Thank you for the hermeneutic question of Matthew 2 quoting Hosea 11, “What hermeneutic methods did the Matthew use in quoting Hosea 11 —- He clearly used that quote out of context?”
If I may venture an answer for one’s consideration on Matthew citing Hosea 11 on Matthew 2:15, from a both historical, exegetical, and eschatological viewpoint.
The citation of the passages:
Matthew 2, “13 When they had gone, an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream. “Get up,” he said, “take the child and his mother and escape to Egypt. Stay there until I tell you, for Herod is going to search for the child to kill him.” 14 So he got up, took the child and his mother during the night and left for Egypt, 15 where he stayed until the death of Herod. And so was fulfilled what the Lord had said through the prophet: “Out of Egypt I called my son.”[c] 16 When Herod realized that he had been outwitted by the Magi, he was furious, and he gave orders to kill all the boys in Bethlehem and its vicinity who were two years old and under, in accordance with the time he had learned from the Magi.
Hosea 11, “When Israel was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called my son. 2 But the more they were called, the more they went away from me.[a] They sacrificed to the Baals and they burned incense to images. 3 It was I who taught Ephraim to walk, taking them by the arms; but they did not realize it was I who healed them. 4 I led them with cords of human kindness, with ties of love. To them I was like one who lifts a little child to the cheek, and I bent down to feed them” (NIV).
For one’s consideration, Matthew may have cited the narrative of parallelism or analogy of Exodus 4:22–23 of Pharaoh killing the Jewish baby boys in Egypt and subsequent their departure to the Promised Land to King Herod attempting to kill the Jewish baby boys and the subsequent departure to and from Egypt by Joseph and Mary to the Promised Land. The author may be alluding that there are individuals who sought to kill the Promised Child of the Jewish people as Pharaoh and King Herod.
Another consideration is foreshadowing. The events of the Old Testaments and from the Tabernacle may also have an implied future event or symbolizes a person or event that will ultimately fulfilled that event. For example, the writer of Hebrew refers to the Tabernacle constructed by Moses is only a reflection of the heavenly Temple or the high priest making the yearly sacrifice implies that another person must come to end the sacrifice for sins (Hebrews 4–5).
Hebrew 9 says this, “Now the first covenant had regulations for worship and also an earthly sanctuary. 2 A tabernacle was set up. In its first room were the lampstand and the table with its consecrated bread; this was called the Holy Place. 3 Behind the second curtain was a room called the Most Holy Place, 4 which had the golden altar of incense and the gold-covered ark of the covenant. This ark contained the gold jar of manna, Aaron’s staff that had budded, and the stone tablets of the covenant. 5 Above the ark were the cherubim of the Glory, overshadowing the atonement cover. But we cannot discuss these things in detail now.
6 When everything had been arranged like this, the priests entered regularly into the outer room to carry on their ministry. 7 But only the high priest entered the inner room, and that only once a year, and never without blood, which he offered for himself and for the sins the people had committed in ignorance. 8 The Holy Spirit was showing by this that the way into the Most Holy Place had not yet been disclosed as long as the first tabernacle was still functioning. 9 This is an illustration for the present time, indicating that the gifts and sacrifices being offered were not able to clear the conscience of the worshiper. 10 They are only a matter of food and drink and various ceremonial washings—external regulations applying until the time of the new order” (NIV).
If the first tabernacle was to illustrate the need of someone or something to remove the need of sacrifices, then one might be able to imply that someone or something is foreshadow or depicted in some manner in the Old Testament.
In the case of Matthew 2:14–15, Matthew realizes that there is more to the account of the Israelites coming out of Egypt and being loved by God, but that fulfillment of deliverance is to come through the one, my son, not sons as to the Israelites, but to the Son of God. Matthew didn’t have to allude to the words of Exodus 4:22–23, but he does so to show that the deliverer was to come out of the nation of Israel from one of the tribes of Israel. Thus in my opinion, Matthew from hindsight saw the foreshadowing of the Israelites coming out of the Egypt into the Promised Land to be ultimately fulfilled by the One who came out of Egypt to bring in the Kingdom of God.
From the reader’s perspective, one sees it as referring to the Israelites coming out of Egypt, but from God’s perspective he was seeing the One coming out of Egypt to bring in the Kingdom of God. It is God’s One and Only Son whom God ultimately called my Son.
SUMMARY: The hermeneutical method is illustration and foreshadowing.
For more perspectives: