“Open Bible” by Ryk Neethling (2011), shared under a Creative Commons Attribution License
I recently finished a read-through of the Bible, during which I kept track of every instance the New Testament quotes an Old Testament passage.
I counted only direct, explicit quotations, such as those introduced with “it is written,” or “as it says in the Law of Moses.” I gave some leniency, allowing clear quotations on the list even if introduced by a mere “for.”
I did not include any mere allusions or references to people or events in the Old Testament. I don’t think such allusions are unimportant; I just think they can be difficult to measure. For example, when Paul says he was “rescued from the lion’s mouth” (2 Tim 4:17), is that an allusion to Daniel 6:22-23 (which we probably think of first), or to Psalm 22:21 (which is more linguistically likely)? It’s hard to say. Therefore, I left such unclear examples off the list altogether. One unfortunate result is that books like 2 Peter, Jude, and Revelation, which contain Old Testament allusions in almost every verse, are almost completely absent from the list.
This list has all the Old Testament books that are never explicitly quoted in the New Testament.
-
Judges
-
Ruth
-
Ezra
-
Esther
-
Ecclesiastes
-
Song of Solomon
-
Lamentations
-
Obadiah
-
Jonah
-
Zephaniah
They’re mostly short books, except for Judges. Also, Ezra & Nehemiah were on one scroll (in Hebrew) and were likely to be considered a single book with a unified literary structure. Thus, since Nehemiah is quoted (John 6:31), we could possibly take Ezra off this list. For the same reason, we could potentially remove Obadiah and Jonah, as the twelve minor prophets were on one scroll, considered one book (named “The Twelve”).
Let’s not conclude, however, that the books on this list are unimportant. They are the Word of God, and, as such, they are useful for teaching, reproof, correction, and training in righteousness (2 Tim 3:16). But as we seek to interpret and apply these books, we have few scriptural examples to guide us, and we must instead rely on more general principles from the rest of Scripture. We ought to be less dogmatic about what we come up with. For the raw data listing every quotation, see the resources page.
What strikes you about this list? How ought it to inform our Bible study?
I realize it doesn’t meet your requirements for being quoted, but I would think that Jesus explicitly mentioning Jonah in a way that makes you consider the story of Jonah might be a good reason to remove it from the list.
I was also surprises that Ezekiel isn’t quoted. While it’s not explicit, I think there’s a thematic connection that’s helpful between Ezekiel 34 and John 10.
Also, would being mentioned in a genealogy be a good reason to remove a book from this list? While not a direct quote, this would connect the people from these books to Jesus, which helps us see how these stories fit into the rest of the bible.
Thanks for your comment, Jeremy. Many of these books are mentioned or alluded to in the NT (for example, Hebrews 11:32 mentions numerous characters from Judges. You mentioned Ezek 34/John 10, another good example).
On this list, however, I was limiting the data to texts that are explicitly quoted in the NT.
I don’t believe the Rechab of Matthew’s genealogy is the same Rahab as Judges, that Rahab is spelled different when Paul and James mention her. the Greek spelling more aligns more with the Rekab of 1 Chronicles 2, the last verse.
Wow, this was an amazingly well written response to the 10 OT Books… article. Well done, sir. Many blessings in Je’sus to you and your family.
Now I assume that all of these books were in the LXX but what about the other books that were not quoted from? Such as the Deutornemical (sp?) books.
Jake, I did not keep track of quotes from deutero-canonical books. Everything on this list was from the Old Testament canon, as recognized by Protestants.
None of the deuterocanonical books are directly quoted, but a few are obliquely referenced. Note that the Hebrew Bible considers the minor prophets (Hosea to Malachi) to be a single book.
Well ….the book of Jude quotes from the book of Enoch and the Assumption of Moses !
Neither Enoch nor the Assumption of Moses are in the Septuagint. These are part of the Pseudigraphia, so I wasn’t including them. Only the Ethiopian Orthodox include them in the canon.
