Down an Unfamiliar Road

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER TWENTY-SEVEN

Part X

Here we have echoed of what David said in his psalm: “My mouth is as dry as a piece of baked pottery. My tongue is sticking to the roof of my mouth.”¹ However, the Rabbis made it clear: “When one is led out to execution, he is given a goblet of wine containing a grain of frankincense, in order to benumb his senses, for it is written, Give strong drink to him that is ready to perish, and wine for the bitterness of soul.²”³ To put it bluntly, it was done so that the individual became intoxicated before they died in order to desensitize the pain and consciousness of dying. All four Gospels record this incident. Here in Matthew the Greek word oxos is used, it means “vinegar.” Easton’s Bible Dictionary explains it this way: “The drink offered to our Lord was vinegar (made of light wine rendered acid, the common drink of Roman soldiers) ‘mingled with gall,’ or, according to (Mark 15:23), ‘mingled with myrrh;’ both expressions meaning the same thing, namely, that the vinegar was made bitter by the infusion of wormwood or some other bitter substance, usually given, according to a merciful custom, as an anodyne to those who were crucified, to render them insensible to pain. Our Lord, knowing this, refuses to drink it. He would take nothing to cloud his faculties or blunt the pain of dying. He chooses to suffer every element of woe in the bitter cup of agony given him by the Father (John 18:11).”

While listening to a seminary professor teach on the New Testament, I heard him declared quite authoritatively that Mark was the first Gospel to be written, and that Matthew simply copied a lot of Mark’s material. If that be so, then why would they differ here on the components of the drink offered to Jesus? In the Latin Vulgate and Ethiopic versions, instead of “vinegar,” they read “wine;” and so does Münster’s Hebrew Gospel. In the Arabic version, instead of “gall”, it reads “myrrh.”

Several scholars believe that instead of indicating that the wine was mixed with gall from an animal’s bladder, the ingredient was as bitter as “gall;” such as wormwood, or myrrh, or any other bitter herb, to make it distasteful. But the whole matter becomes mute because as soon as our Lord tasted it He turned His head and rejected the drink. He was bound and determined to suffer every ounce of pain and agony for our healing. As we said before, he refused to die in a drunken stupor.

In Jewish literature, we find a narrative on what happens after a trial ends. Here are some interesting segments that have an uncanny resemblance to what our Lord went through:

Once the trial has ended, he [the convicted] is taken out to be stoned. The place of stoning was outside the court area, as it is written: “Take the blasphemer outside [the camp].”⁴ One man was stationed at the door the courthouse with a signaling flag in his hand, while another was stationed upon a horse at a distance from him, but within his sight. [Thus] if one says: I have a further argument in his favor, he [the one holding the flag] waves the flag, while the man on the horse runs to stop them [from executing the stoning]. And even if he [the convicted man] himself says: I have a further argument in my own favor, he is returned [to court], as many as four or five times, provided, however, that there is substance to his words. If they find an argument to acquit him, they discharge him; but if not, he is taken out to be stoned, and a proclamation precedes him [saying]: “So and so, the son of so and so, is being taken out to be stoned because he committed such and such an offense, and so and so are his witnesses. Whoever knows anything in his favor, let him come forward and state it.” When he was about ten cubits away from the place of stoning, they would say to him; Confess, for such, is the way of all who are executed, that they [first] confess, for one who confesses has a share in the World to Come. Because, we find so in the case of Ahan, that Yehoshua said to him; “My son, please give glory to the Lord, the God of Israel, and confess to Him.”⁵ And Ahan answered Yehoshua and said; “Indeed, I have sinned against the Lord, the God of Israel, and thus and thus I have done.” And from where do we know that his confession atoned for him? From the words: “And Yehoshua said; Why have you brought trouble upon us? The Lord shall trouble you on this day”⁶ [meaning], this day you are troubled, but you shall not be troubled in the World to Come. And if he doesn’t know how to confess, they say to him: Say, may my death atone for all my sins. Rabbi Yehudah says: If he knows that he is a victim of false evidence, he may say: May my death atone for all my sins but this one. They [the Sages] said to him: If so, everyone will say so [even if they were not the victim of false evidence] in order to clear himself. When he was four cubits away from the place of stoning, they removed his garments…But the Sages say: A man is stoned unclothed. A post is sunk into the ground with a beam protruding from it [at the top]. He places his hands together, one over the other and hangs him. Rabbi Yose says: The post is leaned against the wall, and he hangs him in the manner that butchers do. He is immediately untied [and let down]. If he is left [hanging] overnight, a prohibition is thereby transgressed, for it is written; “But you must not leave his body on the tree overnight. Rather, you should surely bury him on that [same] day, for a hanging [human corpse], is a blasphemy of God.”⁷ That is to say [when people ask] why was he hanged? [It must be] because he cursed the Name [of God], and thus the Name of Heaven is profaned. They did not bury him [the executed person] in his ancestral burial plot [since one may not bury the wicked in the company of the righteous], rather, two cemeteries were prepared by the court, one for those who were decapitated or strangled [whose crime is less severe] and the other, for those who were stoned or burned [whose crime is more severe, as it would not be proper to bury one whose crime is less severe in the company of one whose crime is more severe].⁸

I wonder if they even gave our Lord the opportunity to recant? I doubt it because they were intent on getting rid of Him permanently. This also helps us understand why Jesus had to be buried in a borrowed tomb since His family was prohibited from burying Him in their family plot, possible the one in which His earthly father Joseph was entombed. Then comes the signature moment.

Verses 35-37: The soldiers nailed Jesus to a cross. Then they threw dice to divide His clothes between them. The soldiers stayed there to guard Him. They put this sign above His head with the charge against Him written on it: ‘THIS IS JESUS, THE KING OF THE JEWS..’”

