here is nothing about the covenant REMOVING SIN - read Isaiah 59. Further, Paul gets the formula in the first verse BACKWARD. Let's look at the specific differences. Paul: He will turn away ungodliness from Jacob Isaiah: TO THOSE WHO TURN FROM TRANSGRESSIONS IN JACOB Paul puts the onus for our sin on God. Isaiah puts the responsibility to STOP SINNING on US, not on God. This is a _HUGE_ deal as the Donald would say. Paul completely twisted what Isaiah said. The problem is he does this _ALL OF THE TIME_ Blaming God for our sin, is the reason James wrote his epistle. 1:18 -> "We wouldn't expect a photographic image" This is what Torah demands of itself, but it's also what we should expect when other books are quoted. Let's take a look at when Paul misquoted Torah. Rom 10:8 NKJV - But what does it say? "The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart" (that is, the word of faith which we preach): What does it say? He's quoting "Scripture" and it is YOUR job to make sure he's doing so FAITHFULLY. What does it _ACTUALLY_ say? Deu 30:14 NKJV - "But the word [is] very near you, in your mouth and in your heart, that you may do it. That we may _DO_ IT - not that we BELIEVE the word which Paul preached. Paul completely stripped these three verses OUT of context, and ALTERED TORAH (Deut 4:2) to support HIS presupposition of saving faith. 1:23 -> "progressive revelation" Christians love this term to defend completely changing the Torah and the Prophets. However, what does YHVH warn? Mal 3:6 NKJV - "For I [am] the LORD, I do not change; Therefore you are not consumed, O sons of Jacob. Amo 3:7 NKJV - Surely the Lord GOD does nothing, Unless He reveals His secret to His servants the prophets. He does _NOTHING_ without first revealing the secret to His prophets, and He does NOT CHANGE. Progressive revelation is a crock. It's moral relativism, and ascribing it to YHVH God himself. Remember my opening - the "scriptures" of the _EARLY_ "church" was NOT THE NEW TESTAMENT. So if this dramatic faith that YOU possess is TRULY OF YHVH, you would find it THROUGHOUT the "Old Testament" as well. 1:30 -> "new details" Ecc 1:14 NKJV - I have seen all the works that are done under the sun; and indeed, all [is] vanity and grasping for the wind. Pro 24:21 NKJV - My son, fear YHVH and the king; Do not associate with those given to change; Scripture tells us and warns us that: 1) there is _NOTHING_ new under the Sun. 2) Do not (I REPEAT) _DO NOT_ go chasing after the *NEW* thing. Do not associate with those *GIVEN TO CHANGE* Yeshua (whom most of you know as Jesus) did NOT CHANGE THE TORAH. That would make him a sinner, by the Torah he dispensed to Moses. 1:40 -> "Later texts interpret earlier texts" That's like looking at a blueprint upside down, using commentary (which is essentially at best what the NT is) to interpret a book. Imagine buying the cliff notes for a massive novel, and believing you then fully understand every detail of that novel. That's what most Christians are doing, reading the NT and trying to interpret the OT through it. You are doing it BACKWARDS. There was NO NT IN THE FIRST CENTURY. It's not hard to understand what happened if you are humble. Jer 8:8 Shalom.

[@barbarianater]

Even jesus said "don't put new wine in old wineskins" Btw that was very well informed and insightful. I was kinda aware of all this already but the way u iterated it was so convincing 👏👍 i'd recommend u upload a video speaking on the matter so more people know about it

[@Hebrew42Day]

@@barbarianater I have videos on my channel covering inerrancy

[@EvaAnika]

This is what happens when someone holds on extremely tightly to what they've been taught, instead of letting the truth speak for itself.

[@percibalfelicesjr4203]

Does the New Testament misquote the Old Testament? My Short Answer: Yes! My Long Answer: By reading and studying carefully the Old Testament/Hebrew Bible, my answer would be still yes, the new testament authors really misquote the old testament scriptures to confirm what they already believe.

[@primeiraigrejabatistadesob2192]

The Word of God is the true!

[@gideonopyotuadebo2304]

There can only be one king in a kingdom. Yehovah the Almighty God is the only king of heaven and the only King of the whole earth, the only God of heaven and the only God of the whole earth. Jesus cannot be king in heaven

[@hitoshura2800]

This is the weakest explanation for the incongruity of new testament quotes for the OT. Think about this, mormonism calls itself divinely inspired aswell, there are HUGE discrepancies between its quotes and theology versus what preceeded it. They us the SAME EXACT EXCUSE, they try to explain away conflicts with "progressive revelation " and "filling out" the meaning of scripture. I'm sorry but any false prophet can use this excuse and explain away why his message doesn't match up with what came before. This doesn't work. You have to start with the framework that the new testament is the word of God in order to prove your point when what you SHOULD be doing is starting with the old testament and going from there. Progressive revelation doesn't save the new testament at all. Try harder.

[@Hebrew42Day]

Because EVERY false Christian religion is based on PAUL, who totally distorted scripture to support his false Christ.

[@gospelofthekingdom6937]

As long as the progression does not create a theological issue than this is not true. What you're saying would be valid only of progressive revelation brought forth unreconcilable theology. So your claim is a stretch although I see where you're coming from and how you could conclude that but it is not proof that the New Testament is unreliable.

[@percibalfelicesjr4203]

Agree that's why the new testament theology is different from Old testament theology such as the death and rising god theology of NT is never mentioned in the Hebrew Bible.