Matthew 26:14

Mat_26:14-19

Then one of the twelve, called Judas Iscariot, went unto the chief priests.

Judas, the truth sold for money

What was his prompting principle?

(1) Not a Divine impulse;

(2) or sense of public duty;

(3) or malicious feeling towards Christ;

(4) but avarice.

A man, to commit this sin, must have-

(1) Truth at his disposal.

(2) A tempting offer.

(3) Deliberately accept the offer. (Homilist.)

Men may sell the truth for money who-

(1) Have no dislike to it;

(2) feel themselves under an obligation to it;

(3) have no intention of doing any injury to it: (Homilist.)

Emblem of avarice

Gottholds sons had purchased a savings-box, to keep the little sums of money they occasionally received. They soon found that, however easy to drop the pieces in, it was much more difficult to bring them out. He thereupon observed, That is an emblem of the hearts and coffers of the vast majority of the men of these times. They are very greedy to take, but very backward to give, especially for the glory of God and the relief of the poor. Oh, how long we must shake, and how many arts we must try, before we can extract even a penny from a hard and penurious man, for the service of God or his neighbours! So long as he lives, he imagines that the business for which he came into the world is to collect and keep money; but when he has to leave the world, and when death breaks the savings-box to pieces, and he must resign his hoard to others, he does it with reluctance and displeasure. I really believe that, were it not too absurd and useless, many a miser, in making his will, would do what a miser once actually did-appoint himself his own heir. How dreadful a folly to hoard up gold, and to lose heaven.

The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Mat 26:14-16. Then one of the twelve — Judas Iscariot, having been more forward than the rest (Joh 12:4) in condemning the woman, thought himself, as it appears, peculiarly affronted by the rebuke which Jesus now gave to all his apostles. Rising up, therefore, he went straightway into the city to the high-priest’s palace, where doubtless he had received some previous information that the council would be assembled, and finding them there accordingly, he said unto them, What will ye give me — Words that show he was influenced to the infamous action partly, at least, by the love of filthy lucre; and I will deliver him unto you? — I will undertake to put him into your hands, at a time and place in which you may effectually secure him, without the danger of giving any alarm to the people. And they covenanted — Or, bargained, with him for thirty pieces of silver — That is, (reckoning each piece to be of the value of 2 Samuel 6 d.) for 3l. 15s. sterling, the price of a slave, Exo 21:32. A goodly price that he was prized at of them! Zec 11:13. The sum was so trifling that it would be unaccountable that he should have been influenced in any degree by it, to betray to death his friend and Master, had it not been that, as Luke observes, Luk 22:3, Satan at this time entered into him, which doubtless he was permitted to do to punish him for giving way to a worldly, covetous spirit, and probably for other sins, and especially his not improving the great privilege he had enjoyed for about three years, in statedly attending upon Christ’s ministry, hearing all his divine discourses, and being a constant spectator of his holy life and astonishing miracles, and having the high honour of being called to be one of his apostles. And from that time he sought opportunity to betray him — Namely, as Luke observes, in the absence of the multitude, and that officers from the high- priest and his council might come upon him and apprehend him privately.

Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

CRITICAL NOTES

Mat_26:15. Covenanted with him.—Weighed unto him (R.V.). After the old custom. There had been in the land a coined shekel since the time of Simeon, 143 B.C.; but weighing seems to have still been customary in the temple treasury (Meyer). Or “weighed” may be simply equivalent to “paid.” Thirty pieces of silver.—I.e. thirty silver shekels. G. C. Williamson, D.Lit., in “The Money of the Bible,” says, “In the time of our Lord there were no shekels current (save, perhaps, a few of the old ones), although money was reckoned in shekels, very much as in the present day reckonings are made in guineas, although no coin of the value of a guinea is in use.” Judas may have been paid in Syrian or Phœnician tetradrachms, which were of the same weight (Madden). A shekel was between two and three shillings sterling. Perhaps this was but an earnest of a larger sum.

Mat_26:17. The first day of the feast of unleavened bread.—“The feast of” omitted in R.V. The 14th of Nisan, which commenced after sunset on the 13th. Dr. Edersheim says: “Properly speaking, these two” [the “Passover” and “Feast of unleavened bread”] “are quite distinct, the ‘Passover’ taking place on the 14th of Nisan, and the ‘Feast of unleavened bread’ commencing on the 15th, and lasting for seven days, to the 21st of the month. But from their close connection they are generally treated as one, both in the Old and in the New Testament; and Josephus, on one occasion, even describes it as ‘a feast for eight days.’ ”

Mat_26:18. To such a man.—The Greek word is that used when the writer knows, but does not care to mention, the name of the man referred to (Plumptre). The Master saith.—Therefore the host in question was a disciple, but not one of the Twelve (Bengel). My time is at hand.—For the disciples the “time” may have seemed the long-expected season of His manifesting Himself as King (Plumptre). I will keep.—I keep (R. V.). The arrangements had been previously made. It was usual for the inhabitants of Jerusalem to lend guest-chambers to the strangers who came to the feast (Carr).

Mat_26:20. He sat down with the Twelve.—See R.V: sitting = reclining. The Paschal ceremonial, so far as it bears on the Gospel narrative, may be described as follows:—(a) The meal began with a cup of red wine mixed with water: this is the first cup mentioned, Luk_22:17. After this the guests washed their hands. Here probably must be placed the washing of the disciples’ feet (John 13). (b) The bitter herbs, symbolic of the bitter bondage in Egypt, were then brought in, together with unleavened cakes, and a sauce called charoseth, made of fruits and vinegar, into which the unleavened bread and bitter herbs were dipped. This explains Joh_13:26. (c) The second cup was then mixed and blessed like the first. The father then explained the meaning of the rite (Exo_13:8). The first part of the “hallel” (Psalms 113, 114) was then chanted by the company, (d) After this the paschal lamb was placed before the guests. This is called in a special sense “the supper.” But at the Last Supper there was no paschal lamb. There was no need now of the typical lamb without blemish, for the antitype was there (1Co_5:7). At this point, when, according to the ordinary ritual, the company partook of the paschal lamb, Jesus “took bread and blessed it, and gave it to His disciples” (Mat_26:26). (e) The third cup, or “cup of blessing,” so called because a special blessing was pronounced upon it, followed: “after supper He took the cup” (Luke). “He took the cup when He had supped” (Paul). This is the “cup” named in Mat_26:27. (f) After the fourth cup the company chanted (see Mat_26:30) the second part of the “hallel” (Psalms 115-118) (Carr.).

Mat_26:25. Thou hast said.—A Hebrew form of affirmation.

MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.—Mat_26:14-25

The guilt of betrayal.—This portion of Scripture begins (Mat_26:14-16), and concludes (Mat_26:23-25) with the mention of Judas Iscariot. Also in the middle (in Mat_26:21) our Saviour has him in mind. We may rightly, therefore, use the whole passage as turning on Judas, and serving to show us the true nature of that which he did. It does so, in particular, by showing us, first, how much evil his purpose involved; and, secondly, how many obstacles his pertinacity overcame.