In his book, a Flemish philologist and humanist presented various shapes of instruments in which people were crucified in ancient days. For instance, on page 647 there is a woodcut showing a person being crucified on a single pole. On page 648 a person being impaled on a pole with a sharp end. On page 649 a person on an X-shaped cross. On page 650 a two cross-beamed instrument made out of tree trunks, and on page 661 a two beam cross made of flat beams from a carpenter’s shop.⁹

Most scholars have accepted the two cross-beamed instrument as the one Jesus was crucified on, something that Lipsius agreed with. However, starting in 1950, the Jehovah’s Witness Watchtower Society started showing the picture of Christ being nailed to a single beam pole. They claimed that “This is the manner in which Jesus was impaled,” thereby giving the false impression that it was Lipsius who claimed, or believed, that Jesus was executed on a single upright stake. But bowing to strong criticism, the Society, in its 1985 Kingdom Interlinear Translation, changed the reading to indicate the cross of Jesus as only “One such instrument of torture … illustrated by Justus Lipsius …”

At the moment of His death, in order to add insult to injury, the Roman soldiers fulfilled the prophecy: “They divide my clothes among themselves, and they throw lots for what I am wearing.”¹⁰ While some of the soldiers gambled for His robe, some just sat on the ground waiting for Him to die. We may wonder why Matthew says they stayed there to guard Him. It surely wasn’t because Jesus was going anywhere. Rather, they did not want the disciples of Jesus sneaking up to the cross, taking Him down to help Him survive. This was ordered by Pilate. And, just as they guarded the cross, they would also be told to guard His tomb for the same reason.¹¹

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER TWENTY-SEVEN

Part IX

After they played their silly pranks, the Roman soldiers put Christ’s garments back on Him and led Him away to the place where He would be crucified. As Moses directed back in the wilderness, a person being put to death must go outside the camp. Therefore, it is logical to conclude that the place of the skull was outside the walls of Jerusalem.¹ I’m sure that the reason the Jewish leaders were so insistent on getting Pilate to try Jesus and then get on with the crucifixion, was not only because the Feast of Passover was in full swing, but because their own verbal traditions said, “Once the trial has ended, he [the convicted] is taken out to be stoned. The place of stoning was outside the court area, as it is written: ‘Take the blasphemer outside [the camp], Leviticus 24:14.”²

And speaking on this subject, a renown Rabbi commented, “After a defendant has been convicted, we do not delay the matter, but instead execute him immediately.”³ He goes on to say, “When a person is sentenced to death, he is taken out of the court and led to the place of execution.”⁴ Then he adds: “The court does not attend the funeral of the executed person. Whenever a court has a person executed, they are forbidden to eat for the remainder of that entire day. This prohibition is included in the interdiction: “Do not eat upon the blood.⁵”⁶ A meal of comfort is not given the relatives of those executed by the court. This too is derived from the above verse. These acts are forbidden, but they are not punishable by lashes.”⁷

But this would not stop the religious leaders from eating. You see, it was the Romans who were putting Him to death! There is an interesting commentary in Jewish writings that many scholars take as a direct reference to Jesus. It reads:

AND A HERALD PRECEDES HIM etc. This implies, only immediately before [the execution], but not previous thereto. [In contradiction to this] it was taught: On the eve of the Passover Yeshua⁸ was hanged. For forty days before the execution took place, a herald went forth and cried, ‘He is going forth to be stoned because He has practiced sorcery and enticed Israel to apostasy. Anyone who can say anything in His favor, let him come forward and plead on His behalf.’ But since nothing was brought forward in His favor He was hanged on the eve of the Passover! — ‘Ulla retorted: Do you suppose that he was one for whom a defense could be made? Was he not a Mesit [enticer], concerning whom Scripture says, “Neither shall you spare, neither shall you conceal him?”⁹ With Yeshua, however, it was different for He was connected with the government [or royalty, i.e., influential].”¹⁰

But this is patently false. Christ had no such prior warning. Nor were any of His friends given an invitation to come as witnesses for His defense. The mob captured Him at night. The trial lasted until morning and then He was led to Pilate. Following this, they led Him out of the common hall, through Jerusalem, out of its gates, in order to crucify Him.

Verse 32: As the soldiers were going out of the city with Jesus, they saw a man from Cyrene named Simon, and they forced him to carry Jesus’ cross.

As they reached the gate to exit the city, apparently the soldiers saw that Jesus would not make it all the way to the place of execution, and they had no interest in carrying the cross for Him. So they drafted a man standing in the crowd to do it for them. Matthew found out later that his name was Simon, and that he hailed from the city of Cyrene, a large and important metropolis in Cyrenaica, the district of Upper Libya on the north coast of Africa, west of Egypt. Cyrene was one of the five large cities that gave to this region the name of “Pentapolis.”

One historian names these five cities: “The region of Cyrenaica, also called Pentapolis, is rendered famous by the oracle of Hammon, which is distant 400 miles from the city of Cyrene; also by the Fountain of the Sun there, and five special cities, those of Berenice, Arsinoë, Ptolemais, Apollonia, and Cyrene itself.”¹¹ Jewish historian Josephus names Cyrene in his comments: “And now did the madness of the Sicarii [dagger carrying zealots], like a disease, reach as far as the cities of Cyrene; for one Jonathan, a vile person, and by trade a weaver, came there and prevailed with no small number of the poorer sort to give ear to him; he also led them into the desert, upon promising them that he would show them signs and wonders.”¹² Today we know this region as Libya.

Verses 33-34: They came to the place called Golgotha. (Golgotha means “The Place of the Skull.”) There the soldiers gave Jesus some wine mixed with vinegar. But when He tasted it, He refused to drink it.

I’m sure that when Simon planned his trip to Jerusalem – no doubt because the Cyrenian Jews had a synagogue in Jerusalem – where many came for annual feasts, he never envisioned that after traveling such a long distance it would result in him carrying the cross for a man being crucified just for claiming to be the Messiah and King of the Jews. Matthew says their destination was on a hill named Golgotha. Either Matthew or his scribe adds that the word means “Place of the Skull.”

There are several explanations for this title. One is reported to be a Jewish tradition that says Adam was buried there. But this does not concur with the stated Jewish belief that Adam and Eve were buried in the Cave of Machpelah, in Hebron. The cave also became the burial site for the couple’s descendants, Abraham and Sarah.¹³ According to a Christian story from Ethiopia, Noah retrieved the first couple’s bodies before the flood and had them reburied at Calvary [Golgotha]. However, others believe it received this designation because so many were hung there that numerous skulls were laying around from bodies left unclaimed for burial. At least, there seemed to be some deference given to the condemned, even if they were criminals. In this context, naming this hill “the place of the skull,” may not have been based on its topographical features but because so many skulls of those crucified were still laying around.

David seems to describe our Lord’s circumstances, “You know the shame I have suffered. You know all my enemies. You saw how they humiliated me. I feel the pain of their insults. The shame makes me feel like dying! I wanted some sympathy, but there was none. I waited for someone to comfort me, but no one came. They gave me poison, not food. They gave me vinegar, not wine.”¹⁴

From Jewish writings, we find that drinking strong vinegar was used as a sedative for someone in pain and on the verge of dying. In it reads: “Said Rabbi Huna son of Rabbi Joshua, ‘let him sip vinegar’. Said Rabbi Idi ben Abin: One who has swallowed a wasp cannot possibly live. Let him, however, drink a quarter of strong vinegar; perhaps [by this means] he will live long enough to set his house in order. But then it goes on to describe a situation that comes very close to what our Savior was dealing with: ‘Our Rabbis taught: One should not drink water in the night; if he does drink his blood flowing from his head, for it is dangerous. What danger is there? The danger of Shabriri (blindness). But if he is thirsty, how can he put things right? — If there is another person with him, he should wake him and say: I am thirsty for water.”¹⁵ Jesus knew He was going to suffer, but He didn’t want to do so in a sedated stupor. He wanted to remember it so that anyone coming to Him in the future with their own sorrow, grief, and agony, He could say: I know how you feel, I’m acquainted with your pain.

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER TWENTY-SEVEN

Part VIII

Verse 26: Then Pilate set Barabbas free. And he told some soldiers to beat Jesus with whips. After that, he handed him over to the soldiers to be hung on a cross.

Several early church writers give their opinions on what Pilate did next. For instance, Chrysostom had this to say: “Why did Pilate have Jesus whipped? Either as one presumably condemned, or to please the crowd, or as if he were willing to give their judgment some sort of standard legal expression. And yet he ought to have resisted them. For indeed even before this he had said, ‘Take Him yourselves and judge Him by your own law.’¹ There were many reasons that Pilate and the others might have held back: the signs and the miracles, the great patience of the one who was suffering these things, and above all, His harmless silence. For since both by His defense of Himself and by His prayers, He had shown His humanity, again He now shows His glory and the greatness of His nature, both by His silence and by His indifference to what they said. This might have led them to marvel. But neither Pilate nor the crowd takes sufficient note of these pieces of evidence.”² These irate Jewish leaders were so blinded by their jealous-envy, it made it impossible for them to see the shining glory of the Lamb of God being led to slaughter to set mankind free from the bondage of sin and death.

Then Jerome gives his impression: “Barabbas the robber, who had provoked a riot among the crowds and committed murder, was released to the Jewish people.… Now Jesus, having been delivered up by the Jews, was absolved of guilt by Pilate’s wife and was called a just man by the governor himself. Moreover, the centurion declared that He was truly the Son of God.³ The learned reader may be hard pressed to explain the fact that Pilate washed his hands and said, ‘I am innocent of the blood of this just man,’⁴ and later handed over the beaten Jesus to be crucified. It is important to realize that Jesus was dealt with according to Roman law, which decreed that whoever is to be crucified must first be beaten with whips. Thus Jesus was handed over to the soldiers for scourging, and their whips did their work on that most sacred body and that bosom which held God. This came about so that, in keeping with the words “many cords of sins” and with the whipping of Jesus, we might be free from scourging. As holy Scripture says to the just man: ‘The whip did not draw near to your tabernacle.‘⁵”⁶

And early church scholar Apollinaris sees the spiritual aspects of what Jesus went through: “The floggings [are] for the sins of the world, because the sinner is flogged many times, according to the prophecy that says, ‘I gave my back to the whips.’⁷ And so is fulfilled [the saying] that the righteous [will give Himself] for sinners. The height of goodness is also fulfilled when ‘the righteous [suffered] for the unrighteous,’⁸ so that ‘by His wounds we might be healed,’ as Isaiah says.⁹”¹⁰ In other words, what Jesus suffered and endured as a result of the crowd’s frenzy and Pilate’s acquiescence to their wishes, was done for our sake, not His. It was all for our salvation and healing. O how much more should we honor, praise, and thank Him for what He did for us on that day.

Verses 27-31: Then Pilate’s soldiers took Jesus into the governor’s palace. All the soldiers gathered around Him. They took off Jesus’ outer garments and put a red robe on Him. Then they made a crown from thorny branches and put it on His head, and they put a beating-reed in His right hand. Then they bowed before Him, making fun of Him. They said, “We salute you, king of the Jews!” They spit on Him. Then they took the beating-reed and kept hitting Him on the head with it. After they finished making fun of Him, the soldiers took off the robe and put His own garments back on Him. Then they led Him away to be hung on a cross.

Now comes the mocking, jeering, and taunting of the Son of God. The Jewish leaders must have had a smirk on their faces as they watched the man whom many called the Messiah being so shamed and humiliated. Especially, since this worker of miracles who even raised the dead now seemed so hopeless and helpless.

They knew what well-respected rabbis had taught: “If one [makes a fist and] boxes another man’s ear, he has to pay him [on account of degradation] a [set fee of a] sela [for degradation]. Rabbi Yehudah in the name of Rabbi Yose HaGalily says, [He has to pay him the set fee of] a maneh [i.e., one hundred dinar; the halachah does not follow Rabbi Yehudah]. If he slapped him [the Rabbis set a higher fee for greater shame and] he has to pay him two hundred zuz; [if he did it] with the back of his hand, he has to pay him four hundred zuz. If he pulled his ear, plucked his hair, spat so that the spittle reached him, removed his garment from upon him he must pay four hundred zuz; [however] the general rule is, all depends upon the dignity [of the insulted person].”¹¹ But since these were Jewish laws, and the Romans were the ones beating Jesus, there was no need or pressure to abide by these humane rules.

What made this even more despicable, the clothes that Jesus wore were His only earthly possession. The Arabic version says that there were two garments put on Jesus, one a purple vest, and the other a scarlet robe. This was to signify the robes worn by kings. And since His followers claimed Him to be the King of the Jews, the Romans wanted to show Him how they felt about it. According to some scholars, such as John Gill, they say the Persiac Version of Matthew’s account states that this robe was very likely an old coat of one of their officers.