The book of enoch was not included in the hexaplaric correction of the lxx as edited by origen and publiced by eusebious, but was indeed used by the jewsih sect called the essens, several copies of the book in hebrew and arameic were found in the caves of the dead sea. the book was known by the jews in palestine in the first century as james attested by quoting it. the book was also translated to greek very early in times, all the antenicean father knew it in greek as origen atested but only a minority of jews and christian keep it as canonic (the jews and christian in eritrea and ethiopia) are the only modern christian that keep it in their canon.
The name of Jonah is quoted by Jesus! 🙂
Yes, that is true. And many of the judges are mentioned by name in Hebrews. But this list is counting only direct, explicit quotations, such as those introduced with “it is written,” or “as it says in the Law of Moses.” The text of the book of Jonah is nowhere directly quoted in the NT.
This is good because in ‘Evidence that Demands a Verdict’ one of the arguments Josh McDowell uses for not including the Deutero-Canonicals is that Christ does not quote from them.
Mark 14:21 (NRSV)
For the Son of Man goes as it is written of him, but woe to that one by whom the Son of Man is betrayed! It would have been better for that one not to have been born.”
Matthew 26:24 is similar. There is an explicit reference to it being written but it is not in the canonical OT.
Enoch 38:2
And when the Righteous One shall appear before the eyes of the righteous,
Whose elect works hang upon the Lord of Spirits,
And light shall appear to the righteous and the elect who dwell on the earth,
Where then will be the dwelling of the sinners,
And where the resting-place of those who have denied the Lord of Spirits?
It had been good for them if they had not been born.
It’s interesting that the New Testament explicitly endorses Hanukkah as a Holy Day in John 10, but not Purim.
However i have a theory the Books of Maccabees claimed credit for Hanukkah, and tried to for Purim, but that Hanukkah really goes back to Haggai 2, and possibly Leviticus 24.
If Hanukkah went back to Leviticus, it’d have been mentioned in Leviticus 23. And, Josephus was also explicit that Hanukkah began with the Maccabees.
Our modern Chapter Divisions were not in the original texts, Leviticus 25 shows that YHWH is still dealing with the Calendar.
Josephus was using 1 Maccabees as his source, he’s not an independent witness to anything.
For several years, I have doubted that Esther is the “word of God.” This is a theory of mine based upon several facts.
Firstly, as you mention, Esther is never quoted by Christ or his apostles. This is a fact.
Secondly, Esther is the only book from today’s Hebrew scriptures that was not found amongst the Dead Sea Scrolls excavation. This is a fact.
Thirdly, God is never mentioned in the Book of Esther. This is a fact.
Fourthly, Esther and Vashti are not known queens in Persian history. The wives of Xerxes are known to historians today, and they do not include an unknown Jewish maiden. Kings in those days married for power and influence. They didn’t have to conduct beauty contests (or sex contests?) to pick a woman. A king in those days would take any woman that he wanted — thus harems. This is a historical fact.
Fifthly, I find it very questionable that God would promote “whoring around” to gain his objective. In the story of Esther, each virgin would spend one night with the king, and she wouldn’t return unless he requested her. These women were then sent to the concubine quarters. Esther pleased the king more than all the other virgins and she was made queen. The story reads more like a Jewish Cinderella story with sexual undertones. This is not a fact, but an observation of mine.
Esther foreshadows Jesus fulfillment of Passover just as much as Exodus 12 does. Esther is part of why the Resurrection had to be on the 17th of Nisan.
How does the Esther story foreshadow “Jesus’ fulfillment of Passover”? How do you know that the resurrection occurred on Nisan 17? Thank you.
Because Jesus died on the 14th and rose 3 days later. And Because the Triumphal entry fulfilled the 10 of Nisan.
I’m not seeing the correlation.
Anyhow, I guess you know that the measurement of days, months and years changed between the centuries of Xerxes and Yeshua Mashiach; plus, they have changed since Yeshua Mashiach and today’s calendars.
When Moses first wrote about Passover, the name of the first month was Aviv (Exodus 13:4). The name “Nisan” didn’t exist. The month name “Nisan” is of Assyrian-Babylonian origin; “Nisan” is a month name which was probably adopted after Babylonian conquest.
I don’t think anyone claims to know the exact date of when Yeshua was crucified. Even the gospel of John and the three synoptic gospels don’t agree on the day of the week in which Yehshua died. John’s gospel has Christ crucified on the day of Passover (as the sacrificial lamb). The synoptic gospels have Christ crucified after he and his disciples ate Passover dinner (the “last supper”).
To discuss what day Yeshua of Natzaret was crucified is straining at a gnat while swallowing a camel. The date is not the focus of the event. The important aspect is that Yeshua of Natzaret died for our sins. The dates pale in significance.
What we need to realize as devoted Christians is that God’s word is pure and it is true. But, God gave us a warning not to “add to or take away from” his word (Deuteronomy 4:2, Proverbs 30:6). Do you think that God had an inkling that people might try to change his word for their own selfish purposes? You betcha!
I know for a fact that people have changed God’s word. One of the best examples is that throughout the Hebrew scriptures in most English translations, the name of Yahweh (יהוה) has been removed from scripture and replaced with either LORD or GOD in all caps — more than 6,500 times!
Hebrew scriptures that are quoted in the New Testament (the original topic of this blog page), such as Joel 2:32 (which is quoted by Peter in Acts 2:21 and by Paul in Romans 10:13), we are getting truth that has been “modified” by man. The oldest Hebrew manuscripts have that Joel 2:32 is written as — “Whoever calls on the name of Yahweh shall be saved.” Remember that no original writing of scripture has ever been found to date. So most scholars accept the oldest scriptures of any Bible manuscript as the best source. These changes are translated incorrectly in the Old Testament and then the incorrect translation is carried to the New Testament.
When translators do make a change, they have to change other scriptures to make everything “line up.” As any good accountant will tell you, once you cheat on the books, you have to keep changing the numbers to hide that first act of cooking the books
So, as a Christian, I have to constantly seek for which words in our today’s “Bible” is pure truth from God, and which items have been modified (added to or taken away) from God’s truth.
After studying the book of Esther (because I used to love this book), I had to conclude from the accumulated facts that it is not the word of Yahweh. I was disappointed about this conclusion — but I’d rather have pure truth. Fairy tales are not true; for instance, Cinderella — it’s a great story — but it’s not true.
Here’s a tool that I believe God gave us to help us discern what is his word and what isn’t. “When a prophet speaks in the name of Yahweh, if the thing doesn’t follow, nor happen, that is the thing which Yahweh has not spoken: the prophet has spoken it presumptuously, you shall not be afraid of him.” (Deuteronomy 18:22)
I have seen certain New Testament “promises” that have “failed” so it makes me suspicious that they are Yahweh’s truth. I come to that conclusion based upon Deuteronomy 18:22.
We have to be wise as serpents but as harmless as doves.
No, the Synoptics do not say the Last Supper was a Passover Sedar, inf act I find that higlhy unlikely since there was no Lamb. They all place the Crucifixion on the 14th of Nissan.
https://midseventiethweekrapture.blogspot.com/2014/07/the-crucifixion-points-to-30-ad.html
Also, concubinage and polygyny are in fact allowed in Scripture (which never once mandates monogamy).
Part of your objection to Esther is Prudish Augustinian Sexual Morality that NONE of The Bible actually endorses as much as you think it does. Women “whore around” to achieve God’s objective in Judges as well.
So…you believe that the God who created the entirety of the universe, including the smallest particles of you, is incapable of ensuring that His Scripture is brought together and revealed to mankind in the manner in which He desires? That’s essentially what you’re saying. You’re telling us that the Master and Creator and Ruler of the universe was unable to stop man from including a book in His Holy Scriptures that He didn’t intend to go in there. Hmm…interesting.