I. The evil involved.—What utter treachery, to begin. “Judas Iscariot, which also betrayed Him.” That is the first note in the case. Treachery towards One who had favoured him much. This Judas, it is also noted, was “one of the Twelve” (Mat_26:14). One of those, i.e., who had been admitted to the special intimacy of the Man he betrayed. But for this honour he could not—as, but for his falseness, he would not—have done that which he did. Treachery also towards One who had trusted him much; in one respect, apparently (Joh_12:6), the most of the Twelve. Twofold, therefore, was the treachery of which he was guilty. He was false to kindness, and false to confidence too. Wholly spontaneous also, in the next place, his treachery seems to have been. It does not appear, from what we are told, that temptation assaulted him, as it were. It rather appears that he went after it, and sought it himself. “He went to the priests,” it is said (Mat_26:14). Probably the idea of the Saviour being betrayed by one of His disciples had never occurred to them as a possible thing. And therefore, it was, probably, that they had never thought of making any attempt in that line. Probably, also, this accounts for the peculiar satisfaction (Mar_14:11) with which they seemed to have welcomed the communication of Judas. “Who would ever have thought of our receiving such an offer as this?” Certain it is that his treachery, next, was of a very wanton description. It was not as though he had been influenced by the prospect of making any great gain by his baseness. Merely, it is said, the price of a slave (see also Zec_11:13)—a sum about large enough to purchase a plot of ground of which all the value appears to have gone, and which only afterwards could be turned to use in the way of contempt (Mat_27:7)—was all he looked for from his sin. Yet, last and worst, his resolve to commit it was of the most deliberate kind. This wretched bribe was his ruling thought—the thing he longed for—the thing he lived for—at that time. What a picture we have in Mat_26:16 of one bent upon evil! Happen what may, and come what might, so far as he is concerned, this consummate wrong shall be done.

II. The obstacles overcome.—In the case of this sin, as of so many others, there was nothing less than a whole array and succession of influences, which ought to have told in the opposite line. The holiness of that special season was one thing of this kind. Was the Passover (Mat_26:17), the great feast of the year, a time for such deeds? Was such a Passover, also, of all Passovers (see Mat_26:18), a time for such deeds? How vividly, also, at that feast itself, were the claims of the intimacy to which the Saviour had admitted Judas brought home to his notice! He was at the same table—he was partaking of the same food—he was doing so at the same time—with his Benefactor (Mat_26:23). What was he about to take with that same hand with which he had just taken that “sop”? Was there not something in such a thought which should have made him draw back? Also, at that supper, in its general sorrow, and in that which produced it, was there not much which ought to have been of an equally adversative kind? “Verily I say unto you,” the Saviour says to all, “that one of you shall betray Me.” The very suggestion is too much for every one else. Every one else is “exceeding sorrowful” at the very idea. Every one else can think of nothing worse as being possible for himself (Mat_26:22). What an object-lesson, therefore, as to the enormity of his sin for Judas himself. In the intensity of their grief, he could see what they all thought of that which he was secretly thinking of doing. If they had all known it, and stood up and adjured him with tears not to think of doing so, they could not, virtually, have said any more. And, lastly, there was the special grief of the Master Himself. What a burst of sorrow was His! How significant its direction—over Judas himself! How equally significant the time of its expression—even when inexpressible suffering was approaching Himself! How beyond description its depth—“good were it for that man if he had not been born” (Mat_26:24)! Can any one imagine a stronger appeal, whether to love or to fear?

How exceedingly great, therefore, we see, in conclusion, is the deceitfulness of sin! What was it that this unhappy man promised himself by his sin? For which he condescended to such baseness? For which he gave up so much? For which he rushed over such obstacles? For which he resisted such appeals? For which he lost his all? What strikes one so much, on this side of the question, is the amazing folly of sin! How it blinds men to truth—to affection—to honour—to all but itself! See such passages as Mat_13:22; Heb_3:13; Isa_44:20, etc., etc. Hence the wisdom of that prayer of the Psalmist’s (Psa_119:37), and of the advice given us in Heb_12:2, to “look off unto Jesus.” The only safety against that which thus bewitches men in the wrong direction, is to fix the attention on that which fascinates in the right.

HOMILIES ON THE VERSES

Mat_26:14-16. Judas the covetous.—This incident reveals Judas Iscariot. If he had intended to compel Christ to commit Himself, and begin at once His kingdom, the very last thing he could have thought of would be making money for himself out of such a transaction. We should divest our minds altogether of the idea that the case of Judas was an exceptional one. We are warranted in looking at Judas exactly as we look at any other man. He had to be exposed to temptation, but was capable of resistance. He was liable to err, to falter, to fall, but there was provided for him adequate and opportune help. Notice:—

I. A strand of weakness in his natural disposition.—The question set before each one of us is this: What can you become under the burden of your particular bias and disability? Some men are inclined to pride, some to sensualities, some to drink, and some to covetousness. The strand of weakness in Judas was the “love of money.” We are as gardens filled with various seeds, of weeds and of flowers. We can nourish the weeds, if we please. But we can cut down their growths and pluck them out if we will. Judas nourished the weed.

II. A dividing line in his history.—And there is such a line in every personal history. A time when it is settled whether the evil or the good is to be the stronger force in the life. It may be difficult to fix such a time in the case of Judas, and yet many think they find it in connection with our Lord’s very spiritual address on the “Living Bread” (John 6.). At the close of that address, the Evangelist brings Judas in. “For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray Him.” That day “many of His disciples went back, and walked no more with Him”; and it is not unreasonable to assume that, though Judas did not then break away from the apostolic company, the conviction then came to him that all his hopes were doomed to disappointment, and Jesus was no such Messiah as he had desired. Let us not fail to observe that Christ’s efforts to spiritualise the thoughts and ideas of the Apostles might have influenced Judas, as they did influence the others. They would have done so, but for the self-seeking, and money-loving, which made him insincere, and turned him into the clay which the warm, life-giving sunshine can but harden.

III. The motives of the betrayal.—He was disappointed in the thing that had grown to be the ruling power in his nature—his love of money; and the disappointed man only too easily can become the revengeful man. Such a man only awakens to behold himself when the consequences of his ill-doing are fully before him. Then such a man may feel remorse—he will not rise to healthy repentance. Judas let money rule him, and money brought him down to a woe unspeakable.—Weekly Pulpit.

Mat_26:17. Preparation for the Passover.—

1. It is commendable to remember God’s ordinances in due time, and to prepare for them.

2. Our Lord made Himself so poor that He had not a house of His own, albeit He was Owner of all the earth.

3. Our Lord subjected Himself unto the law, and did keep exactly both the moral and ceremonial law, that He might deliver us from the yoke of the one, and from the curse for breaking of the other

4. The terms of sacramental speech were well understood by Christ’s disciples, as to put the thing signified for the sign; by this phrase, “to eat the passover,” they mean “to eat the lamb,” the sacramental memorial of the angel’s passing over the houses of the Israelites in Egypt.—David Dickson.

Mat_26:18-19. “A worthy man for so holy a service.”—

1. The Lord will not want friends, wheresoever He is. Here in Jerusalem He hath friends, as He had also in Bethany.

2. He hath such control of the spirits of men, as He can bow their will to do what service He pleaseth.

3. Christ hath taken on Him to be our Teacher and to Him only the dignity of Master is due; therefore He calleth Himself “the Master.”

4. It is of His own free choice that our Lord doth employ any man more than another.

5. The more near our time to depart this life doth draw, the more careful should we be to have all things done by us which should be done; therefore saith He, “My time is at hand, I will keep the Passover.”

6. It is the part of true disciples to follow Christ’s direction in all things, and, being clear in the command, to go about the obedience of it.—Ibid.

Mat_26:20. Christ sitting with the Twelve.—

1. Neither is the sacrament the worse, nor are the communicants polluted, albeit an undiscovered hypocrite be in company with them at the Lord’s Table.

2. The Lord will not discover hypocrites till they by their own deed discover themselves, but will suffer them to lurk among the saints, till His own time come; as here He suffereth Judas to lurk and to eat the Passover.

3. Social sitting at table is a very fit posture for a religious feast.—Ibid.

The positive and the permanent.—God had commanded the attitude of standing in the reception of the paschal meal: the Jewish church having come to the land of promise, and being there at rest, reclined at the festival, and our Lord conformed to that practice—a proof that positive commands of a ceremonial kind, even of Divine origin, are not immutable, if they are not in order to a permanent end.—C. Wordsworth, D.D.

Mat_26:21-22. Our Lord forewarning His disciples.—

1. It is possible that a man may come to the Lord’s Table the one day and betray Him shortly after.

2. The possibility that a communicant may become a traitor should put all men to search themselves.

3. Sincerity and charity will make men search and suspect themselves rather than another; as here the Apostles say not, “Is it Judas?” but “Is it I?”