But they weren’t finished. Every king must have a crown. But, as was already forewarned: “People made fun of Him, and even His friends left Him. He was a man who suffered a lot of pain and sickness. We treated Him like someone of no importance, like someone people will not even look at but turn away from in disgust.”¹² The word used in the Aramaic Version has been interpreted as “white thorns,” which were common in Judea at that time. A Danish physician discusses the various aspects of the crucifixion of Christ and speaks about the crown of thorns. He points out that in the Syriac Vulgate it reads: Hieronymus sed spinae genus non definiunt, meaning, “Jerome did not define the class of the thorns.”¹³

The crown of thorns was all part of the mockery. So as believers, we are not pressured to put too much emphasis on what type of thorn was used nor how the crown was woven. They must have chosen an old bamboo-type stick that was laying around and put it in His hand to serve as His scepter. As they laughed and spit on Him, they would grab the stick out of His hand and hit Him over the head with it. As the prophet said: “They will hit the Judge of Israel on the cheek with a stick.”¹⁴

Little did they know that the man they were beating was the Son of God who came to die for their sins. So when Jesus later would cry out on the cross, “Father, forgive them, they don’t know what they are doing,” it would not be impermissible to include Isaiah’s picture of a shameful and belittled Messiah when he wrote: “It is true that many were shocked when they saw Him. He was beaten so badly that He no longer looked like a man.”¹⁵

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER TWENTY-SEVEN

Part VII

Chrysostom believes that Pilate’s question to the crowd on what should he do with Jesus was intentional in order to embarrass them into reconsidering their request. He wanted them to think about what they were asking and what it would lead to. Didn’t they know that they were asking for a man, who had an impeccable reputation for doing good, to be crucified, and a criminal whose life was spent in robbing and causing trouble to be released back into society? But they didn’t seem to care. So this prompted Pilate to ask again.

Verse 23: Pilate asked, “Why do you want me to crucify Him? What wrong has He done?” But they shouted even louder, “Crucify Him on a cross!”

Much to his surprise, Pilate’s appeal fell on deaf ears. The crowd had made up their minds to be obedient to the Jewish priests and leaders rather that seek justice and find out who this Jesus of Nazareth really was. Never did they question their religious leader’s accusations. Not once did they ask for evidence in order to prove their case. Even Pilate saw more clearly than they did that Jesus was innocent of all the charges brought against Him.

But Pilate was caught between the proverbial rock and a hard place. Something that his predecessors had developed to please the Jews, he was now having to use to appease them. So he had a difficult choice to make. Either stand up for justice or stand up for tradition. After all, what would it gained him if he took the anger they were directing at this Jesus of Galilee and turned it against himself. So he took the only way out that he could see. He sided with the crowd.

Verses 24-25: Pilate saw that he wasn’t getting anywhere and that a riot was developing. So he sent for a pitcher of water and washed his hands before the crowd, saying, “I am innocent of this man’s blood. The responsibility is yours!” And all the people yelled back, “We will take responsibility for His death—let His blood be on our hands and that of our children!”

In an attempt to rinse himself of any mea culpa in the execution of Jesus, Pilate openly washed his hands in front of the people. But Jewish patriarch Job was quick to warn: “If I wash myself with snow, and make my hands clean with lye, Yet You will plunge me in the slime pit, and my own clothes will hate me.”¹ We know that washing one’s hands was to show innocence, that was a Jewish custom even in king David’s day, “I will wash my hands in innocence and walk around your altar, ADONAI.”²

One Jewish commentator says, that another reason for washing one’s hands was to prove that whatever had been achieved was done so through honesty, not deception.³ But after reading through Roman customs and manners, I’m persuaded that it may have had a different meaning. For instance, one Roman historian wrote these words for a character in his story named Faunus: “When he regained his senses, he said: ‘King and father to the high gods, if I have touched your offerings with pure hands, and if a pious tongue, too, asks for what I seek, grant atonement from your lightning.”⁴ Pilate was a follower of these gods, and so he may have been asking for mercy should he unknowingly do harm to one of their own by having this Jesus hung on a cross.

And, in one Greek play, we find Odysseus at dawn in front of Ajax’s tent in the Greek camp in the city of Troy. Odysseus is seen examining the ground before the tent. Athena appears from above and says, “You resemble a keen-nosed Spartan hound, looking for the man that just went inside with his face and slaughterous hands streaming with sweat and blood.”⁵ Athena goes on to explain, that Ajax would have already washed his hands since it was their custom to always wash their hands after coming into contact with blood. So this may have been Pilate’s way of saying, “I don’t want any innocent blood on my hands when this is over.”

The Jews had their own way of assigning responsibility for people being killed without cause. Back when Israel sent spies into Jericho, they came into contact with the prostitute Rahab. And because of her helping them escape, they gave her a sign to put on her house so that when the Jews came in, none in her household would be harmed. Here were the instructions they gave her, “When we enter the land, you tie this piece of scarlet cord in the window you let us down from; and you gather together in your house your father, mother, brothers, and your father’s entire household. If anyone goes out the doors of your house into the street, he will be responsible for his own blood, and we will be guiltless. But everyone who stays with you in the house — we will be responsible for his blood if anyone lays a hand on him.”⁶ In other words, the scarlet cord, like the blood of the Passover lamb, would keep any of them from being slaughtered as long as they stayed under its protection.

Even today, if someone is guilty of committing a crime that deserves the death penalty, we say: “Their blood is on their own hands.” This was also a common concept in Jewish thinking, as we can see in the Talmud.⁷ But it was also accepted, that this act of shedding innocent blood would follow the guilty person to their grave and beyond. As one highly regarded Rabbi states: “With regard to capital punishment, the victim’s blood and the blood of his unborn descendants are dependent on the murderer until eternity. As it is said with regard to Cain, ‘The voice of the blood of your brother is crying out.’ The Torah uses the plural form of the word blood, implying his blood and the blood of his descendants.”⁸ So the Jews here were so confident that they were asking for the crucifixion of a guilty man, that they were willing to risk the damaging consequences of having His blood hound them and their children for generation after generation.

While some scholars believe that when the Roman general Titus came and destroyed Jerusalem in 70 AD, this curse was fulfilled. Jewish historian Josephus records this incident: “The main reason why he [Titus] did not forbid that cruelty was this, that he hoped the Jews might perhaps yield at that sight, out of fear lest they might themselves afterward be liable to the same cruel treatment. So the soldiers, out of the wrath and hatred they bore the Jews, nailed those they caught, one after one way, and another after another, to the crosses, by way of jest, when their total number was so great, that room was wanting for the crosses, and crosses wanting for the bodies.”⁹

Pilate’s decision to give in might seem like an easy way out, but those who knew Pilate saw this more as a cover-up for his embarrassment of being bullied by the Jewish leaders. For as Pilate was described: “He was a man of a very inflexible disposition, and very merciless as well as very obstinate.”¹⁰ And just for the record, Pilate had Jesus scourged to show that he acted with some authority. Some believe that he did so with the hope the Jews would be satisfied with such a beating and give up the idea of having Him crucified. But that was not their plan, nor was it God’s plan.