The Jewish people as you know were captives in a foreign land along with captives from other nations. When the King directed those under him to find the beautiful young women, they went all over the territory held by the Medes and Persians. I didn’t matter who they were Moredecai and Esther had no choice in the matter. It is evident that they were faithful Jews. In Joshua God used a prostitute named Rahab to accomplish His purpose. In fact God used a murder named Moses, a man named David you had an illicit relationship as well as murdering her husband. God used many people who were not pristine to accomplish His purpose. And God used Moredecai and Esther to defeat those who wanted the Jews killed. Sex is not the only sin, but God uses those of us who are sinners to live according to His purpose and the purpose He has for our individual lives. God’s chosen people still celebrate Purim today.
Jesus makes a comment about ‘Kicking against the Goads/Pricks” at Paul’s conversion. Many thing this is quoting Euripides Bacchants. But I think that is possibly actually an allusion to Ecclesiastes.
Esther is being read inside, out! The Spiritual man will see Esther as a warning to be watchful towards an ungodly powerhungry Jewish dispora, that rejects the culture, of their host, usurps government, and commits genocide, like the Bolshieviks, and Jews in Spain did for 400 years!
Am I the only person who is bothered by the book of Esther? I read this book and I keep wondering where God fits in. “ Meanwhile, the remainder of the Jews who were in the king’s provinces also assembled to protect themselves and get relief from their enemies. They killed seventy-five thousand of them but did not lay their hands on the plunder.” (Esther 9:16)
It is not mentioned in the Dead Sea Scrolls. Jesus and the apostles never mention it. I just wonder if it is…
I can see why you might be uncomfortable with the Violence there, but it was in Self Defense, even in the New Testament Jesus says we should have Swords. Frankly the Torah itself has more questionable Violence then Esther.
Chuck Missler liked to say that Esther is about how Coincidence are God working under cover.
Hey. Do you have a list with all the books of the OT mentioned (even if not quoted) in the NT? Thanks
Unfortunately we don’t.
No problem. Thanks.
Every example of the NT quoting the books of Samuel of Chronicles is also a quote of the Psalms, of that Historical Book incorporating a Davidic Psalm. And the only example of it quoting the books of Kings is a quote of Elijah.
Shouldn’t the we consider the inconsistencies between those two records a reason to view them as conflicting witnesses? I dare say they present more problems for NT theology then Esther which many want to attack.
Thank you for this helpful study. You asked: “How ought [this list] to inform our Bible study?” That is a good question. Here is some background thinking and an answer from my perspective.
There is a very popular view that essentially says that Christians cannot properly understand the Old Testament unless it is read through the lens of the New Testament. There is a sense in which this is a sound and helpful idea.
But the way it is commonly applied leads to strained interpretation that many words that the Old Testament authors used and their authorial intent based on those words. One of the benefits of your study is to expose a way that this approach impoverishes many Old Testament texts. In the Old Testament books as a whole, there are vast portions that are not only not quoted, but also are not alluded to in the New Testament. If the New Testament is our only lens, how does it help with those passages? Ordinary Christians who want to read and understand Scripture for themselves receive little or no help.
Your study points to the need to equip people to just read each text for what it says, not to look somewhere else for understanding of that text. The authors (human and divine), wrote with an intention in each text and wrote in a way that ordinary people, guided by the Spirit, could understand that intention. If Christians are trained to examine the text well and think about the implications of the words, they will understand.
Thank you for what you are doing to accomplish that.
For those troubled with the book of Esther, there seem to be a number of evidences that Ahasuerus of Esther is Artaxerxes of Ezra Chp. 7-10 & the book of Nehemiah. We should not be surprised that a king can have more than one name as seen from Israel/Judah kings in Kings/Chronicles. Here’s four correspondences I’ve come across that may link these two as being the same king. 1) There are 7 counselors in Ezr 7:14 which are named in Est 1:14, 2) both rule from Shushan (Neh 1:1, Est 1:2), 3) the queen of Neh 2:6 could indeed be Esther, and 4) this king (Ahasuerus/Artaxerxes) is a drunkard! Nehemiah is his cupbearer of wine (Neh 2:1) and just search the word “wine” in Esther (1:7, 1:10, 5:6, 7:2,7,8). He’s not only merry with wine, he holds wine parties! No wonder people were perplexed at his hasty decision making (Est 3:15). Thus, if these are the same king, Esther is linked to the books of Ezra & Nehemiah.
If the above is true, two interesting stories take place at the same time in the 7th year, 10th month of this king’s reign. In Judah Ezra commands the men of Judah to separate from their heathen wives, while in Shushan Esther becomes queen. What a beautiful picture of redemption.
Please do not turn to secular chronology of the Media/Persia kings as a source of truth, seek the truth where it may be found.
Ezra clearly places Ahasuerus between Darius and Artaxerxes. The entire idea of making him Artaxerxes comes form the errors of the Septuagint and Josephus.
My bible class taught by Dr. Chris Hulshof teaches that every book in the old testament testament is quoted somewhere in the new testament besides the book of Esther
If I’ve missed any direct quotations in my analysis, please let me know!
I”m not satisfied that the New Testament can be said to quote either Samuel or Chronicles, those quotes are also also Psalms, it’s more like these two Biographers of David simply quotes the same Davidic Psalms he does.
Likewise I think Nehemiah is simply also drawing on Psalm 78.
I also think Hebrews 13:5 is far more likely to have verses from Deuteronomy about YHWH promising not to Forsake us then that verse from Joshua which was itself only referring back to Deuteronomy as Joshua often does.
Add to that how New Testament quotations of Kings all comes from one Chapter and all seem to more about Elijah then the narrator of Kings.
I don’t like admitting this, but I’m partly growing skeptical of the entire Historical genre of the TNAK outside of the Torah itself. Judaism divides the TNAK into three categories, Torah, Prophets and Writings, the New Testament only refers to the Law and the Prophets, but does give Prophetic status to the Davidic Psalms and Daniel.
At the very least, areas where Chronicles and Samuel-Kings are in apparent disagreement the new Testament seems to side against Chronicles. Like on whether or not the Samaritans should be considered Gentiles.
Matthew seems to have at least been familiar with Ruth, since her names appears only in that book in the TNAK. Also the generation between Nasshon and Boaz is spelled Salmon only in Ruth, Chronicles prefers Salma.
Don’t take that comment seriously, I consider this idea sometimes but usually quickly abandon it.
Paul quotes positively what is called “a testimony collection” recounted only in the book of 1 samuel:
act 13:14
And when he had removed him, he raised up unto them David to be their king; to whom also he gave testimony, and said:
“I have found David the son of Jesse, a man after mine own heart…which shall fulfil all my will.”
1. the complete quote as such do not exist in any part in the OT,
2. the masoretic, the targum of pseudojonathan and the lxx do not render this verse in first person but in second person.
3. only the portion “a man after MINE own heart” except by the conjugation of the first person, is a verbatium quote witnessed by the masoretic and LXX in 1 samuel 13:14 where read : “a man after HIS own heart”
4. the portion “which shall fulfil all my will.” is a verbatium quote of a reading variant present only of this verse on the targum of pseudo jonatan, where appear instead of the “a man after mine own heart”.
conclusion Paul is indeed quoting from 1 Samuel. FROM different reading traditions.
that is the only unambiguous quote i could found of the book of Samuel in the NT, apart of just references. aside this, external evidence show that the book of kings and samuel was indeed circulating at the time of christ. in palestine, in qumram has been found fragment in hebrew from 2 sammuel and 1 kings:
1Q7 : 2 Samuel 18:17–18; 2 Samuel 20:6–10; 21:16–18; 23:9–12.
5Q2 : 1 Kings 1:1,16–17,27–37
while nothing from what is called “corpus chronister” had been found: 1-2 chronicles, esdras nehemias, all of them supously written by esdras according to the talmud tradition.
The book of sirach writed in the 2BC do not account neither for this books.
relevant to the period is to point that A contemporary of the apostles: Clement of Rome in his letter 1 clement 18:1 combine reading from LXXpsalm 88.20 and LXX1 sam 13.14.
i have not found any unambiguous quotation from 1-2 chronicles esdras nehemias in the NT.
Josephus in the first century attested the existence of Greek LXXesdrasA which he quotes but do not seem to know Hebrew Esdras and nehemias, as he never quote them.
i believe untill evidence show differently that what we called the books of “corpus chronister” werent edited in Hebrew in their masoretical form but until the end of the first century or beginning of the 2century. then was translated by theodocion to Greek and enter in this way in christian collections as ESDRAS B.
the oldest manuscript evidence of chronicas are from 2/3 century in greek
2Chr 24 PLondChrist 3 = PEgerton 4 (parch, space/punct; KS)
3ce [#971] vh075 t051A
2Chr 29-30 PBarc 3 (pl) [ed 2ce, t 3ce) 2/3ce [#?] vh076 t051
there in not preserved manuscript fragments from esdras or nehenmias neither in hebrew or greek until the 4th century greeks unicials.
Doesn’t Romans 3:10 quote Ecclesiastes 7:20?
That’s a good question, but the language doesn’t appear to be close enough to conclude a citation of Ecclesiastes. The language matches the Septuagint of Psalm 14/53, with one change (“righteous” for “good”).
Obadiah, Jonah, and Zephaniah can be taken off, as they were originally included in a single book called The Twelve Prophets.
Thanks. A nice read. No one knows whether Jesus could speak Hebrew. In his time, the LXX (a Greek translation of the Hebrew) was commonly used. It is more likely that Jesus spoke Greek than Hebrew, and his mother-tongue was most probably not Hebrew but Aramaic, which he is quoted speaking in the gospels.
Ergo, on a side note, neither was he necessarily called “Yeshua”, whilst the name “Jesus” is an anglicisation of the Greek, “Iesous” as we find it in the NT. But we NEVER find any record anywhere of Jesus being called “Yeshua”. Not even once.
I wonder about Jesus speaking Egyptian and maybe even Latin? Food for thought.
I wonder how Jesus could could teach in the temple without speaking Hebrew……at age 12. Are we saying the the Jewish Rabbi’s were teaching Torah in Greek….in the temple?
Jonah – as was in the belly of the whale 3 days, so too … Just process that
In Acts 18:6, when Paul states that “your blood be on your own heads” is clearly a reference from Ezekiel.
Perhaps, but even if so, it is clearly an allusion and not a quotation. This list is tracking only quotations.
I like the discussions. I believe the Bible, as we have it today, can be understood by anybody as much as one’s effort. There is the main message simple and clear, which is the most important, but there are infinte deep things to consider too, which are for grownups. Heb 5:10
Moreover, there will always be questions, other wise there will not be knowledge, that is how it works. If we become discouraged everytime a controversy arises, then we are drifting away from knowledge. That’s how it works, hence such discussions.
I like the ‘enlightment spirit’ which reclaimed the Bible from the churches to the ‘ordinary’ person.
It is my belife that God does not inspire anybody to understand his word, neither individual nor church, but that everybody is entitled to do that given his motive and effort. Matthew 7:7, Daniel 12:4
I have many things to say on the subject matter under discussion, but I am always unsure of my knowleadge hence prefere to learn.
Thank you
Interesting article and conversations. I enjoyed reading all of it.
For those who brought up the canonicity of Esther, can anyone provide counterpoint to why Esther should be considered Scripture other than it’s preservation?
Hebrews 11 refers to what can only be found in 2 Macc 6 and 7. On YouTube there is a great video on this: The Apocrypha Apocalypse Challenge.
Also Jesus talks about the Golden Rule—“do unto others” — That comes from Sirach. (Or is it Tobit?). Not a direct quote but clearly mentioned in that book.