Matthew 23:35

ὅπως ἔλθῃ ἐφ’ ὑμᾶς πᾶν αἷμα δίκαιον ἐκχυνόμενον ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς, ἀπὸ τοῦ αἵματος Ἅβελ τοῦ δικαίου ἕως τοῦ αἵματος Ζαχαρίου υἱοῦ Βαραχίου, ὃν ἐφονεύσατε μεταξὺ τοῦ ναοῦ καὶ τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου.

So that upon you may come all the righteous blood shed on the earth, from the blood of Abel the righteous to the blood of Zechariah son of Berechiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar.

Matt 23:35 [Textus Receptus (Elzevir) (1624)]87-88
Ὅπως ἔλθῃ ἐφ’ ὑμᾶς πᾶν αἷμα δίκαιον, ἐκχυνόμενον ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς ἀπὸ τοῦ αἵματος Ἅβελ τοῦ δικαίου ἕως τοῦ αἵματος Ζαχαρίου υἱοῦ Βαραχίου, ὃν ἐφονεύσατε μεταξὺ τοῦ ναοῦ καὶ τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου.

MSS: E, F, K, M, S, Y, Ω, 7, 8, 10 (f62r), 11 (f112r), 12 (p155), 22 (f48v-49r), 43 (f51v-52r), 44, 157, 201 (f60rc1-2), 438 (f105v-106r), 556, 700, 771, 901 (f42v), 1582, 1701 (f50v), ℓ339, ℓ339 (ii) (f161vc1)

Matt 23:35 [Peshitta]
ܐܰܝܟ݁ܰܢܳܐ ܕ݁ܢܺܐܬ݂ܶܐ ܥܠܰܝܟ݁ܽܘܢ ܟ݁ܽܠܶܗ ܕ݁ܡܳܐ ܕ݁ܙܰܕ݁ܺܝܩܶܐ ܕ݁ܶܐܬ݂ܶܐܫܶܕ݂ ܥܰܠ ܐܰܪܥܳܐ ܡܶܢ ܕ݁ܡܶܗ ܕ݁ܗܳܒ݂ܶܝܠ ܙܰܕ݁ܺܝܩܳܐ ܘܰܥܕ݂ܰܡܳܐ ܠܰܕ݂ܡܶܗ ܕ݁ܰܙܟ݂ܰܪܝܳܐ ܒ݁ܰܪ ܒ݁ܪܰܟ݂ܝܳܐ ܗܰܘ ܕ݁ܰܩܛܰܠܬ݁ܽܘܢ ܒ݁ܰܝܢܰܝ ܗܰܝܟ݁ܠܳܐ ܠܡܰܕ݂ܒ݁ܚܳܐ܂

Matt 23:35 [Vulgate]
ut veniat super vos omnis sanguis iustus qui effusus est super terram a sanguine Abel iusti usque ad sanguinem Zacchariae filii Barachiae quem occidistis inter templum et altare

Critical Apparatus :

(1) οπως : B, D, E, F, G, K, L¹, M, S, W, Y, Δ, Ω, 1, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 22, 43, 44, 157, 201, 438, 490, 556, 700, 771, 892, 901, 1582, 1701, ℓ339, ℓ339 (ii),
(2) οπω : L*
(3) οπως αν : א¹, C, 13, 33, ℓ1086,
(4) εως αν : 4

(5) παν : א¹, B, C, D, E, F, G, K, L, M, S, W, Y, Δ, Ω, 1, 4, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 22, 33, 43, 44, 157, 201, 438, 490, 556, 700, 771, 892, 901, 1582, 1701, ℓ339, ℓ339 (ii), ℓ1086,
(6) OMIT παν : א*

(7) εκχυνομενον : E, F, K, L, M, S, Y, Ω, 1, 4, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 22, 43, 44, 157, 201, 438, 490, 556, 700, 771, 892, 901, 1582, 1701?, ℓ339, ℓ339 (ii), ℓ1086, Stephanus, Beza, Elzevir
(8) εκχυννομενον : א, B, C, G, W, Δ, 9, 13, 33, Lachmann, Tischendorf, Tregelles, Westcott & Hort, Weiss, von Soden
(9) εχχυννομενον : D

(10) του αιματος (i) : א, B, C, E, F, G, K, M, S, W, Y, Δ, Ω, 1, 4, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 22, 43, 44, 157, 201, 438, 490, 556, 700, 771, 901, 1582, 1701, ℓ339, ℓ339 (ii), ℓ1086,
(11) OMIT του : D, L, 33, 892

(12) του αιματος (ii) : א, B, C, D, E, F, G, K, L, M, S, W, Y, Δ, Ω, 4, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 22, 43, 44, 201, 438, 490c, 556, 700, 771, 901, 1582c?, 1701, ℓ339, ℓ339 (ii), ℓ1086,
(13) OMIT του : 1, 33, 490*, 892, 1582*?