One Jewish commentator points to what happened between God and Isaiah: “The Holy One warned him: ‘Isaiah, My children are obstinate, troublesome. Art thou willing to be smitten and put to shame by them?” Then Isaiah replied: “I will let those people beat me and pull the hair from my beard. I will not hide my face when they say bad things to me and spit at me. The Lord God will help me so the bad things they say will not hurt me¹¹.”¹² By saying: Father forgive them, they don’t know what they are doing, Jesus was saying the same thing. And of course, Jesus knew the reason for all this: “He was being punished for what we did. He was crushed because of our guilt. He took the punishment we deserved, to bring us peace. We were healed because of His pain. We had all wandered away like sheep. We had gone our own way. And yet the LORD put all our guilt on Him.”¹³

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER TWENTY-SEVEN

Part VI

Verses 17-18: When a crowd gathered, Pilate said to them, “I will free one man for you. Which one do you want me to free: Bar-Abbas or Jesus who is called the Messiah?” Pilate knew that they had handed Jesus over to him because they were envious of Him.

We might say that Pilate’s question was similar to that of Elijah on Mount Carmel, “You must decide what you are going to do. How long will you keep jumping from one side to the other? If the Lord is the true God, follow Him. But if Baal is the true God, then follow him!”¹ It appears that Pilate asked this question with a bit of sarcasm because Matthew records that Pilate knew full well the Jewish leaders had brought Yeshua the Son of God to him out of envy.

The Greek word “phthonos” is translated here by the KJV as “envy,” the same word given in the Aramaic Version. Several English translations use the English term, “jealousy.” But there is a subtle difference between the two. Jealous means: “apprehensive or vengeful out of fear of being replaced by someone else.” It can also mean “watchful,” “anxiously suspicious,” “zealous,” or “expecting complete devotion.” Envy means: “to bear a grudge toward someone due to coveting what that person has or enjoys.” In a milder sense, it means “the longing for something someone else has with or without any ill will intended toward that person.” So we can clearly see that these religious leaders were envious of the adoration and praise the followers of Jesus gave Him as being a messenger sent from God.

When we add up all the things Jewish leaders were saying about Jesus we might be persuaded to combine the two into one, jealous-envy. Since Barabbas had been imprisoned because of his seditious acts against the Romans, Pontius Pilate could be seen here as playing a game of cat and mouse in order to free Jesus by order of the people, not by his order. He knew Barabbas would be popular with the Jews because of his anti-Roman activities. Naturally, Pilate must have jailed him to keep peace in Judea. But by offering Barabbas to the people, Pilate was really saying: If you chose Barabbas whom I have imprisoned as an insurrectionist against the power of Rome, that will be a slap against me. If, however, you chose to save Jesus, whom you hate, that may be a slap at you, but it will keep me in favor of you.

Yet, as we see, the Jews willingly took a swipe at Pilate by letting his enemy go free while getting rid of their own foe. By playing such a game, Pilate ended up twice a loser. The crowd chose a man who a man with a common name that did not lift any eyebrows because of its uniqueness but only because of his sordid reputation. Yet, these jealous-envious Jewish leaders were willing to overlook the spotless reputation of Yeshua the Messiah. Then Matthew’s account takes a twist.

Verse 19: While Pilate was sitting there in the place for judging, his wife sent a message to him. It said, “Don’t do anything with that man. He is not guilty. Last night I had a dream about Him, and it troubled me very much.”

For some reason, the attempted intervention by Pilate’s wife struck Matthew as being so heroic that he felt inspired to include it in his Gospel. Although no name for her is given here, according to one Jewish source her name was Abrokla.² Some identify this as a Jewish name, which means she would be much like the wife of governor Felix.³ We find that Pilate’s wife is mentioned in the apocryphal Gospel of Nicodemus (probably written around the middle of the 4th century), which gives a more elaborate version of the wife’s dream than Matthew. It is said that she was referred to in the text as Procula, but this is not apparent in the English version.⁴

According to the Catholic Encyclopedia, she is called, Claudia Procula. Historical references suggest Claudia was the illegitimate daughter of Julia, Augustus Caesar’s only natural offspring. During her first two marriages, Julia had numerous lovers, and upon the death of her second husband she married Tiberius. Some psychologists suggest that this was the result of losing her father at a young age. Julia’s lewd and scandalous lifestyle continued, and so distressed her father Augustus that he banished her from Rome and allowed Tiberius to divorce her. While in exile she gave birth to Claudia and shortly thereafter died. After Tiberius became Emperor, he found favor in Claudia and adopted her as his own daughter.

Then, a document called “Claudia’s Scroll” was translated from an ancient Latin Manuscript first found in a Monastery in Bruges, Belgium where it had lain for centuries and is now referenced within the Vatican archives. A letter, purportedly written in Latin by Pilate’s wife from “a little Gallic mountain town” several years after Pilate left Jerusalem, was first published in English by Pictorial Review Magazine in April 1929. In the letter, it states that Pilate’s wife successfully sought Jesus’ aid to heal the crippled foot of her son Pilo.

Verse 20: Now the leading priests and older Jewish leaders told the people to ask for Barabbas to be set free and for Jesus to be killed.

Matthew wants his readers to know before he shares the record of what happened next, that the whole response of the crowd was a setup. It was orchestrated by the leading priests and elders to put pressure on Pilate in order to get their way. So we can certainly say that the cry that went up asking for crucifixion was not spontaneous, it was prearranged.

Early church scholar Origen also sees this collaboration of evil intent on the part of the Jewish leaders. He writes: “It is evident how the elders and the mentors of Jewish worship have stirred up the Jewish people and incited them against Jesus, that they might destroy Him and have Barabbas released. For the crowds put their belief in their leaders and priests. The crowd—a truly sizable crowd walking, as it were, on the ‘broad path that leads to destruction⁵ — sought and kept crying out to have Barabbas released to them.”⁶

Verses 21-22: Pilate said, “I have Barabbas and Jesus. Which one do you want me to set free for you?” The people yelled, ‘Barabbas!’ Pilate asked, “So what should I do with Jesus, the one called the Messiah?” All the people said, “Crucify Him on a cross!’”

We can see that the crowd was coached by the leading Jews to ask for Barabbas. So this was not a spontaneous decision by a majority, it was contrived and orchestrated. Even now, during political demonstrations, when participators are often asked why they are there they have less than a heartfelt response. It almost sounds rehearsed. I’m sure this was not lost on Pilate nor Jesus. Pilate was trying to arrange a political solution to avoid a riot, while Jesus was firmly committed to seeing His mission through to the end.

