Matthew’s quotation of Hosea is a classic example of typology or typical fulfillment based on his deep understanding of the Scriptures and valid types already established in the Old Testament.1 In Matthew 2:15 he neither discovered new meaning of the text nor used “creative exegetical techniques” unknown or undecipherable to others,2 but rather applied his knowledge of the Scriptures in how they connected the Messiah to Israel as a nation.
A typological fulfillment of an Old Testament prophecy is based on discerning parallels and motifs that are common between the events found in the Old and the New Testaments.3 Many scholars see Matthew’s quotation of Hosea 11:1 as an example of such fulfillment. Some scholars contend that the connection between the original text and the later sense “may appear arbitrary,” and thus may or may not be repeatable today.4
Matthew and Hosea's Prophecy
Hosea 11:1 is based on Exodus 4:22-23 where God calls Israel his firstborn son. Looking back at Israel’s descending to, and their deliverance from Egypt, Hosea points at how God demonstrated his love toward his “son” Israel by delivering them from a deadly famine,5 by sending them to Egypt,6 and then by delivering them from the hands of Pharaoh. Similarly, Matthew looks at God’s deliverance of his Messiah by sending him to Egypt and then bringing him once again to his homeland. The parallelism involves deliverance from certain death by going to Egypt and then returning.7 Thus, it is natural to accept that Matthew—looking at these parallel events—used Hosea 11:1 to conclude that Jesus’s descending to, and return from Egypt provided the ultimate fulfillment of this Old Testament prophesy.8
While Matthew’s use of the Old Testament text is indeed typological—that is, deduced from existing parallels—it is not solely based on similarities in the historical events; rather, it finds its roots in the Pentateuch. Michael Rydelnik provides a compelling case when examining the second and third oracles of Balaam.9
The Oracles of Balaam
In Numbers 23:21 the Hebrew text uses the singular pronominal suffixes referring to Israel as a singular collective noun.10 In Numbers 23:22 the pronoun used suddenly becomes plural signifying that the Israelite nation is in view.11 Numbers 23:24 literally begins with “Behold, a people” to indicate that Israel as a nation is in view here.
In the third oracle, however, verse 7 refers to a seed of Israel and a king who will rise above Gog and whose kingdom shall be exalted.12 Therefore, the Targum correctly understood this oracle as messianic.13 In verse 8 the oracle provides the same prophecies regarding the promised king as the second oracle did regarding all of Israel. The below chart outlines the parallels:14
| The Second Oracle of Balaam (Num. 23:18-24) | The Third Oracle of Balaam (Num. 24:5-9) |
| v. 22: God brought them out of Egypt; he15 hath as it were the strength of an unicorn. | v. 8: God brought him16 forth out of Egypt; he hath as it were the strength of an unicorn: he shall eat up the nations his enemies, and shall break their bones, and pierce them through with his arrows. |
| v. 24: Behold the people shall rise up as a great lion, and lift up himself 17 as a young lion: he shall not lie down until he eat of the prey, and drink the blood of the slain. | v. 9: He couched, he lay down as a lion, and as a great lion: who shall stir him up? Blessed is he that blesseth thee and cursed is he that curseth thee. |
Conclusion
By juxtaposing these two oracles the pattern becomes clear: What God did for Israel, he will also do for his Messiah. When quoting Hosea, Matthew did not arbitrarily pick a verse from the Old Testament and then apply his own interpretation to it; rather, he understood well the Old Testament scriptures and used this typological interpretation, which had been already deeply founded in the earliest books of the Scriptures. This hermeneutical approach is certainly repeatable by today’s interpreters, as it simply relies on “connecting the dots” of the Scriptures and on a deep study of the word of God.
Ultimately, Matthew employed a typological interpretation of the Old Testament, but his was rooted in Scripture and supported by proper hermeneutics of the biblical text. Modern interpreters can and should do the same.
Footnotes:
1. Michael Rydelnik, The Messianic Hope: Is the Hebrew Bible Really Messianic?, NAC Studies in the Bible and Theology, ed. E. Ray Clendenen (Nashville, TN: B&H Publishing Group, 2010), chap. 7. Google Play Books.
2. William W. Klein, Craig L. Blomberg, and Robert L. Hubbard, Jr., Introduction to Biblical Interpretation, 3rd ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Academic, 2017), 263.
3. Craig L. Blomberg, “Matthew,” in Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament, ed. G. K. Beale and D. A. Carson (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2007), 8.
4. Klein, Blomberg, and Hubbard, Introduction to Biblical Interpretation, 263.
5. See Gen 41:53-57.
6. Compare God’s commandment to Isaac in Gen 26:2 to that given to Jacob in Gen 46:3.
7. Michael G. Vanlaningham, “Matthew,” in The Moody Bible Commentary, ed. Michael Rydelnik and Michael Vanlaningham (Chicago, IL: Moody Publishers, 2014), 1457. ↩
8. Blomberg, “Matthew,” 8.
9. See the second oracle in Num 23:22-24, and the third oracle in Num 24:7-9.
10. “He hath not beheld iniquity in Jacob, neither hath he seen perverseness in Israel: the LORD his God is with him, and the shout of a king is among them” (Num 23:21 – emphasis added).
11. Rydelnik, The Messianic Hope, chap. 7. Google Play Books. “God brought them out of Egypt; he hath as it were the strength of an unicorn.” (Num 23:22 – emphasis added). Notice that the switch between the plural and singular pronominal suffixes here refers to Israel and Jacob respectively (see v. 21). The author here is using compositional devices to emphasize that Israel are the descendants of Jacob and can thus be referred to with masculine singular pronouns.
12. Gog is Israel’s end-of-time enemy. Although the Masoretic Text reads Agag, the variant reading used here is based on other ancient versions as adopted by Rydelnik. See Rydelnik, The Messianic Hope, chap. 7. Google Play Books.
13. Rydelnik, The Messianic Hope, chap. 7. Google Play Books.
14. Adopted with significant modifications from Rydelnik, The Messianic Hope, chap. 7. Google Play Books.
15. Notice that the singular pronoun used here refers to Israel as explained above.
16. Unlike the second oracle, the singular pronouns here refer to the “seed” and “king” who shall rise in Israel.
17. Like v. 22, the singular pronouns here refer collectively to Israel.