(14) υιου βαραχιου : א¹, B, C, E, F, G, K, L, M, S, W, Y, Δ, Ω, 1, 4, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 22, 33, 43, 44, 157, 201, 438, 490, 556, 700, 771, 892, 901, 1582, 1701, ℓ339, ℓ339 (ii), ℓ1086,
(15) υιου βαραχειου : D
(16) OMIT υιου βαραχιου : א*

A Textual Commentary On Matthew 23:35

(a) Another argument on which some critics ground the later date of Matthew’s Gospel, is the mention of Zachariah, son of Barachiah, who is said to have been slain between the sanctuary and the altar (Matt. xxiii. 35). Hug, Credner, Eichhorn, and apparently Weiss,¹ suppose that this Zachariah is Zachariah the son of Baruch, whose murder at the commencement of the Jewish war by the Idumeans in the temple is mentioned by Josephus ; ² and hence they argue that the Gospel was not written until after this event ; that it was an assertion put into the mouth of our Lord by the writer of this Gospel. Hug attempts to escape the objection drawn from this anachronism by supposing that our Lord spoke of the death of Zachariah in a prophetic spirit although in the Gospel it is mentioned as a past event (ὃν ἐφονεύσατε) ³ But the supposition is wholly fanciful. The Zachariah of Josephus is the son of Baruch, not of Barachiah. There is indeed a difficulty in identifying the person of whom our Lord speaks with any prophet mentioned in the Old Testament ; but the common opinion is probably correct, that the allusion is to Zachariah the son of Jehoiada, who was murdered in the court of the temple by order of King Joash ⁴ (2 Chron. xxiv 20-22).

1 Weiss, Einleitung in das N.T. § 47, trans. vol. ii.

2 Josephus, Bell. Jud. iv. 5. 4.

3 Hug’s Introduction to the N.T. vol. ii. p. 12, Eng. trans.

4 The difference of name, Jehoiada instead of Barachiah, is a difficulty. In the Gospel according to the Hebrews, Zachariah is called, not the son of Barachiah, but the son of Joiada. Ebrard, taking into account the extreme age of Jehoiada, supposes that Zachariah was his grandson. Is it not possible that it might have been the prophet Zechariah who is called the son of Barachiah ? (Zech. i. 1).

(Patton James Gloag, Introduction to the Synoptic Gospels, p. 142)

(b) Jerome, Comm. in Matt. xxiii. 35, In Evangelio quo utuntur Nazareni pro filio Barachiae filium Ioiadae reperimus scriptum- ‘In the Gospel which the Nazarenes use we find “son of Joiada” written for “son of Barachias.”‘
No Zacharias son of Barachias is known except the minor prophet of that name. There is no Jewish tradition that he died à violent death, and there is not the slightest doubt that the person referred to is the ‘Zechariah the son of Jehoiada’ of 2 Chron. xxiv. 20, 21, who actually was stoned in the court of the priests, between the altar of burnt offerings and the Temple itself, and whose death forms the subject of one of the wildest Talmudic legends. As the murder of Abel comes first in the Old Testament so in the Jewish arrangement of the books the murder of the son of Jehoiada came last.
The words ‘son of Barachias’ in Matt. xxiii. are indeed left out by א and Eusebins, but are kept by V ACD, the Latin versions, the Thebaic, the Pěshiţtā, by Irenaeus, and by Origen ; the Curetonian Syriac, which is deficient here, probably contained them also, for it adds them to Luke xi. 51. Thus the testimony both of numbers and antiquity compels us to keep the words, and to account for them as best we can.
It is next to impossible that the original reading was simply ‘Zacharias.’ No authority previous to the 4th cent. omits the words ‘son of Barachias.’ And the name ‘Zacharias’ of itself so naturally suggests the minor prophet that a copyist who believed him to be the person intended would scarcely think it needful to indicate him more closely by adding ‘son of Barachias.’
On the other hand it seems most improbable that this glaring mistake should be due to the Jewish writer himself. I believe that the Gospel according to the Hebrews has kept the original reading, and that the passage passed through three different forms :-
(1) Zacharias son of Jehoiada — so the original ;
(2) Zacharias son of Barachias – so a very early copyist (or the translator if the Greek Matthew be a translation), knowing only the minor prophet, and correcting, as he thought, the mistake ;
(3) Zacharias by itself — so some later copyists, correcting the real mistake of No. 2.
(Edward Byron Nicholson, The Gospel According To The Hebrews, p. 59)