Also, in one book written in 1629 on the various types of instruments used in crucifixions, we see that the cross was a form of Roman punishment to be inflicted on the vilest and meanest and worst of men, such as seditionists, wicked servants, thieves, and murderers.⁷ It was intended to be not only a torturing and painful death, but a very shameful and ignominious one. So it makes you wonder why the leading priests and elders of the Jewish nation would contrive to have one of their own put to death in such a horrible way. From all that has been said up to this point, it appears that His loss was nothing to them compared to what they saw as their loss in status and demotion as spiritual leaders of God’s people. That’s what made them famous, respected, wealthy, and feared by the people and the occupation forces. But Pilate was having trouble with the same feelings. If a riot broke out, he could easily be accused of not keeping law and order under Roman rule and therefore easily replaceable. So he decided to compromise just enough to keep the Jewish religious leaders happy.

Midori Koto is a character in the television series, Highlander. The role was played by Japanese-born American actress and singer, Tamlyn Tomita. In Season Three, Episode 1: “The Samurai,” Midori is speaking to a character named Duncan MacLeod about a vow she made and why it was so important for her to keep it. She answered his questions, about maintaining her honor by the choice she made, by saying, “Honor isn’t about making the right choices. It’s about dealing with the consequences.”

Dr. Gloria Edmunds wrote on accepting choices and their consequences. She said: “Accepting responsibility for oneself includes an understanding of how your choices have consequences and recognizing your responsibility for choices. Choices play a key role in shaping or defining your life.

In a moment, an unwise choice can completely derail your best-developed goals and plans or an unwise choice can completely change your life. Acting responsibly involves making wise choices that can lead to positive outcomes, and thus avoiding poor choices that can result in negative consequences. A person needs to take responsibility for choices and to understand what contributes to wise choices, as well as poor choices.”

In the end, our honor and character will be best tested in how we deal with the results of our choices, whether good or bad. So, don’t feel so bad if you see that you did not make the wisest choice. Rather, stand up and take responsibility so you can then address the consequences with honor. People will respect you more for that than your insistence in always being right. – Dr. Robert R Seyda

I do not know what stories parents read to their children today or what they learn in kindergarten, but when I was growing up children were always memorizing nursery rhymes, listening to fairy tales, hearing Aesop’s Fables read to them, and reading books with inspiring stories like the little Dutch boy who discovered a leak in the dike and saved his town from flooding.

Here’s one such moral story that may make you smile and nod in agreement with what it is intended to teach.

Once upon a time there was a rich King who had four wives. He loved the 4th wife the most and adorned her with rich robes and treated her to the finest of delicacies. He gave her nothing but the best.

He also loved the 3rd wife very much and was always showing her off to neighboring kingdoms. However, he feared that one day she would leave him for another.

He also loved his 2nd wife. She was his confidant and was always kind, considerate and patient with him. Whenever the King faced a problem, he could confide in her, and she would help him get through the difficult times.

The King’s 1st wife was a very loyal partner and had made great contributions in maintaining his wealth and kingdom. However, he did not love the first wife. Although she loved him deeply, he hardly took notice of her!

One day, the King fell ill and he knew his time was short. He thought of his luxurious life and wondered, “I now have four wives with me, but when I die, I’ll be all alone.” Thus, he asked the 4th wife, “I have loved you the most, endowed you with the finest clothing and showered great care over you. Now that I’m dying, will you follow me and keep me company?” “No way!”, replied the 4th wife, and she walked away without another word. Her answer cut like a sharp knife right into his heart.

The sad King then asked the 3rd wife, “I have loved you all my life. Now that I’m dying, will you follow me and keep me company?” “No!”, replied the 3rd wife. “Life is too good! When you die, I’m going to remarry!” His heart sank and turned cold.

He then asked the 2nd wife, “I have always turned to you for help and you’ve always been there for me. When I die, will you follow me and keep me company?” “I’m sorry, I can’t help you out this time!”, replied the 2nd wife. “At the very most, I can only send you to your grave.” Her answer came like a bolt of lightning, and the King was devastated.

Then a voice called out: “I’ll leave with you and follow you no matter where you go.” The King looked up, and there was his first wife. She was so skinny as she suffered from malnutrition and neglect. Greatly grieved, the King said, “I should have taken much better care of you when I had the chance!”

In truth, we all have 4 wives in our lives: Our 4th wife is our body. No matter how much time and effort we lavish in making it look good, it will leave us when we die.

Our 3rd wife is our possessions, status, and wealth. When we die, it will all go to others.

Our 2nd wife is our family and friends. No matter how much they have been there for us, the furthest they can stay by us is up to the grave.

And our 1st wife is our Soul. Often neglected in pursuit of wealth, power and pleasures of the world. However, our Soul is the only thing that will follow us wherever we go. So cultivate, strengthen and cherish it now, for it is the only part of us who will follow us to the throne of God and continue with us throughout Eternity. When the world pushes you to your knees…..You’re in the perfect position to pray.

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER TWENTY-SEVEN

Part V

In His dealing with the false accusations made by these religious leaders, our Lord was following the pattern foretold by the prophet Isaiah, “He was treated badly, but he never protested. He said nothing, like a lamb being led away to be killed. He was like a sheep that makes no sound as its wool is being cut off. He never opened his mouth to defend himself.”¹ Pilate couldn’t understand Jesus’ silence, but what he didn’t know was that our Lord was on a mission. Therefore, the Master stood silent because He felt the same way His royal ancestor did, “LORD, You are my source of strength, so I have been an example to others.”²

It also fulfilled what was told to another high priest, “Listen, Joshua, you who are the high priest, and listen, you fellow priests seated before him. You are all examples to show what will happen when I bring my special servant. He is called, the Branch.”³ This is quite contrary to what a German philosopher said: “Those who keep silent are almost always lacking in subtlety and refinement of the heart; silence is an objection, to swallow a grievance must necessarily produce a bad temper.”⁴

Chrysostom follows up on the intent of the questioning: “Do you see what He is asked first? Is this the same charge that they had been continually bringing forward in every circumstance? They could see that Pilate was not ready to take into account subtle matters of Jewish law. So they directed their accusation outwardly to state charges of political disloyalty. They did the same later with the apostles, always charging them with political motivations, always bringing forward some trumped-up idea that they were after worldly power. They were treating Jesus now as if He were a mere man and as if He were under suspicion of treason.… What they were really interested in was finding some charge that would have Him put to death.”⁵

Verses 13-14: So Pilate said to Him, “Don’t you hear all these charges they are making against you? Why don’t you answer?” But Jesus said nothing, and this really surprised the governor.

Here Christ exemplifies the ultimate in what we find so impossible today, that is: “innocent silence.” Jesus said more by remaining silent than if He would have embarked on a long discourse defending Himself. It is a lesson for us, that when we are unjustly accused, we can stand strong and not give in to the urge of trying to explain the unexplainable. If we do feel any necessity to utter a response, Jesus gives us an example of that too, “Father forgive them, they know not what they do.”

Maximus of Turin gives us his eloquent sermon on our Lord’s unusual silence in the face of these baseless accusations: “It might seem remarkable to you, brothers, that the Lord should be accused by the chief priests before the procurator Pilate and should be silent and that He should not refute their wickedness by His response, since indeed a defense which follows quickly is the only way to refute a persistent accusation. It might seem remarkable, I say, brothers, that the Savior should be accused and should remain silent. Silence is occasionally understood as an affirmation, for when a person does not wish to respond to what is asked of him he appears to confirm what is raised against him. Does the Lord then confirm his accusation by not speaking? Clearly, He does not confirm His accusation by not speaking; rather He despises it by not refuting it. For one who needs no defense does well to keep silent, but let one who fears to be overcome defend himself and one who is afraid of being vanquished hasten to speak. When Christ is condemned, however, He also overcomes, and when He is judged He also vanquishes, as the prophet says: ‘that you should be justified in your words and should vanquish when you are judged.’⁶ Why was it necessary for Him, therefore, to speak before being judged, when for Him judgment was a complete victory?”⁷

Verses 15-16: Every year at Passover time the governor would free one prisoner—whichever one the people wanted him to free. At that time there was a man in prison who was known to be a trouble-maker. His name was Bar-Abbas.

Jewish historian Josephus tells us about this custom: “When Albinus heard that Gessius Florus was coming to succeed him, he was desirous to appear to do something that might be grateful to the people of Jerusalem; so he brought out all those prisoners who seemed to him to be most plainly worthy of death and ordered them to be put to death accordingly. But as to those who had been put into prison on some trifling charge, he accepted money for their fines and dismissed them.”⁸

So apparently, this act by Pilate was sanctioned by Rome as long as those prisoners “who seemed most worthy of death” were not released. This is interesting, since this incident with Lucceius Albinus, the procurator of Judea, took place around 64 AD. Could it be that what happened as a result of this custom allowed Bar-Abbas to be set free? But why would Pilate choose someone, who was not guilty of a capital crime that warranted a death sentence be granted a reprieve in place of someone for whom the death sentence was being asked? Perhaps Pilate didn’t see any reason to condemn Jesus to death and hoped these religious leaders would see it the same way and agree.

There has been some discussion about the name Bar-Abbas. The Aramaic Version reads “Bar-Abba” meaning, “father’s son” which some scholars take to be the equivalent of what we would say today as, the father’s “pet son.” In other words, he was a spoiled brat just like his father. But his name has come down to the English-speaking world as Barabbas. When checking a well-known Jewish Book of Genealogies we find that Bar-Abba was a common name among the Jews, appearing over 47 times, including Jeremiah Bar-Abba, Hiyya Bar Abba, Ammi Bar Abba, Abba Bar Abba, Samuel Bar Abba, Aha Bar Abba, etc.⁹

There is a humorous story in Jewish tradition about this name. Someone went to the cemetery and was asked who they were looking for. They answered, “I am looking for Abba. They said to him: There are many Abbas here. I want Abba bar Abba, he said. They replied: There are also several Abba bar Abbas here. He then said to them: I want Abba bar Abba the father of Samuel; where is he? They replied: He has gone up to the Academy of the Sky.”¹⁰ So it appears that Bar-Abbas was something like a nickname.

In addition, when the Jews translated the Gospels, in the Münster Edition it reads, “Bar Rabba,” which means, “the son of a master.” But we find an interesting play on words in the Complete Jewish Bible, were verse 16 reads, “There was at that time a notorious prisoner being held, named Yeshua Bar-Abba.” With our Lord’s name also being Yeshua, that would make Pilate’s question in verse seven more interesting when put this way: “Pilate asked the crowd, ‘Whom do you want me to set free for you? Yeshua the son of Abba? or Yeshua the Son of God?” But even this would not be enough to persuade them.

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER TWENTY-SEVEN

Part IV

One early church bishop and theologian gives us his assessment on all that transpired with Judas Iscariot and how it could be spiritually understood. He writes: “This field then is this entire world, in which we who have been dispersed and scattered bear the fruit of good work for the Lord. Yet perhaps you might ask me if the field is the world, who the potter is who could have the ownership of the world. Unless I am mistaken, the potter is the one who made the vessels of our body from clay. Scripture says of Him, ‘Then the Lord God formed the man from the dust from the earth.’¹ The potter is the One who, with the warmth of His own breath, made alive the slimy clay of our flesh and with fiery heat put together the fluid and earthly matter of our bodies.”²

The bishop’s sermon was entitled, “The Potter’s Field.” Let’s see where he takes his listeners: “The potter, I say, is the one who brought us into existence with His own hands and who is refashioning us for His glory through Christ. The apostle says, ‘We are being changed into His likeness from one degree of glory to another.’³ That is to say, we who from our previous condition have broken to pieces because of our own misdeeds are restored in a second birth through the loving kindness of this same Potter. We who have been struck by death because of Adam’s transgression rise anew through the grace of the Savior. Clearly, this Potter is the one of whom the blessed apostle says, ‘What will that being molded say to its molder?’ And again, ‘Has the potter no right over the clay to make out of the same lump one vessel for beauty and another for common use?”⁴”⁵

Then the bishop concludes: “The field of this potter, then, was bought with Christ’s blood for travelers. For travelers, I say, who were without home or country and were cast about as exiles throughout the earth, rest is provided by the blood of Christ so that those who have no possession in the world might have a burial place in Christ. Who do we say that these travelers are if not very devout Christians who, renouncing the world and possessing nothing in the world, rest in the blood of Christ? For the Christian who does not possess the world utterly possesses the Savior. Christ’s burial place then is promised to travelers so that the one who preserves himself from fleshly vices like a traveler and stranger may merit Christ’s rest. For what is Christ’s burial place if not the Christian’s rest? We, therefore, are travelers, in this world, and we sojourn in this life as passersby, as the apostle says: ‘While we are in this body we are away from the Lord.’⁶ We are travelers, I say, and a burial place has been bought for us at the price of the Savior’s blood. ‘We have been buried with Him,’ the apostle says, ‘through baptism in His death.’⁷ Baptism, therefore, is Christ’s burial place for us, in which we die to sins, are buried to evil deeds and are restored to a renewed infancy, the conscience of the old person having been dissolved in us for the sake of another birth.”⁸

What the bishop does not say at this point is the role this potter’s field, as he describes it here, in Judas Iscariot’s painful and unnecessary death. Could it be, that in his mind the reason Judas does not have the hope that he describes for all believers who also die and are buried in the field, is because even though he went there repentant, he tried to pay the price for his own sin? Had he gone there to pray and ask God for forgiveness, then perhaps he too could have arisen as a new creature in Christ Jesus.