4. The sincere man dares not trust the deceitfulness of his own heart, but bringeth it to the Searcher thereof, and relieth upon His testimony, as here the Apostles do, saying to Christ, “Is it I?”—David Dickson.

Mat_26:22. “Is it I?”—Consider:—

I. The sorrow of the disciples.—

1. They were sorrowful that He, of all others, should be betrayed.

2. But the circumstance that affected them the most acutely was this: that their Master should be betrayed by one of them whom He was honouring by His presence and exalting by His fellowship.

II. The inquiry of the disciples.—

“Is it I?” Various feelings, no doubt, prompted this inquiry:—

1. Aversion to the crime itself.

2. Apprehension of the punishment due to such a crime.

3. Self-distrust.

4. Hypocrisy.—Judas, also, with the faithful ones, said, “Is it I?”—H. Ashbery.

Mat_26:24. Judas Iscariot.—It has been observed that our Lord Himself says the sternest as well as the most tender things that are recorded in the gospel. It is the Most Merciful Himself who says. “It were good for that man if he had not been born.” As we think over the piercing words, we see how they close for ever the door of hope, since, if in some remotely distant age there were in store for Judas a restoration of his being to light and peace, beyond that restoration there would still be for him an eternity, and the balance of good would at once preponderate immeasurably on the side of having been born. It must be good for every human being to thank God for his creation, for the opportunity of knowing and loving the great Author of his existence, unless such love, such knowledge, has been made of his own act for ever impossible.

I. There are sayings about Judas which might seem to imply that his part in life was forced on him by some inexorable destiny.—St. John says that Jesus knew from the beginning who should betray Him. Our Lord asked the assembled Apostles, “Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil?” In His great intercession He addresses the Father, “Them that Thou gavest Me I have kept, and none of them is lost save the son of perdition.” And at the election of Matthias St. Peter points to the destiny of Judas as marked out in prophecy—“His bishopric let another take”—and he speaks of Judas as having gone to his own place. This and other language of the kind has been understood to represent Judas as unable to avoid his part as betrayer, and the sympathy and compassion which are thus created for him is likely to blind us to a true view of his unhappy career. The truth is that at different times the Bible looks at human life from two very different—and, indeed, opposite—points of view. Sometimes it regards men as factors in the Divine plan for governing the world, for bringing about results determined in the Divine counsels. At other times it regards men as free agents, endowed with a choice between truth and error, between right and wrong, between a higher and a lower line of conduct; and then it enables us to trace the connection between the use each man makes of his opportunities and his final destiny. Both ways of looking at life are, of course, strictly accurate. It is no doubt difficult, if not impossible, with our present limited range of knowledge, to reconcile the Divine sovereignty in the moral world with the moral freedom of each individual man. Some of the great mistakes in theology are due to an impatience of this difficulty. If our ordL, looking down upon our life with His Divine intelligence, speaks of Judas once and again as an instrument who would contribute to the working out of the redemption of the world, the gospel history also supplies us with materials which go to show that Judas had his freedom of choice, his opportunities, his warnings, and that he became the betrayer because he chose to do so.

II. For Judas’ career illustrates, secondly, the power of a single passion to enwrap, enchain, possess, degrade, a man’s whole character.—Judas, we must suppose, had his good points, or he never would have become of his own act a disciple of our Lord Jesus Christ. But Judas had one vice or passion, the love of money, carried to a point which filled his thoughts and controlled the action of his will. Just as there are bodily diseases which, at first unobtrusive and unnoticed and capable of being extirpated, if not taken in time will spread and grow, until first one and then another limb or organ is weakened or infected by them, so that at the last the whole body is but a habitation for the disease which is hurrying it to the grave: so in the moral world one unresisted propensity to known wrong may in time acquire a tyrannical ascendency that will make almost any conceivable crime possible in order to gratify it.

III. The history of Judas shows us that great religious privileges do not of themselves secure men against utter spiritual ruin.—Religious privileges only do their intended work when they are responded to on our part by the dispositions which make the most of them, by sincerity of purpose, by a humble—that is to say, a true—estimate of self, by sorrow for past sin and by watchfulness over present conduct, by an especial care not to let any one passion acquire that preponderance and supreme place in the soul which may render all helps to holiness useless, which may forfeit all prospect of eternal peace. Judas lived in the closest intimacy with Jesus; but this intimate relation with Jesus did not save Judas from a crime compared with which that of the Jewish Rabbis, and the Roman soldiers, and Pontius Pilate, and the chief priests, and the scribes and Pharisees, was venial; it did not save him becoming the betrayer. Observe, too, in the betrayal of our Lord, the survival of religious habit when the convictions and the feelings which make religion real have passed away. Judas betrayed the Son of man with a kiss. The kiss was a customary expression of mingled affection and reverence on the part of the disciples when they met their Master. To suppose that Judas deliberately selected an action which was as remote as possible from his then true feelings is an unnecessary supposition. It is more true to human nature to suppose that he endeavoured to appease whatever there may have been in the way of lingering protest in his conscience by an act of formal reverence that was dictated to him by long habit, and that served to veil from himself the full enormity of his crime at the moment of his doing it.—Canon Liddon.

Mat_26:25. Betraying Christ.—There are other ways of betraying the Lord than by selling Him for a definite sum of money, and by sealing the hateful bargain with the kiss of treachery. I shall speak of three ways of betraying Christ, to which we seem specially liable in our own day.

I. The betrayal on the side of the intellect.—The popular intellectual position of our day is one of antagonism to Christ. The men who profess to be the leaders of our thought are never tired of telling us that the story of Jesus is a myth, and that the life of Christ in us is the result of a delusion. I want you not to betray your Lord until you are sure that He is not your Lord. I want you not to betray Christ because men say that He is disproved, but look for yourselves whether He is disproved.

II. The betrayal through the sins of our own nature.—

1. Animal appetites.

2. Covetousness.—It sometimes calls itself thrift; it sometimes calls itself economy; sometimes it is even on the plea of benevolence.

3. Unbelief.

4. Want of truth.

III. The betrayal by silence.—We are tempted to betray our Lord by silence amongst His people, and in the world where His people are not. St. Chrysostom tells us of one of the early martyrs, St. Lucian, who was brought before the tribunal of the judge to be condemned to death, and the judge said to him, “What is your name?” and he answered, “I am a Christian.” “And what is your country?” and he answered, “I am a Christian.” “And what is your business?” and he answered, “I am a Christian.” And to every question of the judge he had but one answer: “I am a Christian.” The man’s life had got absorbed in his Redeemer. He had no family, no country, no trade, except to be Christ’s and to confess Christ before men. We want Christians of that sort in the present day.—R. F. Horton, M.A.

The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary (gen. ed. Joseph S. Exell; Funk & Wagnalls, c. 1892) — public domain (pre-1929). A full-Bible homiletical/sermon-outline anthology covering 65 of 66 books (2 John is absent from the source module). Text from a community e-Sword module.

TREASON OF JUDAS

Mat 26:14-16; Mar 14:10-11; Luk 22:3-6. “But Satan entered into Judas, called Iscariot, being of the number of the twelve.” There is not an intimation against Judas till about the close of the second year of our Lord’s ministry. (Joh 6:64-71) Judas had faithfully preached these two years with the other eleven, his financial office infelicitously conducing to that fatal development of money-love. This whole year he has been gradually wrought upon more and more by Demon Avarice. Now, he even has the impudence to speak out overtly at the supper condemnatory of Mary for her lavish prodigality in pouring forty-five dollars’ worth of Oriental myrrh on the head of the Savior. Of course, this bold step encouraged Satan, who had long been tinkering with him and pulling on him, so that he proceeded at once to enter into him, thus gaining a decisive victory, and taking possession of him.

“And having gone away, he spoke with the high priests and captains as to how he might deliver Him to them.” These captains were the officers of the temple guards. The holy Temple Campus is said to contain thirty-five acres. Most of it is open pavement, where the Moslem millions now assemble on their great religious anniversaries; but where the children of Abraham, in the good olden time, used to gather, not only from all parts of Canaan, but from their Gentile dispersions in all the ends of the earth. As Jesus was a native Jew, He was never prohibited from coming into this holy area. At present, any Jew entering that holy place would be instantly killed. I have entered it twice, and both times guarded by Turkish soldiers, with loaded guns, so long as I remained in the sacred inclosure. Hence that holy place, from the days of David and Solomon, has been constantly guarded by soldiers. Of course, these temple guards were subject to the ipse dixit of the hierarchy.

“And they rejoiced, and contracted with him to give money [i. e., thirty pieces of silver, as Matthew says]. And he promised them, and continued to seek opportunity to deliver Him to them without a mob.” Such was the popularity of Jesus with the common people, that they constantly anticipated and feared that, in case of an attempt to arrest Him, a mob would rise, take Him out of their hands, and do them violence.

William B. Godbey, Commentary on the New Testament (1896–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

26:14-16 Judas sold himself to the authorities (see also John 11:57), concealed it (Matt 26:25), and then took them to Jesus at the appropriate time so they could carry out their plans (26:47-56; see John 18:2). Later, Judas was overcome by guilt and committed suicide (Matt 27:3-10; see Acts 1:15-22). Judas was apparently known for his greed (Matt 26:14-15; John 12:4-6; 13:29). It is also possible that he was motivated by disappointment over the nature of Jesus’ reign as Messiah, his own humiliation over the anointing of Jesus (see John 12:1-8), or resentment over the leadership of the Galilean apostles, Peter, James, and John. Whatever his motivation, Judas’s betrayal was a part of God’s sovereign plan (Acts 1:16-17).

Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Mat 26:14. Πορευθεὶς, departing[1118]) The disciples were not under restraint. The wicked could depart when he would.

[1118] Judas departed, doubtless, about the nightfall of Wednesday. On that very night, being possessed by Satan, he seems, as we have reason to think, to have had an interview with our Lord’s adversaries, but on the following day to have fixed with them on the further proceedings.—Harm., p. 496.

Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1860) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Mat_26:14-16. On Ἰούδας Ἰσκαρ., see on Mat_10:4.

τότε] after this repast, but not because he had been so much offended, nay, embittered (Wichelhaus, Schenkel, following the older expositors), by the reply of Jesus, Mat_26:10 ff. (comp. Joh_12:7 f.),a view scarcely in keeping with the mournful tenderness of that reply in which, moreover, according to Matthew, the name of Judas was not once mentioned. According to Joh_13:27, the devil, after selecting Judas as his instrument (Mat_13:2), impelled him to betray his Master, not, however, till the occasion of the last supper,a divergence from the synoptical narrative which ought, with Strauss, to be recognised, especially as it becomes very marked when Luk_22:3 is compared with Joh_13:27.

εἷς τῶν δώδεκα] tragic contrast; found in all the evangelists, even in Joh_12:4; Act_1:17.

In Mat_26:15 the mark of interrogation should not be inserted after δοῦναι (Lachmann), but allowed to remain after παραδ. αὐτόν. Expressed syntactically, the question would run: What will ye give me, if I deliver Him to you? In the eagerness of his haste the traitor falls into a broken construction (Kühner, II. 2, p. 782 f.): What will ye give me, and I will, etc. Here καί is the explicative atque, meaning: and so; on ἐγώ, again, there is an emphasis expressive of boldness.

ἔστησαν] they weighed for him, according to the ancient custom, and comp. Zec_11:12. No doubt coined shekels (Otto, Spicil. p. 60 ff.; Ewald in the Nachr. v. d. Gesellsch. d. Wiss., Gött. 1855, p. 109 ff.) were in circulation since the time of Simon the Maccabee (143 B.C.), but weighing appears to have been still practised, especially when considerable sums were paid out of the temple treasury; it is, in any case, unwarrantable to understand the ἔστησαν merely in the sense of: they paid. For ἵστημι, to weigh, see Wetstein on our passage; Schleusner, Thes. III. p. 122; Valckenaer, ad Eurip. Fragm. p. 288. The interpretation of certain expositors: they arranged with him, they promised him (Vulg. Theophylact, Castalio, Grotius, Elsner, Fritzsche, Käuffer, Wichelhaus, Lange), is in opposition not only to Mat_27:3, where the words τὰ ἀργύρια refer back to the shekels already paid, but also to the terms of the prophecy, Zec_11:12 (comp. Mat_27:9).

τριάκ. ἀργ.] ἀργύρια, shekels, only in Matthew, not in the LXX., which, in Zec_11:12, has τριάκοντα ἀργυροῦς (sc. σίκλους); comp. Jer_32:9. They were shekels of the sanctuary (שֶׁקֶל הַקֹּדֶשׁ), which, as containing the standard weight, were heavier than the ordinary shekels; according to Joseph. Antt. iii. 8. 2, they were equivalent to four Attic drachmae, though, according to Jerome (on Mic_3:10), whose estimate, besides being more precise, is found to tally with existing specimens of this coin, they were equal to twenty oboli, or to 3⅓ drachmaei.e. to something like 26 to 27 silbergroschen (2s. 6d.). See Bertheau, Gesch. d. Isr. pp. 34, 39; Keil, Arch. II. p. 146.

ἐζήτει εὐκαιρίαν, ἵνα] he sought a good opportunity (Cic. de off. i. 40) for the purpose of, etc. Such a εὐκαιρία as he wanted would present itself whenever he saw that συλληφθέντος οὐκ ἔμελλε θόρυβος γενέσθαι, Euthymius Zigabenus; comp. Mat_26:5.

REMARK 1.

As the statement regarding the thirty pieces of silver is peculiar to Matthew, and as one so avaricious as Judas was would hardly have been contented with so moderate a sum, it is probable that, from its not being known exactly how much the traitor had received, the Gospel traditions came ultimately to fix upon such a definite amount as was suggested by Zec_11:12. Then, as tending further to impugn the historical accuracy of Matthews statement, it is of importance to notice that it has been adopted neither by the earlier Gospel of Mark, nor the later one of Luke, nor by John. Comp. Strauss, Ewald, Scholten.

REMARK 2.

As regards the idea, that what prompted Judas to act as he did, was a desire to bring about a rising of the people at the time of the feast, and to constrain the dilatory Messiah to establish His kingdom by means of popular violence (Paulus, Goldhorn in Tzschirn. Memor. i. 2; Winer, Theile, Hase, Schollmeyer, Jesus u. Judas, 1836; Weisse, I. p. 450),the traitor himself being now doubtful, according to Neander and Ewald, as to whether Jesus was the Messiah or not,it may be affirmed that it has no foundation whatever in the Gospel record, although it may be excused as a well-meant effort to render a mysterious character somewhat more comprehensible, and to make so strange a choice on the part of Jesus a little less puzzling. According to John especially, the subjective motive which, in conjunction with Satanic agency (Luk_22:3; Joh_13:2; Joh_13:27), led to the betrayal was simply avarice, not wounded ambition as well, see on Mat_26:14; nor love of revenge and such like (Schenkel); nor shipwrecked faith on the occasion of the anointing of Christ (Klostermann); nor melancholy, combined with irritation against Jesus because the kingdom He sought to establish was not a kingdom of this world (Lange). Naturally passionate at any rate (Pressensé), and destitute of clearness of head as well as force of character (in opposition to Weisse), he was now so carried away by his own dark and confused ideas, that though betraying Jesus he did not anticipate that he would be condemned to death (Mat_27:3), and only began to realize what he had done when the consequences of his act stared him in the face. Those, accordingly, go too far in combating the attempts that have been made to palliate the deed in question, who seek to trace it to fierce anger against Jesus, and the profoundest wickedness (Ebrard), and who represent Judas as having been from the firsteven at the time he was chosenthe most consummate scoundrel to be found among men (Daub, Judas Ischar. 1816). That fundamental vice of Judas, πλεονεξία, became doubtless, in the abnormal development which his moral nature underwent through intercourse with Jesus, the power which completely darkened and overmastered his inner life, culminating at last in betrayal and suicide. Moreover, in considering the crime of Judas, Scripture requires us to keep in view the divine teleology, Peter already speaking of Jesus (Act_2:23) as τῇ ὡρισμένη βουλῇ καὶ προγνώσει τοῦ θεοῦ ἔκδοτον, in a way corresponding very much to the view taken of the conduct of Herod and Pilate in Act_4:28. Judas is thus the tragic instrument and organ of the divine εἱμαρμένη, though not in such a sense as to extenuate in the least the enormity and culpability of his offence, Mat_26:24. Comp. Joh_17:12; Act_1:25; and see, further, on Joh_6:70, Remark 1.

Meyer — Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament — English translation by Peter Christie, edited by Frederick Crombie (T&T Clark, 1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Mat 26:14-16 . Judas offers to betray Jesus (Mar 14:10-11 , Luk 22:3-6 ).

Mat 26:14 . τότε , then; the roots of the betrayal go much further back than the Bethany scene vide on Mat 17:22-23 but that scene would help to precipitate the fatal step. Death at last at hand, according to the Master’s words. Then a base nature would feel uncomfortable in so unworldly company, and would be glad to escape to a more congenial atmosphere. Judas could not breathe freely amid the odours of the ointment and all it emblemed. εἷς τ . δ ., one of the Twelve (l).

The Expositor's Greek Testament, edited by W. Robertson Nicoll (1897–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Verse 14. Then - Judas] After this supper at Bethany, Judas returned to Jerusalem, and made his contract with the chief priests.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

(14) Then one of the twelve, called Judas Iscariot.—The narrative of St. John leads us, as has been said, to connect the act of treachery with the fact just recorded. There was the shame, and therefore the anger, of detected guilt; there was the greed of gain that had been robbed of its expected spoil, and thirsted for compensation. The purpose that had been formed by the priests and scribes after the resurrection of Lazarus (Joh_11:47) may well have become known, and have suggested the hope of a reward. All these feelings were gathering strength through the three days that followed. Possibly there mingled with them a sense of disappointment that the kingly entry into Jerusalem was not followed up by immediate victory. St. Luke’s words, that “Satan entered into Judas” (Luk_22:3), are remarkable (1) as implying the personal influence of the Tempter; (2) as indicating the fiendish tenacity with which he followed out his purpose; (3) as coinciding with what St. John (Joh_13:27) relates at a later stage of his guilt. Nor can we forget that, even at an earlier period of his discipleship, our Lord had used words which spoke of the “devil-nature” that was already working in his soul (Joh_6:70).

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

14–16. The Treachery of Judas

Mar_14:10-11; Luk_22:3-6

St Mark, like St Matthew, connects the treachery of Judas with the scene in Simon’s house. His worldly hopes fell altogether at the thought of “burial.” It is a striking juxtaposition: as Mary’s is the highest deed of loving and clear-sighted faith, Judas’ is the darkest act of treacherous and misguided hate.

The motive that impelled Judas was probably not so much avarice as disappointed worldly ambition. Jesus said of him that he was a “devil” (diabolus or Satan), the term that was on a special occasion applied to St Peter, and for the same reason. Peter for a moment allowed the thought of the earthly kingdom to prevail; with Judas it was the predominant idea which gained a stronger and stronger hold on his mind until it forced out whatever element of good he once possessed. “When the manifestation of Christ ceased to be attractive it became repulsive; and more so every day” (Neander, Life of Christ, Bohn’s trans., p. 424).

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Then one of the twelve, called Judas Iscariot,.... Who was provoked and exasperated, to the last degree, by this action of the woman, and Christ's defence of it, and because the ointment was not sold, and the money put into his hand; and being instigated by Satan, who had now entered into him, formed a scheme in his mind to betray his master, and was resolved to put it in execution, whereby he might, in some measure, satisfy both his avarice and revenge; and, as an aggravation of this his wickedness, he is described, as "one of the twelve": of his twelve disciples; so the Persic and Ethiopic versions: this is a way of speaking used by the Jews (k); they call the twelve lesser prophets, or "the twelve", without any other word added thereunto. He was not an open enemy, nor one of Christ's common hearers, nor one of the seventy disciples, but one of his twelve apostles, whom he made his intimates and associates; whom he selected from all others, and called, qualified, and sent forth to preach his Gospel, and perform miracles: it was one of these that meditated the delivery of him into the hands of his enemies, and never left pursuing his scheme till he had effected it, even Judas Iscariot by name; so called, to distinguish him from another disciple, whose name was also Judas. This man

went to the chief priests; of his own accord, unasked, from Bethany, to Jerusalem, to Caiaphas's palace, where the chief priests, the implacable enemies of Christ, with the Scribes, and elders of the people, were met together, to consult his death: Mark adds, "to betray him unto them", Mar 14:10, which was manifestly his intent in going to them; and Luke, that he "communed" with them "how he might betray him unto them", Luk 22:4; in the safest, and most private manner; and both observe that they were glad; for nothing could have fallen out more to their wishes, who were met together on this design. The Jews, in their blasphemous account of Jesus (l), say as much: they own, that Judas, or Juda, as they call him, offered to betray him into the hands of the wise men, saying to them, almost in the words expressed in the following verse,

"if you will hearken unto me, , "I will deliver him into your hands tomorrow";''

and which agrees very well with the time also: for it was two days before the passover that Jesus was in Bethany, where he supped with his disciples, and washed their feet, and had the box of ointment poured on his head; and on the night of the day after all this was done, Judas set out from thence to Jerusalem; see Joh 13:30, so that it must be the next day before he could meet the high priests, and on the morrow, at night, he delivered him into their hands; on the proposal of which, they say, that Simeon ben Shetach, whom they make to be present at this time, and all the wise men and elders, "rejoiced exceedingly".

(k) T. Bab. Bava Bathra, fol. 14. 2. & 15. 1. (l) Toldos Jesu, p. 16.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

14 Then one of the twelve, called Judas Iscariot, went unto the chief priests,

Ver. 14. Then one of the twelve, &c.] sc. When he heard of the chief priests and elders meeting about such a matter, Satan sets him on, being now malcontent, to make one among them. That spirit of darkness loves to dwell in a soul that is clouded by passion: as in Saul when he was envious at David; and here in Judas, when defeated of his design, and fretted at his Master’s reprehension.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

The chief priests were then assembled; Judas, the disciple, who chiefly regretted the expense of the perfumes that had been used on his Lord and Master, at the feast of Bethania, and wished for an opportunity to make good the loss, when to the chief priests, saying:

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

Mark saith, Mar 14:10,11, And Judas Iscariot, one of the twelve, went unto the chief priests, to betray him unto them. And when they heard it, they were glad, and promised to give him money. And he sought how he might conveniently betray him. Luke hath this yet more fully, Luk 22:3-6, Then entered Satan into Judas surnamed Iscariot, being of the number of the twelve. And he went his way, and communed with the chief priests and captains, how he might betray him unto them. And they were glad, and covenanted to give him money. And he promised, and sought opportunity to betray him unto them in the absence of the multitude. While they were busy in council, (viz. the chief priests, and scribes, and elders), how they might surprise Christ without making a tumult, Judas surnamed Iscariot, one of the twelve disciples of our Lord, instigated by the devil, who possibly did take advantage of Judas’s discontent that the ointment was not sold, and he had not the money to put into the bag, or that Christ checked him so openly before the disciples, goes to the council, and offereth them to betray him unto them, without making any noise in the city. This being what they desired, and were consulting how to effect, they were glad of such an offer, and agreed with him for a sum of money. No evangelist but Matthew, in this place, mentions the particular sum, which was thirty pieces of silver. Interpreters do very probably think that these thirty pieces were thirty staters or shekels of the sanctuary, which being but of the value of two shillings and six pence apiece, amounted but to three pounds fifteen shillings in our money, which was the sum appointed by the law, Exo 21:32, to be paid for a servant gored to death by the beast of another, the poorest and meanest price of any person’s life: Judas left it to them, and they set the meanest price imaginable. There are other opinions about the value of these pieces of silver, but this is the most probable, especially considering the mean opinion these men had of Christ, and their design and interest to depreciate him as much as might be, and that the priests were the great men in this council, who most probably agreed with him for such pieces of money as were most in use amongst the Jews. It may be a just matter of admiration that they should make so cheap a bargain with him, considering that they doubtless (had he insisted upon it) would have given him more; but there was a prophecy to be fulfilled, which we find Zec 11:12,13, So they weighed for my price thirty pieces of silver. And the Lord said unto me, Cast it unto the potter: a goodly price that I was prized at of them. I shall have occasion, when I come to Mat 27:9, to discourse that text further. The price was set by the council of Heaven, which had determined this degree of our Lord’s humiliation, that as he took upon him the form of a servant, so his life should be valued at the rate of an ordinary servant’s life. Though therefore Judas was covetous enough to have asked more, and it is like the malice of those councillors would have edged them to have given more, yet it was thus ordered by the Divine council. Christ must be sold cheap, that he might be the more dear to the souls of the redeemed ones. For thirty pieces of silver he covenanted with them, and they promised it to him; whether it was now paid, or when he had done his work, appeareth not. From that time, (saith Mark), he sought how he might conveniently betray him. Luke expounds this ἄτερ ὄχλου, without tumult, Luk 22:6. He was now fixedly resolved upon his villany; his lust wanted but opportunity, which soon after offered itself.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

14. One of the twelve — A very apostle, one of the twelve stars in the Christian firmament, thus falls, to be a betrayer and seller of the Son of man. Judas was doubtless stung by the present conversation. The chief blame of our Lord’s rebuke lay on him.

Wednesday of Passion Week.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Vers. 14-16. Compact of Judas with the Jewish authorities to betray Jesus. (Mar_14:10, 11 Luk_22:3-6)

Then. The time referred to is the close of Christ"s addresses, and the assembling of the Jewish authorities mentioned at the beginning of the chapter, vers. 6-13 being parenthetical. It is reasonable to suppose that the loss of the three hundred denarii, at which he would have had the handling, and the reproof then administered, gave the final impulse to the treachery of Judas. This seems to be signified by the synoptists" introduction of the transaction at Bethany immediately before the account of Judas"s infamous bargain (see preliminary note on vers. 6-13). One of the twelve, called Judas Iscariot. That he was one of the twelve, the chosen companions of Christ, emphasizes his crime, makes it more amazing and more heinous. To witness the daily life of Christ, to behold his miracles of mercy, to listen to his heavenly teaching, to hear his stern denunciations of such sins as covetousness and hypocrisy, and in spite of all to bargain with his bitterest enemies for his betrayal, reveals a depth of perverse wickedness which is simply appalling. Well may the evangelist say that Satan entered into Judas; (Luk_22:3) it was the devil"s work he was doing; he followed this evil inspiration, and thought not whither it would lead him. Went unto the chief priests. Their hostility was no secret. Judas and everybody knew of their hatred of Jesus, and of their attempts to get him into their power; he saw his way to carrying out his purpose, and making of it some pecuniary gain. We are not to suppose that this miserable man sank all at once to this depth of iniquity. Nemo repente fit turpissimus. Though the descent to Avernus be easy, it is gradual; it has its steps and pauses, its allurements and checks. Modern criticism has endeavoured to minimize the crime of Judas, or even to regard him as a hero misunderstood; but the facts are entirely in favour of the traditional view. We can trace the path by which the apostle developed into the traitor, by studying the hints which the Gospels afford. He was probably at first fairly sincere in attaching himself to Christ"s company. Being a man of business capacity and skill in the management of money matters, he was appointed treasurer of the little funds at the disposal of Christ and his followers. Half-hearted and self-seeking, his undertaking this office was a snare to which he easily fell a victim. He began by petty peculations, which were not discovered by his comrades, (Joh_12:6) though he must often have felt an uneasy apprehension that his Master saw through him, and that many of his warnings were directed at him. (see Joh_6:64, Joh_6:70, Joh_6:71) This feeling lessened the love for Jesus, though it did not drive him to open apostasy. He had admitted the demon of covetousness to his breast, and he now adhered to Christ for the hope of satisfying greed and worldly ambition. The teaching and miracles of Christ had no marked influence on such a disposition, softened not his hard heart, effected no change in his evil and selfish desires. And when he saw his hopes disappointed, when he heard Christ"s announcement of his speedy death, which his knowledge of the rulers" animosity rendered only too certain, his only feeling was hatred and disgust. The transient expectations raised by the triumphal entry were not fulfilled; there was no assumption of the earthly conqueror"s part, there were no rewards for Christ"s followers, nothing but enmity and threatening danger on every side. Judas, seeing all this, perceiving that no worldly advantage would be gained by fidelity to the losing side, determined to make what profit he could under present circumstances. Not with the mistaken idea of forcing Christ to declare himself, and to put himself at the head of a popular movement, nor with any notion of Christ miraculously saving himself from his enemies" hands, but simply from sordid love of gain, he made his infamous offer to the chief priests. It was just when they were in perplexity, and had determined on nothing except that the arrest and the condemnation were not to take place during the feast, that Judas was introduced into the assembly. No wonder "they were glad"; (Mar_14:11) here was a solution of the contemplated difficulty; they need have no fear of a rising in favour of Christ; if among his chosen followers some were disaffected, and one was ready to betray him, they might work their will, when he was once quietly apprehended, without any danger of rescue and disturbance. (see on Mat_27:3)

HOMILIES BY MARCUS DODS Vers. 14-25, 47-50. Judas.

By piecing together what the various Gospels tell us about Judas, we can see the process by which our Lord separated him from the rest.

1. Our Lord indicated that among the disciples there was a traitor. Unable to detect the conscious look of guilt in the face of any of his companions, each, conscious of the deep, unfathomed capacity for evil in his own heart, can but frankly ask the Master, "Lord, is it I?" But there was one of them who did not join in the question.

2. Jesus answered, "He that dippeth his hand with me in the dish, the same shall betray me." The circle of suspicion is thus narrowed.

3. Almost simultaneously with this Peter beckons to John, who puts at last, in a whisper, the definite question, "Who is it?" and Jesus, in the ear of the beloved disciple, whispers the reply, "He it is," etc. (Joh_13:26) The look that accompanies the giving of the sop, as well as the act itself, shows Judas that his treachery is discovered. He therefore mechanically takes up, in a somewhat colder form, the question of the rest and says "Master, is it I?" His fear subdues his voice to a whisper, heard only by John and the Lord, and the answer, "Thou hast said. That thou doest do quickly," is equally unobserved by the rest. The sin of Judas presents us with one of the most perplexed problems of life and character. Let us, first of all, look at the connection of this betrayal with the life of Christ. Why might Jesus not have been taken without the help of a traitor? Possibly the reason was that it was needful that Jesus should be made perfect through suffering, that so he might be s merciful High Priest. He had already suffered in a variety of ways in body and mind; but till he was brought into close contact with a man who could accept his love, eat his bread, press his hand with assurance of fidelity, and then sell him, he did not know the misery that one human being can inflict on another. In conjecturing the character of Judas, we must start from the idea that with extraordinary capacity for wickedness he had also more than ordinary leanings to what was good. He was an apostle, and had been called to that office by Christ. He was himself so impressed with Christ as to follow him. It is possible he may have hoped to receive wealth and honor in the new kingdom, but this motive mingled with the attachment to Christ"s Person which all the apostles had. That Judas was trusted by the other apostles is manifest. Even to the end he is unsuspected by them, and to the end he has an active conscience. He is overwhelmed with remorse and shame; his sense of guilt is stronger even than the love of money that had hitherto been his strongest passion: he judges himself fairly, sees what he has become, and goes to "his own place." If we ask what precisely it was in the crime of Judas that makes us so abhor it, manifestly its most hateful ingredient was its treachery. It is also invested with a horror altogether its own by the fact that this Person whom he betrayed was the Son of God and the Saviour of the world the best beloved of God and every man"s Friend. After three years" acquaintanceship and observation of the various ways in which Christ could bless people, this was all he could get from him. And there are still such men men who can find nothing in Christ that they sincerely care for, though calling themselves his followers.

I The sin of Judas teaches us the great power and danger of the love of money. It infallibly eats out of the soul every generous emotion and high aim. It can be so easily and continuously gratified, and it is notoriously difficult to extirpate. Covetousness is more a sin of the will than sins of the flesh or of a passionate nature. There is more choice in it, and therefore it above all others is called idolatry, because it above all others proves that the man is in his heart choosing the world and not God.

II Disappointment in Christ is not an unknown thing among ourselves. Men attach themselves to Christ in a loose, conventional way. They are not wholly and heartily his, but merely seek to derive some influences from him. The result is that they one day find that through all their religious profession and apparently Christian life their characteristic sin has actually been gaining strength. And finding this, they become aware that they have lost both this world and the next. They find that the reward of double-mindedness is the most absolute perdition.

III The most comprehensive lesson is the rapidity of sin"s growth, and the enormous proportions it attains when the sinner is sinning against light. The position Judas enjoyed and by which he might have been forever enrolled among the foremost of mankind, one of the twelve foundations of the eternal city, he so skilfully misused that the greatest sinner feels glad that he has yet not been left to commit the sin of Judas.

We may, then, walk with Christ, and yet be no Christians after all. Frequently we think and act as if the knowledge of our duty and the occasional good feelings and impulses that we enjoy were themselves saving, whereas it is this that makes our sin and our danger so much the greater. It is possible that the only result of our knowing Christ may be that we betray him. D.

Vers. 14-25. The crime of Judas.

I CHARACTER OF JUDAS. Though Judas had extraordinary capacity for crime, he must also have had more than ordinary leanings to what was good. He was an apostle. This implies on Christ"s part discernment of some qualities in Judas likely to make him useful to the Church. It implies on Judas"s part a willingness at least to put himself in the way of what was good. It is true he might follow Jesus as a speculation, expecting advancement and wealth as the result. But this motive mingled to some extent in the discipleship of all the apostles. And probably along with this unworthy motive there was in him, as in them, some mixture of higher purpose. He may have felt the elevating influence of Christ"s fellowship, and may have wished to feel it more. And it is something in his favour that he remained so long in Christ"s company. Yet this man, with his intelligence, his occasional good impulses, his feeling of affection for Christ, his favouring circumstances, committed the greatest crime it has been possible for any to commit.

II HEINOUSNESS OF HIS CRIME. The most hateful element in the crime is its treachery. Caesar defended himself till struck by the dagger of a friend; then he covered his face, and accepted his fate. One can forgive the open blow of a declared enemy, but the man who lives with you on terms of intimacy, and thus learns your past history, your ways and habits, and the state of your affairs, the man you so confide in that you communicate to him what you keep hidden from others, and who, while you still think well of him, uses his knowledge of you to blacken your character, damage your prospects, and ruin your family, this man is a criminal of a different dye. So Judas used his knowledge of Christ"s habits his hour and place of prayer, etc. The circumstance, too, that he made money by his treachery is an aggravation. The best use he could think of to put Jesus to was to sell him for five pounds. After all be had seen and known of Jesus, this was all the benefit he thought he could derive from him.

III ATTEMPTED PALLIATIONS OF HIS CRIME. So diabolical does the crime seem, so difficult is it to believe that any one who had known and lived with Jesus could find it in his heart to give him up to his enemies, that attempts have been made to account for the act on less damning motives. Especially it has been urged that it was the purpose of Judas merely to force the hand of Jesus to compel him to resort to force in self-defence, and erect the standard of the new kingdom. He was weary of the inactivity of Jesus, and sought to bring matters to a crisis. Some plausibility is given to this view by the subsequent remorse and suicide of Judas. This, it is said, proves that he did not intend the death of his Master. But to argue thus is to forget that in all cases sin committed looks very different from sin in prospect. Doubtless Judas did not clearly foresee the terrible guilt of giving up his Master to death; but this does not imply that he did not intend to give him up to death. Before we sin, it is the gain we see; after we sin, the guilt.

IV SOURCES OF THE CRIME. His discipleship bad put him in the way of temptation. He had carried the bag of the small community. His covetousness had increased upon him. And now he saw clearly that no great scope for money making was to be found in the company of Jesus. He was a disappointed, embittered man. He felt he must break with Christ, but in doing so would win what he could, and would revenge himself on those who had kept him poor, and at the same time, by exploding the society and annihilating it, would justify his own conduct in deserting the cause.

Infer:

1. The power and danger of the love of money. All that we do in the world day by day has a more or less direct reference to money. This passion of covetousness is therefore always appealed to. Other evil propensities allow intervals of freedom, periods of repentance and amendment; but this is constant. Judas"s fingers were always in the bag; it jingled as he walked; it lay under his pillow as he slept.

2. The enormous growth a sin makes when committed against light. Everything in Judas"s position to win him from worldliness. But the uuworldliness of his company only led him to take greater advantage, and did not infect him with generosity. Had he passed his days as a small trader in Kerioth, he could only have reached the minor guilt of adulterating his goods and giving them out in false measures; but in Christ"s company his sin acquired abnormal proportions. Inducements to righteousness and opportunities of good provoke in the sinner a strong and determined bent to sin. D.

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Mark xiv, 10; Luke xxii, 3.

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

Judas offers to betray Christ:

v. 14. Then one of the Twelve, called Judas Iscariot, went unto the chief priests,

v. 15. and said unto them, What will ye give me, and I will deliver Him unto you? And they covenanted with him for thirty pieces of silver.

v. 16. And from that time he sought opportunity to betray Him.

There is a world of significance in the expression "one of the Twelve. " One of those whom Jesus chose out of the larger circle of His disciples; one of those whom He had with Him for three years, in the intimacy of the communion which obtains between teacher and pupils; one of those to whom He had given the promise of special rewards; one of the Twelve that were to become the teachers of the whole world in a peculiar sense. His name, Judas Iscariot, has, since that time, and will, till the end of time, stand for the lowest and meanest treason. He stands as an example to warn and deter all men against yielding to the first impulse toward sin. Love of money, covetousness, avarice, theft, treason, and murder of His Savior: those were the stepping-stones in his downward career. Without receiving a preliminary inducement from the chief priests, he deliberately went to them and made his heinous offer. He would deliver Christ to them for a consideration. And then began a hellish bargaining and haggling over the price of betrayal. But they realized the caliber of the man with whom they were dealing, his vice being by this time probably stamped upon his face. They placed in the balance, they weighed out to him, they set before him to stimulate his greed, as he actually saw the money before him, thirty shekels or pieces of silver, about fifteen dollars, the average price for a slave in those days, Exo 21:32; Zec 11:12. For this miserable sum Judas sold his Lord, for this he bartered away his immortal soul. His vacillating mind, greedy for the money, came to a decision; he sought a convenient opportunity to betray Him.

Paul E. Kretzmann, Popular Commentary of the Bible (1921–1924) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Observe here, 1. The person betraying our blessed Redeemer, Judas: Judas, a professor; Judas, a preacher; Judas, an apostle, and one of the twelve whom Christ had chosen out of the world to be his dearest friends, and his own family and household. Shall we wonder to find friends unfriendly and unfaithful towards us, when our Saviour had a traitor in his own house?

Observe, 2. The heinousness of his sin in betraying Christ; he betrayed Christ Jesus, a Man; Christ Jesus, his Master; Christ Jesus, his Maker; the first was murder, the second treason.

Learn thence, That it is no strange or uncommon thing for the vilest of sins, and most horrid impieties, to be acted by such persons as make the most eminent profession of holiness and religion.

Observe, 3. What was the sin occasioning and leading Judas to the committing of this horrid sin; it was covetousness. I do not find that Judas had any particular malice against Christ’s person, but a base and unworthy spirit of covetousness possessed him; this made him sell his Master. Covetousness is a root-sin; and inordinate desire and love of riches, an eager and unsatiable thirst after the world, is the parent of the most monstrous and unnatural sins: Therefore remember we our Saviour’s caution, Take heed and beware of covetousness Luk 12:15; he doubles the caution, to show us both the great danger of the sin, and the great care we ought to take to preserve ourselves from it.

Observe, 4. How small a sum tempted the covetous mind of Judas to betray his Master, thirty pieces of silver; which amounted but to three pounds fifteen shillings of our money. This was the price of a slave or common servant, Exo 21:32. As Christ took upon him the form of a servant, so his life was valued at the rate of an ordinary servant’s life. it may seem a wonder, that the high-priests should offer no more for the life of our Saviour, and that Judas should accept so little; seeing that his covetousness was so great, and their rage so grievous, how comes it to pass that he demands so little, and that they offer no more? Had the reward been proportioned to the greatness of their malice, it had been thirty thousand rather than thirty pieces of silver. But the scripture must be fulfilled; accordingly the wisdom of God overruled this matter, for fulfilling that prophecy, They weighed for my price thirty pieces of silver. Zec 11:12 Let not any Christian be concerned that he is despised and undervalued; he can never meet with so great a reproach, with so low an abasement, for Christ, as Christ underwent for him.

Observe lastly, Judas’s folly, as well as treachery; he that might have demanded what he pleased for this purchase, He says unto the chief priests, What will ye give me? As if he had said, " I am resolved to sell him at any rate, give me what you will for him." Nay, farther, Judas covenanted, and they promised, but whether it was now paid, appeareth not.

Learn, that such a person as has a vile and base esteem of Jesus Christ, will part with him upon any terms. The bare expectation of a few shekels of silver, will make such a one willing to part with a pearl of great price. Wonder not then to see some persons selling their country, their friends, their God, and their religion, for money. Judas did so before them.

William Burkitt's Expository Notes on the New Testament (1700–1703) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

14. Then … Judas Iscariot went. A comparison of all the accounts will show that when his avarice was thus disappointed, he went, at the first opportunity, to the priests. His Master was about to be crucified, he had not been permitted to enrich himself, there was now no probability that he would become the treasurer of Christ as an earthly king.

B. W. Johnson's The People's New Testament with Notes (1889–1891) — public domain. Electronic text from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) ThML edition.

Connecting Statement:

Judas Iscariot agrees to help the Jewish leaders arrest and kill Jesus.

to deliver him to you

"to bring Jesus to you"

thirty pieces of silver

Since these words are the same as those in an Old Testament prophecy, keep this form instead of changing it to modern money.

thirty pieces

"30 pieces" (See: Numbers)

to deliver him to them

"to give him over to them"

translationWords

the twelve

Judas Iscariot

chief priests

silver

unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.

14–16. THE TREACHERY OF JUDAS

Mar 14:10-11; Luk 22:3-6

St Mark, like St Matthew, connects the treachery of Judas with the scene in Simon’s house. His worldly hopes fell altogether at the thought of ‘burial.’ It is a striking juxtaposition: as Mary’s is the highest deed of loving and clear-sighted faith, Judas’ is the darkest act of treacherous and misguided hate.

The motive that impelled Judas was probably not so much avarice as disappointed worldly ambition. Jesus said of him that he was a ‘devil’ (diabolus or Satan), the term that was on a special occasion applied to St Peter, and for the same reason. Peter for a moment allowed the thought of the earthly kingdom to prevail; with Judas it was the predominant idea which gained a stronger and stronger hold on his mind until it forced out whatever element of good he once possessed. ‘When the manifestation of Christ ceased to be attractive it became repulsive; and more so every day’ (Neander, Life of Christ, Bohn’s trans., p. 424).

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge University Press, 1896; 21 vols, various authors incl. Carr, Maclear, Plummer, Farrar, Lumby, Moule, M. R. James, Simcox) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

14-16.] Compact of Judas with the Chief Priests to betray Him. Mar 14:10, Mar 14:11.Luk 22:3-6Luk 22:3-6. (See also ἤδη, Joh 13:2.) When this took place, does not appear. In all probability, immediately after the conclusion of our Lord’s discourses, and therefore coincidently with the meeting of the Sanhedrim in ver. 3. As these verses bring before us the first overt act of Judas’s treachery, I will give here what appears to me the true estimate of his character and motives. In the main, my view agrees with that given by Neander, in his Leben Jesu, p. 688. I believe that Judas at first became attached to our Lord with much the same view as the other Apostles. He appears to have been a man with a practical talent for this world’s business, which gave occasion to his being appointed the Treasurer, or Bursar, of the company (Joh 12:6; Joh 13:29). But the self-seeking, sensuous element, which his character had in common with that of the other Apostles, was deeper rooted in him; and the spirit and love of Christ gained no such influence over him as over the others, who were more disposed to the reception of divine things. In proportion as he found our Lord’s progress disappoint his greedy anticipations, did his attachment to Him give place to coldness and aversion. The exhibition of miracles alone could not keep him faithful, when once the deeper appreciation of the Lord’s Divine Person failed. We find by implication a remarkable example of this in Joh 6:60-66, Joh 6:70, Joh 6:71, where the denunciation of the one unfaithful among the twelve seems to point to the (then) state of his mind, as already beginning to be scandalized at Christ. Add to this, that latterly the increasing clearness of the Lord’s announcements of his approaching passion and death, while they gradually opened the eyes of the other Apostles to some terrible event to come, without shaking their attachment to Him, was calculated to involve in more bitter disappointment and disgust one so disposed to Him as Judas was.

The actually exciting causes of the deed of treachery at this particular time may have been many. The reproof administered at Bethany (on the Saturday evening probably),—disappointment at seeing the triumphal entry followed, not by the adhesion, but by the more bitter enmity of the Jewish authorities,—the denunciations of our Lord in ch. 22:23. rendering the breach irreparable,—and perhaps his last announcement in ver. 2, making it certain that his death would soon take place, and sharpening the eagerness of the traitor to profit by it:—all these may have influenced him to apply to the chief priests as he did. With regard to his motive in general, I cannot think that he had any design but that of sordid gain, to be achieved by the darkest treachery. See further on this the note on ch. 27:3.

Henry Alford, The Greek Testament (1849–1861) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

14-16. From Mar 14:10-11.

(M) 14. Then went one of the twelve, who was called Judas Iscariot, to the chief priests.] Mk. has: “And Judas Iscarioth, the one of the twelve, went away to the chief priests.”—τότε] cf. on 2:7.—εἷς] is here equivalent to τις; cf. on 8:18. Mk.’s ὁ εἱς is paralleled in early papyri; cf. Moulton, p. 97.—Ἰσκαριώτης] cf. on 10:4.

14-16. Mt. and Lk. agree in the following:

Ἰσκαριώτης, Mat_14 = Ἰσκαριώτην, Luk_3; Ἰσκαριώθ, Mar_10.

ἐζήτει εὐκαιρίαν, Mat_16, Luk_6.

International Critical Commentary — older volumes (1896–1929), various authors — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.