Matthew 27:1

Ch. Mat_27:1. The Second and formal Meeting of the Sanhedrin

St Mar_15:1; St Luk_22:66-71; not mentioned by St John

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.

Mat_27:1-10

Then Judas, which had betrayed Him, when he saw that He was condemned.

Judas and the priests-end of evil association

Men join hand in hand for a wicked object, out of which they hope for common profit. For a while the alliance lasts, and evil seems to have power of coherence as well as good. But conflicting interests arise, and then the nature of the union is apparent. Sin began by severing the bond between man and his Maker, and what other bond can henceforth have any permanence? If left to do its will, it would disintegrate Gods universe into atoms of selfishness. Observe here-

I. Judas, and the state of mind to which he is brought. He begins in the guilt of selfishness, and ends in its utter solitude.

1. Separation from human companionship.

(a) From Christ and the apostles. After his act of treachery was committed, he felt as if a bridge were broken behind him. He had no more part nor lot in the circle of which he had been a member.

(b) From his employers and accomplices. Here again, he is alone. He has served their purpose, and is thrown away like a broken tool.

2. Self-desertion. He can no longer keep company with his own thoughts. Backward, forward, upward, his sin meets him wherever he turns, and his feeling is that which the poet has given to the apostate angel, Me miserable, which way shall I fly!

3. Deserted by the tempter and the bribe. He has no pleasure in the thing he coveted. the silver, which was so dear, eats his flesh as it were fire, and he casts it from him like a viper that has stung the hand. So does the devil ever cheat the sinner of the substance for a shadow, and then robs him of that, or changes it into a frightful spectre from which he would escape if he could.

4. Separation between the soul and God. That which is reviving light to others is to him consuming fire, and he seeks flight from God as a relief and escape, Remorse only hardens. The heart of stone may be crushed and remain stone in its every fragment; it can only be melted when the love of God is suffered to shine on it. But when it refuses to admit that love, what can be done? For a time this awful isolation may not seem so terrible as it is. Other things may be put in the place of God-friendships, occupations, and pleasure. But when these pass, as pass they must, and perish like flowers on the edge of a gulf, the awful depth of the chasm will be seen. When fold after fold which now closes the eye of the soul is torn off, and it is Compelled to look on eternal realities, how will it stand the gaze?

II. The chief priests and their conduct.

1. Their disregard for their instrument when their purpose is gained. How differently would Judas have been treated, had he gone to Christ! If any friendship is to be formed that will stand us in stead in the hour of trial, it need not be sought among bad men consorting for unprincipled ends. The first stress will lay bare the hollow of such friendships, and show what bitter enemies confront one another when wicked men are separated by selfish purposes.

2. Their attempt to shake off the responsibility of the common act. One of the punishments in concerted sin is mutual recrimination, and the weakest are denied not only pity but ordinary justice.

3. Their taunt. A sneer at his being too late in coming to the knowledge of Christs innocence. This view of the matter should have suggested itself earlier. Infinitely better to meet the ridicule of sinners for not joining them, and to keep a good conscience, than to end by being subjected to their taunts with the bitter knowledge that they are deserved! (J. Ker, D. D.)

Judas, which had betrayed Him: treachery against a Friend

I am going to put before you the behaviour of Judas in a purely human point of view; no narrow view of the question, but that which most concerns us. I would have you look to his dishonourable betrayal of his Friend. Put out of sight, then, the crucifixion of the Son of God; for this does not strictly belong to Judas: this truth Judas never learnt. Put out of sight, also, the whole transcendent scheme of redemption: Judas knew nothing of this. But Jesus was his Friend. Day by day he had lived with Jesus. Day by day he had heard Him speak, Who spake as never man spake. Day by day he had seen the ineffable grace of the Son of Man. Truth had dwelt with him, and had not won his allegiance. Love had dwelt with him, and had failed to touch his heart. Purity and holiness had gradually unveiled their glories in his presence, and he had looked aside, and been proof to their loveliness. Jesus had been his Friend. The Incarnate Son of God had dwelt upon earth, not merely to promise heaven, but to be that heaven which He promised; not merely to judge and reward hereafter, but to be in each believer-Life. This was what was presented to the eyes and heart of Judas-the glories of a present immortality of purity and love; glories veiled indeed, but not unseen by watchful loving eyes. Jesus was his Friend. And we must observe that Judas was thoroughly aware of what was true and good, and perfectly conscious, as far as a broad, general choice went, of the surpassing excellence of Him with whom he lived. (E. Thring, M. A.)

Dissatisfaction of Judas

Might not Judas have sung care away, now that he had both the bag and the price of blood, but he must come and betray himself. Whiles he played alone, he won all; but soon after, his own wickedness corrected him, and his backslidings reproved him (Jer_2:19). Sin will surely prove evil and bitter, when the bottom of the bag is once turned upward. A man may have the stone who feels no fit of it. The devil deals with men as the panther does with the beasts: he hides his deformed head, till his sweet scent have drawn them into his danger. Till we have sinned, Satan is a parasite; when we have sinned, he is a tyrant. But it is good to consider that of Bernard: At the Day of Judgment a pure conscience shall better bestead one than a full purse. (John Trapp.)

Revulsion of feeling after sin is committed

What an awful difference there is in the look of a sin before you do it and afterwards! Before I do it, the thing to be gained seems so attractive, and the transgression that gains it seems so comparatively insignificant. Yes! and when I have done, the two alter places; the thing that I win by it seems so contemptible! Thirty pieces of silver! pitch them over the Temple enclosure and get rid of them I The thing that I win by it seems so insignificant; and the thing that I did to win them dilates into such awful magnitude! For instance, suppose you or I do anything that we know to be wrong, tempted to it by a momentary indulgence of some mere animal impulse. By the very nature of the case that dies in its satisfaction, and the desire dies along with it. We do not want it any more, when once we have got it. It lasts but a moment and is past; then we are left alone with the thought of the thing that we have done. When we get the prize of our wrong-doing we find out that it is not as all-satisfying as we expected it would be. Most of our earthly aims are like that. The chase is a great deal more than the hare. Or, as George Herbert has it, Nothing between two dishes. A- splendid service of silver plate, and when you take the cover off there is nothing in it. It is that old story over again, of the veiled prophet who wooed and won the hearts of foolish maidens, and when he had them in his power in the inner chamber removed the silver veil that they had looked upon with love, and showed hideous features that struck despair into their hearts. Every wrong thing that you do, big or little, will be like some of those hollow images of the gods that one hears of in barbarous temples: looked at in front, fair; but when you get behind them you find a hollow, full of dust and spiders webs and unclean things. (A. Maclaren, D. D.)

Gradual downfall of Judas

It is clear that he had no intention whatever of committing so terrible a crime as the consequences showed it to be. Alas l what a fearful, gradual downfall there must have been since the moment when the sweetness of the Word of Life first made him give up all to follow Christ! How day by day little dishonourable choices must have been made, with an uneasy conscience, before he arrived at the deep dishonour of the betrayal l How, whilst his companions were gradually putting away their delusions, and seeing more clearly, and clinging more strongly, he was gradually separating from them too; acting the part of the tempter sometimes-as when we find him taking the lead in complaining of the waste of ointment-but nevertheless having less in common with them every day, as they became nearer to Jesus and he became more distant. (E. Thring, M. A.)

Iscariots confession

The man who has wronged another proverbially finds it harder to forgive than he who suffered the wrong; and the heavier the wrong the more reluctant is he to admit that it had no justification. He seeks to justify himself by depreciating the character of the neighbour to whom the wrong has been done; he sets himself to think of him as badly as he can, to speak even worse of him than he thinks, that he may thus in some degree shift the burden of guilt on to other shoulders than his own. Judas, therefore, had every motive to think and speak of Jesus the worst he could. He was in the habit, too, of glossing over his sins, of inventing better motives for them than they would bear. If he could have found any fault in the Man Christ Jesus, and, much more, if he had seen in Him anything worthy of death, would he not have clutched at it now, and proclaimed it, that he might thus justify himself to the world? Nay, if he could have fixed on a single point in the character and life of Jesus on which to hang so much as a suspicion, would he not have dwelt on it, and exaggerated it, and woven from it at least some thin disguise for his own perfidy and shame? We may be very sure that the Son of Man was verily innocent when it is Judas who pronounces Him innocent. And we may also be sure that there was much that was genuine in the repentance of the man who, by acknowledging the innocence of his Victim, brought the whole weight of his deed upon himself. The instruments of darkness, who, to win us to our harm, often throw a false colour of virtue round the sins to which they tempt us, must indeed have lost their power with Judas when, seeing what he had done, he publicly confessed that it was innocent blood he had betrayed, and so left himself without palliation or excuse. (S. Cox, D. D.)

See thou to that

The tools of more respectable sinners are flung away as soon as they are done with. These three, Judas, the priests, and Pilate, suggest to us a threefold way in which conscience is perverted.

I. Judas-the agony of conscience. I see nothing in Scripture to bear out the hypothesis that his motives were mistaken zeal; he was a man of a low, earthly nature, who became a follower of Christ, thinking that He was to prove a Messiah of the vulgar type. The sudden revulsion of feeling which followed upon the accomplished act; not like the words of a man who had acted on mistaken love. What an awful difference there is between the look of sin before you do it and afterwards; before, attractive and insignificant; after, contemptible. Here is hell, a conscience without hope of pardon. You cannot think too blackly of your sins, but you may think too exclusively of them.

II. Pilate-the shufflings of a half-awakened conscience. Here, then, we get once more a vivid picture that may remind us of what, alas! we all know in our own experience, how a mans conscience may be clear-sighted enough to discern, and vocal enough to declare, that a certain thing is wrong, but not strong enough to restrain from doing it. Conscience has a voice and an eye; alas! it has no hands. It shares the weakness of all law, it cannot get itself executed. Men will climb over a fence, although the board that says Trespassers will be prosecuted, is staring them in the face in capital letters at the very place where they jump. Your conscience is a king without an army, a judge without officers. If it had authority, as it has the power, it would govern the world, but as things are, it is reduced to issuing vain edicts and to saying, Thou shalt not! and if you turn round and say I will, though, then conscience has no more that it can do. And then, here, too, is an illustration of one of the commonest of the ways by which we try to slip our necks out of the collar, add to get rid of the responsibilities that really belong to us. See ye to it does not avail to put Pilates crime on the priests shoulders. Men take part in evil, and each thinks himself innocent, because he has companions. Half a dozen men carry a burden together; none of them fancies that he is carrying it. It is like the case of turning out a platoon of soldiers to shoot a mutineer-nobody knows whose bullet killed him, and nobody feels himself guilty; but there the man lies dead, and it was somebody that did it. So corporations, churches, societies, and nations do things that individuals would not do, and each man of them wipes his mouth, and says, I have done no harm. And even when we sin alone we are clever at finding scapegoats.

III. And so, lastly, we have here another group still-the priests and people. They represent for us the torpor and misdirection of conscience. Then answered all the people and said, His blood be on us and on our children. They were perfectly ready to take the burden upon themselves. They thought that they were doing God service when they slew Gods Messenger. They had no perception of the beauty and gentleness of Christs character. They behoved Him to be a blasphemer, and they believed it to be a solemn religious duty to slay Him then and there. Were they to blame because they slew a blasphemer? According to Jewish law-no! They were to blame because they had brought themselves into such a moral condition that that was all they thought of and saw in Jesus Christ. With their awful words they stand before us, as perhaps the crowning instances in Scripture history of the possible torpor which may paralyze consciences. The habit of sinning will lull a conscience far more than anything else. (A. Maclaren, D. D.)

Conscience needs revelation

And it is quite possible that a man may have no prick of conscience and yet have done a very wrong thing. So we want, as it seems to me, something outside of ourselves that shall not be affected by our variations. Conscience is like the light on the binnacle of a ship. It tosses up and down along with the vessel. We want a steady light yonder on that headland, on the fixed solid earth, which shall not heave with the heaving wave, nor vary at all. Conscience speaks lowest when it ought to speak loudest. The worst man is least troubled by his conscience. It is like a lamp that goes out in the thickest darkness. Therefore we need, as I believe, a revelation of truth and goodness and beauty outside of ourselves to which we may bring our consciences, that they may be enlightened and set right. We want a standard like the standard weights and measures that are kept in the Tower of London, to which all the people in the little country villages may send up their yard measures, and their pound weights, and find out if they are just and true. We want a Bible, and we want a Christ to tell us what is duty, as well as to make it possible for us to do it. (A. Maclaren, D. D.)

The remorse of Judas on the condemnation of Christ

You will observe the testimony which Judas bears to Christ and His religion. Had Christ been a deceiver Judas would have been aware of it; how valuable his testimony would have been against our Lord. Yet it is evident Judas had nothing to communicate. It is evident from the narrative of the evangelists that the devil had much to do with the treachery of Judas. In no case has Satan power over the individual except as that individual shall furnish him with advantages. It was the unrestrained covetousness of Judas which opened an access to the tempter. We must not excuse ourselves by accusing the devil; but it is distinctly said that he put into the heart of Judas Iscariot, etc. How Satan succeeded in working up Judas to this treachery?

I. We may give it as in a high degree probable that the devil suggested to Judas that by placing Christ in the hands of His enemies he should only afford him an opportunity of showing his power by defeating their malice. How easy for the traitor to argue No harm but good will arise from the betrayal; he would actually be doing Christ a service! In this way professing Christians comply with the customs of the world, fancying that they will disarm prejudice and recommend piety. Satan dealt with Judas as a man with a conscience that had to be pacified.

II. We may also suppose that, in place of suggesting to Judas the probability that Jesus would escape, Satan plied him with the certainty that Jesus was to die. The prophecies attested this. Your treachery is needful, and so cannot be criminal. Men imagine that if their sins contribute to Gods fixed purpose they cannot be guilty. The purpose would have been accomplished without the sin.

III. There is something very affecting in the fact that Judas gave himself up to despair on seeing that Jesus was given over to death. The moment a sinner is brought to see his own work in Christs death, then is the moment for showing him his life in Christs work. Only feel that we crucify Christ, and we are ready for being told that Christ was crucified for us. (H. Melvill, B. D.)

Refusing a legacy

I. An illustration of the lack of conscience on the part of the professedly religious is seen in the treatment of a guilty soul. They consulted about the money, but not the man. They ought to have rejoiced in the confession of Judas, and that he had time to save Jesus and himself. They discard their tool. We have frequently seen men of good position and of high moral principles associate on equal terms with those below them for civil or political purposes. The priests could not make him shoulder all the guilt.

II. The schemes of the conscienceless to get rid of an unwelcome legacy. Says one, Pity to waste the money; says another, Never mind the past, it will serve a good end now. Cast it into the Kedron. Melt it over again, and thus get out the stain. Buy the potters parcel of ground. Good suggestion, was the murmur. This will secure conscience and personal advantage at the same time. How conscientious were these unprincipled men.

III. How direct sin and conscienceless scheming are overruled by Christ. His betrayal causes a cemetery to be provided for the stranger and outcast; thus it is turned to good effect. (F. Hastings.)

The repentance of Judas

I. Wherein it resembled true repentance.

1. It was similar to true repentance in that conviction of sin from which it sprung.

2. In the open acknowledgment of guilt to which his convictions led him.

3. In the deep sorrow with which his repentance was accompanied.

4. In the self-condemnation with which the repentance of Judas was attended.

5. His extreme anxiety to counteract the evil consequences of his crime, and his entire renunciation of its fruits.

II. Wherein it differed from it.

1. It differed from it in its origin. It had its origin in the natural conscience, not in the grace of God.

2. In the object of his sorrow. Judas repented not of his crime, but of its consequences.

3. In its extent. It was of a partial nature.

4. In its results.

This shows-

1. That we may bear very close resemblance to the disciples of Christ, and yet remain still in the number of His enemies, and share their condemnation.

2. That a profession of attachment to Christ aggravates the guilt of sin, and renders an indulgence in it peculiarly dangerous.

3. No man can be a gainer by sin. (C. Bradley.)

The unconverted warned by the remorse of the lost

I. The sinner in the next world will know the character of sin as Judas knew it. Now men do not judge of sin aright, their imagination is dazzled by its charms. As soon as the sin is committed its promise is found to be delusive.

II. This will lead him to hate sin and everything connected with it. Now he loves it. He will hate it because of its consequences. He will hate the gains and pleasures that once allured him. As Judas hated the priests, the sinner will hate his evil comrades. Judas disliked the thought of the happiness of his fellow disciples; the sinner will know that he might have had joy. With what feelings will he regard himself? (B. W. Noel, M. A.)

I. The conduct and character of Judas. His object not malice but avarice.

II. The conduct of the high priests ash elders.

1. Judas could not endure his own reflections. Compare the unfeeling spirit with which these men treat this conscience-stricken sinner with the love of the Saviour for the sinner.

2. The delusion which sometimes occupies the minds of the ungodly-It is not lawful for us to put them into the treasury, etc. They who care not for innocent blood, who care not for the remorse of their victim, are very careful about Gods treasury. Thus Satan deludes men.

(1) See what is in man.

(2) See what dreadful havoc one lust can make on a promising character.

3. How good a work to pluck men out of the hands of Satan. (G. J. Noel.)

The betrayer

I. His character.

1. He occupied a very high position.

2. He enjoyed great privileges.

3. He committed a great crime. Trace this sin-the plot, etc.

4. He deeply repented. His repentance was real, distressing, etc.

5. He made restitution.

6. He despaired of mercy.

II. Deduce from this subject some lessons of instruction. We learn-

1. That we may possess great privileges, make a blazing profession, and fill a high office, and still have no real piety.

2. That whatever amount of repentance a man may possess, in the absence of faith in Christ the soul will perish.

3. That there is tremendous power in a guilty conscience to inflict punishment. Cain, David, Herod, Judas, penitents.

4. The danger of indulging in the sin of covetousness.

5. That the atonement alone presents the only remedy that will meet all the deep-felt necessities of a guilty conscience. (A. Weston.)

The repentance and suicide of Judas

There are many principles underlying this tragedy.

I. That the repentance of Judas was occasioned by the new aspect which his sin assumed.

II. That, the delusion dispelled, two faculties of the mind urged him to confession and restitution-memory and reason.

III. That alliances based on sin are utterly hollow and worthless.

IV. That sin brings in its train the most maddening remorse and despair. (E. T. Carrier.)

The true confessor and the false

I. Examples of false confession. Its falsehood consisted in this-It was constrained, selfish, superficial, impulsive, temporary. Beware!

II. Examples of true confession. In true confession we take our proper place; we come to see sin somewhat as God sees it. (Dr. Bonar.)

The repentance of Judas

The history of Judas was written for our admonition, and is full of instruction to all.

1. How totally unprepared he seems to have been for the terrible results of his treachery. The condemnation of Jesus was an event on which he had not calculated. He was horror-struck and confounded with the unforeseen consequences of his villainy. No man, when consenting to temptation, can possibly tell how much evil may be involved in the sinful act which he contemplates, or determine the results in which it shall issue.

2. To what excesses of wickedness a man may be hurried, who is yet far from being hardened in iniquity. It was not any malignant or revengeful feeling which he entertained against our Lord, but the promptings of avarice only, that determined Judas to the perpetration of his immoral crime. The ungovernable grief and horror that seized him manifests that he was not hardened in iniquity. The sense of virtue and shame was far from being extinct. But there was the wretched greed of lucre in his soul. Constantly assailed by this temptation, he gradually yielded. Hence the danger of encouraging a disposition to covetousness, and of listening to temptation of whatever kind.

3. The tranciency of sinful pleasures. It was night when he received the reward of iniquity, but when morning came then came repentance too. How many such extreme cases are there l

4. How dearly the pleasures of sin are purchased.

5. The sort of sympathy a man may expect from his accomplices in iniquity.

6. How the sense of guilt may operate. He was brought to repentance, but it was a very different kind of repentance from that which he purposed coming to. The sense of guilt may take either of two very different forms-godly sorrow or the sorrow of the world. Look at Judas, and beware! Precisely the same purposes as many are entertaining beguiled him onwards, until at length it surprised him with the repentance of despair. Conclusion: Make repentance a voluntary act. Repent now! (W. H. Smith.)

What is that to us?-Responsibility not to be shaken off

Though they might disown responsibility, they could not destroy it. A man may stop his chronometer in the night, but he cannot arrest the sunrise. As long as men are in the pursuit of an object, they may be able, with the aid of passion, to stifle conscience; but when the object is reached, and the value deliberately counted, conscience can begin to strike the balance. The heat and halo of the chase are over, and the net result can be reckoned, at least on one side; the miserable gain, if not the infinite loss. So it is with the betrayer, and so it must be, by and by, with those who hired him. They may meanwhile outbrave Judas, but they have to meet God. And, let us think of it-the poisoned arrow a man uses may wound himself. The sneer is always on the way to the remorse. They have both the same hard bitterness in them-the same want of Gods love. (J. Ker, D. D.)

The devil tempts to despair

The craft of the devil is often displayed in representing a sin to which we are tempted as trifling, but after we have committed it as so great that there is no help for us in God. (Ayguan.)

Manner of Iscariots death

Objectors have represented the statement in this text as inconsistent with that in Act_1:18, where he is said to have purchased a field with the reward of iniquity, and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out. But these passages do not necessarily contradict each other. Matthew does not say that Judas, after having hanged himself, did not fall to the ground; nor, on the contrary, does Luke say that Judas did not hang himself before he fell to the ground; and unless the writers affirm the reality of the events which they respectively mention in such a way as to assert or imply that if the one event be true the other must be false, it is obvious that they do not contradict each other. Of the precise relation of the two events in question to each other we have no information, and can affirm nothing with certainty. Some intermediate circumstance connected the one with the other as parts of the same transaction, but that circumstance has not been recorded. It is conjectured that Judas may have hung himself on the edge of a precipice near the valley of Hinnom, and that the rope breaking by which he was suspended, he fell to the earth and was dashed to pieces. As I stood in this valley, and looked up to the rocky heights which span over it on the south side of Jerusalem, I felt that the proposed explanation was a perfectly natural one; I was more than ever satisfied with it. I measured the precipitous, almost perpendicular walls, in different places, and found the height to be variously forty, thirty-six, thirty-three, thirty, and twenty-five feet. At the bottom of these precipices are rocky ledges, on which a person would fall from above, and in that case not only would life be destroyed, but the body almost inevitably bruised and mangled. (H. B. Hackett, D. D.)

Iscariots motive for suicide

One of the most learned and compassionate fathers of the early Church, Origen, reports and argues for what seems to have been a not uncommon belief in those early days, viz., that Judas was moved to hang himself by some confused thought that, beyond the veil, in the life to come, he might meet his Master once more, and cast himself at His feet, confessing his guilt, and imploring pardon for his sin. That, however, is only a tradition, though surely many of us would be glad to know that it was something more. But he must be dull and hard indeed who does not feel that in that loathing of himself and of his guilt, which made life intolerable to him, there is some proof that Iscariot was not altogether sold under sin. (S. Cox, D. D.)

The mixture of good and bad in Judas

We are too hard in our thoughts of Judas if we hold him to have been an utterly graceless, abandoned, and irredeemable reprobate; and above all, we are too hard and narrow in our thoughts of Christ if we suppose even the sin of Judas to have put him for ever beyond the pale of mercy. Judas was once a babe, such as we all have been, and had a mother who loved him, and built bright hopes upon him. Probably, too, he had a father who led him to school and to synagogue, and trained him carefully in the Hebrew wisdom and piety. He shot up into a steady and thrifty young man-not addicting himself to vicious and spendthrift courses, but rather displaying a mind unusually open to religious impressions. We can trace in him some touch of the character of his ancestor, Jacob; the same by no means infrequent combination of religious susceptibilities and aspirations with a determination to do well in the world, the same preference of crafty and subtle expedients for securing his ends over the frank and downright methods of which Esau is one type, and Peter another. Two souls, two natures, were at strife in the man, as they were also in Jacob; the one subtle, grasping, money-loving, the other keen to discern the value of things unseen and eternal, and to pursue them. And for a time, as we all know, the better nature conquered. When he heard the call of Christ, all that was noble, and unselfish, and aspiring in the man rose up to welcome Him and to respond to His call. He was not a thief and a traitor when he became an apostle; nor when he went out into the cities and villages of Galilee, without staff or scrip, preaching the kingdom of heaven; nor when he returned to his Master rejoicing that even devils were subject unto him. Goodness, honour, devotion, self-sacrifice, were not unknown to him then. Let us remember what there was of good in him once, what there was of good in him even to the end: for no man who is capable of repentance is wholly and irredeemably bad; and let us not be overhard in our thoughts of him, nor unjust even to his tainted memory. The medieval Church had a legend which shows that even in those dark stern days men had glimpses of a light which many among us have not caught even yet. The legend was that, for the sake of one good and kindly deed performed in the days of his innocency, Judas was let out of hell once in every thousand years, and allowed to cool and refresh himself amid the eternal snows of some high mountain for a whole day. But we know that while he was still true to Christ he must have wrought many good and kindly deeds; and if he still suffers the punishment of the evil deeds he did, are we to believe he does not also, in some mysterious way, receive the due reward of his good deeds. (S. Cox, D. D.)

Passion is stronger than the fear of death

The dread of death is universal and instinctive; and yet how many rush into its arms! Suicide is a most impressive fact in this connection. The disappointed lover, the discouraged adventurer, the suspected clerk, the child wounded in its self-love or fearful of punishment, faces the great enemy and invites his blow. Every now and then the community is shocked by suicides so unprovoked and so frequent as almost to persuade us that the natural fear of death is passing away. The inconsistency is easily explained. Bacon says there is no passion that will not overmaster the terror of death. For passion is thoughtless; occupied wholly with an immediate suffering it makes no estimate of any other kind of pain; absorbed in an instantaneous sorrow it takes no other sorrow into account. The mind entertains but one passion at a time, whether it be joy or fear. But men are not always or generally under the influence of passion. Ordinary life is calm, calculating, considerate, and it is to ordinary life that death is terrible. It is the thought of death that is terrible, not death. Death is gentle, peaceful, painless; instead of bringing suffering it brings an end of suffering. It is miserys cure. Where death is, agony is not. The processes of death are all friendly. The near aspect of death is gracious. There is a picture somewhere of a frightful face, livid and ghastly, which the beholder gazes on with horror, and would turn away from, but for a hideous fascination that not only rivets his attention, but draws him closer to it. On approaching the picture the hideousness disappears, and the face is that of an angel. It is a picture of death, and the artists object was to impress the idea that the terror of death is an apprehension. Death is an ordinance of nature, directed by beneficent laws to beneficent ends. (O. B. Frothingham.)

The field of blood.

Site of Aceldama

The field of blood is now shown on the steep south face of the valley or ravine of Hinnom, near its east end, on a narrow plateau, more than half way up the hill side. Its modern name is Hak-ed-damne. It is separated by no inclosure; a few venerable olive-trees occupy part of it, and the rest is covered by a ruined square edifice-half built, half excavated-which, perhaps originally a church, was in Maundrells time in use as a charnel-house. It was believed in the middle ages that the soil of this place had the power of very rapidly consuming bodies buried in it, and in consequence either of this or of the sanctity of the spot, great quantities of the earth were taken away; amongst others by the Pisan Crusaders, in 1218, for their Campo Santo at Pisa, and by the Empress Helena, for that at Rome. Besides the charnel-house, there are several large hollows in the ground, which may have been caused by such excavations. The formation of the hill is cretaceous, and it is well known that chalk is always favourable to the rapid decay of animal matter. (Dr. Smith.)

Origin of name

The article τοῦ expresses a particular field known by that name; so called from having been used by a potter, no doubt to dig clay for his wares. Thus several villages in England have the prefix Potter, probably from part of the ground having been formerly occupied for potteries-e.g., Pottersbury, Northamptonshire. So the field at Athens, appropriated as a cemetery for those who fell in the service of their country, was called Ceramicus, from having been formerly used for brickmaking. This, of course, would make a field unfit for tillage, though good enough for a burying-ground, hence the smallness of the price. (Bloomfield.)

The repentance of Judas

If you ask how he repented, I think he repented as most usurers repent, upon their death-beds. There is a shame of sin, and guilt of conscience, and fear of judgment, even in the reprobate, which is a foretaste of hell, which the wicked feel; even as the peace of conscience and joy in the Holy Ghost is a foretaste of heaven, which the godly feel before they come thither. So Judas was displeased with the ugliness of his treachery, and had a misshapen sorrow, like a bears whelp, but without any conversion to God, or hope of mercy, or prayer for pardon, or purpose to amend. Only he felt a guilt, a shame and anguish in his heart, which was rather a punishment of sin than a repentance for his sin, and a preparative for hell which he was going unto. For hardness of heart and despairing of mercy are sins, and punishment for sins too; but true repentance is such a sorrow for one sin as breedeth a dislike of all sins, and moveth to pray, and resolveth to amend; which falleth upon none but the elect. (Henry Smith.)

A gnawing conscience

There is a warning conscience and a gnawing conscience. The warning conscience cometh before sin; the gnawing conscience followeth after sin. The warning conscience is often lulled asleep; hut the gnawing conscience wakeneth her again. If there be any hell in this world, they which feel the worm of conscience gnawing upon their hearts may truly say that they have felt the torments of hell. Who can express that mans horror but himself? Nay, what horrors are there which he cannot express himself? Sorrows are met in his soul at a feast; and fear, thought, and anguish divide his soul between them. All the furies of hell leap upon his heart like a stage. Thought calleth to fear, fear whistleth to horror, horror beckoneth to despair and saith, Come, help me to torment this sinner. (Henry Smith.)

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

Mat 27:1-2. When the morning was come — As soon as the day dawned, the chief priests and elders took counsel against Jesus, &c. — It seems they separated for the space of an hour or two, and at daybreak came together again to consult what method they should take to carry into execution the sentence they had passed against him, namely, to put him to death for the pretended crime of blasphemy. And now they resolved to carry him before Pilate the governor, loaded with chains, that he likewise might give sentence against him. For, indeed, otherwise they could not accomplish their purpose; the power of life and death being now taken out of their hands. The Roman governors of Judea, it must be observed, resided commonly at Cesarea, and there was only an inferior officer in Jerusalem, with a single legion to keep the peace of the city. At the great festivals, however, they came up to prevent or suppress tumults, and to administer justice; for the governors of provinces frequently visited the principal towns under their jurisdiction on this latter account. Accordingly it is insinuated, Joh 18:39, that Pilate was wont to give judgment in Jerusalem at the passovers. Being come, therefore, as usual, a while before the feast, Pilate heard of the stir that was among the rulers, and was informed, perhaps by Nicodemus, or Joseph of Arimathea, of the character of the person on whose account it was made; and that the chief priests were actuated by envy in their proceedings against him, Mat 27:18.

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

Friday of the Crucifixion.

§ 135. — JESUS TAKEN BEFORE PILATE, Mat_27:1-14.

1. The morning — Of Friday, the day of the crucifixion. All the chief priests and elders of the people — The Sanhedrim. See note on Mat_26:3.

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

CRITICAL NOTES

Mat_27:2. Pontius Pilate.—Must have belonged, by birth or adoption, to the gens of the Pontii, one of whom, C. Pontius Telesinus, had been the leader of the Samnites in their second and third wars against Rome, B.C. 321–292. The cognomen Pilatus means “armed with the pilum or javelin,” and may have had its origin in some early military achievement. When Judæa became formally subject to the empire, on the deposition of Archelaus, a procurator, or collector of revenue, invested with judicial power, was appointed to govern it, subject to the Governor of Syria (Luk_2:2), and resided commonly in Cæsarea. Pontius Pilate, of whose previous career we know nothing, was appointed, A.D. 25–26, as the sixth holder of that office. His administration had already, prior to our Lord’s trial, been marked by a series of outrages on Jewish feelings.

(1) He had removed the headquarters of his army from Cæsarea to Jerusalem, and the troops brought their standards with the image of the emperor into the Holy City. The people were excited into frenzy, and rushed in crowds to Cæsarea to implore him to spare them this outrage on their religion. After five days of obstinacy and a partial attempt to suppress the tumult, Pilate at last yielded (Jos., Ant. XVIII. iii. 1, 2; B.J., II. ix. 2–4).

(2) He had hung up in his palace at Jerusalem gilt shields inscribed with the names of heathen deities, and would not remove them till an express order came from Tiberius (Philo. Leg. ad Caium, c. 38).

(3) He had taken money from the Corban, or treasury of the temple, for the construction of an aqueduct. This led to another tumult, which was suppressed by the slaughter, not of the rioters only, but also of casual spectators (Jos., B. J., II. ix. 4).

(4) Lastly, on some unknown occasion he had slain some Galileans while they were in the very act of sacrificing (Luk_13:1), and this bad probably caused the ill-feeling between him and the tetrarch Antipas mentioned in Luk_23:12. It is well to bear in mind these antecedents of the man, as notes of character, as we follow him through the series of vacillations which we now have to trace (Plumptre). The wish of the Sanhedrin in delivering Jesus to Pilate was to have their sentence confirmed without inquiry. See Mat_26:66 (Carr).

Mat_27:3. Repented himself.—It is worth while to mark in the translation the difference between μεταμέλομαι, to change one’s care, and μετανοέω, to change one’s mind or purpose, and thus between the repentance of Peter, who abhorred the cause of his sin, and the remorse of Judas, who shrank back from the effect; or the godly sorrow which leads to life, and the worldly regret which leads to death (Schaff).

Mat_27:5. In the temple.—Into the sanctuary (R.V.). “The holy place,” into which only the priests might enter. How is this to be explained? Perhaps he flung the money in after them. But thus were fulfilled the words of the prophet (Zec_11:13) (Brown).

Mat_27:6. The treasury.—The temple free-will-offering treasury, called “Corbanas” (Jos., B. J., II. ix. 4), into which the corbans, or gifts of the people, were cast (Morison). The price of blood.—See Deu_23:18. By parity of reasoning, the priests seem to have thought that the blood-money which was thus returned was excluded also (Plumptre).

Mat_27:7. The potter’s field.—Tradition places this (Aceldama, Act_1:19) in the valley of Hinnom, south of Jerusalem. To bury strangers in.—That is, say Grotius, Fritzsche, and Meyer, for such stranger-Jews as might die while visiting the city on occasion of any of the great festivals. It is more likely, however, that the reference is to foreigners, such as Greeks and Romans, whose ashes would be regarded as, in a special sense, unclean. So Beza. There would thus be a compromise of feelings. The money would be treated as unclean, and yet it would be laid out for a charitable purpose (Morison).

Mat_27:8. Wherefore.—St. Luke (Act_1:19) assigns the death of Judas in a field which he had bought as the origin of the name. It is possible that two spots may have been known by the same name for distinct reasons, and the fact that two places have been shown as the Field of Blood from the time of Jerome downwards is, as far as it goes, in favour of this view. It is equally possible, on the other hand, that Judas may have gone, before or after the purchase, to the ground which, bought with his money, was, in some sense, his own, and there ended his despair, dying literally in Gehenna, and buried, not in the grave of his fathers at Kerioth, but as an outcast, with none to mourn over him, in the cemetery of the aliens (Plumptre).

Mat_27:9. Jeremy the prophet.—The citation is from Zec_11:13, but neither the Hebrew nor the LXX. version is followed exactly. Among the explanations of the prophecy being attributed to Jeremiah rather than Zechariah are the following:

(1) “Jeremiah,” who begins the Book of the Prophets in the Hebrew Canon, is intended to indicate the whole of that division of the Scriptures. This was the view of Lightfoot (Hor. Hebr.), and is favoured by Scrivener, David Brown, and others.

(2) This is an error on the part of an early transcriber.

(3) This is a slip of the pen or a slip of the memory on the part of the Evangelist himself.

MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.—Mat_27:1-10

The homage of guilt.—“When the morning was come,” it appears to have been thought by those who had condemned the Saviour to death that the time had arrived for carrying out the resolution they had come to. They therefore, it is said, “took counsel” as to the best way of so doing. Two things seem to have determined them in the line they adopted. One was that the power of life and death was now out of their hands (Joh_18:31-32). The other that the Roman governor, in whose hands it lay, would soon be taking his morning seat for the administration of justice. To him, therefore, they lead the Saviour forthwith, taking Him “bound” (Mat_27:2) as one already condemned, and going in a body (Luk_23:1), as though to show that the condemnation was the act of them all. None that looked on, therefore, could fail seeing all that was meant. Jesus is now “seen” to be “condemned (Mat_27:3). The effect of this sight on the man who had betrayed Him, and the effect of this effect on those who had condemned Him, are told to us next.

I. The effect on Judas.—We see this, first, in that which he says. When he “sees” that Jesus is “condemned” (ibid.), he sees also what has been said of Him by the priests, viz., that He is guilty, and so worthy of death. What he says in reply, seeing this, is, that He is nothing of the kind. To shed His blood, on the contrary, will be to shed “innocent blood.” That is the first thing he declares. He declares, also, what is implied in this, that he had his own share in the matter. “I have sinned” in that I have betrayed this innocent blood. And he showed, yet further, how strongly he felt this by the peculiar emphasis of his words: Here, take this money which you gave me for betraying Him, for I desire to have it no more (Mat_27:3). A marvellous result on the part of one who is spoken of as a “thief” (Joh_12:6), that he should thus deny, as it were, his own nature, on account of the depth of his feelings. The same effect is shown still more in that which he does. In this we find him resolved, at all costs, to have nothing more to do with that bribe. If they will not accept it, he will not retain it, be the result what it may. In no sense shall it be his any more. It shall not even, as it were, be any more in his hands. As something, therefore, now utterly hateful to him, “he flings it down” in the temple, and then goes away, and, in a similar manner, flings away his own life (Mat_27:5). The whole tragedy, in short, is, in every way, a most striking testimony to the innocency of Jesus. Even this man of covetousness cannot bring himself to keep the price of His life. What a revelation of the real nature of his convictions about Him! With all the almost certain suspiciousness of his nature (see Joh_12:4-5); with all the length and depth of his past intimacy with Jesus; he remembers nothing of Him but that which is good! No more competent witness, no more reliable witness, no louder witness, to the innocency of Jesus, could possibly be. Even Judas cannot live and see it denied!

II. The effect of this effect on the priests.—This was very significant in itself. Carefully gathering together the pieces of silver thrown down, all they think of is how to invest them in the most politic way. As the price of blood, it would never do to return them to the treasury of the temple. On the other hand, to them it would be just as inadmissible not to use them at all. What they resolve on, therefore, is to employ them in purchasing a piece of ground in the neighbourhood of the city, once used by a potter, but now probably exhausted, and so to be had (probably) for the exact modicum of money of which they wished to dispose. Not impossibly they had learned this through Judas himself. Not impossibly, also, this is how that exact sum had come to be agreed on between them. Anyhow, if the transaction was begun by him, it was completed by them. Thinking the place a convenient one to “bury strangers in”—and looking on it, doubtless, as quite good enough for that purpose—they purchased it for that end. Herein, therefore, we see the whole effect upon them of what Judas had done. The further question, whether or not they were really shedding “innocent blood,” as he said, was, in their judgment, no business of theirs (Mat_27:4). Even more significant, next, was this action of theirs in regard to the future. That purchased field became one of immense notoriety before long. Bought with the money of perishing Judas, it became inseparably linked with that fact. It became known, therefore, for all future time, as the “field of” (innocent) “blood,” because bought with money which the betrayer himself, with his dying lips, had declared to be the price of such blood. Who could see that field afterwards without thinking of the two lives it had cost? And without remembering also what the one of those lives had virtually said of the other, viz., that it was a life without sin? Quite as significant, lastly, was this action of the priests in connection with the past. Either as a thing of vision, or else of equally instructive typical history, there was language on record in one of the prophets—it does not really matter in which—which relates the purchase of an exactly similar field at an exactly identical price; and describes that price also as being, in some way, the value set on a life (Mat_27:9-10). So plainly, although so mysteriously; so fitly, and therefore so forcibly, had this step been foretold. Whatever else is doubtful, this is clear about that mysterious word. It was the crowning element in lending importance to this nefarious transaction. Long prophecy, in a word, had foreseen, what all posterity has since verified, of the significance of that field as an unconscious but eternal testimony to the innocency of the Saviour.

1. See, therefore, finally, on the one hand, the real origin of this testimony.—We have called it the homage of guilt. Judas designedly—the priests undesignedly—proclaim Christ here to be guiltless. Like so many Balaams, these later witnesses, intending to curse, are found blessing instead. But what has brought this about? Whose hand is it that is working in reality behind both Judas and them? And whose voice is it, therefore, that, as well by his lips and their actions as by the voice of prophecy about both, is thus testifying to Jesus? No devout heart can help seeing that it is the voice of His Father Himself. Practically, in short, it is Mat_3:17; Mat_17:5 over again.

2. See, in consequence, on the other hand, the peculiar timeliness of this testimony.—Just after Judas has treated the Saviour as guilty, he is compelled to testify to the exact opposite in the most irresistible way. Just after the priests have condemned the Saviour, they are made to condemn themselves for so doing. In other words and finally, just when Jesus has been delivered up to the Gentiles as guilty, God declares Him thus to be His “Holy One” still. Perhaps never more so than then!

HOMILIES ON THE VERSES

Mat_27:1-2. Christ sent to Pilate.—

1. The wicked are exceeding watchful to accomplish an ill turn, especially against Christ; for late at night and early in the morning are the chief priests and others busy to have Christ put to death.

2. It is no new thing to see corrupt church governors abuse the civil magistrate in execution of their unjust and cruel conclusions, as here the priests and elders deliver Christ bound to Pilate the governor.—David Dickson.

Was Jesus dealt with legally?—The question is sometimes asked, Was the trial of Jesus fair and legal according to the rules of Jewish law? The answer must be that the proceedings against Jesus violated both

(1) the spirit, and

(2) the express rules of Hebrew jurisdiction, the general tendency of which was to extreme clemency.

I. The Talmud states: “The Sanhedrin is to save, not to destroy life.” No man could be condemned in his absence, or without a majority of two to one; the penalty for procuring false witnesses was death; the condemned was not to be executed on the day of his trial. This clemency was violated in the trial of Jesus Christ.

II. But even the ordinary legal rules were disregarded in the following particulars:

(1) The examination by Annas without witnesses;

(2) The trial by night;

(3) The sentence on the first day of trial;

(4.) The trial of a capital charge on the day before the Sabbath;

(5) The suborning of witnesses;

(6) The direct interrogation by the high priest.—A. Carr, M.A.

Mat_27:3-5. Judas Iscariot.—In the story of Judas Iscariot we have the prominent tragedy of the Gospels.—

I. The character of Judas.

II. The history of his scheme.

III. The efforts to save him.—Judas did not fall at once and unwarned. He had the same chances of better things which his brother Apostles had. He thrust away from himself the helping hand which Christ’s love extended to him. From the earliest time to the latest moment, Christ sought to save the traitor from himself. Recall Christ’s method. He did not receive recruits without caution. There were after-warnings also. Generally, the tone of our Lord’s teaching respecting worldliness was one constant warning. To a man like Judas, trying to secure his own interest, and making this the prime object of his thoughts, the words, “Ye cannot serve God and Mammon,” came like a trumpet-toned note of alarm. But besides general language like this, there were utterances of our Lord’s which, in the light of Judas’ character, sound like direct and special efforts to awake him from his dream of self. Read in the light of Judas’ designs the parable of the unjust steward. Or, again, the parable of the wedding-garment had its message for the traitor. As the crisis draws near, Christ puts forth fresh and final attempts to save him. “Ye are not all clean,” He said, at the time when it was not yet too late for the traitor to cleanse his fault. Christ still stood near at hand in the garb of service, stooping to wash the earth stains from His disciples’ feet. One more effort Christ will make. At the supper table He quotes the words, “He that eateth My bread lifted up his heel against Me” (Joh_13:18). Later still more explicitly, “One of you shall betray Me” (Joh_13:21). Even then it was not too late. The last step had not been taken by Judas. But, as with a man sliding down a steep place, the impetus of temptation was too strong. He takes the food from the hand of Christ. With treason in his heart, he does not hesitate to take that pledge of affection and loyalty. There is a treachery in the doing so; the Nemesis of base acts is further baseness. “After the sop Satan entered into him” (Joh_13:27). The crisis is passed at that moment. He will not turn back now. “That thou doest, do quickly” (Joh_13:27). “He went out straightway; and it was night.” An hour later his treason was an accomplished fact.

IV. The catastrophe.—The inward story of Judas’ life is a story of help refused and warning disregarded.—Bishop W. B. Carpenter.

Judas’ remorse.—Having uttered these words of anguish to the chief priests (Mat_27:4), probably as they led the procession on the way back from Herod’s court to Pilate’s, and having suffered the coarse, ungrateful, cruel rebuff that drove him to desperation, he, with hell in his heart and the price of innocent blood in his hand, rushed headlong through the Court of the Gentiles, the Court of the Women, and up the fifteen steps where the Levites were wont to sing the Songs of Degrees. There, because able to proceed no farther, he stood madly at the Gate Nicanor—where penitents had received, a thousand times, those words of forgiveness and blessing which he should never hear, and where, thirty-three years before, Mary had presented the Holy Child whose blood he had betrayed—and, with the might of despair and the bitter vengeance of a lost man, threw the thirty accursed coins over the Court of the priests, over its altar of burnt offering and its brazen laver, over the steps of the priests; so that, having gone hissing through the air, they rang the knell of doom upon the marble floor of the Holy Place. After this act of burning insanity he rushed down the valley of Hinnom, climbed its slippery slopes on yonder side, and on the summit hanged himself—hanged himself probably with the girdle in which he had carried the price of blood; but the girdle that could not carry the price of betrayal could not bear the betrayer, and so it snapped, letting fall its burden over the rocky steeps, down, down, into the valley of Gehenna—“his own place.”—David Davies.

Conscience-stricken Judas.—

1. Though before a sin be committed the bait and allurement is only seen, and the conscience blindfolded, kept captive and benumbed; yet after sin is committed it shall be wakened at last, and see the ugliness of sin discovered.

2. When the evil of sin is discovered, then is the naughtiness of every inducement unto it discovered also, and the grief is more than any gain or pleasure inducing unto it can counterbalance; for Judas now counteth little of the thirty pieces of silver, bringeth back the price, and casteth it down in the temple.

3. Such as sin by the inducement of others need not look for comfort from the enticers of them unto it, but must bear the guilt of it alone.

4. When Justice pursueth the sinner, and he flieth not to God’s mercy in Christ, there needeth no other judge, or witness, but his own conscience only; it is sufficient to convict, condemn, and torture him, so as he will choose to strangle himself rather than endure the vexation of it.—David Dickson.

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.

EIGHTH SECTION

JESUS AND HIS BETRAYER.—JUDAS AND THE HIGH-PRIESTS

Mat_27:1-10

(Mar_15:1; Luk_22:66 to Luk_23:1; Joh_18:28)

1When [But, δέ] the morning was come, all the chief priests and [the, οἱ elders of the people took counsel against Jesus to put him to death: 2And when they had bound him, they led him away, and delivered him to Pontius Pilate the governor.1 3Then Judas, which [who] had betrayed2 him, when he saw that he was condemned, repented himself [regretting, μεταμεληθείς],3 and brought again [brought back] the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and [the] elders, 4Saying, I have sinned in that I have betrayed the innocent4 blood [I sinned, or erred, in betraying innocent blood, ἥμαρτον παραδοὺς αῖμα ἀθῶον].5 And they said, What is that [it] to us? see thou to that,[it]. 5And he cast down the pieces of silver in the temple, and departed [withdrew, or isolated himself, ἀνεχώρησε],6 and went [away hence] and hanged himself. 6And the chief priests took the silver pieces, and said, It is not lawful for to put them into the treasury, because it is the price of blood. 7And they took counsel, and bought with them the potter’s field, to bury strangers in. 8Wherefore that field was called, The field of blood, unto this day. 9Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremy [Jeremiah]7 the prophet, saying, And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of him that was valued [priced],8 whom they of the children of Israel did value [priced. Gen_37:28; Zec_11:12-13; Jer_18:1; Jer_19:12; Jer_32:6 ff]; 10And gave them for the potter’s field, as the Lord appointed me [to me].9

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

Mat_27:1 When the morning was come.—The formal meeting of the council must have taken place after six o’clock in the morning. The night of His betrayal into the hands of the high-priests was past, and the morning of His betrayal to the Gentiles had dawned. The deed, commenced in the night, was sufficiently developed and matured to be finished in clear day-light.—All the chief priests and the elders of the people took counsel.—This meeting of the Sanhedrin, which Luke describes in his Gospel, was intended at the same time to meet all the forms of law, and definitely to express the grounds of the charge against Jesus. But, as we have already seen, in point of fact, it only served to cover those violations of the law into which their reckless fanaticism had hurried them. One of the main objects of the Sanhedrin now was, to present the charge in such a light as to oblige Pilate to pronounce sentence of death. Accordingly, they agreed on the following course of procedure: 1. They demanded the absolute confirmation of their own sentence, without further inquiry into their proceedings (Joh_18:30). 2. Failing to obtain this, they accused Jesus as King of the Jews, i.e., as Messiah, in the ambiguous, semi-religious and semi-political sense of that title. 3. When (according to John) Jesus repudiated the political character of His kingdom, they preferred against Him the charge of making the religious claim that He was the Son of God. But as the effect of this accusation proved the very opposite from what they had expected, they returned to the political charge, now threatening Pilate with laying before the Emperor the fact that Jesus had made Himself a king. No doubt the general outline of this procedure was planned and sketched in the meeting of the Sanhedrin. Of course, they could not have foreseen that Pilate himself would offer them the means to overcome his opposition, by setting Jesus and Barabbas before them on the same level.—All the priests, elders, and scribes.—[Matthew mentions only the first two of these three classes, but Luke, Luk_22:66, adds also the scribes.—P. S.] “Besides their common hatred, each of these three estates had their own special motive for hostility to the Lord. The priests were indignant that He should lay greater stress on obedience than on sacrifice; the elders were offended that He judged traditionalism by the standard of revelation; the scribes, that He contended against the service of the letter by the spirit of the word. In a thousand different ways had they felt their prejudices shocked, and their ambition and pride humbled. At last the hour of revenge had come. Thus they led Him before their supreme council. The language used by Luke (Luk_22:66) seems to imply that they led Jesus, in formal procession, from the palace of the high-priest into the council-chamber, on the area of the temple. It is scarcely probable that they would have conducted Him, with such formalities, from the prison-chamber to the upper hall of the high-priest’s palace. According to the Talmud, sentence of death could only be pronounced in the Gazith (the council-hall on the temple-mountain). See Friedlieb, p. 97 (who, however, questions the correctness of this statement). At any rate, it would appear indispensable that a formal meeting of the Sanhedrin should assemble on the temple-mountain” (Leben Jesu, ii. 3, p. 1786). On Sabbaths and feast-days the Sanhedrin met in an uncovered space, which was enclosed by a wall, in the vicinity of the court of the women, and not in the Gazith. In ordinary circumstances, judicial matters were not carried on upon the Sabbath-day. “Hence, notwithstanding the studied semblance of legality, the whole procedure was characterized by irregularity and violence.” Wichelhaus, p. 211.

To put Him to death.—The resolution had been finally taken during the night, and their present object was to put that sentence and the charge against Jesus into proper form, as a means toward the end in view.

Mat_27:2. And when they had bound Him, they led Him away.—They bound Him, even when they first seized Him (Mat_26:50; Joh_18:12). These fetters He also still bore when led from Annas to Caiaphas (Joh_18:24). They seem to have been removed during His examination before Caiaphas. After that they appear to have been again put upon the Lord. Now they proceed in a body (Luke) to hand over to the Roman procurator Him whom they had condemned. They calculated upon producing, by their formal procession in a body, so early in the morning, and that on the first day of the feast, the impression that Jesus had committed some fearful and unheard-of crime. For this purpose they now put Him again in fetters. Besides, this early and pompous procession would tend to terrify the friends of Jesus among the people, and to anticipate any possible movement in His favor. If Pilate had once sentenced Jesus, there would be less cause for apprehension on the score of a popular tumult. “The procession of the Sanhedrin passed from the council-chamber across the temple-mountain, in a northerly direction, toward the palace of the governor, which lay at the northern base of the temple-mountain. As the house of the high-priest was situated on the northern slope of the Upper City, or of Mount Zion, and a lofty archway led across the valley of the Tyropæon, connecting the temple-mountain with Mount Zion, it seems probable that Jesus may, before that, have been brought in formal procession across this high archway into the council-chamber on the temple mount. As we may assume that Herod, the ruler of Galilee, resided, during his stay at Jerusalem, in the palace of Herod, which also stood on the northern slope of Mount Zion, Jesus must afterward have again been led from the hall of judgment, on the temple mount, across that archway and back—a spectacle of ignominy and woe.” (From the author’s Leben Jesu, ii. 3, p. 1502.)

And delivered Him.—The original παρέδωκαν contains an allusion to the second great betrayal of the Saviour. “After Judea became a Roman province (upon the deposition of King Archelaus), the Sanhedrin no longer possessed the jus gladii. Comp. Joh_18:31.” Meyer.

Pontius Pilate.—The sixth Roman procurator of Judæa, and successor of Valerius Gratus. He held this office for ten years during the reign of the Emperor Tiberius (Joseph. Antiq. xviii. 4, 2). His arbitrary conduct, however, led to repeated risings of the Jews, which he suppressed by bloody measures (Joseph. Antiq. xviii. 3, 1; De Bello Jud. ii. 9, 2). He was accused before Vitellius, the Præses of Syria, who deposed and sent him to Rome, to answer before the Emperor for his administration. He was probably deposed from his office the same year as Caiaphas from the priesthood—in 36 p. C. (ær. Dion.). According to Eusebius, Hist. Ecc_2:7, and the Chronic. of the first year of Cajus, he committed suicide during the reign of Cajus Caligula. The opinion entertained of him by the Jews was affected by their fanaticism on the one hand, and on the other by his proud contempt of the Jewish nation. He affords one of the earliest instances of that antagonism between the Roman and heathen spirit of the world and Jewish fanaticism which, under the administration of his successors, attained such immense proportions, and at last burst forth in open war for independence. The bitter and derisive contemptuousness which he ever and again displayed, led to frequent conflicts with the leaders of the Jews, in which the obstinate determination and cunning of the latter generally secured the victory. This aversion to the Jews made it easier for him to take a favorable view of the cause of Jesus. To this must be added, the moral impression produced by the person of Jesus, the religious awe which the mysterious religious character of the Messiah evoked, and the warning of his wife. Under the influence of such feelings, he made unmistakable efforts to withdraw Jesus from the vengeance of His enemies, whose minds and motives he easily read, or at least sought to avoid having any part in His condemnation. Hence he sent Jesus to Herod, placed him side by side with Barabbas, solemnly washed his hands, presented Him to the people after He had been scourged, etc. But he was too weak and unrighteous to pronounce what he must have felt a righteous sentence, and boldly to adhere to it as a matter of duty, instead of resorting to these numerous paltry devices. Hence also his carnal and devilish wisdom was overmatched by the superior cunning and skill of the Jewish priesthood. Pilate may serve as a type of the complete unbelief, worldly-mindedness, and morally impotent civilization of the ancient Greek and Roman world. According to the word of the Lord Himself, Pilate was guilty, but his sin was less than that of the priesthood which had delivered the Christ into his hands (Joh_19:11). Ordinarily, Pilate appears not to have been so yielding. Philo, legatio ad Caj.: “His disposition was unyielding, nor was he moved to leniency toward daring malefactors.” For the literature and history of Pilate, comp. Danz, Univ. Wörterbuch, sub Pontius Pilate. On the defence set up by some writers for Pilate, see Heubner, Com. p. 484, note. See also especially, Lavater, “Pontius Pilate, or Human Character in all its Phases.” Winer, art. Pilate [and other Bibl. Encyclop.]. The apocryphal tales connected with Pilate are recorded in the “Acta Pilati.” They are of a twofold character: 1. Such as were invented by Christians; 2. such as were of heathen origin, defamatory in their nature, circulated in the schools by order of Maximums about the year 311. See Heubner, p. 427. The introduction of “Pontius Pilate” in the Creed shows that in the mind of the Church he was regarded as representing the ancient world, and in general the spirit of the world.

The governor, ἡγεμόνι,—the more general term. The more special designation of the office was ἐπίτροπος, procurator. Winer: “The official title of procurator or eparch was given to the chiefs of administration—commonly Roman knights—who were appointed along with the governors both of imperial and senatorial provinces, and whose duty it was to attend to the revenues of the imperial treasury, and to decide on all legal questions connected with this department. Occasionally they occupied the place of governor in smaller provinces, or in districts which had been conjoined with larger provinces, but were separately administered, when they had the command of the troops stationed in their district and administered the law even in criminal cases; the president of the province retaining, however, the superintendence of such administration, and being empowered to receive and hear accusations against the procurator. Comp. Joseph. Antiq. xviii. 5, 2; xx. 6, 2; Bell. Judges 2, 4, 3.”—After the banishment of Archelaus (six years after Christ), when Judæa and Samaria were conjoined with the province of Syria, the government of Palestine was administered by a procurator. This governor of Palestine generally resided at Cæsarea, by the sea; but during the Passover he was in Jerusalem, whither the male population of the whole country flocked, and where it was his duty not only to preserve order, but also the prestige of the Roman power. If the presidents of Syria were in Palestine, they, of course, exercised sovereignty in the country. In regard to succession of the procurators, which was interrupted by the reign of Herod Agrippa from 41–44, see Winer, art. Procurator, and K. von Raumer’s Palestine, p. 338 et seq.

Mat_27:3. Then Judas ... when he saw.—He might readily learn that Jesus had been condemned. But he also saw it, from the procession in which the Pharisees conducted Jesus to Pilate, which could have no other object than to secure His condemnation.—Repented himself (regretted, felt sorrow, remorse).10—This repentance was not genuine, as occasioned by the consequences of his deed, but false, as caused by these consequences, and these alone. It seems, then, that he had not anticipated such an issue. This circumstance has frequently been adduced in support of the idea, that the object of Judas in betraying the Lord had been to induce Him to display His majesty and glory as the Messiah. But in that case we would have expected that his repentance would lead him now to cling to Jesus. Yet he seems to have expected that, as on former occasions, so now, Jesus would miraculously deliver Him self from the power of His enemies; and that in any case he would have his own honor promoted by the turn things would take (see above). Moreover, by the very fact, that after His betrayal Jesus surrendered Himself unto death, Judas was filled with terror and anguish, seeing in this the fulfilment of Christ’s prediction, and an indication that all His other sayings, notably that concerning His betrayer, would also be fulfilled. Reckoning in his own mean way, Judas expected an ordinary result; and the fact that all his anticipations proved so utterly false, and the issue proved so entirely extraordinary, filled his mind with awe.

And brought back the thirty pieces of silver.—The way of spurious penitence in contradistinction to the genuine repentance of Peter. His first disposition is to attempt some outward rectification of his deed in the sight of men, without previous humiliation before God, and seeking of refuge with Him. In connection with this, it is also a question whether he did not also entertain the hope of a still higher reward for his betrayal. The second stage and feature is expressed in the word ἀνεχώρησε, the force of which is too little understood [and not adequately rendered in our authorized version by “he departed”]. It conveys to us the idea that “he retired or withdrew” into solitude—desolation, a desert place—“and went away thence and hanged himself.”—The third stage was that of absolute despair. The precise time when Judas brought back the thirty pieces of silver is not mentioned. But from the circumstance that Matthew connects it with the leading away of Jesus unto Pilate, we infer that he approached the priests and elders during the time of their appeal to the Roman governor, and the transactions connected with it. We can readily conceive that many opportunities for this may have offered, when they were not otherwise engaged, as, for example, during the examination before Herod.

Mat_27:4. I (have) erred.11—Luther translates ἥμαρτον here: I have done (did) evil; de Wette as the authorized Engl. Version]: I have sinned. The word bears either construction. Accordingly, we prefer rendering it, I (have) erred, which seems to express the mind and the views of Judas more fully. The desire to make his guilt appear as small as possible is also evident from the explanation which he offers of his conduct.—In that I betrayed innocent blood, i.e., that by my betrayal I have caused the bloody death of one who is innocent. This admission may be taken as a grand testimony in favor of the innocence of Jesus, which must be added to that of Pilate, and to the indirect testimony of the Sanhedrin itself, which could prefer no other accusation against Jesus than that He had designated Himself the Messiah and the Son of God. If Judas could have recalled any circumstance, however trifling, which might have cast a shadow upon the Lord, we may readily believe he would gladly have appeased his conscience in that manner. Still this declaration about innocent blood cannot in any way be construed into the testimony of a penitent disciple. It seems to us that, in his remorse and anguish, Judas, with his carnal millennarian views, would now view Jesus in the light of an innocent enthusiast. The balance of evidence is strongly against the reading αἷμα δίκαιον.

What is it to us? see thou to it!—Bengel: Impii in facto consortes post factum deserunt.

Mat_27:5. In the temple.—Meyer rightly calls attention to the distinct and definite meaning of the expression. “It is neither beside the temple (Kypke), nor in the council-chamber, Gazith (Grotius), nor is it equivalent to ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ (Fritzsche and others); but—as the term ναός always implies, and in the sense which every reader must attach to the preposition ἐν—in the temple-building, i.e., in the holy place where the priests were. Thither Judas now cast the pieces of silver. In his despair, he had penetrated where priests alone were allowed to enter.” If, as seems probable, this took place on the morning of Christ’s death, we can readily understand how he found the temple empty, and thus was able to cast down the money in the sanctuary, as a testimony against the hierarchy. “There lay that blood-money, the price of the betrayal of innocent blood, from which the field was called, The field of blood—a. testimony against Israel.” Hengstenberg, Christologie, iii. 2, p. 464.

And he withdrew himself (anchorite-like into solitude), and went away hence.—We have here not one movement of Judas, but two: the verb ἀνεχώρησε is separated and distinguished by καί from ἀπελθών, and the latter indicates the going away from the deed, which had been designated by ἀνεχώρησε. From the locality where his suicide took place, we may infer that he had first attempted to retire from the world, and to lead a life of penitence as an anchorite in the valley of Gehinnom. But his despair allowed him no rest, and he committed that awful deed which the religion and the history of his people (Saul, Ahithophel) alike condemned.

And hanged or strangled himself.—Meyer (following de Wette) observes: “We must not be led by the statement in Act_1:18 to attach any other than its primary meaning to the word ἀπάγχομαι (such as, he was consumed by anguish of conscience, Grotius, Hammond, Heinsius, etc.), as the only one which accords with the simple historical narrative. To reconcile the difference, it is generally assumed, that after having hanged himself, Judas fell down headlong. In that case, Matthew would simply have recorded one part, and Luke the other, of his sad end (thus Kuinoel, Fritzsche, Olshausen, etc.). This cutting in pieces of the narrative, is, however, not only arbitrary, but unsupported by Act_1:18, which does not even explicitly record the fact of a suicide,” etc. Accordingly, Meyer supposes that there were two different traditions about the end of the betrayer, the relative historical value of which cannot be exactly determined, bearing to the end that Judas had met with a violent and fearful death, in a manner which tradition variously represented as suicide by hanging (Matthew), or as falling headlong and bursting asunder in the midst (Act_1:18), or finally, as a swelling of the body, and crushing by carts and wagons (Papias according to Œcum.).” In considering this question, we must, in the first place, avoid being confused by the apocryphal legend. (See the passage in Winer, art. Judas, Note 4.) Next, we must bear in mind the different point from which Matthew here, and Peter in Acts 1. view the same event. Matthew simply records the successive stages of Judas’s despair, terminating in suicide by hanging himself. Peter, on the other hand, views the death of Judas as the condign reward of a wicked part, in opposition to the part of the apostleship which he was to have obtained. Viewed in this light, Judas had first voluntarily gotten the reward of iniquity, and ultimately (involuntarily) a field, upon which he fell dying, all his bowels gushing out. That the words of Peter do not mean that Judas had purchased a field with the thirty pieces of silver, appears from the rhetorical character of his address, in which he assumes a knowledge of the facts of the case, and by the explanatory clause, added to the words: he purchased—and fall ing headlong, etc. The expression, “purchased” or gained for himself, is ironical, with special reference to the circumstance that he hanged himself in the field which was afterward purchased for the thirty pieces of silver. Accordingly, we adopt the view so vividly sketched by Casaubonus. That writer suggests that Judas (according to Matthew) hanged himself over a precipice in the valley Of Gehinnom. The branch broke, or the rope was torn, and Judas (according to the report of Peter) fell down headlong and burst asunder. Winer, indeed, carpingly objects, that the effects described by Peter could in that case only have resulted if the body had fallen on jagged pieces of rock. But we may safely leave a criticism which is driven into difficulties in search of rocks, among the rocky valleys around Jerusalem.

Mat_27:6. It is not lawful.—Wetstein: Argumento ducto ex Deu_13:18. Sanhedr. fol. 112.—Thus unconsciously condemning their own hypocrisy who had paid this same price of blood.

Mat_27:7. And they took counsel;—i.e., resolved in council. No doubt this took place after the crucifixion, although soon afterward.—And bought the potter’s field.—Evidently a well-known place. A field used for potteries would, of course, be a waste and comparatively valueless spot.—To bury strangers in.—The expression does not refer to Jews from other countries (as Meyer supposes), who in a religious point of view were not strangers, nor to professing heathens, who were left to themselves, but to Gentile proselytes (of the gate), to whom a certain regard was due, while priestly exclusiveness would not allow them to repose in properly consecrated graves. Thus, even in this act of cheap charity and pious provision on the part of a Sanhedrin which slew the Lord of glory, Pharisaism remained true to itself. The price of blood and the field of blood are declared quite suited for “strangers.” The field of blood, or Aceldama (Act_1:19), is on the steep face of the southern hill, opposite Mount Zion, which bounds the valley of Ben Hinnom. Tradition points out the spot. “In a corner where some graves or natural caves, in a semi-dilapidated condition, are found, is the Aceldama or field of blood of tradition. In support of the accuracy of this view, I may state, that above it there is a considerable stratum of white clay, where I repeatedly observed people working. Eusebius and Jerome are the first who mention the tradition in the Onomasticon. This place of sepulture, which till the fourteenth century belonged to the Latins, became afterward the property of the Armenians. Probably it ceased to be used for interments since the last century, although it is impossible exactly to determine the date. A large vaulted sepulchre in a rock, or rather a cave, served to indicate the locality of the field of blood.” Krafft, Topogr. of Jerus., p. 193.—The field of blood adjoins “the Hill of Evil Counsel,” where Caiaphas, according to tradition, possessed a country house, in which the death of Jesus had been resolved upon (Mat_26:3). Braune confounds this with the Hill of Offence, on the southern top of the Mount of Olives. In the Middle Ages it was believed that the soil of the Aceldama had the power of consuming bodies in one, or at least in a few days. Accordingly, shiploads of it were, during the thirteenth century, transported to the Campo Santo at Pisa.

Mat_27:9. That which was spoken by Jeremiah the prophet.—De Wette observes: “Neither this nor any similar passage is found in Jeremiah. Accordingly, some Codd. and Versions omit these words. But a similar passage occurs in Zec_11:12. Hence Cod. 22, Syr. p. in m. read Ζαχαρίου. But even Origen, Eusebius, Jerome, and Augustine found the common reading, which, in fairness, cannot be disputed. Origen, Homil. 35, supposes that the passage is found in an apocryphal book of Jeremiah. Jerome found the passage in an apocryphal writing of Jeremiah, which a Nazarene showed him, but he thought it was borrowed from Zechariah. To us it seems probable that the Evangelist has been misled by the statement in Jer_18:2, to name that prophet instead of Zechariah. The quotation from Zechariah is freely made, the phraseology being different both from the Hebrew text and from the Sept.” The following are various attempts at removing the difficulty: 1. It was a mistake of memory (Augustine)12; 2. the reading “Jeremiah” is spurious (Rupert von Deutz, etc.); 3. it occurred in a work of Jeremiah which has been lost (Origen, etc.); 4. it was an oral statement of that prophet (Calovius, etc.); 5. the Jews have expunged the passage from the book of Jeremiah (Eusebius). “If the passage has been found in an Arabic book, or in a Sahidic or Coptic lectionary, these must be regarded as interpolations from our passage.” Meyer,13—In reference to the above, we remark,—1. That it is very improbable our Evangelist should have confounded the prophecies of Zechariah—with which he evidently was quite familiar, quoting without naming them, as in Mat_21:5; Mat_26:31—with those of Jeremiah 2. It seems impossible to identify the passage before us with Jer_18:2, since it contains no reference to a purchase on the part of the prophet. 3. On the other hand, however, we find a connection between the quotation of Matthew and Jer_32:8, especially Mat_27:14 : “Thus saith Jehovah of hosts, the God of Israel, Take these evidences [letters], this evidence of the purchase which is sealed, and this evidence which is open, and put them in an earthen vessel, that they may continue many days. For thus saith the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel, Houses, and fields, and vineyards, shall be possessed [in German, purchased] again in this land.” These words must be taken along with Mat_27:8, where the Lord commanded the prophet to act in this manner. These words are now paraphrased by the Evangelist, in connection with materials furnished by Zechariah and by Jewish history, so as to exhibit the πλήρωσις of what the prophet intended to convey, viz., that the boldest purchase should yet be made, by which the price set upon the Messiah would be given for a potter’s field to be a burying-place for pious pilgrims. The meaning of the quotation is as follows: At the command of the Lord, Jeremiah bought a field at Anathoth, at a time when Jerusalem seemed to be in the hands of the king of Babylon, in order thereby symbolically to express the idea that Jerusalem was still a place of hope, and that it had a blessed future in store. Thus unconsciously had the Sanhedrin, by its purchase of the potter’s field as a burying-place for strangers, symbolically and prophetically expressed the idea that Jerusalem was yet destined to be the place of pilgrimage of countless worshippers. Thus they unconsciously prophesied, as Caiaphas did, according to Joh_11:50; and thus had they fulfilled the prediction of Jeremiah (Mat_27:15; Mat_27:43-44). 4. The Evangelist sums up in a brief sentence the grand thought of Jeremiah (as he had done in Mat_2:23), referring in it to Zec_11:12, without, however, quoting that passage. There the typical Shepherd of the people of God (who is the same as Jehovah himself) has His price fixed by His sheep. They give it as thirty pieces of silver, the well-known price of a slave. Jehovah says: “Cast it to the potter, אֶל־הַיּוצֵר: a goodly price that I was prized at by them.” (On the meaning of these obscure words, comp. the author’s “Leben Jem,” ii. 3, p. 1494.) The Sept. adds, by way of explanation, “to the melting-pot.” (An anomalous explanation by Hitzig, mentioned by Meyer, who thinks he finds in it a rectification of the Sept. and the punctuation of the text.) This is to imply that the money was impure, and required to be melted over again. 5. Matthew also distinctly alludes to Gen_37:28—the purchase-money of Joseph when sold by his brethren. 6. Accordingly, the passage in question combines four different quotations: (a)“And they took the thirty pieces of silver,” which is derived from the narrative, with a special reference to Zechariah; (b)“the price of Him that was valued”—also after Zechariah; (c) “whom they bought of the children of Israel” [as in the margin of the authorized version]—after Genesis 37; (d) “and gave them for the potter’s field”—the narrative of the text, with a special reference to Zechariah; (e) “as the Lord appointed to me”—the key of the whole passage, quoted from Jer_32:6; Jer_32:8. They gave the whole price for which they bought and sold the Saviour for a potter’s field, to serve as a place of burial for believing Gentile pilgrims. Thus, while sealing their own doom, they have unconsciously made Jerusalem a city of the future—but of a future which shall bring advantage to believing Gentile pilgrims—they have purchased for them a resting-place in death.

Mat_27:9. Of Him that was valued or priced, τοῦ τετιμηένου.—Meyer thinks that “the expression is intended to give the Hebrew הַיְקָר (pretii). But the Evangelist evidently read הַיָּקָר (cari, œstimati), and applies it to Jesus as the valued One κατ ̓ ἐξοχήν; Euthym. Zigabenus: τοῦ παντίμου χριστοῦ, comp. Theophylact, and of late Ewald: the invaluably valuable One, who nevertheless was valued at so low a price.” This view implies not only that Matthew had intended closely to follow Zechariah, but that he had at the same time misunderstood and misrepresented him. It attaches to the verb τιμάω a twofold and a contradictory sense. The meaning of the words really is: “of Him that was valued”—the sense favored by most critics, including de Wette and Hofmann. Nor is there any tautology about it, as the words δ Ìνἐτι μήσαντο ἀπό mean: whom by valuing they purchased, or, whom they bought. Thus the expression, “of Him that was valued,” would seem specially to refer to the passage in Zechariah—the priests being the subject of the verb ἐτιμήσαντο.—Whom they bought of the children of Israel (=Jacob).—This does not mean that Christ had been valued by the whole people (Hofmann); nor, at the instigation of the children of Israel (Meyer); nor, from among the children of Israel, i.e., for a man of Israel (Baumgarten-Crusius); but, bought from the children of Israel (Castellio, Luther, and others). Judas is here the representative of the whole treacherous nation; and the passage alludes to the sons of Jacob, who sold Joseph.—For the potter’s field, εἰςτόν,—for the purchase thereof. The allusion here to Zec_11:13 is very slight. The passage in the prophet, “Cast it אֶל־הַיּוֹצֵר” (and that, as appears from the sequel, in the temple), is rendered by the Sept. εἰς τὸ χωνευτήριον, to the melting furnace. Hitzig proposes to read יוֹצָר, the treasure, hence, Cast it into the temple treasury. But, irrespective of the fact, that this is merely an arbitrary conjecture, it would give a wrong meaning, as the small price was to be treated with contempt, not with honor and distinction. Hengstenberg explains it: Cast it to the potter=the executioner. But these two terms are certainly not identical. The potter forms the vessels for the temple, and puts the old into new forms. Accordingly, we conjecture that in the court of the temple, where the various vessels were arranged, there was a place bearing the inscription “To the potter,” which was equivalent to “the melting furnace.” Into this receptacle, designated by its inscription, Jehovah directs the thirty pieces of silver to be cast.—Thus “to the old iron” cast the price, according to which they have valued Him as equal with “old iron.” Gerlach regards the thirty pieces of silver as the hire of a shepherd for a year. But it is well known to have been the price for a slave.—As the Lord appointed to me.—Referring not to the passage in Zechariah, but to the narrative of Jeremiah referred to, that the Lord had commanded him, by way of symbol, to purchase the field at Anathoth.

DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL

1. On the Character of Judas, see our previous remarks. For more detailed treatises about his call to the apostolate, comp. Heubner, Comment, p. 418. On the defence set up for Judas by a section of the Gnostics and of the Menonites, and by some modern writers, see Heubner, p. 420.

2. The Repentance of Judas.—Terrible and mysterious as is the guilt, so awful and sad is the repentance of the traitor, as it ultimately terminates in the blackness of despair. The ancients were wont to place it side by side with the penitence of Cain, as the counterpart of true repentance. Thus much is evident, that from first to last his penitence was unhealthy and godless. For its source and origin was not his guilt, but the consequences resulting from it (“when Judas saw that,” etc.). Secondly, in its course and progress it did not appear as repentance toward God, in the economy of salvation. We see him seeking first to offer human satisfaction before the priests; next, retiring as a penitent into solitude; and lastly, casting himself, in his suicide, headlong into the abyss of despair. We note the opposite of all this in Peter. Here we have first bitter weeping, repentance toward God, and return to Christ; and then human satisfaction, offered in the strength of the pardoned soul and in newness of life. Lastly, there is the sad termination in the case of Judas,—his repentance being the sorrow of the world, which worketh death (2Co_7:10). At the outset, he wants the genuineness and sincerity in dealing with an offended God which constitutes the grand characteristic of true repentance; during the course of it, that faith which flies for refuge to the sovereign mercy of God, who is able and willing to pardon; and hence, in the end, the victory of hope and love over despair. Heubner remarks: “When the conscience of a sinner awakens and fills him with terror he is hopelessly lost if he lose faith—faith in the grace of God, who is able and willing to pardon, and faith in an atoning and all-sufficient Saviour. Hence it is absolutely necessary to keep firm hold of faith.” However, ingenuousness and truth are the condition of ability to believe. He that doeth the truth cometh to the light. The same writer remarks; “Satan has two arts by which he seduces men. Before we sin he cries out: Spera! and after we have sinned: Despera!” (See the quotation from Luther, Works, vol. xix. 1498.)

3. Suicide: Saul, Ahithophel, Judas.—“Suicide, if not freely and voluntarily committed, but arising from physical disturbance, may expect pardon from God.” In his “Table talk,” Luther expressly says (Walch’s edition, Matthew 48 § 13, p. 1039), “that all cases of suicide are not condemned.” (Which may be added to Stäudlin’s History of the opinions on Suicide, p. 116.) Heubner: “When suicide is committed freely, and with full consciousness and reflection, it is always the result of sinful estrangement and alienation from the Creator, and of despair in everlasting love. True, it is very generally also the consequence of gross sins which torment the soul, and of violent passions. These alone, however, do not lead men to their eternal downfall; it is unbelief alone. Hence it is that suicides are now so much more common.”—What makes suicide at once detestable and horrifying is, in the first place, the false and wicked combination of the most extreme contradictions,—self-love and self-abandonment, deliverance and destruction, healing and murder, rebellion against God and forth stepping to His judgment-bar; in the second place, the fact that the self-murderer perverts to his own destruction that moment which God had appointed to be the crisis of his perfected salvation (see Act_16:27); in the third place, the circumstance that the self-murderer, regardless of consequences, anticipates and neutralizes, in a cowardly and wicked manner, the act of free surrender of the soul to God in death, which is its highest spiritual form (see the author’s Positive Dogmatik, p. 1243). Suicide is, so to speak, the theatrical exhibition and full development of sin’s self-destructive nature, and is the natural type of eternal self-condemnation. Truth accordingly must never in its testimony cease to war against suicide, regarded in itself; she cannot compromise with it, but must ever condemn it as the evidence of despairing unbelief. But as suicide is often the result of bodily and mental weakness, the twin child of madness, we should deal with actual cases in a forbearing, mild, and cautious spirit. We should act similarly in those cases where remorse in after-life leads to suicide, though that act appears to be merely the natural consequence of the preceding heinous crime committed by the miserable persons. The spiritual suicide of Judas was consummated in the moment of his treachery against his Lord and Master. Heubner’s statement: “We may fall ever so low, if we only hold fast the faith,” is as liable to misconception as many similar remarks of Luther. Faith is ethical in its very nature, and cannot be separated from moral laws. Unon other points connected with suicide, consult the Systems of Ethics. We should not return to the confessional, because the reserve of ungodly men and their brooding lead them to self-destruction; but we should, throughout the Evangelical Church, recommend the practice of a free confession of heart.

4. Appropriation of the Blood-Money.—“Hypocritical conscientiousness. Their scruples arose from Deu_23:18 :—‘Thou shalt not bring the hire of a whore, or the price of a dog, into the house of the Lord thy God for any vow; for even both these are an abomination unto the Lord thy God.’ The instruments of the wicked are a source of disgust and dread to them, especially those to whom the stain of blood attaches as a memorial of their guilt. They are agents to awaken conscience, and threaten punishment. These wretches suffered blood to stain their hands and lie upon their consciences, but they would not allow the temple treasury to be defiled. The money-chest they valued above their conscience. They would not transgress by receiving defiled money, for they feared to render their treasury valueless: this was their reverence for God (Mat_23:24). There is a proper solicitude, however, which we should all have, to keep our property undefiled.”—“They appropriated the money to a charitable purpose; but it is impossible to remove the guilt and disgrace of former days by acts of mercy.” Heubner. Similar institutions were common in the Middle Ages. The cloister of Königsfelden in Switzerland was the fruit of Queen Agnes’ bloody vengeance.

5. The Field of Blood.—Even in the acts of charity performed by the Sanhedrin, the characteristic traits of its members come to view; the most complete hypocrisy, making the money-chest of God’s house more sacred than God Himself and God’s acre.14 They purchase for a paltry sum, and that the price of blood, a field of blood, to inter pious pilgrims from heathen nations, who were not reckoned to be fully Jewish proselytes. So the charity of the Middle Ages sought out beggars upon whom to expend its kind offices, and these it furnished with beggars’ broth. Unconsciously, these hypocrites were compelled to perpetuate the memory of their sinful acts; and in this act, besides, was given unconsciously a plastic type of the Sanhedrin. Without willing it, they had to fulfil Jeremiah’s prophecy. The purchase of the potter’s field to be a resting-place for foreign pilgrims becomes prophetical of this, that Jerusalem, Palestine, and Israel’s entire inheritance, was destined to be a resting place for the believing Gentile world.

6. Here for the first time Christian grave-yards took the place of isolated sepulchres, as was the custom among the Jews. And who was probably the first interred in that field? This history preaches mildness and tenderness.

HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL

The counsel and the treachery on the morning of the feast. 1. The counsel and treachery: (a) An act of treachery from a resolution of council; (b) a counsel which was perfected by an act of treachery 2. On the morning of the feast: (a) The morning thought; (b) the festival thought, of the rulers of Israel.—The abominable display of the high-priest and the chief council on the festal morning.—Christ’s murder disguised under an imposing act of worship rendered to God.—The great display of fanaticism, in its historic import to the world.—Blessed are they who can resist the currents of the time.—The mad pomp with which the Jews abandon their long-looked for King to the Gentiles.—Judaism in the act of involving the Gentile world in the guilt of Christ’s murder: the opposite of the promise: “In thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed,” Isaiah 53—The effects of magnificent display: 1. Its power; 2. its weakness.—Jesus abandoned by His own nation to the Gentiles.—The second betrayal the sentence of death pronounced upon the first betrayal (Now when Judas saw).—The repentance of Judas the completion of his guilt, as seen: 1. In its beginning; 2. its means; 3. its end.—The repentance of Judas compared with Peter’s, 2Co_7:10.—To render due satisfaction, we must begin at God’s throne.—(Against Thee only have I sinned.) Eze_33:15-16.—That innocent blood, which he had betrayed, would have saved him, had he known its full value.—Judas’s testimony to the innocence of Jesus a significant fruit of his discipleship: 1. The spoiled fruit of a reprobate or deserter; 2. the important testimony of a deserter.—The unwilling testimony of the unbelieving and despairing to the glory Jesus.—Behold how heartlessly the wicked abandon the instruments of their guilt! “See thou to that.”—The confession of a bleeding conscience is unheard by the hierarchical superintendents of the confessional.—How soon is the friendship of the wicked at an end!—They hurl one another mutually into destruction.—The fruitless attempts of Judas to silence his conscience.—The end of Judas; or, suicide the sign of finished unbelief.—The conscientious scruples of the unscrupulous: “It is not lawful.”—The charitable institutions of a hardness of heart which cloaks itself under the garb of piety: 1. Their occasion,—the committal of a crime; 2. their spring,—superstition and selfishness; 3. their form,—monuments of a proud, unloving spirit.—The price at which the world valued Christ sufficed to purchase an old, exhausted clay-pit (“loam-pit or sandhole”).—The fulfilment of the prophet’s word; or, the burying-ground of pious pilgrims—i.e., of believers—bought with the purchase money of Jesus.—The field of blood of despairing Judaism converted into a burial-field (a field of peace) for the believing Gentile world.—They who delivered Christ over to the Gentiles have had to yield their land likewise to the Gentiles.

Starke:—We should be up early, not to injure our neighbor, but to praise God, Psa_108:2-3, and to attend honestly to our calling, Psa_104:23.—Zeisius: Christ has been bound that He might free us from the bonds of sin, death, the devil, and hell.—He also thereby sanctified and blessed the bonds of our afflictions, especially those endured for the gospel.—Canstein: Satan blinds the eyes to precipitate man into sin; and then he opens them again, that despair may seize the sinner.—Do not be such a fool as to commit a sin to gain the world’s favor; for it will draw its head out of the noose, and leave thee to be hanged.—Quesnel: There is a kind of hirelings and false shepherds, to whom it is of no consequence whether their sheep stray and are lost or not.—Zeisius: Do but see how far greed will lead a man.—Canstein: The anguish of an evil conscience deprives a man of his judgment, so that he is no more his own master; for when he thinks by self-murder to free himself from: torment, he only plunges himself into eternal torment.—Thou canst find many a companion in sin; but when thy poor conscience will have comfort, thou art forsaken by them all.—Hast thou sinned deeply, despair not; arise, and repent truly.—Nova Bill. Tub.: Christ has given the grave money for our burial, and has purchased for us, poor pilgrims who have nothing of our own, a resting place.—Canstein: The wicked themselves must assist in establishing divine truth.

Gossner:—“See thou to that:” such is their absolution.

Gerlach:—It was a remarkable circumstance in the passion history of Christ, that He must be delivered up to the Gentiles. Not the Jews only were to reject and crucify the Son of God, but the Gentiles also; and His blood crieth for mercy on behalf of Jews as well as Gentiles.

Heubner:—The witness of Judas. He was the spy whom Satan had been permitted to place among the confidential friends; he was Satan’s appointed fault-finder, who should pay attention to discover any fault that might be committed. But he had to confess he had betrayed innocent blood.—That Judas might have gained pardon, if he had believed, is acknowledged by, e. g., Chrysostom, in Sermon 1 on Repentance, and by Leo the Great, in the 11th Sermon on the Passion.—Even the most glorious opportunities of virtue and religion, even the companionship and conversation of the most holy and most lovable of men, are perverted to its own ruin by a corrupted spirit.—An evil germ, small at first, but nourished and tended, produces fruits ever more and more poisonous.—They care for the bodies of dead foreigners, but let the souls of the living perish.—The perpetuation of sinful acts through memorials, names, etc., against the will and expectation of evil-doers.—How are the children of God, yea, Christ Himself, valued in this world! To how many are philosophers, artists, heroes, or millionnaires far more precious!

Braune:—Common minds become small criminals, great characters great criminals, as men judge: the former are base, the latter more wicked. (Still the deed of Judas was the very depth of baseness.)—He seeks to clear himself only before his own conscience and his accomplices, not before God, and that he would do without Jesus. He wanted faith, and hence he prayed not and sought not.—Themselves they have stained, God’s treasury they would not defile.—Schulz: The end of Judas: 1. His despair; 2. his ruin.

[Burkitt:—Behold! a disciple, an apostle, first a traitor, then a self-murderer. Behold! all ye covetous worldlings, to what the love of that accursed idol has brought this wretched apostle. Behold! Judas, once shining in the robes of a glorious profession, now shining in the flames of God’s eternal wrath and vengeance. Lord! how earnest ought we to be for thy preserving grace, when neither the presence, the miracles, the sermons, the sacraments of Christ, could preserve and secure a professor, a disciple and apostle from ruinous apostasy. Let him that standeth take heed lest he fall.—Doddridge:—The irresistible force of conscience in the worst of men.—The testimony of the traitor to the innocence of Jesus.—The wrath of man shall praise the Lord.—D. Brown:—The true character of repentance is determined neither by its sincerity nor by its bitterness, but by the views under which it is wrought. Judas, under the sense of his guilt, had nothing to fall back upon; Peter turned toward Jesus, who was able and willing to forgive. In the one case we hare natural principles working themselves out to deadly effect; in the other, we see grace working repentance unto salvation.—Wordsworth:—Judas, a type of the Jews, in his sin and end (?).—P. S.]

Footnotes:

[1]Mat_27:2.—[Τῷ ἡλεμόνι, here=ἐπίτροπος, procurator, which was the proper official character and title of Pilate; but ἡλεμών is a more general term which applies to proconsuls, legates, or procurators. Hence governor may be retained. Vulgate and Beza translate: præsidi (but this title belonged to the President of Syria (Luk_2:2), Pilate’s superior); Castalio: prœtori (in the wider acceptation of early Roman history); Tyndale, Coverdale, Cranmer, Genevan, Bishops: deputy (but this is used for ἀνθύπατος, proconsul, in Act_13:7-8; Act_13:12; Act_18:12; Act_19:38); Campbell: procurator (correct, but not so generally intelligible as governor); Luther: Landpfleger; Ewald and Lange: Statthalter.—P. S.]

[2]Mat_27:3.—Παραδούς according to B., L., cursive MSS., Lachmann, [and Tregelles. Tischendorf and Alford retain the usual reading: παρα δι δούς.]

[3]Mat_27:3.—[It is worth while to mark in the translation the difference between μεταμέλομαι, to change one’s care, and μετανοέω, to change one’s mind or purpose, and thus between the repentance of Peter, who abhorred the cause, his sin, and the remorse of Judas, who shrunk back from the effect; or the godly sorrow which lends to life, and the worldly regret which leads to death.—P. S.]

[4]Mat_27:4.—In place of ἀθῶον (innocent) some manuscripts and translations read δίκαιον (righteous), which has too little authority.

[5]Ver.4.—[So in accordance with the concise earnestness of the Greek, and the state of Judas. “The fewer words the better.” Similarly Ewald: Ich sündigte übergebend [better: verrathend] unschuldiges Blut, and Conant: I sinned, etc. But Lange: Ich habe gefehlt, etc., I erred; Luther: Ich habe übel gethan, I did evil, which draws a nice distinction between blundering and sinning, and is perhaps better suited to the case of Judas, who, like Cain and Saul, had no real sense of sin itself in its horrible guilt and enormity, and hence no true repentance, but shrunk back in dismay from the consequences of sin. The Greek π̔́ μαρτον, however, admits of both translations. Comp. Lange’s Exeg. Notes, Coverdale correctly omits the article before innocent, but the other older English Versions unmeaningly profix it.–P. S.]

[6]Mat_27:5.—[Lange lays stress on ἀνεχώρησε, and translates: zog sich surück (einsiedlerisch in die Oede), See his Exeg, Notes—P. S.]

[7]Mat_27:9.—Jeremiah is left out by several cursive MSS. and in the Syriac and Persian translations. Cod. 22, and others, ad Ζαχαρίου. [Cod. 22 is an inferior MS. of the eleventh century, and can therefore hardly claim any authority On the difficulty of the true reading, see the Exeg. Notes.—P. S.]

[8]Mat_27:9.—[So Conant, who substitutes priced for valued, to retain the verbal correspondence between price and priced as in the Greek τήν τιμήν τοῦ τετιμημένου. Comp. Ewald, who translates: den Schatz des Geschätzten, weichen schätzten, etc.—P. S.]

[9]Mat_27:10.—[Ευνέταξέμοι, either appointed to me, as Scrivener and Conant propose, or commanded me, as Coverdale has it. The appointed me of the Authorized Version is susceptible of another meaning. Thus correct Mat_28:16.—P. S.]

[10][Comp. Crit. Note on Mat_27:3, p. 501.—P. S.]

[11][So Dr. Lange translates in his Version: Ich habe gefehlt. See the Critical Note on Mat_27:4, p. 501.—P. S.]

[12][Adopted by Alford: “The citation is probably quoted from memory and inaccurately.” He refers to similar mistakes in the apology of Stephen, Act_7:4; Act_7:16, and in Mar_2:26. Wordsworth cuts the Gordian knot in a manner directly opposite, though equally unsatisfactory, viz.: by the bold dogmatic assert on that the name of Jeremiah is here purposely substituted for that of Zechariah to teach us that all prophecies proceed from one Spirit, and that the prophets are merely channels, not sources, of the Divine truth. But this object could have been reached much better by substituting the Holy Spirit or the Scripture for the name of the writer —P. S.]

[13][Dr. Lange might have added a sixth attempt to solve the difficulty, viz.: that the book of Jeremiah, being actually arranged by the Jews as the first of all the prophets (Bava Bathra) gave its name to the whole body of their writings. So Lightfoot and Scrivener.—P. S.]

[14][Gottesacker, also Friedhof, is the German name for grave-yard.—P. S.]

Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures (Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical), ed. John Peter Lange, English translation edited by Philip Schaff (1864–1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Mat 27:1-10.

Jesus Formally Sentenced And Delivered To Pilate. Suicide Of Judas

This section divides itself into Mat 27:1 f., and Mat 27:3-10.

I. Mat 27:1 f. The Formal Meeting Of The Sanhedrin

Mar 15:1 Luk 22:66-71. It seems greatly best to suppose, as we have been doing, that while the real trial and condemnation of Jesus had already occurred, (Mat 26:57-68) a formal session of the Sanhedrin was held after daybreak, when the morning was come. So Mark ’in the morning,’ and Luke ’as soon as it was day.’ The Mishna ("Sanh." IV., 1) expressly provides that criminal cases can be decided only in the day time, and that while a sentence of acquittal may be made the same day, a sentence of condemnation must be postponed to the next day. We have seen (on Mat 26:66) bow the latter provision might have been evaded, but the former seems to have been here regarded, being in fact harder to evade. Luke has not described the informal meeting and sentence, but he has just before mentioned the indignities offered to Jesus, which we know from Matt. and Mark to have followed that sentence. It is natural that Luke, in describing the formal session should include some things that occurred in the previous investigation, since this made no difference as to the general result; nor can we tell how far the formal meeting would repeat the processes of the other. Whatever view may be adopted as to the several examinations of our Lord by the Jews, we see clearly that it was public action, on the part of the highest national authorities, and was afterwards approved even by the popular voice. (Mat 27:25.)—The place of this session may have been the high priest’s residence, as before, but more probably was the regular hall for meetings of the Sanhedrin (see on Mat 26:59); notice especially that Luk 22:66 says, "they led him into their council," the Sanhedrin.

Took counsel against Jesus to put him to death. They had already voted that he deserved to die (Mat 26:66), and would only need to repeat that vote in the formal session. But there was a further question as to how they could actually put him to death, as the Romans had taken from the Sanhedrin (see on "Mat 26:59") the right to inflict capital punishment, and this could be managed only through Pilate the governor (see on "Mat 27:11"), who had come from his usual residence at Cesarea to Jerusalem, in order to insure order at the great feast, and attend to any administrative points that might come up. They probably then agreed to make before Pilate the accusations they actually did make, viz., that Jesus claimed to be a king, and forbade payment of tribute to Cesar, (Luk 23:2) and that he stirred up the populace. (Luk 23:5, Luk 23:14) The further charge of blasphemy (Joh 19:7) they would bold in reserve. The Com. text has ’Pontius Pilate,’ as in Luk 3:1 Act 4:27, 1Ti 6:13; but ’Pilate’ alone is probably correct, according to some of the best documents.[1] As to Pilate, and the term governor,’ see on "Mat 27:11". When they had, bound him. So Mark. He had also been bound when they arrested him at Gethsemane, Joh 18:12, Joh 18:24, but the bonds would naturally be at least in part removed while they kept him in the house. The persons who bound Jesus and led him away are naturally understood to be not the chief priests and elders (Mat 27:1), but the officials who did their bidding. The Mishna directs ("Sanh.," VI., 1) that sentence shall be followed by leading away to execution, while the court remain in session so as to hear any new evidence that may be brought in the criminal’s behalf, or any reasonable appeal he may make, while on the way, for a new trial. But here "the whole company of them rose up, and brought him before Pilate." (Luk 23:1, Rev. Ver.) He was not yet on the way to execution, and they need not keep the Sanhedrin in session.

[1] à B L Σ, 83, 102, Memph., Theb., Pooh., Origen. We might suppose Pontius struck out here because wanting in the other Gospels; or inserted because familiar to the early Christians; but then why net likewise insert it in Mark, Luke, and John? In the absence of decisive internal considerations, it is safest to follow documents so generally right.

II. Mat 27:3-10. The Sad Fate Of Judas

Not found in the other Gospels, but compare Act 1:16-19.

(a) Judas returned the money and hanged himself. (Mat 27:3-5.) Judas, which had betrayed him, see on "Mat 10:4" as to his earlier history. When he saw that he was condemned, viz., that Jesus was condemned by the Sanhedrin. Perhaps he literally saw the procession to Pilate’s abode, and understood it to mean that the Sanhedrin had condemned him. This must have occurred before the crucifixion, as only the condemnation is mentioned. It is most natural to follow Matthew’s order, placing it before the trial by Pilate. Yet that is not a necessary view, since Matt. might record the scene here to avoid a break in the subsequent narrative. The chief priests and elders in general went with the procession to Pilate, (Luk 23:1) but some of them may have gone at once to the Court of the Priests, in order to oversee the morning preparations for worship. The chief priests and elders are mentioned in Mat 10:3, with one article for both names (correct text), probably because the two classes were closely associated in the Sanhedrin and otherwise. In v. 1 the article in the originalis repeated because of the added words ’of the people.’ Repeated himself, deeply grieved over and regretted his conduct, the word being metamelomai, quite different from metanoeo, which is used for repenting unto salvation, see on "Mat 3:2"; see on "Mat 21:29". Brought again the thirty pieces of silver, see on "Mat 26:15". In that I have betrayed, delivered up, as in Mat 26:2, see on "Mat 10:4"and see on "Mat 17:22". Innocent blood. The Rev. Ver., margin, ’righteous blood’[1] is probably correct, but there is no important difference. The reply of the rulers was scornful. Compare Act 18:15. In the temple, Rev. Ver., into the sanctuary. But the Com. text, ’in the sanctuary’ is more probably correct.[2] The sanctuary is naos, the central building or temple proper, see on "Mat 4:5" and see on "Mat 21:12". Some have attempted to establish an occasional loose use of for the whole sacred enclosure, but without success. Hot being a priest, so far as we have any reason to believe, Judas had no right to enter this building, or even the Court of the Priests that surrounded it. lie must have felt desperate and reckless, so that he rushed into the Court of the Priests, or into the building itself, and flung the coins ringing on the floor of the sanctuary. If we read ’into,’ he must at any rate have entered the court, which was equally forbidden. And went and hanged himself. See the same word in 2Sa 17:23 Tob 3:10. As to the further statements in Act 1:18 f., see below.

[1] It is read by B (second hand) L, Memph., Theb., Old Latin, and Vulg., Syriac of Jerns., Arm., Æthiopic, Origen, and other Fathers. The Sept. has ’innocent blood’ fifteen times, ’blameless blood’ three times, ’righteous blood’ four times; but in only one of these is that expression found in the Hebrew. So ’righteous blood’ is a rare expression, and more likely to have been changed into the common ’innocent blood’ than contrariwise. In New Testament ’righteous blood’ is found only in Mat 23:35; ’innocent blood’ not at all.

[2] ’In’ might easily be changed to ’into,’ by persons who knew that Judas had no right to enter the sanctuary. It is probably an "Alexandrian" alteration, being found in à L, Origen, Eusebius: and Westcott Hort would doubtless call it such but for its being found also in B.

In connection with what has been said of Judas in Mat 10:4, Mat 26:14, Mat 26:24, it may be remarked that our Lord gave Judas a position for which he appears to have been by nature specially fitted. That is for any man the best providential assignment, and can only turn out otherwise through his own grievous fault. (Compare Edersheim) Some modern critics and literary men, in view of Judas’ remorse and suicide, have tried to construct for him a noble character—being apparently influenced partly by love of paradox, partly by pity and charity, and partly, it is to be feared, by a low estimate of sin. They say that Judas, like the other apostles, was expecting Jesus to set up a worldly kingdom, in which, whoever was otherwise greatest, he might hope to be Treasurer. This hope would feed at once his ambition and his covetousness. Seeing that the Master shrank from establishing a worldly kingdom, he is supposed by these writers to have resolved upon a diplomatic stroke; he would betray him to the rulers, and then Jesus would be obliged to deliver himself by force, perhaps by miracle, and would no longer delay to assume the Messianic throne. it was the unexpected and mortifying failure of this high scheme that wrought in him such intolerable remorse. Now that such alone was the aim of Judas, is a fancy forbidden by the express statement of John that he was "a thief"; (Joh 12:6) and of Jesus, long before, that he was "a devil"; (Joh 6:70) and by the Saviour’s awful words, (Mat 26:24, Rev. Ver.) "Woe unto that man through whom the Son of man is betrayed! Good were it for that man if he had not been born." One may sometimes incline to think it possible that, along with the low avarice which accepted a small reward for treachery, there may have been connected in his mind vague hopes that somehow Jesus would escape, and it would all turn out well. See an excellent article in this direction by Park in Smith’s "Bib. Dict.," Amer. Ed., vol. 2, page 1498 ff. But it is difficult to suppose the elevated aims above indicated to have been cherished by a thief and a traitor; and most of the critics in question have felt it necessary for their theory to disparage the Gospel statements. It seems much more probable that, taking literally the Saviour’s predictions that he would be crucified, and perceiving the growing enmity and fixed purpose of the rulers, Judas was minded to save what he could out of the wreck, as the end of his course of petty peculation, and as some consolation for blasted hopes in regard to the kingdom and its treasury. It may also be that he was angered by the rebuke during the supper at Bethany (see on "Mat 26:10"f.), and long before dissatisfied at gradually perceiving how Jesus proposed self-renunciation and cross-bearing instead of worldly self-aggrandizement. As to his end, we know that men often lay plans for some vile act in a dreamy, or a moody, sullen fashion, and when it has been consummated, awaking to realize what they have done, are filled with vain regret and remorse. It might easily have been so with Judas, and thus his remorse and suicide are not in the least inconsistent with his having been a low thief and a shameful traitor.—’What mournful scenes of evil encompass the awful tragedy of the crucifixions—Caiaphas and Pilate, Peter and Judas. Let these help us to understand the sinfulness of human nature and the dreadful guilt of sin, and we can better appreciate the necessity, significance, and power of the cross.

(b) How the money was disposed of. (Mat 27:6-10.) To put them into the treasury, the (Hebrew word borrowed in the Greek), where every (see on "Mat 15:5") or consecrated article was deposited. (Compare Josephus "War," 2, 9, 4.) It is not lawful.... because it is the price of blood. This is supposed to have been inferred from Deu 23:18. The money had already dishonoured the temple by being thrown on its floor. And they took counsel, probably some hours or even days later, when they had more time to think of so small a matter. The potter’s field, spoken of as known by that name. To bury strangers in. This was a contemptuous charity, probably referring to Gentiles who died at Jerusalem, as they would have been unwilling to bury any Jew in a place having a taint of desecration. The field of blood. Acts gives also the Aramaic term Aceldama. The tradition fixing the place of Aceldama in the side of the valley of Hinnom, on the south of Jerusalem, goes back as far as Jerome ("Onom."). while Eus. seems to locate it on the north. Compare Robinson,"Bibl. Res.," and a striking description in Hackett’s "Illustrations of Scripture." Unto this day, shows that this Gospel was written a good many years after the crucifixion; it would be much more natural in A. D. 60 than in A. D. 40.

The account in Act 1:18 f. differs in various points from that here given. (1) Matt. says the chief priests ’bought the field’; Acts, ’this man purchased (acquired) a field.’ The latter is a high wrought expression, perfectly intelligible—all that he acquired by his treachery was a field. The money bought him a burial-place; that was to him the sole financial outcome of the iniquitous transaction. (2) Matt. says he ’hanged himself’; Acts, ’failing headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out.’ Why should these be called inconsistent statements? Suppose that he hanged himself in the potter’s field—probably an unenclosed spot, from which potter’s clay had often been obtained, like a brickyard, and therefore not costly; and suppose that the rope, or a limb of a tree, broke; and the statements are all accounted for. (3) Matthew ascribes the name field of blood to the fact that it was bought with the price of blood; Acts, to the fact that his own blood was poured out there. All the circumstances (McClellan) must have become known to the Christians, who resided at Jerusalem for years after their occurrence, and would feel a painful interest in the entire story. One of the reasons for that name does not exclude the other.—These several explanations are artificial, but not highly so, and are certainly all possible; and therefore it cannot be fairly said that the accounts are incredible because contradictory, nor that the writers were erroneously informed.

Mat 26:9. Then was fulfilled. For the term ’fulfilled,’ see on "Mat 1:22"; and for the phrase ’then was fulfilled,’ instead of ’that it might be fulfilled,’ compare on Mat 2:17. It was natural to shrink from referring so horrid a crime in any sense to the divine purpose. Spoken by, through, Jeremiah, viz., ’by God through Jeremiah,’ see on "Mat 1:22"; see on "Mat 2:17". Price... was valued... did value. The same word is used throughout in the Greek; the repetition being painfully impressive. Com. Ver. must of necessity vary the translation, ’price,’ ’valued,’ ’did value’; but it did better than Tyn., Cran., Gen., which had ’price,’ ’valued,’ ’bought.’

The prophecy is evidently derived from Zec 11:13, and yet is here referred to Jeremiah. There can be no doubt as to the text. Augustine already remarks that the few (Latin) copies which omitted the name (as also Peshito does), or substituted Zechariah, were evidently trying to remove a difficulty. This difficulty has been the subject of immense discussion. The principal theories are as follows: (1) Error on the part of Matthew. This is apparently a very easy solution of Luther, Beza, etc., and is popular now with many, even Keil and Wright (on Zechariah). But some have surely failed to consider the consequences involved in such an admission. Persons who earnestly seek another solution, or who admit they cannot find one and are quietly recognizing an unsolved difficulty, may he just as honest and truth-loving as those who with reckless bravery cut the knot. (2) Origen and Eusebius suggested, and many have repeated, that it might be a mistake of an original copyist, which is of course a mere assumption, but quite as likely as a mistake of the Evangelist. Morison ingeniously compares "strain at a gnat" in Mat 23:24, which appears to have been a slip of the pen or a typographical error in the original edition of King James. (3) The notion (Origen, Jerome, Ewald, and others), that it was taken from some Apocryphal writing ascribed to Jeremiah, is arbitrary and hardly worth discussing. (4) Mede suggested, followed by Turpie, Wright, and others, that Jeremiah may have been the author of Zechariah 9-11. This would partly fall in with the recent theory as to a divided authorship of that book; but the theory holds, for internal reasons, that the author must have belonged to the time of Micah and Isaiah. Mede’s view is barely possible. Morison well says that it would be "a critical anachronism" to suppose Matthew indicating in this fashion the composite authorship of the book. (5) Lightfoot quotes the Talmud as saying that, in the ancient order of the prophetic books, Jeremiah stood first. So he thinks Matthew has quoted from the general prophetic collection as the Book of Jeremiah; compare the Psalms of David, the Proverbs of Solomon. This is very ingenious. But no similar quotation is found in New Testament Hengstenberg and Cook ("Bib. Comm.") notice the fact that only Jeremiah, Isaiah, and Daniel are quoted by name in the Gospels, Zechariah being several times quoted or referred to in the Gospels, and many times in New Testament, but never named. (6) Hengstenberg thinks that as the later prophets often reproduce earlier predictions, so Zechariah. was here really reproducing Jer 18:2 and Jer 19:2, and Matt. intentionally refers to the original source, though adopting mainly the later form. This theory is ably argued in Hengstenberg’s "Christology,"and Kliefoth has a similar though distinct theory (see Wright). Besides the above-mentioned fact that Zechariah is so often quoted but never named, Hengst. notices also that Mar 1:2 f. refers to Isaiah what comes partly from Malachi, giving the older and greater prophet credit for the whole, the two predictions being akin.—On the whole this last seems the most nearly satisfactory theory; but some of the others are possible, even plausible. If not quite content with any of these explanations, we had better leave the question as it stands, remembering how slight an unknown circumstance might solve it in a moment, and how many an once celebrated difficulty has been cleared up in the gradual progress of Biblical knowledge. Compare on Mat 20:29, Mat 23:35.

In Zec 11:13 the prophet in vision is a representative of Jehovah acting as shepherd of Israel. The flock so misbehave that the shepherd calls for his wages to quit. The people (flock) show him contempt by valuing him at thirty shekels, the price of a slave. Jehovah says to the shepherd, "Fling it to the potter, the glorious price at which I was priced by them." The prophet adds, "And I took the thirty pieces of silver, and I flung it, in the house of Jehovah, to the potter." In like manner, Jesus is contemptuously valued by the representatives of Israel at thirty shekels, and this is flung away in the house of Jehovah, and goes to a potter for the purchase of his field. The two cases are similar internally as well as in striking external points, and the Evangelist declares them to have a prophetic relation. Compare on Mat 1:23, Mat 2:17 f.—Ewald, Bleek, Meyer, and others, hold that the Hebrew does not mean ’potter,’ but ’treasury.’ They change the vowels, and make an unknown word, and think that this is required by the subsequent words ’in the house of Jehovah.’ It is enough to say that the money flung in the temple did go to the potter. Stone have suggested the artificial but not impossible hypothesis of a potter who had a shop in the temple courts and supplied the temple, and who owned the piece of land that was bought.

As to the form of the quotation, Matthew here leaves the Sept. and makes considerable changes in the expressions of the Hebrew, but only such as bring out more clearly the meaning which, if we consider the passage as prophetic, is really conveyed by the Hebrew. Compare on Mat 2:6.

Homiletical And Practical

Mat 27:3. Downward course of one who began as a teacher and an apostle. (1) Avarice, (2) Thievery, Joh 12:6, (3) Betrayal, (4) Remorse, (5) Suicide, (6) His own place, Act 1:25.—Peter and Judas. (1) They both, and they only, are called Satan, Mat 16:23 Joh 6:70 (2) They both, and they only, turned openly against the Master at the end. (3) They both sorrowed deeply, but in one it was remorse, in the other it was humble and loving repentance. (4) One committed suicide, the other found forgiveness and lived a long life of usefulness.—How the traitor was treated. (1) Eagerly welcomed, and promptly paid, Mat 26:15 (2) Solemnly warned, but in vain, Mat 26:24 (3) Diligently assisted, Mat 26:47 Joh 18:3 (4)

Scorned and slighted, Mat 27:4. (5) The price of his treachery made a monument of his ignominy forever.

Mat 27:4."I have sinned."Spurgeon has a sermon that introduces seven different persons in Scripture, each saying,"I have sinned" "What is that to us?" It was really much to them; for if Judas bad betrayed a righteous man, they had condemned him. They could not shift their guilt upon Judas, as Pilate could not shift his upon the Jews. (Mat 27:24) Henry: "It is folly for us to think that the sins of others are nothing to us, especially those sins that we are any way accessory to, or partakers in.... Sinners, under convictions, will find their old companions in sin but miserable comforters. It is usual for those that love the treason to hate the traitor."

Mat 27:5. How often does gain gotten by crime become a torment.

Mat 27:6. Scrupulosity and injustice. (1) They would pay the price, but would not put the price of blood in the treasury. (2) They would not enter the governor’s abode for fear of defilement, (Joh 18:28) but they would manoeuvre and lie to make the governor murder the righteous. (3) They were horror-struck at a claim to be the Messiah, (Mat 26:65 f.) and they would bribe Roman soldiers to a false report to prevent the claim from being believed. (Mat 28:12)

Mat 27:10. Euthym.: "Let the money-lovers consider how Judas (1) committed the sin, (2) did not enjoy the money, (3) lost his life." Luther: "In Judas we see two things; how sin at first easily slips in, but afterwards makes such a horrible end."

John A. Broadus, Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (American Baptist Publication Society, 1886) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

CHAPTER 27

1. Delivered unto Pilate.(Mat 27:1-2.)

2. The Suicide of Judas.(Mat 27:3-10.)

3. Before Pilate. (Mat 27:11-14.)

4. The Awful Choice.(Mat 27:15-26.)

5. Crowned with Thorns and Crucified.(Mat 27:27-44.)

6. The Death of the King. (Mat 27:45-50.)

7. The Rent Veil and the Earthquake.(Mat 27:51-56.)

8. The Burial. (Mat 27:57-66.)

In this great chapter we follow the Lamb of God to the cross. What a journey it was! He, who had lived that wonderful life, had healed the sick, commanded the demons, raised the dead, He, who is announced in the beginning of this Gospel to be Immanuel, God manifested in flesh, the Beloved of the Father is in the hands of men, led away to the cross. What sufferings were His? Who is able to follow the depths of that shame, which He despised, the cross which He endured? But feebly we can meditate on these things, which He suffered in our stead.

The previous chapter closed with that sad record of Peter’s denial and his bitter weeping. The Lord had given His great confession before the high priest, the confession of truth, which resulted in His being condemned to death. The morning had come after this eventful night. (We cannot enter here into the chronology of that week to correct some of the errors of the traditional View.) There was no sleep for many in that night. The Son of God who had watched and prayed in the garden saw no sleep; dragged along He was and reviled by sinners. Peter saw [little] sleep; he went out and wept. The forsaking disciples [had little] sleep; they had fled terror stricken. The chief priests waked and plotted on how to proceed against the Holy One in putting Him into the hands of the Roman governor. Securely bound they led Him away through the streets of Jerusalem, to hand Him over to Pontius Pilate. (Mat 27:1-2) What humiliation for Him to be thus led away! What a contrast with that which happened a few days before, when He was welcomed by the multitudes as the King of Israel!

But before we see Him standing in the presence of the roman governor, the Holy Spirit gives us the record of what became of Judas. “Then Judas, who delivered Him up, seeing that He had been condemned, filled with remorse, returned the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and the elders, saying, I have sinned in having delivered up guiltless blood” (Mat 27:3-4). No doubt he stood there and witnessed all what was done to the Lord. He too spent a sleepless night. He saw the meek and lowly One, buffeted and spit upon. It left him all unmoved; there was no love for the Lord in that heart. Did he expect the Lord to manifest that power of which he, the traitor had been so often an eye witness? Perhaps this very thought it was, which Satan, who had entered into him suggested. His love for money, Satan used as bait. He may have whispered “You get the money and he will take care of Himself. He will not die but get free.” Thus Judas was deceived to sell the Lord. What a sin covetousness, the love of money is! It is the root of all evil; it is idolatry. And this sin is one of the great sins of the present day. Its worst feature is that betrayal of the Lord and His truth, for “filthy lucre’s sake” which goes on in Christendom. Professed teachers, who are described in the Epistle of Jude and in the Second Epistle of Peter, who are nothing but natural men, not having the Spirit, who use great swelling words, which the world calls “oratory” are betraying the Lord as Judas did. They are rushing too in a darkness, just as dense as that into which Judas rushed that night. The Word declares “to whom is reserved the blackness of darkness forever.”

He goes to the priests, who were just as much under that satanic power as he was. He gives them his confession. He has betrayed guiltless blood. That much at least he acknowledges. Then he hanged himself. This is the way Satan uses his victims. He deceives; he is a master in reasoning in a subtle way. He leads on and on, deeper and deeper and when the sin is committed he leads into despair and drags his victim down with himself into the place, which is prepared for him and his angels. Oh, what grace and blessing, to be delivered from the power of darkness, from that awful master. Judas after committing suicide went to his place (Act 1:25). The view given out by some teachers that Judas will come out of his place, to which he departed, and that he will be the final antichrist, the man of sin, is highly fanciful; one does well to beware of such views.

The silver pieces he cast into the temple and the priests, as covetous as Judas, stoop down to pick them up. That which follows is only reported in this Gospel, in the other Gospel records no mention is made of the fate of Judas. It is put only in the Gospel of Matthew on account of its dispensational bearing. The priests judge very religiously that it is not lawful to put the money into the Corban, the treasury of the temple. They decide to buy with the pieces of silver, the field of the potter for a burying ground for strangers. This was in partial fulfillment of what was spoken by Jeremias. The full prophecy is found in Zechariah, but the Spirit calls here attention to what is also spoken by Jeremias. We read in that book (Chapters 17 and 19) of a potter’s field, which was situated on the side of the valley of Hinnom. That valley is also called “Tophet”, a fearful type with its awful memories of Gehenna. Perhaps there, Judas had ended his earthly existence, and after hanging himself had fallen down, and burst asunder. This potter’s field was bought with the blood money.

“By a fiction of law the money was still considered to be Judas’, and to have been applied by him in the purchase of that potter’s field, for the charitable purpose of burying in it strangers. But from henceforth the name of potter’s field, became popularly changed into that of “field of blood.” And yet it was the act of Israel through its leaders. It was all theirs, though they would have fain made it all Judas’: the valuing, the selling and the purchasing. And “the potter’s field”, the very spot on which Jeremiah had been divinely directed to prophecy against Jerusalem and against Israel, how was it now all fulfilled in the light of the completed sin and apostasy of the people, as prophetically described by Zechariah! This Tophet of Jeremiah, now that they had valued and sold at thirty shekels Israel ‘s Messiah-Shepherd -- truly a Tophet, and become a field of blood! Surely not an accidental coincidence this, that it should be the place of Jeremiah’s announcement of judgment, not accidental, but veritably a fulfillment of this prophecy. (Edersheim Life and Times of the Messiah.)

Prophetically all is a foreshadowing of what was to happen to Israel and Israel ‘s land on account of the bloodguiltiness, which they took upon themselves. Israel ‘s land becoming “a burying place for strangers” and Israel scattered among the nations, finding their graves in Haqal Dama, a field of blood.

We see Him now before Pilate, the Gentile governor, where He was to be condemned to die; the Jews had no power and right to execute any one. First He was condemned by the Jews and delivered into the hands of the Gentiles, who also condemned Him. The crowning sin of the world was therefore committed by both, the Jews and the Gentiles. Israel ‘s long promised Messiah and King was delivered by His own people into the hands of the Roman governor, the Gentile power, which was oppressing them. The charge which the leaders of the nation had brought against the Lord before Pilate was the charge of being a rebel; one who made himself king in opposition to the Roman authority. An immense multitude of people must have followed Him to the Praetorium. The governor questions Him without delay, “Art thou the King of the Jews?” The answer comes at once from his lips “Thou sayest.” How brief and full of dignity! Then the accusation of the chief priests and elders began. One after the other spoke. They accused Him urgently, we read in the Gospel of Mark. Perhaps one tried to outdo the other in slandering Him and speaking malicious lies about Him. The Holy Spirit has not given us the detailed accusations they brought against Him; they all were undoubtedly of a political nature. But there He stood, the lamb of God and opened not His mouth. How calm He was in that Babel of voices. There was no need for Him to defend Himself against these unjust accusations. And the Gentile governor, the sharp, worldly, Roman politician wonders at that strange behaviour. Many a time accused criminals had been brought before him and he had witnessed their eagerness in defending themselves. Here stands one in his presence, who does not open His mouth. Nor does He say another word to Pilate after he had questioned him, so that Pilate wondered exceedingly. Such a prisoner had never been before him. He knew he was guiltless.

They had a custom, for how long we do not know, that on the feast the Roman governor would liberate a great criminal, under condemnation. As we read in the Gospel of Mark, the multitude began crying out and to beg, that he would do to them as he had always done. One notable criminal was at that time in custody; his name was Barabbas. Significant name! Translated it means “the son of the father.” The old Syriac version adds another name, the very name which our Lord bore on the earth, the name of Jesus. “Jesus Barabbas” -- a miserable, satanic counterfeit of the true “Son of the Father.” Who was he? He was an insurgent and had committed murder. May he not have been a false Messiah, one of these satanic instruments, who attempted to become leaders? It is not unreasonable to believe this; in all probability he was just such a character.

“Pilate said to them, whom will ye that I release to you, Barabbas, or Jesus who is called Christ? For he knew that they had delivered Him up through envy.” What a scene! Barabbas still in prison, the guilty one; and here before a great multitude of people, among them the elders and the priests, moving around and whispering their satanic council in the ears of the people, there stands securely bound the Holy One, the blessed Lord, in His solemn silence. But ere the question is answered something else happens. We see a messenger coming in haste towards the seat which the governor occupies. He carries an important message, which Pilate has to see at once. The message was from his wife.

“But, as he was sitting on the judgment seat, his wife sent to him, saying, Have thou nothing to do with this righteous man; for I have suffered today many things in a dream, because of Him” (Mat 27:19). It was a solemn warning aimed at the conscience of the superstitious Roman. He knew the victim was without guilt. God in His mercy gave the Gentile a warning. He heeded it not.

The pause, which had come in was well used by the chief priests and the elders for they went among the multitudes and persuaded them that they should beg for Barabbas and to destroy Jesus. Fearful deed it was!

And now he puts the important question: “Which of the two will ye that I release unto you?” It does not take long to bring forth the answer. Barabbas is the people’s choice. Barabbas! Barabbas! Not a voice was heard for the Lord. Where were now the multitudes who had followed Him? Where they who had cried “Hosanna”? If one of them was present they kept silent for fear of the wicked leaders. But Pilate convinced of the awful choice, which had been made, against the authority which he had, makes another attempt: “What then shall I do with Jesus, who is called Christ?” What a solemn question it was; and it is so still. The question was answered there and it must also be answered by every, person to whom the Lord Jesus Christ is offered. He must either be accepted as Saviour and Lord or rejected. The choice decides the eternal destiny; those who accept Him and own Him as their Saviour are saved and all who reject Him as Son of God and Saviour are lost. Pilate’s second question is answered by a great cry, that fearful cry: “Let Him be crucified.” Again Pilate asks: “What evil then has He done?” But his voice is drowned in a greater demand: “Let Him be crucified.” Pilate was fully convinced of the innocence of the silent victim before him, but miserable coward he was, he would not act. When he saw he availed nothing and a great tumult was rising, he took water, washed his hands before the crowd and said: “I am guiltless of the blood of this righteous one, see ye to it.” A Roman ceremony this was not, but we think rather that he borrowed it from the Jews themselves. Deu 21:6; 2Sa 3:28; Psa 26:6 at least refer to what he did here. Pilate with his “See ye to it” casts the bloodguiltiness upon the Jews. The chief priests and elders had used almost the same phrase in speaking to Judas: “See thou to it,” they had said. And what did they answer to the governor’s action and “see ye to it” his word to them? And all the people answering said, “His blood be on us and our children. Then he released unto them Barabbas; but Jesus, having scourged Him, he delivered up that He might be crucified.”

Terrible answer it was. Barabbas is the nation’s choice and the blood of the Holy One is wished by them upon their heads and the heads of their children. Has that awful wish been granted? Let the history of the Jews answer down to the present day. How His blood came upon them and their children; the end is not yet. Barabbas has been their choice and there is still that false Christ to come, who comes in his own name and whom they will receive.

Delivered up to be crucified. The Holy One is now in the hands of cruel, wicked men and all the suffering, shame and cruelty sinful man energized by Satan is capable of inflicting was heaped upon the king, the Lord of Glory. Who could describe that scene, which is before us? Painters have attempted to picture the terrible ordeal on canvas. Recently Tissot has produced pictures, which the world calls “realistic” of great artistic value. Miserable, blasphemous works they are indeed, the imaginations of the human mind. What was done to Him and what He suffered in our stead no brush, no pen, no tongue can tell. The hands tied, the back bent, the cruel scourge of cruel Rome fell upon the Son of God. Satanic hatred against the Holy One supplied the strength to inflict that awful punishment, which Roman writers called “the intermediated death” preceding death by crucifixion. At last that Holy body was a mass of torn and bleeding flesh.

Then the wicked Gentile soldiers began their mockery.

“Then the soldiers of the governor, having taken Jesus with them to the praetorium, gathered against Him the whole band, and having taken off His garment, put on Him a scarlet cloak, and having woven a crown of thorns they put it on His head; and a reed in His right hand; and bowing the knee before Him, they mocked Him, saying, Hail, King of the Jews! And having spit upon Him, they took the reed and beat Him upon His head. And when they had mocked Him, they took the cloak off Him, and put His own clothes on Him, and led Him away to be crucified” (Mat 27:27-30.

A whole cohort of rough, barbaric soldiers are now taking hold of the willing victim. After that terrible scourging, the most awful indignities were heaped upon Him. First they tore His clothes from His outraged body, most likely in eager haste to have their sport with Him. Then they cast a scarlet cloak on Him. That garment was worn by kings, and the scarlet color was produced by the coccus cacti, the crushed insect. Then they wove a crown of thorns and put it on His blessed Head. The crown must have been put upon Him by these instruments of Satan, to inflict pain and to ridicule Him. The crown of thorns also points us back to the garden in which the first man fell. Thorns became the witnesses of the curse, as they are still in nature. The second Man, the Holy One, takes the curse upon His own head. They put a reed, a weak, perishable reed in His hand, the hand which upholds all things, the hand which had been outstretched in blessing over the weak, the erring, the sick, the blind and which had touched the leper; that mighty hand holds the reed, a scepter of mockery. And then the satanic drama of mockery and ridicule is complete. One after the other, these wicked men come and bow the knee before Him, they mock Him. “Oh Joy! or, Rejoice! King of the Jews.” This was their greeting. But they get up from their position and spit upon Him and take the reed and beat Him on His head.

What a scene for us to contemplate! Who can measure its depths! The Son of God, He who came from the bosom of the Father, the Only Begotten, whose Glory Isaiah had seen, insulted, outraged, spit upon trampled upon by His vile creatures. And oh! reader, it was our sin which did it. How affecting to our hearts it should be and indeed it is. How He did love us to give Himself to such shame and suffering.

In that hour it was fulfilled what His Spirit had predicted of His suffering. “I gave my back to the smiters, and my cheeks to them that plucked off my hair; I hid not my face from shame and spitting” (Isa 50:6). And through it all He opened not His mouth. “He was oppressed, and He was afflicted, yet He opened not His mouth; He is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so He openeth not His mouth” (Isa 53:7).

And as we gaze upon this scene once more we behold His Glory as well. The scene of His shame and rejection, of mockery and suffering is prophetic of His exaltation and Glory.

He is the King in Glory; the King of kings and Lord of lords. The royal garment is His. The crown of thorne gives way to the many crowns which His brow will wear. The scepter is His. Every knee must bow before Him and every tongue confess Him Lord, to the praise of God the Father. The highest Glory He reached through suffering, the crown through the cross, because He loved such as we are; because God wants us to be with Him in all eternity. Oh! glorious, blessed Gospel, how sweet to our hearts!

Thy holy head, once bound with thorns, The crown of glory now adorns; Thy seat, the Father’s throne; O Lord, e’en now we sing Thy praise, Ours the eternal song to raise-- Worthy the Lord alone!

As Head for us Thou sittest there, Until Thy members too shall share In all Thou dost receive: Thy glory and Thy royal throne Thy boundless love has made our own Who in Thy name believe.

We triumph in Thy triumphs, Lord; Thy joys our deepest joys afford, The fruit of love divine. While sorrow’ng, suff’ring, toiling here How does the thought our spirits cheer The throne of glory’s Thine.

And now they led Him away that He should be crucified. “Once more was He unrobed and robed. The purple robe was torn from His bleeding body, the crown of thorns from His bleeding brow. Arrayed again in His own, now blood stained, garments, He was led forth to execution. Only about two hours and a half had passed since the time that He had first stood before Pilate (about half-past six), when the melancholy procession reached Golgotha (at nine A.M.).” (Edersheim)

“And as they went forth they found a man of Cyrene, Simon by name; him they compelled to go with them that he might bear His cross. And having come to a place called Golgotha, which means place of a skull, they gave Him to drink vinegar mingled with gall; and having tasted it He would not drink” (Mat 27:32-35).

Physical weakness made it necessary that one should carry His cross. Was there ever such a procession seen before! The Lamb of God led forth to suffer outside of the camp! Oh, the man of sorrows, how He must have looked when they dragged Him to the place of death! But though He did not carry the cross and was weakened, yet He could not succumb at this point. The soldiers had led forth, no doubt, many a one to a similar death. Perhaps some died before the nails could be driven through the hands and feet. Did they fear that this might be the case with Him, whom they had maltreated, dishonored and mocked? Or was it mercy, which offered Him vinegar mingled with gall? Mercy, we believe it was not. It was a stimulant which they offered Him. They knew not that the Life which was in their hands could not succumb; no one could take that life from Him. He would not drink what was given to Him; He did not seek relief, He did not need it. His loving will was to endure all the suffering in perfect consciousness. But there is a prophecy that He should drink vinegar and gall in His suffering (Psa 69:1-36). When the right moment had come for the fulfillment of that prophecy, He said, that the Scripture might be fulfilled, “I thirst.” Then He drank. Before the crucifixion He refused the vinegar and the gall. Golgotha, the place where they took Him, must have been to the north of Jerusalem. It was outside of the gate near gardens, in which were tombs.

Here they crucified Him. No description of the act itself is given in any of the Gospels. Crucifixion was the most horrible torturing mode of putting criminals to death; it originated in Phoenicia and was adopted by the Roman government. The Jews themselves knew nothing of putting transgressors to death by the cross. Inasmuch as the Holy Spirit does not describe the awful act, the nailing of the Lord to the cross, we shall not attempt it. Lifted up, His hands and feet pierced by nails, every muscle stretched and life’s blood pouring out, He hung on the cross, suffering the unspeakable tortures of such a death.

Prophecy is now being fulfilled. All the predictions of His sufferings come true. That what was foreshadowed in the different offerings and sacrifices, is now beheld in its deep and awful reality. The heavenly Isaac is upon the altar and the hand of God about to smite Him; there is no deliverance from the cup, He drinks it to the last drop.

The 22nd Psalm, that great prophecy concerning the sinbearer, comes first of all into view. “They parted His clothes amongst themselves, casting lots.” This was foretold by David (Psa 22:18). It is said that the division of the garments of the victims was a Roman custom. But there is a deeper significance than a mere fulfillment of a prophecy. His enemies, those who nailed Him to the cross, received His clothes. And so for His naked creature He has provided the robe of righteousness by His death on the cross.

In the next place the superscription is mentioned. “And they set over His head His accusation written: “This is Jesus the King of the Jews.” A board on which the crime of the condemned was written was generally carried before the criminal, who was led forth to the place of execution through the crowded streets. This custom was most likely followed with our Lord. Pilate himself had the superscription drawn up and it was written in three languages: Latin, Greek and the Aramaean dialect of Hebrew. We can not follow here the report of the different Gospel records about the writing above the cross. The one here in Matthew was undoubtedly the Latin inscription, while the fullest, as reported by John “Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews” was written in Aramean and the one in Mark “The King of the Jews” is the Greek inscription. Pilate could not help himself, he had to write as he did, though he may have had the thought in mind to avenge himself and to mock the Jews. In spite of the hating Jews He received His true title and that from the Gentile. There it stood written and could not be changed; so it is still. Jesus of Nazareth, the despised, the rejected One, is the King of the Jews, one of His titles; the throne of His Father David is His and in the wider sense He will be the King of kings.

“Then are crucified with Him two robbers, one on the right hand and one on the left.” Another fulfillment of Scripture. “He was numbered with the transgressors” (Isa 53:12).

“But the passers-by reviled Him, shaking their heads and saying, Thou that destroyest the temple and buildest it in three days, save thyself. If thou art the Son of God, descend from the cross. And in like manner the chief priests also, mocking with the scribes and the elders, said, He saved others, Himself He cannot save. He is the King of Israel; let Him descend from the cross, and we will believe on Him. He trusted upon God, let Him save Him now if He will have Him. For He said, I am Son of God. And the robbers also who had been crucified with Him cast the same reproaches on Him” (Mat 27:43-44).

We behold still deeper sufferings of the Holy One. We listen again to the voice of prophecy. “Reproach hath broken my heart; and I am full of heaviness; and I looked for some to take pity, but there was none; and for comforters, but I found none” (Psa 69:20). There is none to pity in the scene before us. He is alone cruelly mocked and He must have felt the reproach as only one who is absolutely holy could have felt it. He was reviled but He reviled not again. Our Gospel does not report a single word coming from His lips. From the Gospel of Luke we learn that the first word He had spoken after He had been lifted up, was that wonderful prayer “Father forgive them for they know not what they do.” He is silent to the cruel and vile mockeries, born in the pit, the very breath of Satan. The old accusation is once more held up against Him. Little they knew that they were fulfilling that very Word about destroying the temple and that the third day, when He would arise as the mighty victor was not far hence.

But it was not only the rabble of the street, the low down element, the uncultured mob which mocked Him, but the chief priests, the elders had gone out to help in reproaching Him. They had come to deride Him in His agony. What awful depravity this reveals. It is astonishing to see that these cultured religionists in their fearful blindness quoted Scripture, when they gazed upon Him. They had said, “He is King of Israel; let Him descend now from the cross, and we will believe on Him.” The great King of Israel, David, had written by the Spirit that great prophetic psalm of the suffering One, the Twenty-second. They knew that Psalm well. The ancient synagogue even had given this Psalm a Messianic interpretation. The sufferer there in that Psalm cries out, “But I am a worm and no man, a reproach of men, and despised of the people.” They gazed upon this great suffering One. “All they that see me laugh me to scorn, they shoot out the lip, they shake the head.” They saw the laughing throng, the cruelly mocking crowds, and they themselves joined in. But there is more than that. The wicked enemies of the great sufferer speak in that Psalm. The very Words they were to utter in the presence of the forsaken sufferer, the words with which they were to revile Him are given. “He trusted on the Lord that He would deliver Him; let Him deliver Him, seeing He delighted in Him.” (Mat 27:8.) These very words the sneering chief priests, elders and scribes uttered before the cross. What awful blindness had come upon them! But more solemn still and full of meaning are the words they also said. “He saved others, Himself He cannot save.” How true, He saved others. And what a confession from their lips that He did save others. They owned His divine power and yet they rejected Him. He could not save Himself, for He would not. He had come to save others, and that could only be accomplished by taking the place of those He came to save. He had to die on the cross; Himself He could not save.

The robbers, too, cast the same reproaches on Him. The one, indeed, becomes ere he dies the mighty trophy of His Grace and hears from the blessed Lord that marvelous word, “Today thou shalt be with Me in Paradise.” As this incident does not belong into this Gospel we pass it by.

The deepest agony has not yet been reached. Awful as the physical and mental sufferings of the Son of God must have been, there was still greater suffering before Him, a suffering before which all the other sufferings pale. Up to this point He had suffered from wicked men, energized by the devil. But now He is approaching the moment when He who knew no sin is to be made sin, when, instead of suffering from men, He is to suffer from God Himself. The cup from which His holy Being shrank He takes now to drink to the last drop.

“Now from the sixth hour there was darkness over the whole land until the ninth hour; But about the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is, My God, my God, why hast Thou forsaken Me?” (Mat 27:45-47).

A solemn darkness settled over the whole land. Was it a darkness which covered the entire earth? Hardly, for in a part of the world it was night and darkness was not possible. No doubt the darkness covered the entire land and perhaps the entire Roman world. It enshrouded the cross with the great sufferer so that He was no longer visible to those who kept guard and those who looked on. That it was not an eclipse of the sun is learned from the fact that it was full moon at that time. It was a supernatural darkness. At the termination of the darkness about the ninth hour we hear His voice out of the darkness. About the ninth hour He cried, not in feebleness, but with a loud voice, “Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani?” But what is the meaning of this darkness? It was the outer sign of what passed over Him, who was then the sinner’s substitute before a holy and righteous God. God had hidden His face from Him; He was forsaken by God Himself. His cry explains the meaning of the darkness, and the darkness gives us the meaning of His bitter cry. God had turned from Him, left Him, who had taken the sinner’s place. He then bore our sins, was made sin for us and was the offering for sin. But who can fathom it? Who can understand the deep mystery, the deep suffering when the holy and righteous God dealt with sin in Him, who had no sin, but who was made sin?

“He was alone with God, made sin; nothing to turn aside the cup of justice; nothing to deaden it. The power which was in Him did not shelter Him; it rendered Him capable of bearing that which weighed on His soul, the feeling of the horror of the curse in the measure in which the love of the Father was familiar to Him, the feeling of that which it was to be made sin in the measure of the divine holiness which was in Him. Neither the one nor the other could be measured. He drank then the cup of judgment of God against sin. All forces Him to utter the cry, a cry which we are allowed to hear that we might know what passed there, the reality of atonement: ‘My God, my God, why hast Thou forsaken Me?’ It is a forsaking which none can fathom, save He who felt it.” (John N. Darby.)

Oh the blessed mystery of what transpired then in those three hours of darkness! It is true we cannot fathom it. We cannot know what it cost to make reconciliation, but we know the great work was done. The just died for the unjust that He might bring us to God. All done for us that God might be just and the justifier of him, who believes in Jesus. “And some of those who stood there, when they heard it said, This man calls for Elias. And immediately one of them running and getting a sponge, having filled it with vinegar and fixed it on a reed, gave Him to drink. But the rest said, Let be; let us see if Elias comes to save Him” (Mat 27:47-50). Who were those who said, This man calls for Elias? It is generally assumed that they were some of the soldiers. They knew perhaps little of Hebrew, it is said, and mistook the word “Eli” My God, for Elias. But against this it must be said that they equally knew little or nothing of Elias. We think rather the persons were mocking Jews, who understood the words and made them the occasion of new mockery. At this time it happened what is more fully recorded in the Gospel of John. “After this, Jesus, knowing that all things were now finished, that the Scripture might be fulfilled, says, I thirst.” Then they gave Him to drink after which He gave up the spirit. The work was done in the three hours of darkness. After that little unfulfilled Scripture is fulfilled at the right time He said, “It is finished.”

But here in our Gospel we read “And Jesus having cried again with a loud voice dismissed His spirit.” It is significant that twice we read of His loud voice. There was no sign and evidence of exhaustion. His life was not taken from Him but He gave His life; He laid it down Himself. The King Himself, when the moment had come, dismissed His spirit. And now we behold a three-fold result of His death. The veil in the temple was rent. The earth was shaken, and the tomb’s were opened and the centurion made his confession as well as those who were with him.

“And lo, the veil of the temple was rent in two from top to the bottom, and the earth was shaken, and the rocks were rent, and the tombs were opened; and many bodies of the saints fallen asleep arose, and, going out of the tombs after His resurrection, entered into the holy city and appeared unto many. But the centurion, and they that were with him on guard over Jesus, seeing the earthquake and the things that took place, feared greatly, saying, Truly this man was Son of God” (Mat 27:51-54).

The rent veil is the first event following the death of the Lord. The veil was the inner one of the temple, dividing the holy of holies from the holy part. It was not an earthquake, which rent this heavy veil, but the power of God. It was done from above and not from below, “from top to bottom.” It must have happened just about the time when the priests entered the holy part at the evening sacrifice. What terror must have seized these officiating priests when they beheld that unseen hand throwing open the most holy place. It has been suggested that this miracle was responsible that so many priests became converted in Jerusalem. For we read in the Book of Acts “and a great company of the priests were obedient to the faith” (Act 6:7). The veil itself was the sign that man was barred from coming to God; that heavy, solid veil, ever gave that testimony that it is impossible for man to approach God. The rent veil shows that it has been made possible. The rent veil declares that the great sacrifice on the cross of the spotless Lamb of God has been accepted. It is the first great answer of God to the majestic word of the dying Saviour, “It is finished.” It likewise shows that the Jewish ceremonial law is fulfilled and ended. Most beautiful and uplifting is that inspired reference to this great event in the Epistle to the Hebrews: “Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus, by a new and living way, which He has consecrated for us, through the veil, that is to say His flesh, and having a high priest over the house of God. Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water. Let us hold fast the profession of Hope without wavering; for He is the faithful that promised” (Heb 10:19-23).

In the next place the earth was shaken, the rocks were rent, and the tombs opened. This statement is peculiar to Matthew; we do not find it in the other Gospel records. The death of the King shook the earth and rent the rocks. The opened tombs declared the glorious news, that His death hath broken the bands of death forever; through death He destroyed him, that had the power of death, the devil (Heb 2:14). The interpretation that the rocks were rent and the graves opened, because the Lord in spirit descended into hades, we reject as unscriptural and fanciful, leading towards more serious errors. The Lord did not descend into hades; He went to paradise.

But besides this great sign, showing the captivity led captive, the power of death destroyed by His death, we read something else. “Many bodies of the saints fallen asleep arose, and going out of the tombs after His resurrection, entered into the holy city and appeared to many.” The reader notices that the resurrection of the bodies of these saints did not take place immediately after the Lord had dismissed His spirit. They came forth after His resurrection. They could not precede Him. He is the first fruits, and these saints could not rise till He was risen on the third day. But why is it mentioned here and not in the next chapter in connection with His own resurrection? It belongs there historically. It is put here by the Holy Spirit to show the effect of the great work accomplished on the cross, the efficacy of the death of our Saviour. Death is now to be swallowed up in victory. “Where O death is thy sting? Where O death thy victory? Now the sting of death is sin, and the power of sin the law. But thanks to God, who gives us the victory by our Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Corinth 15:55-57). By His death the great work of deliverance has been accomplished, and this makes resurrection possible. The rising of the bodies of these saints is a solemn and glorious anticipation of the first resurrection, soon to come. These risen Saints, who came forth after He had left the grave, entered actually in the holy city and appeared to many. It was another mighty, supernatural witness of what had been wrought. But one might ask many questions in connection with this event. Who were they? What became of them? Where are they now? To whom did they appear and for what purpose? These questions and similar ones are unanswerable. It is useless to speculate about it. It is well in these days to abide very close to the written Word.

And the third event, the confession of the Saviour as Son of God by the centurion and the company of soldiers under him. In Luke and Mark we find the centurion mentioned alone, but here it is the entire company. They were Gentiles, heathen. The earthquake, the darkness, the loud voice which had spoken from the cross, all had filled these poor pagans with fear and from their lips, gazing up to the cross where He had bowed His adorable head, came the confession “Son of God.” No such word came from Jewish lips. What a prophetic foreshadowing again. The Gentiles were to believe on Him. That for which they had condemned them and delivered Him into the hands of the Gentiles is confessed by those who had put Him to death.

The work was finished, and God made it impossible that any other indignities could be put upon Him, whose body could not see corruption. It was customary to leave the bodies of the crucified hanging on the cross, the prey of wild birds. What happened about the breaking of the bones and the spear thrust is not recorded in our Gospel, but is fully made known in the Gospel of John. We mention it, therefore, briefly without attempting an exposition. “The Jews, therefore, that the bodies might not remain on the cross on the Sabbath, for it was the preparation, for the day of that Sabbath was a great day, demanded of Pilate that their legs might be broken and they taken away.” Had they succeeded, instruments of Satan as they were, the Scriptures would have been broken. But what happened? “The soldiers, therefore, came and broke the legs of the first and of the other that had been crucified with Him; but coming to Jesus, when they saw that He was already dead they did not break His legs, but one of the soldiers pierced His side with a spear and immediately there came out blood and water. And he who saw it bears witness, and his witness is true, that ye also may believe. For these things took place that the Scripture might be fulfilled. Not a bone of Him shall be broken. And again another Scripture says, They shall look on Him whom they pierced” (Joh 19:32-37).

Then there were many women who witnessed the sufferings of the second man how He bore the curse. They gazed upon Him from afar (Mat 27:55-56).

“Now when even was come a rich man of Arimathea, his name Joseph, who also himself was a disciple of Jesus. He going to Pilate begged the body of Jesus. Then Pilate commanded the body to be given up. And Joseph having got the body, wrapped it in a clean linen cloth, and laid it in his new tomb which he had hewn in the rock; and having rolled a great stone to the door of the tomb, went away. But Mary of Magdala was there, and the other Mary, sitting opposite the sepulchre” (Mat 27:57-61).

Who was this Joseph of Arimathea? A wealthy man of the Jews and a secret disciple of the Lord Jesus. He was an honorable councillor, belonging to the Sanhedrin, who also himself was awaiting the kingdom of God (Mar 15:43). He was a good man and just. When the Sanhedrin had come together to condemn the Holy One Joseph of Arimathea had not assented to their counsel and deed (Luk 23:51). Fear of the Jews had kept his discipleship in the background, but now when the Lord had expired on the cross, and after the mighty events, which had taken place, he comes boldly to the front. His fear became a holy boldness. During the earthly life of the Lord, though he knew Him and believed on Him, fear kept him back from avowing openly his discipleship; but now as His Lord had died He makes His great confession of Him before the Jews, the Sanhedrin and the Gentiles as well. He went right to Pilate. This person had the authority to dispose of the bodies of the crucified. Generally they were, after all dishonor had been done to them, thrown in the malefactors’ graves. He then begged for the body of Jesus, and Pilate consented readily and gave his permission. The death of Christ had made a deep impression upon the Roman governor. That Jesus should have died so soon was a great amazement to Pilate. He called for the centurion to get the details from him and perhaps that official gave him his conviction that the crucified One was Son of God (Mar 15:44). And now to the astonishment of Pilate the well known, prominent and wealthy Joseph comes and begs for the body to do Him honor. How it must have disturbed the coward and troubled his conscience. But another one was there, too. That One helped in the hasty preparation for the burial. “And Nicodemus also, who at first came to Jesus by night, came, bringing a mixture of myrrh and aloes, about a hundred pounds weight. They took, therefore, the body of Jesus and bound it up in linen with the spices, as it is the custom with the Jews to prepare for burial” (Joh 19:39-40). Nicodemus was a very timid man by nature. How he came to the Lord by night for fear of the Jews is well known. From His own lips he heard the blessed truth, the words of life. The precious seed had been sown in his heart. Did it spring up? He also belonged to the council. When the officers returned, having been sent to capture the Lord and they gave their report, Nicodemus, the great acknowledged teacher in Israel ventured a weak defense of the Lord (Joh 7:50-53). It showed the seed working. But the death of Christ brought him and Joseph of Arimathea deliverance from the fear of men; light and liberty flashed in their souls as the result of the death of Christ. The Lord had said to Nicodemus: “As Moses lifted up a serpent in the wilderness so must the Son of Man be lifted up, that whosoever believes on Him should not perish but have everlasting life.” He had been lifted up and Nicodemus believing, confessed Him.

What honor then was done to the Lord. Wrapped in a clean linen sheet, after He had been lifted from the cross and then the resting place for Him, who had finished the work the Father gave Him to do, a new tomb hewn in the rock. It was a fulfillment of Isa 53:9. It is unfortunate that the authorized version gives us such a poor translation of this verse. Literally translated it is “And men appointed His grave with the wicked, but He was with the rich in His death, because He had done no violence, neither was there guile in His mouth.” The authorized version “He made His grave with the wicked” is wrong. The enemy would cast His body to the place where the bodies of the wicked were cast, but the power of God made that impossible.

The great stone is rolled to the door of the tomb. Joseph and Nicodemus depart. Only Mary of Magdala and the other Mary keep their love watch opposite the sepulchre. Thus closed the greatest day in the history of the world, the day on which the Prince of life, the Lord of Glory died on the cross of Golgotha, when the great work of reconciliation had been accomplished and peace was made in the blood of His cross.

That which follows in the chapter is peculiar to Matthew. None of the other Gospels have it. It is indeed the proper place for it.

“Now on the morrow, which is after the preparation, the chief priests and the Pharisees came together to Pilate, saying, Sir, we have called to mind that that deceiver said when He was still alive, after three days I arise. Command therefore that the sepulchre be secured until the third day, lest His disciples should come and steal Him away, and say to the people He is risen from the dead; and the last error shall be worst than the first. And Pilate said to them, Ye have a watch; go, secure it as well as ye know how. And they went and secured the sepulchre, having sealed the stone with the watch besides” (Mat 27:62-66).

But little comment on this striking incident is necessary. The enemy is at work to make all secure, but instead of it he only makes his own defeat complete, and the wrath of the enemy is made to praise Him. They remembered suddenly the words of the Lord, showing how they had watched His utterances. The disciples to whom He had said so often that He would rise on the third day, had forgotten all about it. It did not enter into their minds. This is proven by the way they took the news of His resurrection. It was a forgetfulness, no doubt, produced by the Spirit of God; in this very fact lies a strong argument for the resurrection of the Lord. Their imaginations could not produce, as infidelity has claimed, a supposed appearing of the One who had died. But the enemy remembered. Yet could they really fear that His disciples would steal His body? The disciples had been scattered like sheep. Poor Peter, where was he? They had fled. Would the feeble women roll the stone away and steal His body? Could they think that fraud and deception might be practiced? It was the bad conscience which made them fear. Pilate made no objections; he let them have their desire. The stone is sealed, the guard is placed there to make fraud and illusion an impossibility. Little did they know that they were working to make the fact of the glorious resurrection of the Son of God secure beyond controversy. They furnished one of the strongest proofs for that event, thus becoming involuntary witnesses of His resurrection.

Arno C. Gaebelein, The Annotated Bible (1913–1922) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

CHAPTER 26.

JESUS AT PILATE’S BAR

Mat 27:1-14; Mar 15:1-5; Luk 23:1-5; Joh 18:28-38. “Then they led Jesus from Caiaphas into the judgment-hall.”

When I was in Jerusalem last November and December, I went directly from the Sanhedrin hall, on Mount Zion in the west, to Pilate’s judgment- hall, north-east wall, on the intervening slope between Mount Moriah and Bezetha. “And it was morning.” Thus Jesus has been up all night, dragged hither and thither, abused and afflicted by His enemies, and must be awfully fatigued and exhausted. “And they did not go into the judgment- hall, in order that they may not be polluted, but may eat the Passover.” This illustrates the nonsense into which Satan runs religious people when they give him a chance. Here they are so fearful of contracting ceremonial defilement that they will not so much as enter the Gentile judgment-hall; while they are already guilty of the blackest murder ever concocted in the bottomless pit. You must not think that these things are peculiar to the ancient times. The world is full of them now.

“Then Pilate came out to them, and said, What accusation do you bring against this Man? They responded and said, If He were not an evildoer, we had not delivered Him to thee. Then Pilate said to them, You indeed take Him, and judge Him according to your law. Then the Jews said to him, It is not lawful for us to kill any one, in order that the word of Jesus may be fulfilled, which He spoke, signifying by what death He was about to die.” Very early in our Lord’s ministry (Joh 3:14), in the case of the brazen serpent, He predicted the manner of His death by crucifixion. This was a Roman punishment, the Jews having no such a law. Consequently He was delivered by the Jews to the Romans for execution. You see here the dilemma in which the Jews were involved.

a. Having condemned Him to die for blasphemy, they now wake up to the fact that Judea is no longer free, but a Roman province, the prerogative of capital punishment having already passed out of the hands of the Jews and become the sole right of the Romans. Consequently they have to take Him to Pilate, the Roman proconsul.

b. By the time they arrive at Pilate’s judgment-hall, they have awakened to the fact that the Romans have no law against blasphemy, for which they have condemned Jesus to die. Consequently they see that it will be utterly unavailable to bring this charge against Him before a Roman court. Therefore they have no bill of charges to present to Pilate justifying the commitment of a prisoner to his adjudication.

c. Now they find themselves in a serious puzzle, as the overwhelming probability favors the conclusion that if they present to Pilate the prisoner charged with nothing but blasphemy, on which Roman legislation is utterly Silent, Pilate will simply throw the case out of court, refuse to adjudicate, and drive them all away from his tribunal, as Gallio did at Corinth (Acts 18) when Sosthenes, the chief ruler of the synagogue, brought Paul to him for condemnation, having no charge against him except matters pertaining to their own religion, which the proconsul looked upon as superstition, and consequently, threw it out of court, driving the Jews away from his tribunal, when the Gentile multitude became so disgusted with the foolish persecutions of the Jews against an innocent man that they took Sosthenes and gave him a good thrashing, which seems to have proved a blessing to him, as we only hear of him once more (1 Corinthians 1), when he is associated with Paul in the evangelistic work at Ephesus, having been converted and turned missionary.

d. The final result of all this tergiversation is, that they drop the charge of blasphemy altogether, and take up a new one, on which there had been no action, committing Him to Pilate under the accusation of high treason, claiming to be King of the Jews, and consequently a rival of the Roman emperor.

Luk 23:2. “And they began to accuse Him, saying, We found Him revolutionizing the nation, and forbidding to give tribute to Caesar, and saying that He Himself is, Christ a King.” You see how adroitly they manipulated the matter. As the Scriptures denominate Christ as Prophet, Priest, and King, they construe Him as claiming to be King, and consequently a rival of Caesar.

Joh 18:33-38. “Then Pilate went again into the judgment-hall, and spoke to Jesus, and said to Him, Art Thou the King of the Jews? Jesus responded to him, Do you speak this of yourself, or did others tell you concerning Me? Pilate responded, Whether am I a Jew? Thy nation and the chief priests delivered Thee to me; what hast Thou done Jesus responded, My kingdom is not from this world , If My kingdom were from this world, My servants would fight for Me, in order that I may not be delivered to the Jews. But now My kingdom is not from thence.” This statement of our Savior in reference to His kingdom is frequently quoted as an argument against the coming Millennial Theocracy; but a moment’s reflection reveals the utter impertinency of such an application. Of course, God’s kingdom is not of this world, but of heaven; but that is no reason why, it should, not bear rule over this world. The kingdom of God is here now; yet it is not of this world. The kingdom of Satan is here; not of this world, but of hell, and a usurpation on the earth. When Satan is east out and imprisoned in hell (Revelation 20), thus all obstructions to the heavenly kingdom being removed, the latter, will, so wonderfully prevail on the earth as to receive a boundless, new impetus, not eliminating grace, but adding to it glory, when

“He shall have dominion over river, sea, and shore, Far as the eagle’s pinion or dove’s light wing can soar.”

“Then Pilate said to Him, Art Thou not then a King? Jesus responded, Thou sayest that I am.” N.B. — This is an Oriental form of positive affirmation, Jesus admitting to Pilate that He is King. “For this I was born, and for this I came into the world, that I may witness to the truth.” His is significantly a kingdom of truth, in contradistinction to Satan’s kingdom of falsehood and error. “Every one being of the truth heareth My voice.” Poor Pilate was not of the truth. He was a corrupt thieving politician, therefore he did not hear the voice of Jesus, but came to a miserable end, dying a suicide in lonely exile, having been degraded and banished by Caligula, the Roman emperor.

“Pilate says to Him, What is truth?” Pilate took up the idea that He was a dreamy, visionary philosopher, gone wild with hard study, imagining that He was a King, and that He had found out the truth, as so many Greek sages claimed to have done; meanwhile he had no confidence in His claims to have discovered the truth. Consequently, when he asked the question, he goes right away, not waiting for an answer.

“Saying this again, he went out to the Jews, and tells them, I find nothing criminal in Him.” The Roman Empire had conquered all the world, and was at that time ruling all nations. The very idea that a poor prisoner in bonds, without an army to defend Him, should claim to be King of the Jews was, in Pilate’s judgment, sheer nonsense. Consequently he looks upon the royal claims of his prisoner as simply a matter of ridicule. Believing Him to be a harmless fanatic, dreaming that He is King of the Jews, therefore he makes short work of the judgment by bringing in a verdict of innocence.

Mat 27:12-14. “And while He was being accused by the high priests and elders, He responded nothing. Then Pilate says to Him, Do You not hear how many things they witness against You? And He responded to him not a word, so that the governor was astonished exceedingly.” Will you not follow the example of Jesus, when people falsely accuse you, and keep silent? Let them tell; ever so many scandals on you, give them no attention whatever; and they will soon get ashamed and let you alone, and in all probability make a specialty of showing you kindness.

Luk 23:4-5. “Pilate said to the chief priests and the multitudes, I find nothing criminal in this Man. And they continued to become more and more uproarious, saying that He revolutionizes the people, teaching throughout all Judea, beginning from Galilee even unto this place.” The sun having risen about five is rapidly climbing the Oriental skies, and pouring down, the day from the summit of great Mount Olivet. His enemies, having worked hard all night to get Him condemned and killed before day, lest the people rally and fight, for Him, are now in an awful dilemma. They have Him on hand and are determined to kill Him; meanwhile the people are pouring in from all directions, and they awfully fear an outbreak, in which they will very likely be killed.

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

27:1-2 The Jewish leaders were ready to level charges against Jesus before Pilate so that he would order Jesus’ execution. Pilate, a Gentile, fulfills Jesus’ prediction (20:19).

27:1 The charge of blasphemy (26:65-66), though sufficient for the death penalty among Jews, would not convince a Roman judge. Hence, the leading priests and the elders conspired together to prepare a more political charge consistent with capital offenses in Roman law (see 27:11-26; Luke 23:2).

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

Mat 27:1. Πάντες, all) This council was more fully attended than that of the preceding night; see ch. Mat 26:57.—ὥστε θανατῶσαι Αὐτὸν, to put Him to death) In execution of the sentence which had been passed on the preceding night.

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

Mat_27:1 By the time the Sanhedrim met, as it now did, in full sederunt (πάντες, comp. Mat_26:59), for the purpose of consulting as to how they were now to give effect to the verdict of Mat_26:66, it was well on in the morning (after cock-crowing, Mat_26:74).

ὥστε] they consulted before going further (comp. on Mat_22:15) as to what the consequence might be (comp. on Mat_24:24) if they carried out their intention of putting Him to death, in other words, if they were likewise to give effect to the verdict already agreed upon: ἔνοχος θανάτου ἐστί.

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 27:1-2 . Morning meeting of the Sanhedrim (Mar 15:1 , Luk 22:66 ; Luk 23:1 ).

Mat 27:1 . συμβούλιον ἔλαβον : this consultation took place at a meeting of Sanhedrim, which was probably only a continuation of the night meeting, though regarded as formally a second meeting, to keep right with the law which humanely required, at least, two sittings in a grave criminal case; the Sanhedrists in this, as in all things, careful to observe the letter, while sinning against the spirit of the law. Those who were present at the night meeting would scarcely have time to go home, as the hearing of many witnesses (Mat 26:59 ) would take hours. Absent members might be summoned to the morning meeting (Elsner), or might come, knowing that they were expected. πάντες points to a full meeting, as does also τοῦ λαοῦ after πρεσβύτεροι . The meeting was supremely important, though in one respect pro formâ . The law or custom required a death sentence to be pronounced during day-time. Therefore, the vote of the night meeting had to be formally confirmed. Then they had to consider in what shape the case was to be put so as to ensure the consent of Pilate to the execution of their sentence; a most vital matter. ὥστε θανατῶσαι αὐτόν , so that they might compass His death; the phrase seems meant to cover both aspects of the business on hand: the formal sentence of death, and the adoption of means for securing that it might be carried into effect. ὥστε , with infinitive, here expresses tendency: that He should die, the drift of all done. The result as yet remained uncertain.

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

Mat 27:1. THE SECOND AND FORMAL MEETING OF THE SANHEDRIN

St Mar 15:1; St Luk 22:66-71; not mentioned by St John.

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.

Chap. 27:1,

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

27:1, 2. From Mar 15:1.

(M) 1. And when it was morning, all the chief priests and the elders of the people took counsel against Jesus to put Him to death.] Mk. has: “And immediately in the morning the chief priests, with the elders, and scribes, and all the Sanhedrin, made a council.”—πρωίας δὲ γενομένης] for Mk.’s καὶ εὐθὺς πρωί. Mt. substitutes δέ for καί, and omits εὐθύς, as often.—συμβούλιον ἔλαβον] see on 12:14. Mk. has συμ.ποιήσαντες. Mt. here, as in 26:47, omits καὶ γραμματέων, and adds after πρεσβύτεροι, τοῦ λαοῦ. He omits καὶ ὅλον τὸ συνέδριον as superfluous, but adds, perhaps as compensation, πάντες before οἰ ἀρχιερεῖς; cf. Lk. ἅπαν τὸ πλῆθος αὐτῶν.

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

CHAPTER XXVII.

In the morning, Christ is bound and delivered to Pontius

Pilate, 1, 2.

Judas, seeing his Master condemned, repents, acknowledges his

transgression to the chief priests, attests Christ's innocence,

throws down the money, and goes and hangs himself, 3-5.

They buy the potter's field with the money, 6-10.

Christ, questioned by Pilate, refuses to answer, 11-14.

Pilate, while inquiring of the Jews whether they would have

Jesus or Barabbas released, receives a message from his wife to

have nothing to do in this wicked business, 15-19.

The multitude, influenced by the chief priests and elders,

desire Barabbas to be released, and Jesus to be crucified,

20-23.

Pilate attests his innocence, and the people make themselves

and their posterity responsible for his blood, 24, 25.

Barabbas is released, and Christ is scourged, 26.

The soldiers strip him, clothe him with a scarlet robe, crown

him with thorns, mock, and variously insult him, 27-31.

Simon compelled to bear his cross, 32.

They bring him to Golgotha, give him vinegar mingled with gall

to drink, crucify him, and cast lots for his raiment, 33-36.

His accusation, 37.

Two thieves are crucified with him, 38.

He is mocked and insulted while hanging on the cross, 39-44.

The awful darkness, 45.

Jesus calls upon God, is offered vinegar to drink, expires,

46-50.

Prodigies that accompanied and followed his death, 51-53.

He is acknowledged by the centurion, 54.

Several women behold the crucifixion, 55, 56.

Joseph of Arimathea begs the body of Pilate, and deposites it

in his own new tomb, 57-60.

The women watch the sepulchre, 61.

The Jews consult with Pilate how they may prevent the

resurrection of Christ, 62-64.

He grants them a guard for the sepulchre, and they seal the

stone that stopped the mouth of the tomb where he was laid,

65, 66.

NOTES ON CHAP. XXVII.

Verse 1. When the morning was come] As soon as it was light - took counsel against Jesus. They had begun this counsel the preceding evening, see Mt 26:59. But as it was contrary to all forms of law to proceed against a person's life by night, they seem to have separated for a few hours, and then, at the break of day, came together again, pretending to conduct the business according to the forms of law.

To put him to death] They had already determined his death, and pronounced the sentence of death on him; Mt 26:66. And now they assemble under the pretence of reconsidering the evidence, and deliberating on it, to give the greater appearance of justice to their conduct. They wished to make it appear that "they had taken ample time to consider of it, and, from the fullest conviction, by the most satisfactory and conclusive evidence, they had now delivered him into the hands of the Romans, to meet that death to which they had adjudged him."

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

XXVII.

(1) Took counsel.—Better, held a council. (Comp. the use of the word in Act_25:12.) Another formal meeting was held (according to the Jewish rule that the sentence of the judges was not to be given at the same sitting as the trial) to confirm the previous decision, and probably to determine on the next step to be taken. It ended, as the next verse shows, in sending our Lord to Pilate, and leaving to him the responsibility of punishing. They entered, as the sequel shows, on a kind of diplomatic struggle as to the limits of the ecclesiastical and imperial powers, the former seeking to make the latter its tool, the latter to avoid the responsibility of seeming to act in that character.

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

1 When the morning was come, all the chief priests and elders of the people took counsel against Jesus to put him to death:

Ver. 1. When the morning was come] They had broken their sleep the night before, and yet were up and at it early the next morning, so soon as the day peeped (ως εγενετο ημερα), Luk 22:66. So sedulous are the devil’s servants. Esau began to bustle with Jacob even in the very womb, that no time might be lost.

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.

Jesus is brought before Pilate - See also Mar 16:1; Luk 23:1; Joh 18:28.

When the morning was come - This was not long after Jesus had been condemned by the Sanhedrin.

Peter’s last denial was probably not far from three o’clock a. m., or near the break of day. As soon as it was light, the Jews consulted together for the purpose of taking his life. The sun rose at that season of the year in Judea not far from five o’clock a. m., and the time when they assembled, therefore, was not long after Peter’s denial.

The chief priests and elders of the people took counsel - They ned on his trial Mat 26:65-66 agreed that he deserved to die, “on a charge of blasphemy;” yet they did not dare to put him to death by stoning, as they did afterward Stephen Acts 7, and as the law commanded in case of blasphemy, for they feared the people. They therefore “consulted,” or took counsel together, to determine on what pretence they could deliver him to the Roman emperor, or to fix some charge of a civil nature by which Pilate might be induced to condemn him. The charge which they fixed on was not that on which they had tried him, and on which they had determined he ought to die, but “that of perverting the nation, and of forbidding to give tribute to Caesar,” Luk 23:2. On this accusation, if made out, they supposed Pilate could be induced to condemn Jesus. On a charge of “blasphemy” they knew he could not, as that was not an offence against the Roman laws, and over which, therefore, Pilate claimed no jurisdiction.

To put him to death - To devise some way by which he might be put to death under the authority of the Roman governor.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

When the morning was come. The evangelist is silent with regard to what was transacted during the night, and of the multiplied cruelties and base indignities offered to our divine Redeemer during the whole of the night; for, after his has informed us of Peter’s denial, he immediately proceeds to tell us what happened at break of day. (St. Augustine) --- The chief priests, with the ancients and scribes, after they had wreaked their vengeance upon Jesus by the vilest treatment of his sacred person, took counsel how they might induce the governor to put him to death. In this Sanhedrim, or full council of seventy-two, they again put the question to hold a council. --- Council. Caiphas, in the morning, called a full council of the Sanhedrim. They again put the question to Jesus, and commanded him to tell them if he were the Christ, and Son of God? He owned he was. (Luke xxii. 70.) --- Upon this they led him away, and delivered him to Pontius Pilate, the governor: literally, the president. This they did, 1. because being a festival day, they apprehended a tumult among the people. 2. To make him die a more infamous death on the cross; otherwise they might perhaps have stoned him to death, as they afterwards did St. Stephen. 3. The power of death being taken from them, they durst not well exercise it, at least, without permission from the Roman governor. (Witham)

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 15:1, And straightway in the morning the chief priests held a consultation with the elders and scribes and the whole council, and bound Jesus, and carried him away, and delivered him to Pilate. Luke saith, Luk 23:1, And the whole multitude of them arose, and led him to Pilate. John saith, Joh 18:28, Then led they Jesus from Caiaphas unto the hall of judgment: and it was early; and they themselves went not into the judgment hall, lest they should be defiled; but that they might eat the passover. If any ask why having condemned Christ, they did not put him to death. John tells us, Joh 18:31, it was not lawful for them to put any one to death. They had already out of their malice to Christ broken several of their own canons, or rules observed in ordinary capital causes, sitting in the night time, and upon a festival day. They must have notoriously broken another, if they had themselves on that day put him to death. It should seem by their stoning Stephen, Act 7:59, they had a power in some cases to put persons to death; but Christ was to be crucified, and as to that kind of death they had no power:

See Poole on "Joh 18:31". Besides that, we must consider it was the passover day, and stoning any man to death required a concourse of people to throw stones, and they were afraid of tumults. The Roman governor had the militia in his power, and could better prevent and suppress tumults than they could do. Finally, Christ was by his death to give testimony to his kingly office; and the Jews, as we shall hear, had this to charge him with, That he made himself a King: this was a civil cause, and to be condemned by Pilate the Roman governor amongst them. In the morning, therefore, consulting how to put Christ to death, they delivered him to Pontius Pilate, having first bound him; for though he was bound upon his first apprehension, yet it is probable that they had loosed him when he came into the hall of the high priest, and now bind him a second time, when they carried him before Pilate. John tells us, that they would not themselves go into the judgment hall, lest they should be defiled; but that they might eat the passover; which words have in them a difficulty, and also give us an account of a most unaccountable superstition. For the passover, they had eaten it the night before. But we must know, that not the paschal lamb only, but all the sacrifices offered any of the seven days, were also called the passover, Deu 16:1,2, &c. It was now the first day of unleavened bread, but there were to be offerings this day of which they were to eat, which in a large sense are called the passover. But how unaccountable was the superstition of these hypocrites! They made no conscience, when they had eaten the paschal lamb in the evening, to spend the whole night in consulting how to shed innocent blood, and condemning of Christ; but they pretend now conscience, that they will not go into a pagan’s house in the morning, for that was the defilement they feared, having nothing to do to sit in judgment with him.

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

Before Pilate. The Crucifixion

1, 2. Jesus delivered to Pilate (Mar_15:1; Luk_23:1; Joh_18:28 : see on Jn).

1. When the morning] Since according to St. Luke, who follows an excellent and independent authority, the trial itself did not take place 'until it was day' (Luk_22:66), this second meeting must be placed some time later in the morning, considerably after cock-crowing (Mat_26:74). The object of the meeting, which was evidently largely attended, was simply to consider how to induce Pilate to carry out the sentence, and not as some think to pronounce sentence of death, and so technically to comply with the law which forbade the death sentence to be pronounced on the day of the trial.

2. Pilate] the fifth Roman procurator of Judaea, was appointed in 26 a.d., and held office for ten years. He was then summoned to Rome to answer certain charges made against him, and was banished to Vienna in Gaul, where he is said to have committed suicide. The Roman governor resided generally at Cæesarea, but came to Jerusalem at Passover time to keep order. The Sanhedrin could not lawfully execute Jesus without the consent of Pilate (Joh_18:31), and Pilate was not likely to regard seriously the purely religious charge upon which Jesus had been condemned. They, therefore, altered the charge to one of treason (Mat_27:11).

3-10. End of Judas (see Act_1:18). The divergences of the two accounts of the end of Judas are well known. In St. Matthew he hangs himself; in Acts he is killed by a fall. In St. Matthew the priests buy a field with the blood-money to bury strangers in; in Acts Judas himself buys a field, presumably for his own purposes. It is possible by various ingenious conjectures to harmonise the accounts, but the truth of the matter probably is that the Apostles did not care to investigate at the time so hateful a subject as the fate of the traitor, and that when the Gospels came to be written the exact circumstances could no longer be ascertained.

3. When he saw that he was condemned] This somewhat favours the view that Judas did not intend by betraying Jesus to cause His death. But it is more probable that the meek demeanour of the Sufferer at His arrest and during His trial, brought about a revulsion of feeling in Judas, who now detested himself for what he had done. 'This is the way of the devil. Before we sin, he suffers us not to see the evil of it, lest we should repent. But after the sin is done, he suffers us to see it, to cause us remorse, and to drive us to despair' (Euthymius). Repented himself] Yet his sorrow was not of a godly nature (2Co_7:9), for it led to despair, and further sin.

4. What is that?] His wicked companions n crime desert him when the crime is done.

5. In the temple] RV 'into the sanctuary,' i.e. into the holy place. Judas in his recklessness and despair penetrated where no one but the priests had a right to enter, or, it may be, standing outside the holy place, flung the money violently through the door.

6. It is not lawful] An argument from Deu_23:18. The treasury] lit. 'the Corbanas,' so called because what was placed in it was 'Corban,' i.e. given to God: see Joh_8:20.

7. Bought] In Acts Judas buys the field. The potter's field] The potter probably used to obtain clay from it.

8. The field of blood (Heb. Aceldama)] In Acts it receives its name from the death of Judas in it.

9. By Jeremy the prophet] This quotation, really from Zec_11:12-13; (q.v.), is ascribed to Jeremiah, because Jeremiah stood first in the book of the Prophets, from which it was taken; the order being Jeremiah, Ezechiel, Isaiah, the Twelve Minor Prophets. The passage is paraphrased rather than quoted.

This explanation is due to J. Lightfoot, who quotes 'a tradition of the rabbis.' 'This is the order of the prophets. The book of Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings (former prophets), Jeremiah, Ezechiel, Isaiah, the Twelve (latter prophets).' Other explanations are, a lapse of the evangelist's memory; the word Jeremiah due not to the evangelist but to the first transcriber, who was thinking of Jer_18:2 an oral or traditional utterance ascribed to Jeremiah; a quotation from a lost work of Jeremiah.

And they took] or, 'I took.' Whom they] RV 'whom certain,' RM 'or, whom they priced on the part of the sons of Israel.'

10. And gave] RM 'and I gave.'

11-26. Trial before Pilate] (Mar_15:2; Luk_23:1-7, Luk_23:13-25; Joh_18:28 to Joh_19:16). St. Matthew and St. Mark give practically the same account. St. Luke and St. John are independent of one another and of the others. All give a substantially harmonious account of the trial. Peculiar to St. Matthew was the dream of Pilate's wife, the washing of Pilate's hands, and the cry of the people, 'His blood be on us and on our children.' Peculiar to St. Luke are the exact formulation of the political charges (viz. stirring up rebellion against Cæsar, refusing to pay tribute to Cæsar, and professing to be Christ or king), and the trial before Herod.

The peculiarities of St. John are many (see on Jn). The chief are the conversations between Pilate and Jesus, Pilate's merciful purpose in scourging Jesus, and the final cry which overcame Pilate's resistance, 'If thou let this man go, thou art not Caesar's friend.' Pilate does not appear at the trial in an altogether unfavourable light. He is not without a rude sense of justice. He shrinks from the guilt of innocent blood, and finally yields only to the fear of being accused at Rome of disloyalty if he exasperates too much the Jewish leaders. Pilate shows his truly Roman contempt for the Jews, his superstition, and, what often goes with superstition, his shallow scepticism. He was, however, genuinely impressed with Jesus, which shows that he was not without religious susceptibility.

11. Thou sayest] i.e. 'I am.' But Jesus explained to Pilate privately that His kingdom was not of this world (Jn). Here, as so often, the Fourth Gospel alone renders the narrative clearly intelligible.

15. At that feast] This is the only evidence of such a custom, which is, however, appropriate to the season of the Passover, which commemorates a deliverance.

17. Barabbas] Some ancient authorities have here. the interesting reading 'Jesus Barabbas,' which may really have been the man's full name. The people may have preferred him to Christ because he had led a rebellion against Rome, whereas Christ had said, 'Render to Cæsar the things that are Cæsar's.' The two thieves probably belonged to his company.

19. His, wife] In tradition her name is given as Procla, or Claudia Procula, and she is said to have been inclined to Judaism, or even to have been a proselyte, and afterwards to have become a Christian. In the Greek Church she is canonised. From the time of Augustus the wives of provincial governors commonly accompanied their husbands.

20. The multitudes were not unfriendly, until the chief priests used their influence against Jesus.

24. Washed his hands] A piece of Jewish symbolism (see Deu_21:6) adopted by Pilate to make himself intelligible to the multitude.

I am innocent] It was customary for Gentile judges to protest 'before the sun' that they were innocent of the blood of the person about to be condemned.

25. His blood be on us] A cry of blind and vindictive rage. They care not who bears the blame, so that Jesus be put to death. There is tragic irony in this unconscious prophecy, which was fulfilled in two ways. (1) As a curse upon the unbelieving part of the nation, on whom the blood of Jesus was avenged at the destruction of Jerusalem. (2) As a blessing upon believers, on whom the blood of Jesus came for sanctification, and the remission of sins: cp. Joh_11:50.

26. Scourged] in accordance with the Roman custom before crucifixion. The culprit was stripped and tied in a bending posture to a pillar, or stretched on a frame, and the punishment was inflicted with a scourge made of leathern thongs, weighted with sharp pieces of bone or lead. Criminals sometimes died under it. According to St. John, Pilate scourged Jesus to move the Jews to pity.

27-30. Jesus is mocked by the Roman soldiers (Mar_15:16; Joh_19:1).

27. Common hall] RV 'palace': see on Joh_18:28. But the expression may mean 'barracks.' The whole band] RM 'cohort': about 600 men: see on Joh_18:3, Joh_18:12.

28. Stripped him] RM 'Some ancient authorities read, clothed Him.' The latter is probably right. He had been stripped previously for scourging. A scarlet (or purple) robe] an emblem of royalty. The reed was to represent a sceptre.

31-34. He is led to the Cross (Mar_15:20; Luk_23:26; Joh_19:16). The cross was regarded as the most horrible and most degrading form of punishment, fit only for slaves. 'It is an outrage for a Roman citizen to be bound; a crime for him to be scourged. It is almost parricide to have him put to death. What can I call having him crucified? No word can be found adequate to describe so monstrous a proceeding '(Cicero). Crucifixion was not a Jewish punishment. It originated among the Phœnicians, from whom it passed to the Greeks and Romans. Alexander the Great once crucified 2,000 Tyrians. After the death of Herod the Great, Varus crucified 2,000 rioters. The crucifixion of Jesus was unconsciously avenged by the Romans, who, after the fall of Jerusalem, crucified so many Jews that there was neither wood for the crosses nor room to set them up. The cross consisted of two parts, a strong stake or pole 8 or 9 ft. high, which was fixed in the ground, and a movable cross-piece (patibulum), which was carried by the criminal to the place of execution. Sometimes the patibulum was a single beam of wood, but more often it consisted of two parallel beams fastened together, between which the neck of the criminal was inserted. Before him went a herald bearing a tablet on which the offence was inscribed, or the criminal himself bore it suspended by a cord round his neck. At the place of execution the criminal was stripped and laid on his back, and his hands were nailed to the patibulum. The patibulum, with the criminal hanging from it, was then hoisted into position and fastened by nails or ropes to the upright pole. The victim's body was supported not only by the nails through the hands, but by a small piece of wood projecting at right angles (sedile), on which he sat as on a saddle. Sometimes there was also a support for the feet, to which the feet were nailed. The protracted agony of crucifixion sometimes lasted for days, death being caused by pain, hunger, and thirst. Jesus was crucified on a cross with four arms (crux immissa), as is proved by a title being placed over His head.

The Seven Words from the Cross

1. 'Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do' (Luk_23:34).

2. 'Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise' (Luk_23:43).

3. 'Woman, behold thy son! Behold thy mother!' (Joh_19:26-27).

4. 'My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? '(Mat_27:46; Psa_22:1).

5. 'I thirst' (Joh_19:28).

6. 'It is finished' (Joh_19:30).

7. 'Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit' (Luk_23:46; Psa_31:5).

32. As they came out] viz. of the city, executions being forbidden within the walls (Num_15:35; 1Ki_21:13; Act_7:58; Heb_13:12). Up to this point Jesus had carried His own cross (patibulum): see Joh_19:17. The tradition that Jesus fainted under the cross is probably true: see Mar_15:22. He had been greatly weakened by the scourging. Simon] If Simon was coming home from working in the fields (see Mk, Lk), this is another indication that the Feast of the Passover had not yet begun. He was probably a Jew resident in Jerusalem, but born at Cyrene in Libya (N. Africa) where there were many Jews. The Cyrenians had a synagogue in Jerusalem (Act_6:9). Simon afterwards became a Christian (Mar_15:21 : cp. Rom_16:13).

Compelled] see on Mat_5:41. Here is to be inserted Christ's address to the daughters of Jerusalem (Luk_23:28), among whom, tradition says, was Berenice, or Veronica, a pious woman of Jerusalem, who gave Him her kerchief, or napkin, that He might wipe the drops of agony from His brow. The Lord accepted her offering, and, after using it, handed it back to her, bearing the image of His face miraculously impressed upon it. This napkin, it is alleged, is now in St. Peter's at Rome, but possession of it is claimed also by Milan, and Jaen in Spain. The legend of Veronica is unhistorical, but interesting from its wide diffusion.

33. Golgotha (Aramaic), or Calvaria (Latin), means 'a skull.' It received its name either from being the place of execution, or from being an eminence shaped like a skull. It was certainly not a 'mountain,' as it has been popularly called since the 5th cent. Calvary was close by the garden in which Jesus was buried (Jn), and there is no reason why the traditional site (which lies within the Church of the Holy Sepulchre) should not be the true one. 'The traditional site, the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, has lately been proved to lie beyond the second wall, which was the outside wall at the date of the Crucifixion, and several rock tombs have been found about it. It was near a road. It may therefore have been the site '(Dr. G. A. Smith). Similarly Sir chapter Warren.

34. Vinegar (RV 'wine') .. mingled with gall] Mk 'wine mingled with myrrh': see Psa_69:21. Pious women of Jerusalem were ac customed to offer to condemned criminals a draught of wine and myrrh just before their execution, to stupefy them. The editor of the Gk. Matthew, not understanding the custom, and thinking that the myrrh was added to make the cup bitter and distasteful to Jesus, has rendered it 'gall,' seeing in the incident a fulfilment of Psa_69:21. Tasted] Jesus tasted it, in acknowledgment of the kindness of the women who offered it, but would not drink it, because. He would die for the sins of the world with all His faculties of mind unimpaired.

35. Crucified him] It is important to notice, as bearing upon the question of the reality of Christ's death and resurrection, that the feet were nailed as well as the hands. Even if Christ was not quite dead, the nailing of the feet would effectually prevent His leaving the tomb to appear to the apostles: see Luk_24:40. The time of the crucifixion was the third hour according to St. Mark, but after the sixth hour according to St. John: see on Joh_19:14.

Parted his garments] At this time the criminals' clothes were the perquisites of the executioners. That it might be fulfilled] This reference to Psa_22:18 is omitted by RV: see on Joh_19:23, Joh_19:24.

37 The variations of the inscription on the cross are unimportant. St. John alone states that it was written in Greek, Latin, and Hebrew.

38. Thieves] RV 'robbers,' i.e. brigands, as distinguished from thieves: see on Lk.

39. Passed by] The reference to the passengers along the roads is another indication that this was a working day, not the Passover.

40. Thou that destroyest the temple (RV 'sanctuary')] They called upon Him to perform what He was actually about to do, for 'the temple' was His body: see Joh_2:21.

43. He trusted in God] Psa_22:8. The action of the judges in jeering at the sufferings of the man they had condemned to death, is indecent and brutal. Their misuse of the words of Scripture is blasphemous.

45. From the sixth hour (noon)] Jesus had now been about three hours on the cross (Mar_15:25).

Darkness over all the land (or, 'earth')] The chief, if not the only, historical objection to this darkness, is the silence of Josephus.

But Josephus is silent, not only as to this, but as to almost every event connected with Christianity. Whether as a coincidence, or as a miracle, the fact of the darkness must be received, for the oldest tradition is unanimous on the point. The theory of an eclipse is impossible, as the moon was at the full. The apocryphal Gospel of Peter says, 'And it was midday, and darkness covered all the land of Judæa. And many went about with lamps thinking that it was night, and they fell. Then the sun shone out, and it was found to be the ninth hour.'

46. Eli, Eli, etc.] Psa_22:1. It is not certain whether Jesus spoke in Hebrew or Aramaic, for most MSS contain a mixture of both.

These words are a cry of the human nature of Jesus, which alone could suffer desertion, when He experienced the bitterness of death. They may serve to comfort Christian men and women when they experience the greatest of all trials, the temporary withdrawal of the consciousness of God's presence. But a deeper meaning is also to be sought. Upon the cross Jesus was making atonement for the sins of the world, 'bearing our sins in his own body on the tree,' for upon Him was laid 'the iniquity of us all.' He was so closely identified with the race which He came to save, that He felt the burden of its sin, and cried as the Representative of Humanity, 'My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?' 'The Lord was forsaken, that we might not be forsaken; He was forsaken that we might be delivered from our sins and from eternal death; He was forsaken that we might show His love to us, and manifest to us His justice and His pity; that He might attract to Himself our love, in short that He might exhibit to us a pattern of patience. The way to heaven lies open, but it is steep and difficult. He willed to go before us with an example full of wonder, that the way might not alarm us, but that the stupendous example of a suffering God might incite us' (St. Cyprian).

47. Calleth for Elias] RV 'calleth Elijah.' 'No Jew could have mistaken Eli for the name of Elijah, nor yet misinterpreted a quotation of Psa_22:1 as a call for the prophet' (Edersheim). 'The Jews said this in mockery, having many stories of appearances of Elijah to rescue men from peril of death' (Wetstein).

48. Vinegar] i.e. posca, the sour common wine drunk by the Roman soldiers. Whatever may have been the sentiments of the bystanders, the motive of the man who offered the vinegar was compassion. The Fourth Gospel alone gives the reason of the act. It was our Lord's fifth word, 'I thirst' (Joh_19:28).

49. Here many ancient authorities insert an account of the spear-thrust mentioned Joh_19:34. It is remarkable that the interpolation (if such it is) mentions the spear-thrust before the death of Jesus, and not after it, as in St. John.

50. Cried again] with a loud voice in triumph, 'It is finished' (Joh_19:30), adding immediately, 'Father, into thy hands,' etc. (Luk_23:46).

50. Yielded up] He died voluntarily (Joh_10:18).

51. The veil of the temple] Two veils, a cubit apart, hung before the Holy of Holies. They are said to have been 40 cubits (60 ft.) long, 20 wide, and of the thickness of the palm of the hand. Both were rent. Josephus, for obvious reasons, does not record this event.

The significance of the rending of the veil is variously understood. Some see in it a sign that the old covenant was at an end, the sacrifices abolished, and the divine presence withdrawn from the Temple, even the Holy of Holies being now made common ground, open to the feet of all. Others who regard the Holy of Holies as a type of heaven, and the rest of the Temple as a type of earth, see in the rending of the veil the removing of the barrier between heaven and earth, the reconciling of God and man through the death of Christ: cp. Heb_10:19, Heb_10:20.

The earth did quake] Probably to be connected with the rending of the veil. 'In the Gospel (according to the Hebrews) we read that the lintel of the Temple of infinite size was broken and divided. Josephus also relates that the angelic powers, who once presided over the Temple, then together cried out, Let us depart from these abodes' (Jerome). The statement of Josephus, however, refers to a later period. Rocks rent] 'It would not be right altogether to reject the testimony of travellers to the fact of extraordinary rents and fissures in the rocks near the spot' (Alford); 'To this day Golgotha is a proof of it, where the rocks were rent on account of Christ' (St. Cyril of Jerusalem, 315-386 a.d.).

52. The graves were opened] i.e. by the shock of the earthquake. And many bodies of the saints, etc.] i.e. they rose, not immediately, but with Christ at His Resurrection.

This incident seems to be a pictorial setting forth of the truth that in the Resurrection of Christ is involved the resurrection of all His saints, so that on Easter Day all Christians may be said in a certain sense to have risen with Him.

54. The Son of God] RM 'a son of God,' i.e. a hero or demigod, which is more suitable in the mouth of a heathen soldier. St. Luke, 'Truly this man was righteous.'

55. Ministering] It was the custom of Jewish women to contribute to the support of famous rabbis: see on Luk_8:1-3.

56. Mary Magdalene] Most authorities regard 'Magdalene' as equivalent to 'of Magdala,' a town near Tiberias. There is no ground for the common identification of this Mary with the sister of Lazarus, or with the 'sinner' who anointed our Lord's feet (Luk_7:37).

Mary the mother of James and Joses] St. Mark calls this James, 'James the little': see on Joh_19:25. The mother of Zebedee's children] i.e. Salome (Mk). The synoptists omit all mention of the presence of the Virgin, either because she had been already led away by St. John, or because she was not one of the ministering women.

57-61. Burial of Jesus (Mar_15:42; Luk_23:51; Joh_19:38 : see on Jn). The burial of Jesus in the tomb of a wealthy and influential man was a literal fulfilment of Isa_53:9 : 'with the rich in his death.'

57. Arimathæa] unidentified. Perhaps Ramathaim Zophim in the hill-country of Ephraim.

Joseph] According to St. Luke he was a member of the Sanhedrin, who had not consented to the death of Jesus. According to St. John he was assisted by Nicodemus.

58. Begged the body] According to St. Mark, Pilate assured himself that Jesus was really dead before surrendering the body. It was not lawful to suffer a man to hang all night upon a tree, Deu_21:23. Strictly speaking, Jesus had no legal right to honourable burial. The Jewish law was, 'They that were put to death by the council were not to be buried in the sepulchres of their fathers, but two burial places were appointed by the council.'

60. He had hewn] Only St. Matthew mentions that the tomb belonged to Joseph.

61. The other Mary] i.e. Mary the mother of James and Joses.

62-66. The sepulchre is guarded (peculiar to St. Matthew). It is sometimes argued that this incident is unauthentic, because the enemies of Christ would not be likely to remember obscure prophecies of the Resurrection, which even the disciples failed to understand. This view is possible. But they remembered the obscure saying, 'Destroy this temple,' etc., two years after it had been spoken, and there was a still more recent and clearer prediction addressed to the Pharisees (Mat_12:40).

62. Now the next day] RV 'Now on the morrow, which is the day after the Preparation.' The 'Preparation' is the usual word for Friday.

63. After three days] Joh_2:19; Mat_12:40, etc.

65. Ye have] BM 'Take a guard,' viz. of Roman soldiers.

66. And setting a watch] RV 'the guard being with them.'

J. R. Dummelow, A Commentary on the Holy Bible (Macmillan, 1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Vers. 1, 2. Jesus brought to Pilate. (Mar_15:1 Luk_22:66 Luk 23:1Jo Luk_18:28)

When the morning was come. This is the early morning of Good Friday, the 14th of Nisan. If the rulers had had special regard to legality, they could not have condemned Christ to death at night, as they had done at the late informal assembly; but their respect for conventional rules was overborne by passion and hatred. They had decreed his death by general consent, and then retired for a few hours" necessary rest. Now they again met together, still in the palace of Caiaphas, (Joh_18:28) in order to complete their evil work, to endorse the previous sentence, and, under some pretence, hand their Victim over to the Roman governor, who alone could execute their murderous purpose. The particle de (prwiav de genomenhv), omitted by the Authorized Version, takes us back to the conclusion of the council, (Mat_26:66) the account of its further proceedings being interrupted by the episode of Peter. All the chief priests and elders of the people. It was a large assembly of the Sanhedrin, many members, doubtless, taking part in these proceedings, now that the capital sentence was past, who would not have deliberately planned a judicial murder. Such was the course of Jewish casuistry. To (wste) put him to death. The council had merely to determine how to formulate such a political charge against Jesus as would compel the Romans to punish the offender with death. They were determined that he should die by an ignominious and cursed death, that his pretensions, as being sent by God, might be disposed of forever. Hence arose the persistent cry, "Crucify him!" (vers. 22, 23). The Jewish view of crucifixion is seen in Deu_21:23 and Gal_3:13. They possibly feared some outbreak if they delayed the execution, and kept him prisoner till the conclusion of the feast.

Vers. 1-10. The end of Judas.

I THE FORMAL CONDEMNATION OF OUR LORD.

1. The Sanhedrin. "When the morning was come," St. Matthew says the morning which followed the long sad hours of that night of mockery and shame; the morning which ushered in the greatest day in the world"s history, the day signalized by the darkest crime ever wrought upon this sinful earth, illustrated by the one all-sufficient Sacrifice for sin, by the noblest deed of holiest self-devotion which has brightened the annals of the human race; on that memorable morning all the chief priests and elders of the people came together. They met now to pronounce the formal sentence of death. Their previous meeting was illegal. A capital cause could, by their own rules, be tried only during daylight. This meeting, which St. Luke describes at greater length than the first two evangelists, was held to render valid the irregular sentence passed in the night. They were careful to observe forms and precedents; they heeded not the awful guilt which they were contracting.

2. The delivery to the Gentiles. Again they bound him who is the King of kings. And then they fulfilled his own prophecy they delivered him "to the Gentiles to meek, and to scourge, and to crucify him". (Mat_20:19) They had determined on his death. It was "not lawful for them to put any man to death;" but they scrupled not to employ the agency of the hated Romans to accomplish their wicked purpose. They hated Pilate; he had deserved their hatred by his Cruelties and by his scornful contempt of their religious prejudices. But they hated the holy Jesus more than they hated the cruel and haughty Pilate; and they delivered Jesus, that is, they betrayed him; they completed the evil deed of Judas. As he betrayed his Master to them, so they betrayed their King, their Messiah, to the Roman Pilate. It was an act of treason, awful treason, against the Divine King of the Jews. Indeed, they knew not what they did. "I wot," said St. Peter, after the Ascension, "that through ignorance ye did it, as did also your rulers". (Act_3:17) They would not have dared thus to treat the Lord, had they believed him to be the long expected Messiah. But their ignorance was guilty ignorance. If they had searched the Scriptures with a single heart, they must have seen in the Lord"s life the signs of the Messiah. Some of them were old enough to remember the visit of the Magi, and the excitement which it caused in Jerusalem. All knew more or less of the Lord"s beautiful life, of his holy teaching, of his works of love and power. But they were blinded by hypocrisy and self-interest. They had long sought his death. The solemn entry into Jerusalem on Palm Sunday, the "Hosanna! "shouts, the enthusiasm of the multitude, followed by the controversies in the temple, with the Lord"s awful parables and his stern condemnation of the dominant religionism, deepened their resentment and confirmed them in their wicked purpose. They proposed to seize him alter the feast day; but the unexpected treachery of Judas enabled them to take him at once without uproar or danger. They knew his absolute innocence; they saw his holy calmness, his meek, patient self-possession in the midst of insults; they heard his majestic assertion of his Divine office and dignity. They would not believe; they were blinded by their prejudices, their pride, their interest; they made the guilt of Judas their own; they completed his fearful treason, and delivered their King into the hands of the merciless Roman governor, whose cruel contemptuous character they knew so well, and whom they expected to be the ready and willing instrument for carrying out their evil design.

II JUDAS.

1. His remorse. He had probably mingled with the crowd of spectators, like Peter. He had nothing to fear, as Peter had. It is said that there is a strange, awful attraction which draws a murderer irresistibly to the scene of his crime; some such feeling forced Judas to linger about the high priest"s palace. We know not what his thoughts were during that fearful night. It is possible (though there is no Scripture foundation for the theory) that he may have looked forward, even more eagerly than the other apostles, for the expected earthly reign of the Messiah; he may have been vexed and angry with the Lord for not claiming the throne of David, and thus raising his followers to rank and eminence. It is just possible (very improbable it seems to us) that he may have designed by his treachery to force the Lord to declare himself as the Messiah, to exert his supernatural power, and to set up his kingdom in Jerusalem. It is certain that his avaricious spirit was troubled exceedingly by what he called the waste of Mary"s precious ointment, and that the Lord"s reproof, though gentle and loving, irritated his dark and gloomy temper, and became, through the temptations of the evil being to whom he had sold himself, the goad which drove him to his deadly sin. He brooded over his supposed wrongs; he fretted himself till he was moved to do the most evil deed the world had ever seen. He gave place to the devil; Satan entered into him, and filled him with malice and hatred, and whispered that he might by one act have his revenge, and compensate himself for the fancied loss caused by Mary"s generous offering. Perhaps evil thoughts like this, bitter recollections of supposed slights, cruel exultation over his successful treachery and his ill-gotten gains, filled the traitor"s heart during the night, and for a while kept him from feeling the horror of his crime. But in the morning he saw that Christ was condemned. He had not exerted his Divine power; the twelve legions of angels had not come to his aid. He was condemned like any common malefactor, and delivered to Pilate for the cruel death of the cross. And Judas was the cause of this. He had murdered his Friend, his Master, his Lord, the Innocent, the Holiest One. He repented now; but his repentance was not metanoia not a change of heart, not repentance unto life; it was only metameleia , a change of thought as to his crime (comp. Trench, "New Test. Syn.," sect. 69). He saw his sin now in a different point of view. He could no longer gloat over the luxury of revenge, the evil pleasure of wicked gains; for his crime seemed to glare upon him with fiery eyes; he saw its full horror, its blackness, its hideousness. The thirty pieces of silver which he had coveted were cankered now; they were a witness against him, a witness of his infamy and of his foul treachery; they seemed to eat his flesh as it were fire. He loathed, he hated them; he returned them to the chief priests and elders. "I have sinned," he said, "in that I have betrayed innocent blood." Can he have thought that by returning the price of blood he might stay the accomplishment of that deed of blood? If he had such a thought, his hope was at once extinguished by the cold cruelty of the answer, "What is that to us? see thou to that." The guilt was his, they said. They forgot that it was equally theirs. Pilate very soon after forced them to admit it; he was innocent of that blood, he said, "See ye to it." But now they derided the misery of their companion in guilt; he was their feel; he had served their purpose; they would fling him away.

2. His despair. There was no hope for him; those cruel words drove him to madness. Perhaps he remembered words more awful still, though they were spoken in warning, "Woe unto that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed! good were it for that man if he had not been born." He had not listened to the Saviour"s warning voice; he had thought more of that paltry bribe than of his own poor soul. Avarice, that degrading vice, had eaten all good and holy thoughts out of his mind; his heart was hardened by the deceitfulness of sin. Could he not even now in his misery see his guilt and own his sin, and weep like Peter, and like Peter be forgiven? Alas! no. A horror of great darkness seemed to engulf him; he could not see that look of love and sorrow which had won Peter to repentance. He had trodden underfoot the Son of God; he could not bear even to think of Christ. He had done despite to the Spirit of grace; the Spirit had departed from him. He had no hope either in this world or in the world to come. He could not enjoy the miserable wages of his treason; he threw the pieces of silver back to the priests as they sat or officiated in the sanctuary. He departed; he went and hanged himself. His death was attended by strange circumstances of horror; his name has become a word of reproach; his memory is associated with all that is hateful and accursed. Yet he was an apostle, "one of the twelve," one of the princes of the Church, who were to sit on twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel. His history is full of awful warning to all Christian people, especially to the ministers of Christ"s Holy Word and sacraments. It reminds us that the highest places in the Church are not always safe, that we may not dare to trust in external privileges, however great they may be. It warns us that the deadly sins of ambition and avarice may ensnare those who seem very near to Christ. It adds force and weight to the Lord"s solemn lesson, "Watch and pray, that ye enter not into temptation.

3. The conduct of the chief priests. They would not put the money into the temple treasury, because it was the price of blood; yet they themselves had brought about the bloodshedding of which that money was the price. The money was accursed in their eyes, but not the wicked deed. Very strange is the self-deceit with which hypocrites blind their hearts and cheat their consciences. They bought with the pieces of silver the potter"s field to bury strangers in. It was the field, it seems, (comp. Act_1:18) in which Judas had put an end to his miserable life, the field which he had designed to purchase with the reward of his iniquity. It was well called "the field of blood;" it was defiled with that scene of blood and horror, and it was bought with the price of blood. The chief priests perhaps regarded this purchase as a work of charity. So again and again in the course of history have men sought, by charitable foundations of various kinds, to atone for past transgressions. Many such gifts Lave been given in true repentance; and as the earnest and expression of repentance they are, we may not doubt, accepted. Without repentance and faith they can no more help the guilty soul than the gift of the potter"s field could atone for the blood guiltiness of the chief priests.

4. The fulfilment of prophecy. St. Matthew again, as in so many other places, refers to the writings of the prophets. His thoughts seem to have dwelt much in reverent awe on the great mysteries of the sovereignty and foreknowledge of God, and of that overruling providence which ever brings to pass the counsels of the Most High. There is, apparently, an ancient transcriber"s error here, and other difficulties, which this is not the place to examine, But the passage (Zec_11:12, Zec_11:13) is very remarkable. The price to be given is weighed, it is to be fixed at thirty pieces of silver. The Lord speaks of it as the "price that I the Lord God was prised at of them." The price is cast down in the house of the Lord; it comes ultimately to the potter. The prophecy was fulfilled. The price of the Saviour"s blood bought a resting place for the bodies of Gentile strangers in the neighbourhood of the holy city an illustration of the great and blessed truth that by the blood of Christ those are made nigh who sometime were afar off, who were aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise; but now, through him, are no longer strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints, and of the household of God.

LESSONS.

1. "The love of money is the root of all evil." Fight hard against it.

2. It grows and strengthens with years. Resist it in its beginnings.

3. Ill-gotten gains bring misery. Flee from them.

4. Mark the strange inconsistencies of hypocrisy. Pray to be true and real.

HOMILIES BY MARCUS DODS Vers. 1, 2, 11-14. Christ before Pilate. No. 1.

Caiaphas had a purpose to serve by giving Jesus up to the Romans. Little did he know that while he thought he was making a tool of every one, he was merely God"s tool for accomplishing his purposes. The harmony of the purpose of God, the scheme of Caiaphas, the law of Rome, and the relation of the Jewish court to the Roman procurator, explains fully how, when the Sanhedrin took counsel against Jesus to put him to death, the result was that they resolved to deliver him to Pilate. In their conduct notice:

1. Their scrupulosity about entering the palace. They would not cross a Gentile threshold during the Feast of Unleavened Bread. Types in this of all who are able to be religious without being moral; who shrink from violating some ceremonial rule, but without scruple violate their own convictions whited sepulchres, outwardly spotless, but inwardly full of rottenness and corruption.

2. The satanically prompted cunning of their accusation. They had but an hour ago been obliged to acquit him of such charges, and to condemn him on the ground of his claiming to be the Son of God. But Pilate is too keen sighted to be deceived by their show of loyalty. He cannot believe that since last Passover this great conversion from hatred to love of his government has taken place. One cannot but reflect what a pregnant moment this was for Pilate, when our Lord seemed to wish to open the deepest desires of that severe Roman heart, and prompt him to long, with the Jews, for a spiritual kingdom. Before answering his question, "Art thou the King of the Jews?" he must first know, as John tells us, in what sense Pilate uses the words, "Sayest thou this thing of thyself? Is it not possible that thou too for thine own sake shouldest seek to know this King of the Jews for whom Israel has longed?" There were officers under Pilate whose heathen upbringing had not prevented them from discovering the spiritual grandeur of Jesus, and desiring to belong to his kingdom. But it was too much for Roman pride to be taught by a Jew how to find peace, and even to submit to this bound Jew before him as to a King. A mirror is here held up to those of us who do not "of ourselves" ask Christ what his claims are, who think it quite right that other people should accept and acknowledge him, but cannot bring themselves to do so. Pilate was a man who represents thousands in every age, who persistently and on principle live for the world, and seal up the deeper nature in them that the world does not satisfy; who try, as it were, to live down their own nature, their own immortality. Have your own spiritual necessities taught you the meaning of God"s promise of a King to the Jews? D.

HOMILIES BY J.A. MACDONALD Vers. 1-10. The price of blood.

The day, whose dawn brought repentance to Peter, found the Jewish rulers still plotting how they might effect the murder of Jesus. They had in the night infamously condemned him as a blasphemer, thereby exposing him to the penalty of death by stoning. Almost a hundred years before this Judaea was conquered by Pompey, and made tributary to the Romans, yet it was not until about two years before this that it was made part of the province of Syria. Then the power of capital punishment was taken from the Jews. Surely the sceptre had now departed, and Shiloh must have come. (see Gen_49:10) Doubting whether the Roman governor would put Jesus to death for an alleged offence in religion, the Sanhedrin resolve to accuse him of treason against the Romans on the ground of his having allowed himself to be saluted as King of the Jews. (cf. ver. 11; Luk 23:2Jo Luk_18:31) This decision brought Judas again upon the scene (ver. 3, etc.).

I WHAT COULD THIRTY SHEKELS DO?

1. They could sell Christ into the hands of murderers. The prophecy in Zechariah sets forth:

(1) That God appointed one eminent Shepherd to feed the Jewish people, who are called "the flock of slaughter," evidently in anticipation of what they should suffer from the Romans. This blessed Person is Divine, and confessedly Messiah. (see Zec_11:7)

(2) That the ordinary guides had no regard for their charge: "Their own shepherds pity them not". (Zec_11:5) This was literally the case with the Jewish rulers, Pharisees, scribes, and priests, in our Lord"s time.

(3) That between these unworthy shepherds and the shepherds of God"s appointing there was strong enmity: "My soul loathed them, trod their soul also abhorred me." So Christ had a holy loathing for the pride, hypocrisy, and wickedness of the scribes and Pharisees, and they cherished a malignant hatred of him for his purity and truth.

(4) That he gives up his charge in judicial visitation. And here follows an awful description of the ruin to be brought upon them by the Romans (see ver. 9).

(5) That the covenant between him and his people was broken, viz. the Sinai covenant, and his people rejected, because they refused the covenant from Zion which came to replace it. (Zec_11:10)

(6) That some of the people, however, should admit Messiah"s claims. "So the poor of the flock," etc. (Zec_9:11) These were evidently the disciples of Jesus, who were chiefly from the humbler classes.

(7) That in contrast to these, the heads of the nation estimate Messiah at the price of a slave: "thirty pieces of silver the "goodly price," as he sarcastically observes, "that I was prised at of them". (Zec_11:12, Zec_11:13) When they had an opportunity of withdrawing from their infamous bargain with Judas, they refused it.

2. They could purchase the potters field, to bury strangers in. " This field was thenceforth called "The field of blood," and thereby became:

(1) A monument to the truth of Scripture. Zechariah continues, "And I took the thirty pieces of silver, and cast them to the potter in the house of the Lord". (cf. vers. 3-10 Zec_11:13)

(2) A monument of the innocence of Jesus. This act of Judas was ordained by Providence to refute the sceptic who otherwise could object that Jesus was crucified as an impostor, on the testimony of a disciple who knew him well. In confessing Jesus innocent, Judas acknowledged his Messiahship, for otherwise he would not have been innocent. In this confession of Judas we have a specimen of the victory of Christ over Satan, and a warning to persecutors.

(3) A monument of the infamy of the traitor and of the rulers. And it remained so when Matthew wrote. Jerome also says that in his days it was to be seen in Aelia (the name of the city built on the site of Jerusalem), on the south side of Mount Zion.

(4) It was "to bury strangers in." The unclean "stranger" must not, even in his burial, come near to the "holy" villains who murdered their Messiah! The "stranger" has a Friend in Jesus. As the priests by procuring the Lord"s death had been unwitting agents in procuring the redemption of the world, so in the final disposal of the price of his blood they unconsciously did an act which represents the reception of the Lord"s salvation by the Gentiles. He that has his burial through the blood of Christ may hope also for a resurrection through it.

II WHAT COULD THE SHEKELS NOT DO?

1. They could not redeem Christ from death.

(1) Over that mile lying between the house of Caiaphas to that of Pilate, they led him away, "from prison and from judgment", (see Isa_53:7, Isa_53:8) to "deliver him to the Gentiles," according to his prediction. (cf. Mat_20:19 Joh_18:32) The Churchmen of the Apostasy imitated their Jewish predecessors when they called in the civil power to shed for them the blood of the martyrs.

(2) The bonds in which Jesus was now led differed from those in which he was carried to Annas. They were those special bonds which marked it to be the will of his persecutors that he should be crucified. (see Joh_21:18) So we note that Jesus was put to death by his own countrymen in his true character as the "Son of God;" and by the Romans as "King of the Jews.

(3) The true bonds which bound Jesus were those of his wondrous love to man. Other bonds could not have held him. He suffered himself to be bound, that man might be loosed from the bands of sin. (see Pro_5:22 Lam_1:12-14) So likewise "by his stripes we are healed.

2. They could not purchase the repentance of the rulers.

(1) "What is that to us?" These men did not concern themselves about the innocency of Jesus. They did not say, "What is that to us?" when Judas came to them saying, "What will ye give me, and I will deliver him unto you?" They paid the price of blood, and were determined to shed it. If the elders of Jezreel, to please Jezebel, murder Naboth, is it nothing to Ahab? (see 1Ki_21:19)

(2) "See thou to that." Thus they disclaim the guilt of their own wicked instrument, and turn him over to his terrors. Obstinate sinners stand on their guard against convictions. Those who betray Christ, and justify themselves, are worse than Judas. The resolutely impenitent look with disdain upon the penitent. The wicked encourage men to crime, and desert them after its commission.

(3) The cold villainy of the priests and elders bears testimony to the injustice with which they had treated Christ.

(4) "And the chief priests took the silver pieces, and said, It is not lawful for to put them into the treasury." An astonishing amount of rascality may be associated with the utmost ceremonial scrupulosity. Probably they had taken the money out of the treasury to pay the price of blood. (see Mat_23:24) They were fearful of defiling the temple with blood money, while ruthlessly defiling their consciences with innocent blood. Men are often scrupulous about trifles who stick not at great crimes.

3. They could not redeem Judas from perdition.

(1) Some think Judas was partly induced to betray his Master by the expectation that, as Messiah, he could not suffer death, and that he would deliver himself from the rulers as he had done before. He might, therefore, have calculated that in this case Christ would have the honour, the Jews would have the shame, and he would have the money. They are mistaken who imagine that Christ will work his miracles in the interests of selfishness. But actions are not to be estimated by their consequences, but by their relation to the Law of God.

(2) How differently did the silver appear to the traitor before and after his transgression! He "cast down" the price of the innocent blood. How the victim now hates the snare! That which is ill gotten brings sorrow to the getter. (see Job_20:12-15)

(3) As Judas was actuated by avarice in his sin, so was he possessed with despair in his repentance. Remorse, sharpened by the sense of the contempt and abhorrence of good men, is unbearable. Miserable is the wretch who must go to hell for ease. The repentance of Judas was that of the damned at the judgment, when mercy"s door is shut.

(4) There is little reason to believe that the repentance of Judas was more than the remorse of an upbraiding conscience. (cf. Mat_26:24 Joh_17:12 Act_1:25) It was a repentance which needs to be repented of. (2Co_7:10) Had he returned the money before he had betrayed Christ, he would have agreed while yet in the way. (see Mat_5:23-26) Had he gone to Christ, or even to the disciples of Christ, in his distress, he might have obtained some relief. Sinners under conviction of sin will find their old companions miserable comforters. The devil by the help of the priests drove Judas to despair. Despair of the mercy of God is a fatal sin. One may know his sin, repent, confess, make restitution, and yet be like Judas! J.A.M.

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

In the morning - As the sanhedrim used to meet in one of the courts of the temple, which was never opened in the night, they were forced to stay till the morning before they could proceed regularly, in the resolution they had taken to put him to death. Mark xv, 1; Luke xxii, 66; xxiii, 1; John xviii, 28.

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

The End of Judas.

Christ delivered to Pilate:

v. 1. When the morning was come, all the chief priests and elders of the people took counsel against Jesus to put Him to death;

v. 2. and when they had bound Him, they led Him away, and delivered Him to Pontius Pilate, the governor.

The trial of Jesus before the Sanhedrin, the highest court of the Jewish Church, had lasted into the hours of early morning on Friday, to the time of cock-crowing. Even after that, the Lord had been given no rest, the wicked tortures which some of the servants and others inflicted upon Him robbing Him of even the few moments of respite which his racked and weary body needed. And as soon as the day dawned, the members of the Council convened once more to confirm the sentence of a few hours before, and to make plans for carrying out the resolution thus passed. The law required at least two sittings in grave criminal cases, and thus they observed the letter, even if they did not comply with the spirit of the Law. All the members being present, a formal vote was taken, really only a formality, since any opposing voices would quickly have been silenced. Again the object is nakedly stated: to put Him to death. It seems from the language used by Luk 22:66, that they led Jesus, in formal procession, from the palace of the high priest to the House of Polished Stones, the meeting-hall at the Temple, for according to the Talmud sentence of death could be pronounced only in this room. In the bitterness of their hatred and their burning desire for revenge, the Jews even overlooked the fact that on a festival day the rules of the Sabbath held good, according to which a meeting of the Sanhedrin was unlawful. Having agreed upon their course of action, they now led forth the Lord, bound like a criminal, and delivered Him to Pilate, the governor or procurator of the province. For since Judea had become a Roman province, after the deposition of Archelaus, the Jews no longer had the right to carry out a sentence of capital punishment. They were obliged to turn over criminals whom they believed guilty of death to the procurator, who resided at Caesarea, but came up to Jerusalem during the week of the Passover, partly to keep order among the many thousands of pilgrims, partly to overawe and thus keep in check any Revolutionary spirits by the power of Roman prestige.

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

Mat 27:3-4

The Remorse of Judas on the Condemnation of Christ.

We gather from the narrative of the Evangelists that the devil had much to do with the treachery of Judas. He became, as it were, given up to the will of the evil one, surrendering himself as an agent in effecting his purpose against the Anointed of God. But, now, are we to think that there was nothing needed with Judas but the laying before him a certain paltry bribe? that there were no scruples to be overcome, no objections to be removed, before he could be brought to the betraying his Lord? Here, as we think, our text comes in, explaining, or at all events suggesting, how Satan proceeded in working up Judas to his infamous treachery. If it were when he saw that Jesus was condemned, that Judas was seized with the agony of remorse, we may fairly suppose that it was under an expectation that Jesus would not be condemned, that Judas was brought to meditate the crime of his betrayal.

I. We may consider it probable, that the devil suggested to Judas, that by placing Christ in the hands of His enemies He would only afford Him an opportunity of showing His power by defeating their malice. Then with what ease may he have gone forward in his iniquitous treason. His very belief that Jesus was the Christ would only confirm him in the belief that, though betrayed, He would not be condemned. Any rising feeling, as to the ungenerousness of his conduct in requiting with perfidy so gracious a Master, would be kept down by the persuasion that he did but seek that Master’s glory.

II. There is something very affecting in the fact that Judas gave himself up to despair on seeing that Jesus was given over to death. Had he had any true notion of what Christ had come to do, it would have been the seeing Him condemned, which would have kept him from suicide. Strange, indeed, was the position of Judas. His was a repentance with no hope, because Christ was condemned; and yet it was Christ’s being condemned which should have given hope to repentance. The wretched man died because Christ must die, and yet Christ died that the wretched man might live.

H. Melvill, Penny Pulpit, No. 1,880.

References: Mat 27:3, Mat 27:4.—C. Girdlestone, A Course of Sermons, p. 365; E. Mason, A Pastor’s Legacy, p. 407.

Mat 27:3-5

The text leads us to the contemplation of the conduct and fate of Judas under the remorse occasioned by his betrayal of his Lord. We cannot think any the better of Judas for feeling that remorse, nor will we for a moment admit it as an extenuation of his guilt. Peter wept bitterly after he had denied Christ; but there was more real penitence in his tears than in the frantic desperation of Iscariot when he had handed over his Master to the accuser. The remorse of Judas was but the beginning of his retribution—the first stripe of the avenging angel’s lash, not the bleeding of a contrite or relenting heart.

I. Observe that this remorse was caused by looking at the consequences of his sin rather than at the sin itself. It was "when he saw that Jesus was condemned" that he flung down the money before the elders, and gave vent to his despair.

II. The sting of the remorse of Judas arose from the thought of the innocency of Him whom he had betrayed. (1) "I have sinned in that I have betrayed the innocent blood." Although this was the lamentation of his soul, he did not realise the entire greatness of his guilt, because he did not know the full innocence of the betrayed One. Could he but have thought of this, how ineffable would have been his remorse! It drove him to suicide as it was; but if he could have slain himself ten thousand times, it could not have attested all the woe he would have felt had he known all. (2) The sense of wrong-doing eventually becomes intolerable to the wrong-doer. He does not feel it at the time, but the retrospect shall bring the retribution. There is a capacity in the human soul for self-review, and a tendency in that direction also. The barbed thoughts will not be kept down, the unwelcome visitors will not be shut out.

III. The next conspicuous idea presented by the text is the worthlessness of worldly gains. The price of innocent blood lay in the dust, spurned as a loathsome thing by him who had received it; avoided as a merited curse by those who had offered and paid it; no greedy Jew with hardihood enough to pick it up;—a stern and speaking evidence of the worthlessness of guilty gains.

IV. Confederacy in sin does not diminish individual guilt.

V. Note, lastly, the intolerable remorse which sin brings with it, or, at least, brings after it. Whatever we may say about the natural depravity of man, there is a capacity in the soul for suffering through sin, which sometimes makes the thought of a past evil almost maddening. Life to Judas became unbearable, and he went out and hanged himself.

A. Mursell, Calls to the Cross, p. 106.

I. We see from the repentance of Judas how wide is the difference between a sin in prospect and a sin in retrospect. Before, nothing is in sight but the pleasure, or the honour, or the reward. Afterwards the sting alone remains. Judas had his desire, but along with it a famine entered his soul. Those looks and words of kind and deep compassion—that unceasing self-sacrificing care for his happiness and his good, of which at the time he had thought scorn—now rushed upon his mind with a power which he could not resist; and when he saw that Divine Friend handed over by his instrumentality to suffering and to death, that hard heart was subdued for the moment by a thrill of unwonted tenderness, and he who had betrayed his Lord, when he saw that He was condemned, repented himself.

II. Judas repented himself, but with no godly sorrow. His sorrow was neither from God nor towards God. No cry for forgiveness, no entreaty for a new heart, preceded or followed that crushing sense of sin. It was the remorse of despair, the last token of lingering animation in the natural heart, before the light that was in it should have become darkness for ever.

III. For ourselves, then, let us learn not to rest on any signs and circumstances of repentance, but to seek that true renewal of the heart which comes from God only. The nature of the repentance of Judas is proved but too clearly by its end. He had so long despised mercy that at last he despaired of it. How could he, who for three years and a half had accompanied the Lord, had seen His works and heard His words, not only without loving Him, without being attracted by His Divine character, but actually as a spy and a traitor, and who at last had succeeded in delivering Him up to His enemies, and consigning Him to His last sufferings—how could he even hope, even ask, for forgiveness at God’s hand? And if not, why should he linger out in blank and utter despair the few short years that might yet have remained to him upon earth? If an eternity of wretchedness must be endured, why seek to curtail it by a few days or months, which in comparison with its endless duration could be but as a drop in the ocean?

C. J. Vaughan, Harrow Sermons, 2nd series, p. 81

References: Mat 27:3-5.—E. B. Pusey, Parochial Sermons, vol. ii., p. 197; E. M. Goulburn, Occasional Sermons, p. 139; C. A. Fowler, Parochial Sermons, p. 101.

Mat 27:4

Judas and the Priests—the End of Evil Association.

Note:—

I. Judas, and the state of mind to which he is brought (1) The first effect of his sin is separation from human companionship. (2) His sin brought him to a state where he was deserted by himself. (3) His sin separated between his soul and God.

II. The chief priests and their conduct. Note (1) their disregard for their instrument when their purpose is gained. (2) Their attempt to shake off the responsibility of the common act. (3) They end their sinful compact with a taunt.

J. Ker, Sermons, p. 282.

References: Mat 27:4.—Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. iii., No. 113; R. W. Evans, Parochial Sermons, vol. ii., p. 36; Clergyman’s Magazine, vol. iv., p. 86.

Mat 27:4

(with Luk 23:34)

Self and Christ.

I. Some charges require proof; others are patent, going before unto judgment. The charge of selfishness as a crime of humanity is of the latter kind. To whom need it be proved? As a crime of the race, all plead guilty to it. It is only when we come close home, and charge it upon the man, the separate individual man, that we so much as need a witness. There are forms of selfishness so draped and veiled as to be almost indiscernible. (1) There is a selfishness of earnestness. The man has an end in view, and through quicksands of peril, and over mountains of difficulty, he will reach it or die. The end is a good end; if personal, at least honourable; it may be patriotic; it may be philanthropic; it may be religious. And yet, in his way to it the very earnestness of the aim may make him harsh, narrow, bitter, overbearing, contemptuous. (2) There is a selfishness of affection. Sometimes the very power of loving, beautiful in itself and Godlike, becomes a snare. Viewed in its aspect towards a third person, it may be selfishness; in its aspect towards God, a giving to the creature of affections formed for the Creator. (3) The selfishness of sin. These men who repudiated all share or concern in the misery of Judas, were men who had not only instigated but hired his treachery. Never expect from the accomplice, from the companion of your sin, a burst of hearty natural sympathy, when that sin finds you out.

II. Christ is unselfishness. To see Him, to be united to Him, to be one with Him—and thus it is to be a Christian—is to be like Him in His unselfishness.

C. J. Vaughan, Temple Sermons, p. 101.

References: Mat 27:4-24.—Contemporary Pulpit, vol. vii., p. 173. Mat 27:5.—A. Thomas, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xviii., p. 348; G. Dawson, The Authentic Gospel, p. 252.

Mat 27:6-7

The Field of Blood.

I. The whole history of the transaction whereby our Saviour was betrayed into the hands of His enemies is brimful of awful interest and solemn edification. First, as proving to us that a man will sell his soul for an utterly vile and paltry thing—and that thing, very possibly, money. Nor can the sin of covetousness occupy so prominent a place in the Gospel, in vain. The reason must be, that we are all more prone to it than we like to believe. Next, it is terribly striking to observe how soon the gratifications of sin prove worthless even in the sinner’s eyes; for Judas could not bear to retain his bribe after all.

II. Consider the purpose to which the chief priests are related to have resolved on applying the price of our Lord’s blood. It is worth your notice that St. Matthew goes out of his way to relate this circumstance. The precious blood of Christ is so very precious that the very application of the money for which it was sold must needs be related. We learn that the price of Christ’s blood was expended in purchasing a field for the burial of strangers; that is of such Gentiles as happened to die at Jerusalem. And what else is this but our own history in a parable? for it is the account of how we, Gentiles, acquired our first interest in the precious blood of Christ. As, by His death, He went to prepare a place for the souls of many; so did He, in dying, procure a place of rest for the bodies of many, likewise. Thrice happy and blessed he who was first conveyed to Aceldama for sepulture. A Gentile he, who was already joined in a species of sacrament to Christ. And what if it were some believer in the despised Jesus of Nazareth—one of the first Christians—who was the first to be buried in the field which Christ’s blood had purchased! Would not the outward circumstance and the inward reality have been in marvellous conformity, and had the strictest historical correspondence? Yes, Abraham’s true seed, the members of the Christian Church, begin (like their father Abraham) to inherit the promises; and it is—like him—by having a burial-place given them for a possession; and this at a time when God gave them no inheritance in the land, though He had promised them that in the end they should inherit the whole earth.

J. W. Burgon, Ibid., Ninety-one Short Sermons, No. 43.

References: Mat 27:6.—F. Hastings, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xxvii., p. 168. Mat 27:7.—H. J. Wilmot-Buxton, Sunday Sermonettes for a Year, p. 76.

Mat 27:11

I. Profoundly interesting is it to note, as traced by St. John, the mortal duel which is fought out between the Roman governor and the Jewish hierarchs; a duel which is not less real, nor waged the less fiercely, because carried on under forms which partially veil it from our eyes, so that only at certain moments the intense hostility which animates both him and them is permitted to appear. The conflict is undecided long, but the Jewish hierarchs are victorious in the end. And no wonder. They know their own minds, and he only half knows his. They are consistent, thorough-going in evil, he is weak and less than half-hearted in good. Perhaps Pilate might have ventured something in the cause of righteousness and truth; but an accusation at Rome, and to Tiberius, the most suspicious of all tyrants, this he could not brave; and it is with this that the Jewish chief priests threaten him. They will charge him at Rome with this, his unseasonable lenity to a rebel and pretender to Cæsar’s throne. This they make Pilate clearly to understand, and this is enough. His guilty conscience tells him, that even if in this matter he could clear himself, there were charges enough of malversation, of violence, of cruelty, which they could bring against him, and from which it would be impossible to clear himself. He was prepared to drive matters far, but he dared not drive them so far as this. He delivered Jesus unto them to be crucified.

II. And so ends the tragedy of Pontius Pilate—a bad man, but by no means the worst of that wonderful group which are gathered round the Cross of Christ, and on whom that Cross has poured such a flood of light; who, as actors, abettors, or approvers, share the primary guilt of that crime; the secondary guilt of which is shared by us all. A bad man, but very far from the worst; and therefore the more awful example of the crimes in which men may be entangled merely through a lack of moral stamina; for who can attest to us with such a terrible clearness as he does, how little feeble motions towards good will profit—nay, how they will serve only to deepen the damnation of those who refuse to yield obedience to them: who, seeing what is the better part, do yet for by-ends of worldly policy and convenience, and to make things safe and pleasant to themselves, shrink from the painfulness of duty, and leaving that better part, choose the worse?

R. C. Trench, Sermons in Ireland, p. 212.

Reference: Mat 27:14.—Spurgeon, Morning by Morning, p. 93.

Mat 27:19

The great practical truth which ought to be derived from the text is, that, however our actions have been foreknown and overruled by God, we shall be answerable for them, as resulting from our own will and wrought in opposition to sufficient warning and instruction.

I. It may occur to us as in some respects singular, that this vision was to Pilate’s wife, and not to Pilate himself. Why was there this indirect communication? We can only say, that this would greatly depend on points in Pilate’s character with which we have not full acquaintance, and that we are bound to conclude that God took the course which was best adapted, on the whole, to the circumstances of the case. As the supernatural message came through Pilate’s wife, there may have been furnished a double motive to the governor; in addition to obedience to the vision, there may have been the desire of pleasing the person to whom it had been granted. The attachment of Pilate to his wife may have been great; and on such a supposition, the terrors of the vision would have been more effective upon Pilate as conveyed to him through the tears and entreaties of her whom he loved, than had they burst upon him in their unearthliness, with all the demonstrations of superhuman agency.

II. Observe how greatly it increased the criminality of Pilate, that the message of his wife reached him at the very moment of his taking his place on the judgment seat. Whatever power the vision could have was brought to bear upon him at the precise moment when he most required aid; and the whole thing was ordered, so as to afford him the strongest possible assurance that it had come as a warning from God, and to afford it him when it was most likely to strengthen him to do right. We believe that the same accurate timing of warning and admonition is to be traced in the experience of all, so that, if any one would carefully observe how things fall out when he is exposed to temptation, he would find proof that God sends him seasonable aids, and disposes events to the strengthening him to resist and overcome. Certainly, if He took care that Pilate should receive a message just as he ascended the tribunal whence he would be tempted to deliver a wrong verdict; He will not leave without the appropriate assistance any of those who, being brought into perilous circumstances, are sincerely desirous to keep unsullied their Christian profession.

H. Melvill, Sermons on Less Prominent Facts, vol. ii., p. 258.

Consider:—

I. Pilate’s behaviour on the occasion of this memorable trial. Our Lord’s accusers told him that they had brought Jesus there on political grounds, because He disturbed the public peace by assuming a royal title, by inciting the people to insurrection, and by forbidding them to pay the customary tribute to Rome. This, of course, was a most transparent falsehood, and the shrewd Roman saw through it at a glance. It was absurd to suppose that an attempt to free the nation from the yoke of the foreigner could be criminal in the eyes of the Jewish Sanhedrim. There must be some deeper motive, which at present he could not fathom, for this particular proceeding. Pilate was inclined to do right, but feared to do right. At one time he thought he would follow his convictions and take the consequences. At another time these consequences seemed so appalling that he shrank from the step which would involve him in them. He hesitated, he wavered, and it was just at this very crisis of his fate that there came a supernatural impulse—a warning from Heaven that he could not have expected or hoped for to urge him in the right direction. But it was all to no purpose. The populace, instigated by their priests, chose Barabbas for pardon, howled for the death of Jesus; and the unhappy Roman governor gave way when he heard their clamour.

Consider:—

II. The Saviour’s mode of dealing with this unhappy man. It is obvious, on the very surface of the narrative, that Christ did all in His power to save Pilate from the commission of this monstrous crime. He endeavoured to awaken Pilate’s conscience, to strengthen his good resolutions, to make him understand the unspeakable importance of the circumstances in which he was placed; and we can see clearly that He produced an impression which although it did not, unhappily, lead to the desired result never passed away entirely from the mind of the Roman official. But another agency still is brought to bear upon the Roman governor, even the supernatural agency connected with the dream of his wife. We may suppose that Pilate was greatly attached to his wife. This circumstance is rendered more probable by the fact that he had brought her with him into the province, whereas to have left her behind would have been in accordance with the usual custom of the Jewish procurators. When this message comes therefore from one of whose sincerity and affection he could not for a moment stand in doubt, can it be supposed that even the words of Jesus Himself would produce a deeper effect upon the mind of this perplexed and vacillating man? I cannot but look upon this incident as the supreme Divine effort for the salvation of the sinner, as the last instrumentality which even God Himself was able to employ, the success or failure of which would decide the question of Pilate’s eternal destiny.

G. Calthrop, Penny Pulpit, No. 1,059.

References: Mat 27:19.—T. R. Stevenson, Christian World Pulpit, vol. vi., p. 14; D. G. Watt, Ibid., vol. xv., p. 366; G. T. Coster, Ibid., vol. xxviii., p. 118; Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xxviii., No. 1647; Homiletic Magazine, vol. xii., p. 246. Mat 27:20.—H. Phillips, Christian World Pulpit, vol. i., p. 478. Mat 27:20-54.—Parker, Inner Life of Christ, vol. iii., p. 248.

Mat 27:21

I. All of life is one great warfare. Every thought, word, and deed is a portion of it. All the history of our race, from Adam’s fall until our Lord, shall, at His coming, destroy Antichrist with the spirit of His mouth, is one long attempt of the evil one to set up his authority in the place of God’s, and to dispute His sovereignty over His creatures. God offers us eternity of bliss, pleasures for evermore in Him: Satan so prolongs the present with busy thoughts and schemes and anticipations, as to hide from us an eternity of woe with him. All time is one history of this one manifold choice. All throughout the whole world is one choice between God and Satan, Christ and Barabbas. We know not, indeed, what we do; and so, again and again, our blessed Lord intercedes for those who deliver Him to His foes. But whenever a choice is given, if we have but any fear that we are choosing amiss, if we do what we suspect to be wrong, or worse, if we say wilfully what we think better unsaid—what do we, in fact, but choose Barabbas?

II. We can never make any real progress in holiness, we can hardly take the very first step, we shall be constantly slipping backwards, until, by God’s mercy, we have this stamped upon our souls, that we are ever anew making, that we must in all things make, this choice. There are degrees of choice; as there were degrees and steps in the rejection of our Lord. But there is no safety against making the very worst choice, except in the fixed conscious purpose, in all things to make the best. The character deepens unconsciously; and at last, in men’s sight and but for some mighty interposition of God, it becomes fixed; because it has all along been secretly following or resisting grace, and so choosing God, or rejecting Him. Men will not think they sin; the Jews would not think that Jesus was indeed the Christ; but both crucify Him; and to persuade themselves that they do not only makes their repentance hopeless. Men desire to do things for Him, and then by some self-deceit seek to obtain for them praise of men; or they would give themselves to God’s service, and then become ambitious, as they think, to promote His glory, and end in becoming worldly. They would love God, and end in loving self. What is all this but strictly to go on the way with Jesus, lead Him into the holy city, sing hosannas to Him, and then prefer to Him Barabbas?

E. B. Pusey, Sermons for the Church’s Seasons, p. 274.

Mat 27:22

I. The Roman proconsul looks with a strange mixture of awe and surprise at the poor weary prisoner, and asks, "Art Thou a king?" His wife’s dream had warned him that there was something uncommon about this man, and he was more than willing to set Him free, for he could find no fault in Him. Pilate’s relations with Rome, however, made him afraid to risk a tumult, and so, yielding to the popular clamour which demanded His death, and which threatened to swell into a riot, Pilate delivered Jesus unto them. That was his answer to the awful question of the text.

II. The question which Pilate asked, and which he answered so fatally, is a question which we have, every one of us, still to answer. It is far more awful for us than it was for Pilate. We have to answer it with a full knowledge of what Jesus was and is. We have to answer it aided by the light of centuries streaming upon that Divine Face. So long as Christ is popular, so long as being with Him means going on safely with a rejoicing, happy multitude, there is no doubt or difficulty as to what we will do with Christ; we will gladly follow Him. But there come awful moments in every experience—the Passion Week of every life—when the Christ stands pleading before your soul. A wild, frenzied mob of passions, prejudices, indulgences, sins, raise their murderous clamour, and demand that we shall give Him up—that we shall take into our favour some other popular idol—and each of us has then to answer the question, "What shall I do then with Jesus?" We try to escape it; we endeavour to postpone it as Pilate did, by general discussions about abstract truth. Then we soothe ourselves with the thought that the words which once moved us were exaggerated; this cannot be the Christ; until some great moment of trial comes, and the earth and all that we thought solid and durable in life quakes beneath us, and a darkness, perhaps the darkness of death falls upon us; and then old sins, old decisions for evil, come forth from the graves of memory, and appear unto us, and in the agony of our souls we cry, as the terrible conviction then comes upon us: "Truly, this was the Son of God!"

T. T. Shore, The Life of the World to Come, p. 127.

Jesus Christ is on His trial again before the research and culture of the nineteenth century. The controversies which once raged round His miracles have now gathered about His Person. For acute thinkers saw it was useless to deny the supernatural, so long as Jesus Christ Himself, the great central miracle in history, passed unchallenged. And now, in this age, thoughtful man must, sooner or later, ask himself the question which Pilate put to the Jews: "What shall I do then with Jesus, which is called Christ?" And from the motley crowd of Jews and Gentiles, of friends or foes, grouped round that calm majestic figure, come the three chief answers that the human heart can give.

I. The answer of rejection. The fickle crowd cried, "Let Him be crucified." It was the cry of prejudice, of thoughtlessness, of conscious guilt. That cry finds an echo today. It is couched in less offensive language. It is clothed in the garb of poetry and philosophy, of the highest culture; the form is changed, the spirit is unaltered. It is still the answer of rejection: "Away with Him!"

II. From Pilate comes the answer of indifference. He represented the Roman society of his age, which had lost faith in religion and morality, and yet was troubled by dreams; which was at once sceptical and superstitious; whose creed had been summed up by one of its own writers in a notable saying: "There is no certainty save that there is nothing certain, and that there is nothing more wretched or more proud than man"—a nerveless, hopeless, sorrowful creed, the parent of apathy, cynicism, and unrest. Pilate is a picture of that vain and shallow indifference which is too weak to believe in the truth, and yet too fearful to deny it altogether.

III. There were some in that crowd insignificant in number, in wealth, in influence—often, alas! untrue to their own convictions—who could give a very different answer to Pilate’s question. One of them the previous night had acted as the spokesman of his brethren, when he said: "Lord, I will follow Thee to prison and to death." They were brave words, the language of a faithful and loving heart—forgotten and broken at the first blush of trial, but nobly fulfilled in after years; and they are the answer of faith.

F. J. Chavasse, Oxford and Cambridge Journal, March 2nd, 1882.

Note:—

I. The title given to Jesus in this question: "Jesus which is called Christ." How came Pilate by the knowledge of the descriptive and official title here used—"Christ"? Christ never once occurs in the language of the Jewish clerics addressed to Him, as reported in these chapters. "Christ" is not a Roman word, and it represents no idea that belongs to the Roman religion. Perhaps it was to Him only a sound; but it was a sound that had been sufficiently repeated in his hearing to get fixed in his memory, and to be regarded as connected with the name of Jesus.

II. The embarrassment that prompted the utterance of this question. When we try to trace what led up to it, our conclusion is, that it began to darkle in his heart long before it came on his lip, in fact, we seem to see it working with silent but gathering strength through all the stages of the trial. The defeat of Pilate’s attempt to find a substitute for Jesus had brought him to the last extremity. It was the custom of the Romans, at the feasts, to release a prisoner doomed to die, the people being allowed the right to name him. Pilate wished them to consider Jesus as the sentenced prisoner, but to release Him, and to take in His place a certain infamous criminal called Barabbas. This woke a furious cry of resentment. Then the question came out. Silent until now, at last it found language. His tortuous policy had no other contrivance at command, he lost himself, and did the most pitiable thing a judge can do, that is, he asked the advice of the prosecutors. In a burst of desperation he said, "What shall I do then with Jesus which is called Christ?"

III. Regard this as a present question—What shall you do to Him which is called Christ? will you be neutral? This is what Pilate tried to be. He would take, as he imagined, no part, one way or the other. He had no strong feeling in either direction, no earnestness of any kind, no animus against the accused and none against the accusers: he would only lift a protest, just to satisfy his conscience and save his honour; but would not make a strong stand on either side, and he would simply and fairly keep neutral. We know not a few who are like him. When we think of him, and of those who tread in his steps, two scenes rise before our imagination. The first scene is that of Jesus before the bar of Pilate. Pilate is neutral. The other is that of Pilate at the bar of Jesus. Hell is due; despair is due; sin has to be paid for; Jesus alone is the one constituted Saviour, and now Jesus is neutral. This is a vision: may it never be a reality.

C. Stanford, The Evening of Our Lord’s Ministry, p. 256.

Christ before Pilate—Pilate before Christ.

I. Let us try to account for the hesitation of Pilate to give up the Lord, and then for his final yielding to the clamour of the people. Why all this reluctance on his part to send Jesus to the cross? He was not usually so scrupulous. Wherefore, then, this unwonted squeamishness of conscience? It was the result of a combination of particulars, each of which had a special force of its own, and the aggregate of which so wrought on his mind that he was brought thereby to a stand. There was (1) the peculiar character of the prisoner; (2) the singular message of his wife; (3) the fatality that there seemed about the case. He had tried to roll it over on Herod, but that wily monarch sent the prisoner back upon his hands. The deeper he went into the case he discovered only the more reason for resisting the importunity of the Jews, and however he looked at it his plain duty was to set the prisoner free. Why, then, again we ask, was his perplexity? The answer is suggested by the taunt of the Jews, "If thou let this man go thou art not Cæsar’s friend." He foresaw that if he resisted the will of the rulers he would make them his enemies, and so provoke them to complain of him to the Emperor, who would then institute an inquiry into his administration of his office, and that he was not prepared to face. His past misdeeds had put him virtually into the power of those who were now so eager for the condemnation of the Christ. His guilty conscience made him a coward at the very time when most of all he wanted to be brave.

II. The question of the text is pre-eminently the question of the present age. All the controversies of our times, social, philosophical, and theological, lead up to, and find their ultimate hinge in, the answer to this inquiry, "Who is this Jesus Christ?" Those in the age who have the spirit and disposition of Pilate will anew reject Him; but those who are sincere and earnest in their inquiries will come ultimately out into the light; for "if any man be willing to do His will, he shall know of the doctrine whether it be of God."

III. And what is true of the age, as a whole, is true also of every individual to whom the Gospel is proclaimed. For each of us this is the question of questions, "What shall I do with Jesus, which is called Christ?" You cannot evade the decision, but be sure that you look at the Christ before you give Him up.

W. M. Taylor, Contrary Winds, p. 37.

References: Mat 27:22.—Contemporary Pulpit, vol. ix., p. 96; J. Fraser, University Sermons, p. 1; H. W. Beecher, Sermons (1870), p. 233; Clergyman’s Magazine, vol. i., p. 115. Spurgeon, Three Hundred Outlines from the New Testament, p. 31; New Manual of Sunday-school Addresses, p. 75. Mat 27:23-26.—Homiletic Magazine, vol. x., p. 204.

Mat 27:24

From this act of Pilate’s, I suppose, has arisen a phrase which has passed into the common language of mankind. We talk of washing our hands of a business, and we mean thereby that we will have nothing to do with it. This is exactly what Pilate meant. But there are certain situations in life where it is not possible to rid oneself of a responsibility, and Pilate was precisely placed in such a situation. Act he must, and act he did. How he desired to act the incident recorded in the text shows clearly enough. He would have given much to set our Saviour free. He went through a barren form, therefore, staining his hands with the very water wherewith he washed them, and proclaiming his own guilt even while he declared our Lord’s innocence.

I. Most persons are secretly inclined to pity rather than to blame Pilate; for his conduct gives one the notion of a man driven by circumstances to pursue a course which was contrary to his nature. I take leave to say at once that this is a mistake. Pilate’s nature is a matter of express record, and it proves to have been stubborn, pitiless, inflexible, implacable. Harsh, stern, relentless, and unfeeling he is proved by many of his known acts to have been. If we behold Pilate thus irresolute, it is not him we must pity, but the mercies of Christ which we must rather admire. We infer the calm majesty, the grand innocence, the overwhelming nobility of the Lord, that the sight of Him could fairly unnerve, and overawe, and paralyze, and perplex such a one as Pontius Pilate.

II. It is remarked by Bishop Pearson (in his book on the Creed) that it was "necessary to include the name of Pilate in our Creed: (1) that we might for ever be assured of the time when our Saviour suffered; (2) because Pilate gave a most powerful external testimony to the certainty of our Saviour’s death, and the innocency of His life; (3) that thereby we might understand how it came to pass that Christ should suffer, according to the Scriptures." But I am persuaded that there is yet another reason why the name of the Roman governor is there, and it is in order that it might be an eternal reminder to men that, with every sinful transaction the name of him who connives at it, as well as of him who commits it, is linked in God’s sight, and will be linked for ever. The contriver of an iniquity is the doer thereof, but the abetter of sin is by no means guiltless. His name is tied fast to it, and can never be disconnected from it any more.

J. W. Burgon, Ninety-one Short Sermons, No. 37.

References: Mat 27:24.—Preacher’s Monthly, vol. ii., p. 115; vol. iii., p. 213; W. M. Taylor, Three Hundred Outlines from the New Testament, p. 32.

Mat 27:24-25

The Character of Pilate.

I. There is nothing in the Gospel account of Pilate which is repugnant to the representation of Philo and Josephus. A man of the world without principle is described in both. Nowhere can we fasten on Pilate one single conviction, whether moral or religious. When he came in contact with firm belief in others he was utterly perplexed. When the Jews had remonstrated against bringing the effigies of Cæsar into the city he threatened them with instant death; but the Jewish historian tells us that they bared their throats to the sword, saying, "Death is better than that our laws should be broken," and the weak spirit was overcome by a courage so unintelligible—how could men be willing to die upon a question of images?—and he laid his cruel threats aside, not without admiration, and carried back the obnoxious ensigns to Cæsarea. For ten years he managed to govern the most stubborn people of all the tributaries of the Empire, for a master hard to please. Perhaps from the Roman point of view he had merits as a governor. Where he saw his way clearly he was firm. His cruelty and harshness appeared, perhaps, the best means of restraining a most turbulent race, and so were adopted deliberately. Pilate was a man, then, devoted to his own profession, doing his best to satisfy the master whom he served, and hoping to be rewarded in time with a higher command. But the Jews knew well the weak point in his position, and the power which it gave them over him: "If thou let this man go thou art not Cæsar’s friend."

II. Instead of thinking the Roman governor a monster without parallel, I am persuaded that characters of that type are the commonest that can be found. The man who, much occupied in his own worldly engagements, becomes convinced, by some means of God’s sending, that Christ is truly the Son of God and our Redeemer, yet has not the moral courage to take that truth home to his heart, and let it fashion all his life without regard to what others may say of him, is that a character hard to discover? To say "I find no fault in him," to wash the hands from participation in His blood, to set up over Him "The King of the Jews," and refuse to take it down—such was the Christianity of Pilate; and I fear that many men go no farther. If, from the fear of being singular, we dare not follow Him whom we know to have the right to lead us, then Pilate’s sin is repeating itself in us.

Archbishop Thomson, Lincoln’s Inn Sermons, p. 47.

References: Mat 27:24, Mat 27:25.—Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xxviii., No. 1648; H. W. Beecher, Sermons, 1st series, p. 92.

Mat 27:24-31

Behold the Man.

I. Behold the Man, and see who He is. We see that He is a real and actual man. Men had been on the outlook for that Son of God who should come down in the likeness of man. Perhaps no one expected that the Coming One would prove to be a real man; perhaps even the Jews, to whom pertained the oracles of God, rejected that idea as incongruous and mean, and thought that no hint could be found that Jehovah would ever dwell among them in the nature of such humanity as they could yet imagine; but all expected Him "in the likeness of man." At last He came. "Behold the Man."

II. Behold the Man, and see the tokens of His sorrow. (1) See in these tokens inflictions meant to express contemptuous rejection. (2) See in these sufferings, the tokens of which Christ bore upon Him, some of the sufferings that He volunteered to endure for us men, and for our salvation.

III. Behold the Man, and decide upon what you mean to do. Decide whether you will vote, or not vote, for his crucifixion, was Pilate’s meaning. That question was settled instantly, but the words are used now to quicken your decision on questions of infinite moment still pending. (1) Behold Him, and say whether you will trust your souls with Him or not. Make sure against mistakes on a question so vital as this. Consult the book which is the only verbal authority on the question, the only ultimate standard by which you can decide all controversies in relation to it; resolve to act on what that book declares, and say, will you trust Jesus Christ only, or not? There is not a moment left for trying experiments or making delays. The present life is but "a comma in the endless volume of eternity," and to some of you but a fraction of this life remains. If there be any other foundation on which to build, build upon it; if there be any other name given under heaven, in which you may safely trust for your salvation, trust in that favourite name; if there be any other and any better refuge, fly to it; but if not, at once behold as your one undivided object of trust the Saviour whom we preach. (2) Behold Him, and settle whether you will take Him for your example or not. "Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that we should follow His steps."

C. Stanford, Evening of our Lord’s Ministry, p. 289.

Mat 27:26-51

(with Mar 15:15-37)

Christ on the Cross.

Christ on the Cross is our subject. You know His history, And when you read, "The people stood beholding" you will be ready to add, "And no wonder." Here, before their eyes, was the tragic consummation of a life that was begotten by the Holy Ghost, born of a virgin, and signalized at its birth by the homage of both heaven and earth.

I. His nature was singularly complete. No one of the constitutional temperaments usually distinctive and characteristic of other men is seen in Him, for all of them are resolved in the perfect completeness of His manhood.

II. This completeness of nature displays itself in a corresponding harmony of life. Though of Jewish birth, He was free from bigotry and wedded to no class opinions. In His life there was no excess nor defect, no exaggeration nor narrowness. It presents a complete sphere of beautiful virtue and devout piety, in which all qualities find room for equable adjustment and contribute to an intenser harmony.

III. Notwithstanding such an inward fulness of perfect being, but indeed because of it, His life was full of grief and trouble; His countenance was marred; He was a man of sorrows; grief was His acquaintance, for while His own soul was clear as a morning without clouds, He ever shared the lot of those who sat in darkness, that He might lessen their gloom. He lived not to Himself, but gave His life in service to all.

IV. What think we of Him? Who can doubt that among all the sons of men He only is the Son of man, humanity’s root and flower; that in Him all men are united in their ground and Head? But if among the sons of men He only is the Son of man, it can only be because, among all the sons of God, He only is the Son of God, embodying and representing the fulness and glory of God as He embodies and represents the fulness and glory of man. Let us learn to regard His death as sin’s great act, as the culminating deed of sinful development in the world’s history. The spiritual and worldly powers unite to crucify the Holy One of God. The cross of Christ is a revelation of the sin and guilt of the whole world. But, wonder of wonders! if it is sin’s great act, it is also sin’s great cure. The cross, which is a monument of the world’s doom, is also a standard of the world’s deliverance.

W. Pulsford, Trinity Church Sermons, p. 119.

Mat 27:29

Jesus and Tiberius.

I. Consider the equity of mankind, which was at the same moment awarding to Jesus derision, torture, death, and to Tiberius the most servile and adulatory homage. The equity of mankind, did I say? May we with reverence ascend higher than mankind, and without impeaching the righteousness of the Supreme, ask why His lightnings were not despatched to calcine that Roman despot, and why legions of angels did not descend upon the Prætorium of Pontius to rescue Jesus from His executioners? Why do success and honour wait thus obsequiously upon vice, while holiness encounters only failure and contempt? Is this earth the workmanship and property of One in whom mercy and righteousness meet together? or is it the plaything of some malign power who delights only in obliquity, incongruity, and paradox?

II. What the vulgar world counts ignominious and of low esteem is not the measure of real and moral greatness, or of real and supreme happiness. Look for a moment at the scene especially presented to us in the narrative of the agony in Gethsemane; the cruelty in the Prætorium; the tragedy upon the cross; the burial in the Arimathean’s garden; and then pass to that august day when the conscience of all nations shall be brought before the judgment-seat of Christ. Here, then, with what a different tone it is exclaimed, "Hail, King of the Jews!" Yes; Hail, King of Jew, and King of Gentile, and King of all humanity! It was Thou who didst first reveal to us a universal Father of compassion, a compassion wider than the east is from the west; it was Thou who didst teach us that though He sits upon a throne in heaven, He permits us also to receive Him as a guest into our hearts; it was Thou who, by sealing upon the cross the truths which have redeemed mankind, hast won a name which is above every name, and at which every knee must bow.

W. H. Brookfield, Sermons, p. 216.

References: Mat 27:29.—Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xx., No. 1168; Ibid., My Sermon Notes: Gospels and Acts, p. 53; F. W. Brown, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xix., p. 270; Preacher’s Monthly, vol. x., p. 85; G. Brooks, Five Hundred Outlines of Sermons, p. 406; Homiletic Quarterly; vol. vi., p. 212. Mat 27:32.—T. Gasquoine, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xviii., p. 85. Mat 27:35.—Preacher’s Monthly, vol. i., p. 294; B. J. Snell, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xxiv., p. 372; Case, Short Practical Sermons, p. 104.

Mat 27:32

I. We could not spare this incident; it would leave a gap in the evangelical histories, which it would be quite beyond our power to fill. We have indeed evidence that Christ could hunger and thirst and be weary—and all such evidence is precious, as testifying to the real humanity of the Saviour. But, nevertheless, the evidence is far from being considerable; and if you set it against the account of a crucifixion, in which there is not the least proof that any pain was felt, you might find it hard to furnish a convincing demonstration that Christ suffered in the body like one of ourselves. But the text gives evidence enough to assure the most doubtful that He is verily a man, with all a man’s susceptibilities, His consciousness of pain, His capacity of being tortured. For as He came out from the city, bearing His cross, so worn down was He by His sufferings, so faint with loss of blood, so exhausted by fatigue, that even His remorseless enemies either pitied Him or feared that He would die before He was crucified; the soldiers "found a man of Cyrene, Simon by name, and him they compelled to bear His cross."

II. We can hardly doubt that an event, which has apparently so much significance, was designed to be received by us as a parable, and interpreted as a lesson to the Church. What the Saviour had spoken of, and what He had enjoined, was simply the bearing of the cross—the performing duties and the submitting to endurances, from which nature might be adverse, but which were appointed unto those who would gain eternal life. He had not spoken of His own cross as that which His disciples were to carry; but now, before He departs from the world, He would teach them that they must not only bear some cross or other, if they would follow Him to glory, but that very cross which He carried Himself. Many a cross is of our own manufacture, our troubles are often but the consequences of our sins, and we may not dignify these by supposing them the cross which is to distinguish the Christian. Crosses they may be, but they are not the cross which was laid upon Simon, and which had first been on Christ. He alone bears Christ’s cross who suffers in His cause, who has troubles to endure simply because he is a Christian.

H. Melvill, Sermons on Less Prominent Facts, vol. ii., p. 208.

Mat 27:36

The lessons that the incident teaches us may be very simply gathered together.

I. First we infer from this the old truth of how ignorant men are of the real meaning and outcome of what they do. These four Roman soldiers were foreigners; I suppose they could not speak a word to a man in that crowd. They had plenty of practice in crucifying Jews. It was part of their ordinary work in these troublesome times, and this was just one more. They went back to their barracks stolid and unconcerned, and utterly ignorant of what they had been about. Well, now, so are we all, though in less extreme fashion. No man knows the real meaning, and none of us know the possible issues and outcome, of a great part of our lives. We are like people sowing seed in the dark; it is put into our hands, and we sow. We do the deed; this end of it is in our power, but where it runs out to, and what will come of it, lie far beyond our ken.

II. Take another very simple and equally plain lesson from this incident; viz., the limitation of responsibility by knowledge. These men were ignorant of what they were doing, and therefore they were guiltless. Christ said that Himself: "They know not what they do." But it is marvellous to observe that while the people that stood round the cross, and were associated in the act that led Jesus there, had all degrees of responsibility, the least guilty of the whole were the men that did the actual work of nailing Him to the cross, and lifting it with Him upon it. As knowledge and light rise and fall, so responsibility rises and falls along with them.

III. The last lesson is, How possible it is to look at Christ on the cross and see nothing.

A. Maclaren, Christian Commonwealth, August 5th, 1886.

References: Mat 27:36.—New Outlines on the New Testament, p. 18; Lefroy, Literary Churchman, Sermons, p. 96; Clergyman’s Magazine, vol. xii., p. 148.

Mat 27:39-40

The First Effect of the Crucifixion.

Let us—

I. Identify the persons who uttered this taunt. They were, I think, not like the other people present, there on purpose for the show; no idlers, no loiterers, no sightseers were they. They were bound for the city, and we may fairly assume that they were bound on business. We are not directly told that they were the persons elsewhere spoken of as the buyers and sellers in the Temple, but that they were so is a fair and almost inevitable inference from recorded facts.

II. Recall the speech of Christ which had given these revilers such deep offence. The Lamb of God was the Son of God, and therefore Lord of the Temple. This He declared Himself to be. It was no unsustained assertion; the supernatural power put forth, both in what He said and what He did, proved it. These men now remembered His words in answer to their former demand for a sign, "Destroy this temple, and I will build it again in three days." In the sudden light of hell fire they saw that these words might be so reported as to secure His conviction for a capital offence. They had no time personally to work the contrivance, but there hung about the doorways vile creatures who would swear to anything for money, and two of these they paid to be ready when called upon to swear thus: "This fellow said, I am able to destroy the Temple of God, and to build it in three days."

III. See how these men turned this speech of Christ into ridicule. They exulted to see Him on the cross. They were not afraid that He could hurt them now. It was perfectly safe to insult that which was dying on a cross, therefore they insulted the Sufferer, and this was the spirit of their terrible mirth, "Come down from the cross, if you can! You cast us out of the Temple twice; cast us out again."

IV. Observe that just at the time when this saying was being ridiculed it was being verified. All was coming to pass just as He had said, He had never said, "I will destroy this temple;" when He said "Destroy it" the force of the word was declarative rather than imperative, and He only intimated that if they did, or when they did, destroy His body, He would raise it again in three days. The first part of the oracle was now being fulfilled; the body was being destroyed. The second part was to be fulfilled in three days.

V. Observe the indifference to the death of Christ which these words imply. These men had their fling at the Crucified One; but the crucifixion was no business of theirs; their business was in the city. Jesus heard the men fling their taunt, saw them pass by, and was hurt because they had no pity for themselves. The words of the prophet express the spirit of Jesus, His spirit then, His spirit now, "Is it nothing to you that pass by?"

C. Stanford, Voices from Calvary, p. 71.

Mat 27:40

The First Prayer to the Crucified One.

I. Think of the speech as spoken by those who were passing by. Their complete phrase was, "If thou be the Son of God, come down from the cross." It was no easy thing for these men to believe that Christ was the Son of God. When they had been in His congregation they saw that sure enough He was a man. A man’s foot flashed out that wet print in the sand; a man’s voice lived in His lips; it was a man’s tear that they saw glisten. Now, pointing to that which was on the cross, whatever were the words they actually uttered, the language of their spirit was, "Look at that! is the Godhead under that veil of horror? is it likely?" "Come down from the cross," they cried, and in that cry they dared Him to come down.

II. Think of this challenge as spoken by the leaders of the people. It is plain that their minds were not easy. The mental questions would arise, "Have we gone too far? Is it possible that we have made a tremendous mistake? What if, after all, this should be the Christ of God, the King of Israel?" To keep down their doubts, to keep up their courage, they drew together in close conference, and talked one to another in answer to unspoken language of horrible misgiving and surmise. "Is that the Saviour? He cannot save Himself—that the King! He is not even King over that cross."

III. Think of the cry as spoken by the soldiers. For them the word "Christ" was jargon; the word "Israel" had no meaning; but the word "King" roused them to a rough and terrible play. To them it was rare sport to make believe that this was a coronation day, and grimly ridiculous to speak of a king crowned with thorns, and nailed upon his throne; and they, therefore, caught up the banter, and joined in the chorus of infamy.

IV. Think of this cry as joined in by one, if not both, of the malefactors. It is at least certain that one of the dying men struck in with the cruel cry. A storm of voices rang out the call, "Come down from the cross." The only answer to this exasperating demand was a kingly expressive silence. (1) It was the silence of power; (2) the silence of intensity in resistance of temptation; (3) He was silent because it was a moral impossibility that He should have come down from the cross; (4) it was the silence of One who was doing a great work, and who would not stop to answer trivial words about it.

C. Stanford, Voices from Calvary, p. 93.

Mat 27:42

The Patience of Christ on the Cross.

I. It was a cruel aggravation of the sufferings of our blessed Lord to heap reproaches on His head, even after His enemies had secured His condemnation. Their revilings proved their malice. As to the motives of their conduct, Nature seems to plead with us for them, that such inhuman cruelty was not their own by nature. The truth is, they were not their own masters; they were the ministers of Satan. They had so wilfully indulged their deadly temper that they were given over to Satan, and in these words, "Come down from the cross," they were uttering the wish of Satan.

II. And here, again, is a terrible lesson! All mankind shall minister to the glory of God—some by receiving His saving mercy, some by falling under His awful judgment. Have you ever thought of the meaning of these words in the Proverbs, "The Lord hath made all things for Himself; yea, even the wicked for the day of evil?" Christ had taken upon Himself the work of the atonement, and He would not put it down till it was finished. Think how sublime is His patience. He was deserted by His friends, surrounded by His enemies. With one movement of His limbs He could have loosened the nails, and stepped upon the earth, and made it shake with the tread of angels’ feet. But they cried on, and louder, "Come down from the cross." He seems as one that is deaf and does not hear. It was not His Divine nature, impassive and insensible of temptation, but His strong human purpose of obedience, that was the secret of His undeviating patience. Human nature in His person felt the force of counter attractions and overcame them; it swerved not from its single purpose.

III. The transcendent result of this patience is, of course, the perfection of the atonement; but there is another, worthy of all consideration. Observe the repose and tranquillity which result from patience. Around our Lord there were confused cries and restless tormenting questionings; but He was calm and serene, because He had a single purpose and was patient. The depth of His repose you may attempt to conjecture by His sublime silence, by the calmness of His speech when His lips moved, by His unselfish regard for others. He let the order of Eternal Wisdom take its course; He never interrupted it. He had come for one purpose, only to fulfil it; and while heaven and hell met in conflict, and the earth shook with the concussion, He was calm, and gentle, and full of peace.

C. W. Furse, Sermons at Richmond, p. 32.

References: Mat 27:42.—Clergyman’s Magazine, vol. iv., p. 89; Homiletic Quarterly, vol. iii., p. 267; Ibid., vol. v. p. 159; H. G. Robinson, Man in the Image of God, p. 139; Christian World Pulpit, vol. xxx., p. 245.

Mat 27:42-43

The Mockers at the Cross.

I. The first remark that strikes me as deducible from the whole of these words before us is this, that Christ’s cross apparently shatters to fragments Christ’s claims. Either Jesus Christ died and rose again from the dead, and then He is the Son of God, as He claimed to be; or He died like other men, and there is an end of it. And then it is of no use to talk about Him as a wise teacher and a lovely perfect character; He is a fanatical enthusiast, all the beauty of whose religious teaching is marred and spoiled by the extravagant personal claims which He attached to it. We must dismiss the fair dream of a perfect Man, unless we are prepared to go farther, and say an incarnate God. The cross of Christ shatters the claims of Christ, except He be risen from the dead and exalted to the right hand of God.

II. "He saved others; Himself He cannot save." The cross of Christ is a necessity, to which He voluntarily submitted in order to save a world. These men only needed to alter one letter to be grandly and gloriously right. If instead of "could not," they had said "would not," they would have grasped the very heart of the power, and the very central brightness of the glory of Christianity. It was His own will, and no outward necessity, that fastened Him there; and that will was kept steadfast and immovable by nothing else but His love. He Himself fixed the iron chain which bound Him.

III. The cross is the throne of Christ. In one aspect His death is the lowest point of His humiliation; in another it is the highest point of His glorifying. In one aspect it is His stooping to the lowliest condition of the lowly whom He would serve; in another it is, as He called it Himself, the hour in which "the Son of man shall be glorified."

IV. The concluding taunt here gives us another thought, viz., that the death of Christ is the great proof that God had delight in Him. Christ’s faith never reached a higher energy than it did in that solemn and mysterious moment when it blended with the sense of desolation in that cry, "My God, My God, why hast Thou forsaken Me?" and God’s delight in His well-beloved Son reached its highest energy in the same moment when He became obedient unto death.

A. Maclaren, Christian Commonwealth, Nov. 12th, 1885.

Mat 27:45

Good Friday and its Lessons.

There are two outward incidents recorded in connection with the story of the crucifixion which always impress the mind with a sense of solemnity: one is the rending of the veil of the Temple, the other is the darkness which is recorded to have passed over the face of the land. I propose to say a few words on the dark shadow which belongs to the best of things. We must not be discouraged if we find that the Divine light, coming into the world of human mist and darkness, has itself been at times obscured by that darkness; and now on this great day, this supreme trial of the Christian faith, it might have seemed that Christianity had turned out to be a failure. The grandest career, the holiest cause that ever dawned upon the earth, had ended not in a splendid triumph, but in a dismal ignominious defeat. What, then, do we learn from this?

I. The first lesson is patience and perseverance. We must be patient with others if they stumble in this darkness, if they do not at once find their way towards the truth. There is a darkness of the light for the whole earth, or at least a shadow of suspense and of waiting in which it may well be that some shall find it their first duty to stand and wait, for whom Luther’s text and motto is their best decree, "In silence and in hope shall be our strength."

II. And secondly, the darkness of Good Friday at the cross of Calvary is a likeness of the opposition which each one of us ought to be and will be called to face in doing his duty. Those only can avoid offence who shrink from their appointed tasks, who yield to everything, and who so pass out of life without being spoken against because they never will be spoken of at all. "No cross, no crown;" that is to say, if there is no effort there will be no result worth having.

III. The darkness of the dismal tragedy of the Crucifixion, combined with what followed, reminds us of this yet further consoling truth: Failures are not perpetual failures. Good Friday was a failure as regarded all outward appearance, but after it came Easter Day, and Easter Day was a complete contrasting success.

A. P. Stanley, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xvii., p. 193.

Reference: Mat 27:45.—Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xxxii., No. 1896.

Mat 27:45-46

The Cry from the Depths.

I. We have to speak about the darkness. Note (1) that it was a darkness which science is unable to explain. It was not the darkness of night, for it began at twelve o’clock in the day. It was not the darkness of an eclipse, for it was then full moon, and it is only at the new moon that eclipses of the sun can take place. (2) The darkness was in keeping with the cry which at this time hung over the Redeemer’s spirit. God was pleased to make Nature visibly sympathize with the passion of His Son. The crowning crime of men, the crime of killing the Prince of Life, and so of casting out the Lord of Nature from His own world, was not to pass without some expostulation of Nature itself against it. (3) Regard the darkness at the Crucifixion as a sign from God, intended not only to mark the importance of the event transpiring, but to work upon the consciences of the crucifiers before the deed was done.

II. We have now to speak about the cry. (1) What was there in this cry different from any other dying cry? We must take choice of two alternatives; one is that the cry came from a faintness of heart that was unworthy of a man, the other that it came from feeling a mystery of sinbearing, unfathomable and Divine. That was the cup "tasted," the cup for the passing away of which from Him, if it were possible, He prayed, and to the drinking of which, if the Will required it, He solemnly devoted Himself. (2) The cry had been foretold. The exclamation, "My God, My God, why hast Thou forsaken Me?" is the first verse, and sounds the very key-note, of the 22nd Psalm. Regarding that psalm as a prophecy of Christ’s thoughts while on the cross, we may fairly regard this verse as indicating the thought that would then have first place and power in the great Atoner’s mind. (3) In this cry we have the perfect example of trust in trial. Just then, when He was being crucified in weakness, His cry was "My Strength, My Strength." Although in that hour of darkness He does not utter that happy cry "My Father," He, as the perfect Man, clung fast to his Rock, held on through all the blows of the waves and billows; and even in this short burst of language in agony applied to God the word "My" twice over, appropriating the "Living Strength" as His very own.

C. Stanford, Voices from Calvary, p. 159.

References: Mat 27:45, Mat 27:46.—New Outlines on the New Testament, p. 23. Mat 27:45, Mat 27:51.—Ibid., p. 23.

Mat 27:46

"Why hast Thou forsaken Me?" May we dare to answer that desolate cry? may we presume to take up the question and say, "Lord, it was for us men, and for our salvation?"

I. First, that we might learn what sin is, how deadly, to cause Thy suffering; how hateful in the sight of God, that Thou shouldest feel Thyself forsaken of Him for so much as coming nigh to it, even to bear and to destroy it.

II. Secondly, that we might know how entirely Thou didst take and carry it—yea, for an Apostle has said it—didst even become sin; that we might feel it gone, and in our new freedom might even, as the same holy Apostle has said, become righteousness in Thee.

III. Thirdly, that we might distinguish between the feeling and the reality of God’s desertion; that we might learn, in Thee, to trust Him even when we cannot see, even when we are out of the sunshine of His smile, in the shadow of that spiritual solitude which is darker, yea, darker far, than the valley of death itself.

IV. And so, finally, that we might be made willing, if need be, even to die thus; even to be made like Thee in Thy uttermost desolation, when, with the sins of a world upon Thee, and with tenfold need of the brightest ray from heaven to make the load endurable, Thou wast called to taste death itself in darkness, teaching us that it is not comfort, but safety, not the consciousness, but the reality of God’s love, which is indispensable; that as there is of course no merit, so neither is there always any advantage, in that confidence of acceptance, in that serenity of hope, in that broad daylight of assurance which some make the essence of faith or the whole of religion.

C. J. Vaughan, Words from the Cross, p. 43.

Mat 27:46

Consider the nature of our Lord’s spiritual cross. It was the being brought under all the conditions of a sinner, though Himself without sin. Sin tried upon Him all its powers, first to lure, afterwards to destroy. As for instance—

I. He was tempted by direct suggestions of evil. The approaches of the wicked one were made to the will of the Son of God, with the design of withdrawing the consent of His pure soul from His heavenly Father. They were a thousandfold more hateful and harrowing than the falsehood of His suborned accusers, or the scourging of His sinless flesh.

II. Again, He suffered a perpetual unmingled sorrow for the sins of men. Doubtless the destinies of His Church on earth stood like a lowering horizon behind the Mount of Crucifixion. The rents and wounds of His mystical body already pierced His spirit; and the false kiss which the world should give, to the betrayal of His Church; and the afflictions of His saints, and the tyranny of the strong, and the pampered self-pleasing of soft spirits, and the plagues of worldliness, and the foreseen apostasy of the latter days—all these dwelt heavily on Him to whom all things to come are as things that are.

III. And once more: He suffered throughout we know not how large a portion of His whole life the natural fear of death and of His coming agony. We know with what a piercing strength the first glimpses of a coming sorrow shoot in upon us; how they chequer our whole life, and overshadow all things; how sad thoughts glance off from all we do, or say, or listen to; how the mind converts everything into its own feeling and master-thought. Perhaps our keenest sufferings are in sudden recollections, remote associations, indirect hints, words, tones, little acts of unconscious friends. And even so it was with Him. When a lowly woman anointed Him with ointment He saw in it the preparation for the grave.

IV. And as the chief of all His sorrows, He suffered we know not what darkness of soul upon the cross. He was made sin for us.

There is one more truth we may learn from what has been said. I mean, what necessity there is that all should be thus crucified with Him. Suffering is sharp and piercing, but it cleanses, purifies; it puts in the sharper lines and the deeper colouring; it is as the shadow of His crown of thorns.

H. E. Manning, Sermons, vol. i., p. 258.

References: Mat 27:46.—Contemporary Pulpit, vol. ix., p. 168; J. Keble, Sermons for Holy Week, p. 264; G. Macdonald, Unspoken Sermons, 1st series, p. 163. Mat 27:46, Mat 27:47.—Homiletic Magazine, vol. xii., p. 142.

Mat 27:50

(with Joh 19:30)

I. The words "It is finished" are an expression of relief. Who can rightly conceive what a relief to Jesus, in His perfect human nature, it was to have passed through all His appointed sufferings? How much was finished when His course of suffering came to an end! (1) There was all the pain which His holy soul endured from the nearness of the world’s corruption, and from the virulence of the world’s hatred. (2) The words express His sense of relief from the assaults of the powers of darkness. (3) They express His sense of relief from all He suffered in His experience of the wrath of God.

II. These words express an anticipation of satisfying rest. Between Him and the actual enjoyment in human nature of the rest awaiting Him in the Father’s house there was yet the act of dying. But His eye looked, as to something very near, to the "joy set before Him." On that very day His soul was to be in Paradise, and in continuation of this there stretched eternally before His view what awaited Him as "the Lamb who was slain," in the rest, the blessedness, and the glory of a place "in the midst of the throne of God." In an anticipation of this, so near, there was present rest to His human soul. There was rest to Him also in the results of the work which He finished on the cross.

III. These words are a shout of triumph. The very finishing of the work of Christ, apart from its design and results, was a victory. (1) "Through death He destroyed him that had the power of death, that is the devil." (2) He in His death triumphed over sin. (3) He won a triumph over the world. (4) He knew that in the moment when His spirit was gone out of His body, to it death should be for ever past, and that His death should be the death of the death of all His people. (5) He could bear to think of His body being laid in the grave, after His soul had passed into Paradise; for such was His view of His victory over the grave that He could not in the near prospect of it but raise a shout of triumph.

IV. These words are a "joyful sound." (1) They convey the joyful news that the great work of redemption is completed. (2) They tell us that the everlasting covenant is sealed, and that if we come to Christ we shall obtain, on the ground of His finished work, a right to all its blessings. (3) They tell us that you can find in Christ a right to victory over every enemy.

J. Kennedy, Sermons, No. 29.

Mat 27:51

The rending of the veil proclaims—(1) that man, as man, has access to the heavenly temple; (2) that the powers of the world to come have entered into and possessed man and his world; (3) the final overthrow and abolition of death.

J. Baldwin Brown, The Sunday Afternoon, p. 386.

Reference: Mat 27:51.—Spurgeon, Morning by Morning, p. 110.

Mat 27:51-54

The Language of the Signs.

I. The earthquake. This was—(1) a sign wrought by the direct and unusual interposition of the Creator. (2) It was a sign to alarm men, on account of the capital crime which they had just committed. There is no such alarum as an earthquake. When thunder is travelling under foot, when the ground opens and shuts, when great pits suddenly yawn in the heaving floor, and make massive walls topple on to it, then "the heart meditates terror, and is moved out of its place." To shake the hearts, to shake the conscience, to shake up men from the dull dream of a sense-bound existence did God shake the earth, in the moment when man had just crucified His Son. (3) The earthquake was a sign by which God called attention to the Divine work, which, through the medium of the human work, had just been done. (4) The earthquake was a sign through which God caused the earth to pay royal honour to Jesus, when Jesus died. (5) The earthquake may furnish an illustration of the power that is to work wonders in connection with the cross of Christ.

II. The rent veil. (1) The rending of the veil was, as it was intended to be, the sign which the Jews noticed first. To them, as Jews, the earthquake, in comparison, was a mere nothing; they forgot the earthquake when they thought of the veil. (2) The rending of the veil was a sign that the Jewish dispensation was now, by God’s own act, abolished. (3) The rending of the veil was a sign showing that now, by the death of Christ, there was a revelation of the mystery hid from ages. (4) The rent veil was a sign by which God declared that a free right of way into the Holiest was henceforth open to all.

III. The sign next in order was seen in the opening of the graves and the rising of the dead. Who were these that were raised? What was it precisely that happened at the moment of the Lord’s death? It is vain to conjecture, but at least the miracle teaches how, by the work of Calvary, Christ has power and authority to reconquer from the grasp of death the life that He once created.

IV. There is another sign to study in connection with the death of Christ, and that is the effect of these foregoing signs on the centurion and his companions. The only man who dared to give Jesus His Divine title was one of the soldiers who were the first sinners for whom He had offered the prayer, "Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do."

C. Stanford, Voices from Calvary, p. 233.

References: Mat 27:55, Mat 27:56.—Homiletic Quarterly, vol. iii., p. 230; Parker, Inner Life of Christ, vol. iii., p. 258. Mat 27:57-60.—S. Leathes, Truth and Life, p. 175.

Mat 27:57-66

Buried with Christ.

I. There was an old heathen philosophy that taught deadness to this world; it required the thorough laying aside of all human feelings and passions; but what it inculcated partook of that awful and dread calm which nature itself derives from the grave of man; it had nothing of the peace which the Christian learns by the tomb of Christ, wherein there is release from sin by dying with His death, and in those fruits of righteousness wherein God still works, while He gives rest. There Christ, being dead, yet speaketh, while by His Spirit He quickeneth our mortal bodies. The world invites us to live to it; philosophy bids us to be dead to the world, but Christianity adds, in order that we may live to God. We are not only to be dead with Christ, but to learn of Him and live with Him, if we would find His rest for the soul.

II. Though the Christian be dead to the world, and so really unharmed by it, yet the world will not be dead towards him. This is a great and important truth. The world at this time and at all times lies upon the Church of God like a heavy and oppressive weight, that would stifle and crush it if it could. It is so in the great public at large, as you will find in popular assemblies, in the books and daily records which speak its voice. It is the Pharisee again and again, consulting with Pilate, and speaking of "that deceiver." And the weak Christian is harassed, angry, yet half-ensnared by it, and often shaken in his opinions and his conduct; for the world itself, even in its enmity, seems to be half-Christian, for it says, "That deceiver saith, I will rise again." Though unwilling, it bears testimony; and from a kind of uneasiness and fear which lies deep within it is urged to deeds of ill-will and enmity, and this is a trial to the love and faith of good but over-anxious disciples, because it seems to dishonour their Lord. But our blessed Saviour seems from the sepulchre to say, "Stand still, and see the salvation of God." What is desirable is not merely that we should not be troubled, but seeing, as in the history of this day, how God is bringing good out of evil, and making all things work together for the good of those that love Him, that we should adore His unsearchable judgments, that with love and wonder we should wait for Him, "more than they that watch for the morning."

I. Williams, Sermons on the Epistles and Gospels, vol. i., p. 386.

References: Mat 27:57-66.—Clergyman’s Magazine, vol. ii., p. 210. Mat 27:61.—Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xxiv., No. 1404; Preacher’s Monthly, vol. vii., p. 56. Mat 27:62-64.—Ibid., p. 273. Mat 27:66.—J. Keble, Sermons on Various Occasions, p. 509; Clergyman’s Magazine, vol. iv., p. 224. Matt 27—Homiletic Quarterly, vol. i., p. 60; R. S. Candlish, Scripture Characters and Miscellanies, p. 75.

The Sermon Bible, ed. William Robertson Nicoll (1888–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

The foregoing chapter gave us an account of Judas’s treason, in delivering our Saviour into the hands of the chief priests unto Pontius Pilate, the Roman governor, in order to his arraignment and condemnation.

Whence observe, that it has been the old policy of corrupt church governors to abuse the power of the civil magistrate, in executing their cruel and unjust censures upon holy and innocent persons. The chief priests and elders do not kill our Saviour themselves, but they deliver him over to the secular power, and desire Pilate, the civil magistrate, to sentence and condemn him, which soon after we shall find he did. They bound him, and led him away; but what need was there of binding him, that never made any resistance? And O, what ingratitude was it to bind him with cords, who came to unloose those bands of sins wherewith we were bound.

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

J. W. McGarvey's The Fourfold Gospel [CXXVIII. Third Stage of Jewish Trial].

CXXVIII. THIRD STAGE OF JEWISH TRIAL. JESUS FORMALLY CONDEMNED BY THE SANHEDRIN AND LED TO PILATE. (Jerusalem. Friday after dawn.) aMATT. XXVII. 1, 2; bMARK XV. 1; cLUKE XXII. 66-23:1; dJOHN XVIII. 28.

a1 Now when morning was come, c66 And as soon as it was day, bstraightway cthe assembly of the [702] elders of the people was gathered together, both chief priests and scribes; and they led him away into their council, aall the chief priests and bwith the elders aof the people band scribes, and the whole council, held a consultation, and atook counsel against Jesus to put him to death [Since blasphemy was by no means a criminal offense among the Romans, the Sanhedrin consulted together and sought for some charge of which the Romans would take notice. As we follow their course it will become evident to us that they found no new ground of accusation against Jesus, and, failing to do so, they decided to make use of our Lord's claim to be the Christ by so perverting it as to make him seem to assert an intention to rebel against the authority of Rome]: csaying, 67 If thou art the Christ, tell us. But he said unto them, If I tell you, ye will not believe [as experience had already proven-- Joh_8:59, Joh_10:31]: 68 and if I ask i you, ye will not answer. [Thus Jesus protests against the violence and injustice of his trial. His judges were asking him whether he was the Christ without any intention of investigating the truth of his claim, but merely for the purpose of condemning him by unwarrantedly assuming that he was not the Christ. They therefore asked in an unlawful spirit as well as in an unlawful manner. Jesus had a good right to ask them questions tending to confirm his Christhood by the Scripture, but had he done so they would not have answered-- Mat_22:41-45. Jesus appeals to them to try the question as to who he was, but they insist on confining the inquiry as to who he claimed to be, assuming that the claim was false.] 69 But from henceforth shall the Son of man be seated at the right hand of the power of God. [See p. 698.] 70 And they all said, Art thou then the Son of God? And he said unto them, Ye say that I am. [The Hebrew mode of expression, equivalent to "Ye say it, because I am."] 71 And they said, What further need have we of witness? for we ourselves have heard from his own mouth. [Thus they unconsciously admit their lack of evidence against Jesus.] [703] 1 And the whole company of them rose up, a2 and they bound bJesus, and carried aled him away, d28 They lead Jesus therefore from Caiaphas into the Praetorium: cand brought him before Pilate. band delivered him up to Pilate. athe governor. dand it was early; [The Sanhedrin could try and could condemn, but could not put to death without the concurring sentence of the Roman governor. To obtain this sentence, they now lead Jesus before Pilate in the early dawn, having made good use of their time.]

[FFG 702-704]

J. W. McGarvey (with Philip Y. Pendleton), Commentaries on the New Testament (The Fourfold Gospel, 1914; Acts; and the epistles) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

Matthew Chapter 27

After this (chap. 27), the unhappy priests and heads of the people deliver up their Messiah to the Gentiles, as He had told His disciples. Judas, in despair under Satan’s power, hangs himself, having cast the reward of his iniquity at the feet of the chief priests and elders. Satan was forced to bear witness, even by a conscience that he had betrayed, to the Lord’s innocence. What a scene! Then the priests, who had made no conscience of buying His blood from Judas, scruple to put the money into the treasury of the temple, because it was the price of blood. In the presence of that which was going on, man was obliged to shew himself as he is and the power of Satan over him. Having taken counsel, they buy a burying-ground for strangers. These were profane enough in their eyes for that, provided they themselves were not defiled with such money. Yet it was the time of God’s grace to the stranger, and judgment on Israel. Moreover they established thereby a perpetual memorial of their own sin, and of the blood which has been shed. Aceldama is all that remains in this world of the circumstances of this great sacrifice. The world is a field of blood, but it speaks better things than that of Abel.

This prophecy, we know, is in the book of Zechariah. The name “Jeremiah” may have crept into the text when there was nothing more than “by the prophet”; or it might be because Jeremiah stood first in the order prescribed by the Talmudists for the books of prophecy; for which reason, very likely, also, they said, “Jeremiah, or one of the prophets,” as in Mat 16:14. But this is not the place for discussion on the subject.

Their own part in the Jewish scene closes. The Lord stands before Pilate. Here the question is not whether He is the Son of God, but whether He is the King of the Jews. Although He was this, yet it was only in the character of Son of God that He would allow the Jews to receive Him. Had they received Him as the Son of God, He would have been their King. But that might not be: He must accomplish the work of atonement. Having rejected Him as Son of God, the Jews now deny Him as their King. But the Gentiles also become guilty in the person of their head in Palestine, the government of which had been committed to them. The Gentile head should have reigned in righteousness. His representative in Judea acknowledged the malice of Christ’s enemies; his conscience, alarmed by his wife’s dream, seeks to evade the guilt of condemning Jesus. But the true prince of this world, as regards present exercise of dominion, was Satan. Pilate, washing his hands (futile attempt to exonerate himself), delivers up the guiltless to the will of His enemies, saying, at the same time, that he finds no fault in Him. And he releases to the Jews a man guilty of sedition and murder, instead of the Prince of life. But it was again on His own confession, and that only, that He was condemned, confessing the same thing in the Gentile court as He had done in the Jewish, in each the truth, witnessing a good confession of what concerned the truth as to those before whom He was.

Barabbas, [85] the expression of the spirit of Satan who was a murderer from the beginning, and of rebellion against the authority which Pilate was there to maintain-Barabbas was loved by the Jews; and with him, the wrongful carelessness of the governor, who was powerless against evil, endeavoured to satisfy the will of the people whom he ought to have governed “All the people” make themselves guilty of the blood of Jesus in the solemn word, which remains fulfilled to this day, till sovereign grace, according to God’s purpose, takes it off-solemn but terrible word, “His blood be upon us and upon our children.” Sad and frightful ignorance which self-will has brought upon a people who rejected the light! Alas! how each one, I again say, takes his own place in the presence of this touchstone-a rejected Saviour. The company of the Gentiles, the soldiers, do that in derision, with the brutality habitual to them as heathen and as executioners, which the Gentiles shall do with joyful worship, when He whom they now mocked shall be truly the King of the Jews in glory. Jesus endures it all. It was the hour of His submission to the full power of evil. patience must have its perfect work, in order that His obedience may be complete on every side. He bore it all without relief, rather than fail in obedience to His Father. What a difference between this and the conduct of the first Adam surrounded with blessings!

Every one must be the servant of sin, or of the tyranny of wickedness, at this solemn hour, in which all is put to the proof. They compel one Simon (known afterwards, it appears, among the disciples) to bear the cross of Jesus; and the Lord is led away to the place of His crucifixion. There He refuses that which might have stupefied Him. He will not shun the cup He had to drink, nor deprive Himself of His faculties in order to be insensible to that which it was the will of God He should suffer. The prophecies of the Psalms are fulfilled in His Person, by means of those who little thought what they were doing. At the same time, the Jews succeeded in becoming to the last degree contemptible. Their King was hung. They must bear the shame in spite of themselves. Whose fault was it? But, hardened and senseless, they share with a malefactor the miserable satisfaction of insulting the Son of God, their King, the Messiah, to their own ruin, and quote, so blinding is unbelief, from their own scriptures, as the expression of their own mind, that which in them is put into the mouth of the unbelieving enemies of Jehovah. Jesus felt it all; but the anguish of His trial, where after all He was a calm and faithful witness, the abyss of His sufferings, contained something far more terrible then all this malice or abandonment of man. The floods doubtless lifted up their voices. [86] One after another the waves of wickedness dashed against Him; but the depths beneath that awaited Him, who could fathom? His heart, His soul-the vessel of a divine love-could alone go deeper than the bottom of that abyss which sin had opened for man, to bring up those who lay there, after He had endured its pains in His own soul. A heart that had been ever faithful was forsaken of God. Where sin had brought man, love brought the Lord, but with a nature and an apprehension in which there was no distance, no separation, so that it should be felt in all its fulness. No one but He who was in that place could fathom or feel it.

It is too a wonderful spectacle to see the one righteous man in the world declare at the end of His life He was forsaken of God. But thus it was He glorified Him as none else could have done it, and where none but He could have done it-made sin, in the presence of God as such, with no veil to hide, no mercy to cover or bear it with.

The fathers, full of faith, had in their distress experienced the faithfulness of God, who answered the expectation of their hearts. But Jesus (as to the condition of His soul at that moment) cried in vain. “A worm and no man” before the eyes of men, He had to bear the forsaking of the God in whom He trusted.

Their thoughts far from His, they that surround Him did not even understand His words, but they accomplished the prophecies by their ignorance. Jesus, bearing testimony by the loudness of His voice that it was not the weight of death that oppressed Him, gives up the ghost.

The efficacy of His death is presented to us in this Gospel in a double aspect. First, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom. God, who had been always hidden behind the veil, discovered Himself completely by means of the death of Jesus. The entrance into the holy place is made manifest-a new and living way which God has consecrated for us through the veil. The entire Jewish system, the relations of man with God under its sway, its priesthood, all fell with the rending of the veil. Every one found himself in the presence of God without a veil between. The priests were to be always in His presence. But, by this same act, the sin, which would have made it impossible for us to stand there, was for the believer entirely put away from before God. The holy God, and the believer, cleansed from his sins, are brought together by the death of Christ. What love was that which accomplished this!

Secondly, besides this, such was the efficacy of His death, that when His resurrection had burst the bonds that held them, many of the dead appeared in the city-witnesses of His power who, having suffered death, had risen above it, and overcome it, and destroyed its power, or taken it into His own hands. Blessing was now in resurrection.

The presence therefore of God without a veil, and sinners without sin before Him, prove the efficacy of Christ’s sufferings.

The resurrection of the dead, over whom the king of terrors had no more right, displayed the efficacy of the death of Christ for sinners, and the power of His resurrection. Judaism is over for those that have faith, and the power of death also. The veil is rent. The grave gives up its prey; He is Lord of the dead and of the living. [87]

There is yet another especial testimony to the mighty power of His death, to the import of that word, “If I be lifted up from the earth, I will draw all men unto me.” The centurion who was on guard at the crucifixion of the Lord, seeing the earthquake and those things that were done, trembling, confesses the glory of His Person; and, stranger as he is to Israel, renders the first testimony of faith among Gentiles: “Truly this was the Son of God.”

But the narrative goes on. Some poor women-to whom devotedness often gives, on God’s part, more courage than to men in their more responsible and busy position-were standing near the cross, beholding what was done to Him they loved. [88]

But they were not the only ones who filled the place of the terrified disciples. Others-and this often happens-whom the world had held back, when once the depth of their affection is stirred by the question of His sufferings whom they really loved, when the moment is so painful that others are terrified, then (emboldened by the rejection of Christ) they feel that the time is arrived for decision and become fearless confessors of the Lord. Hitherto associated with those that have crucified Him, they must now either accept that act, or declare themselves. Through grace they do the latter.

God had prepared all beforehand. His Son was to have His tomb with the rich. Joseph comes boldly to Pilate and asks for the body of Jesus. He wraps the body, which Pilate grants him, in a clean linen cloth, and lays it in his own sepulchre, which had never served to hide the corruption of man. Mary Magdalene and the other Mary [89]-for they were known-sat near the sepulchre, bound by all that remained to their faith of Him whom they had loved and followed with adoration during His life.

But unbelief has no faith in itself, and, fearing lest that which it denies be true, it mistrusts everything. The chief priests request Pilate to guard the sepulchre, in order to frustrate any attempt the disciples might make to found the doctrine of the resurrection on the absence of the body of Jesus from the tomb in which it had been laid. Pilate bids them secure the sepulchre themselves; so that all they did was to make themselves involuntary witnesses to the fact, and assure us of the accomplishment of the thing they dreaded. Thus Israel was guilty of this effort of futile resistance to the testimony which Jesus had rendered to His own resurrection. Theywere a testimony against themselves to its truth. The precautions which Pilate would not perhaps have taken they carried to the extreme, so that all mistake as to the fact of His resurrection was impossible.

The Lord’s resurrection is briefly related in Matthew. The object is again, after the resurrection, to connect the ministry and service of Jesus-now transferred to His disciples-with the poor of the flock, the remnant of Israel. He again assembled them in Galilee, where He had constantly instructed them, and where the despised among the people dwelt afar from the pride of the Jews. This connected their work with His, in that which especially characterised it with reference to the remnant of Israel.

Footnotes for Matthew Chapter 27

85: Strange to say, this means son of Abba, as if Satan was mocking them with the name.

86: We find in Matthew, specially collected, the dishonour done to the Lord and the insults offered Him, and with Mark the forsaking of God.

87: The glory of Christ in ascension, and as Lord of all, does not come within the scope of Matthew historically.

88: The part that women take in all this history is very instructive, especially to them. The activity of public service, that which may be called “work,” belongs naturally to men (all that appertains to what is generally termed ministry), although women share a very precious activity in private. But there is another side of Christian life which is particularly theirs; and that is personal and loving devotedness to Christ. It is a woman, who anointed the Lord while the disciples murmured; women, who were at the cross, when all except John had forsaken Him; women, who came to the sepulchre, and who were sent to announce the truth to the apostles who had gone after all to their own home; women, who ministered to the Lord’s need. And indeed this goes farther. Devotedness in service is perhaps the part of man; but the instinct of affection, that which enters more intimately into Christ’s position, and is thus more immediately in connection with His sentiments, in closer communion with the sufferings of His heart-this is the part of woman: assuredly a happy part. The activity of service for Christ puts man a little out of this position, at least if the Christian is not watchful. Everything has however its place. I speak of that which is characteristic; for there are women who have served much, and men who have felt much. Note also here, what I believe I have remarked, that this clinging of heart to Jesus is the position where the communications of true knowledge are received. The first full gospel is announced to the poor woman that was a sinner who washed His feet, the embalming for His death to Mary, our highest position to Mary Magdalene, the communion Peter desired to John who was in His bosom. And here the women have a large share.

89: That is, Mary, the wife of Cleophas, and mother of James and Joses, constantly spoken of as “the other Mary.” In Joh 19:25, Mary the wife of Cleophas has been taken as in apposition with His mother’s sister. But this is simply a mistake. It is another person. There were four-three Marys and His mother’s sister.

John Nelson Darby — Synopsis of the Books of the Bible: the New Testament (c. 1857–1862) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

1. When the morning was come. Jesus had already been condemned, but another meeting of the Sanhedrim after daylight was necessary to give its legal effect, as condemnations to death could not be made in the night. That was the object of this meeting. For a fuller account of it, see Luke 22:66–71. For account of Christ before Pilate and the crucifixion, compare Mark 15:1–47; Luke 23:1–56; John 18:1–38.

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:

This begins the account of Jesus' trial before Pilate.

Now

This word is used here to mark a break in the main story line. Here Matthew starts to tell a new part of the story.

plotted against Jesus to put him to death

The Jewish leaders were planning how they could convince the Roman leaders to kill Jesus. (See: Assumed Knowledge and Implicit Information)

translationWords

chief priests

elder

bind

deliver

Pilate

govern

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