Verse 11: Jesus stood before Pilate, the governor, who asked Him, “Are you the king of the Jews?” Jesus answered, “What you say is true.”

When it comes to how a trial is conducted, the Rabbis state explicitly: “Those who are subject to trial must stand when they receive the judgment pertaining to them.”⁹ And they go on to say: “The judges seat themselves, and the litigants remain standing before them.”¹⁰ Thus, while Pilate was sitting, as was the custom, we notice that Jesus was standing.

This also fits the procedural policies of the Jewish tribunal system. It says: “The witnesses have to stand when they give testimony, [since it is said, ‘And the two parties to the dispute shall stand before the Lord.”¹¹ No wonder we read in John’s Apocalypse: “And I saw those who had died, great and small, standing before the throne. Some books were opened. And another book was opened—the book of life. The people were judged by what they had done, which is written in the books.”¹²

Early church scholar Origen has this to say about Pilate’s question: “Truly Jesus ‘did not consider equality with God something to be grasped¹³ and not once but often humbled Himself on behalf of humanity. See now, ‘having been made the judge of every creature¹⁴ by the Father, the King of kings and Lord of lords, to what extent He humbled Himself. He compliantly stood before the governor of the land of Judea, who asked Him perhaps deridingly or doubtingly, ‘Are you the king of the Jews?’ Jesus thought this question was proper, and He replied, ‘It is as you say.’ Before that, having been entreated by the chief priest to say whether He was the Christ, the Son of God, He answered, ‘You have said it yourself.’¹⁵ Notice the two questions. The first one, ‘If you are the Christ the Son of God,’ was germane to Christ as a Jew. The Roman governor did not state his question by saying, ‘Are you the Christ?’ but rather, ‘Are you the king of the Jews?‘”¹⁶

Then early church preacher Chrysostom asks: “What is Christ’s answer to Pilate’s question? ‘You have said so.’ He confessed that He was [indeed] a king, but a heavenly king. This would be made clearer elsewhere when He replied more specifically to Pilate, ‘My kingship is not of this world.’¹⁷ He gives a reason that cannot be doubted: ‘If my kingship were of this world, my servants would fight, that I might not be handed over.’¹⁸ There was, of course, no excuse for even making such accusations, either from the governor or priests. For in order to refute this suspicion, He paid a tax and taught others to pay it.¹⁹ And when others wanted to make Him a king, He fled.’²⁰”²¹

Verse 12: But then, when the leading priests and the older Jewish leaders made their accusations against Jesus, He said nothing.

Yet, while standing there quietly, once again Jesus chooses not to refute the charges being made against Him. This brings up a very important principle in logic. Is it necessary to answer yes or no to an absurd question, or defend oneself against ridiculous charges? Sometimes it is proper in order for the truth to be told, and once it is revealed then it is up to the accuser to disprove it. At other times, when the question or accusation is posed in such a way that any response would show doubt or uncertainty, then use their own words against them. In other words, Jesus was open to answering proper questions, but He was silent in reaction to false accusations. There was no need for Him to become defensive. The only One He had anything to prove to was His Father in Heaven. Then the Father’s judgment would prove Him right or wrong.

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER TWENTY-SEVEN

Part III

One can only imagine the horror and grief felt by Judas once he realized he had betrayed the Son of God. As we can see, it proved too much for him to handle. Instead of running to Jesus and asking forgiveness, or weeping in repentance as Peter did, he repeated what another betrayer of our Lord’s royal ancestor, king David. After trying, but failing, to turn the people against him so that his son Absalom could take over, we read: “When Ahithophel saw that the Israelites did not do what he suggested, he saddled his donkey and went back to his hometown. He made plans for his family and then hanged himself.”¹

Jewish scholars have a particular take on those who slander or do something to betray another, and how it affects them. In one document, the Rabbis’ ask: “Why does this affliction commence in the bowels and end up in the throat?”² And on another occasion, some Rabbis were discussing what happened to thousands of disciples of Rabbi Akiba who did not treat each other with respect. Rabbi Hiyya ben Abin told them, “All of them died a cruel death.” So they asked what kind of death? Rabbi Nahman told them that they all choked to death.³ In other words, they were hanged. I can only imagine that the hardest part of being strangled by a rope comes when one is no longer able to breathe and call for help.

So in their minds, Judas Iscariot died the worst kind of death because he strangled himself by hanging. But before he did this, he tried to compensate for his sinful betrayal by throwing the bribe money back at the leading priests. Were they then convicted of what they had done? There is no evidence that they felt any shame. After all, their intent was to ruin one man’s life, now they saw that they had ruined two. But it doesn’t seem to have bothered them. In fact, they told Judas that it was now his problem, not theirs.

Verse 6: The leading priests picked up the silver coins off the Temple floor. They said, “Our law does not allow us to keep this money with the Temple money because this money has paid for a man’s death.”

Obviously, the leading priests were quoting a verbal tradition that forbid them from accepting bribe money as an offering, even though it was their money, to begin with. But their claim was based on not mixing this tainted money with the money in the holy treasury which was called the Korban.⁴ As a matter of fact, Flavius Josephus tells us that when Pilate used money from this sacred treasury to build aqueducts to bring water into the city from some 400 furlongs⁵ away, the people were so upset that they rioted and ended up with many of them beaten and trampled to death.

So by refusing to take the money that Judas returned, we see the unbelievable hypocrisy of these leading priests. The very money paid by them to initiate this hideous act was now seven times more repulsive than putting blood money into the temple treasury. Yet, while they greedily and unashamedly plotted the death of the Son of God, they piously and sanctimoniously refused to violate the Temple or its traditional laws. But they had an, even more, sinister motive in refusing this refund. Should their act of bringing Jesus to trial backfire and the people rise up in His support, they wanted to be able to declare their innocence of any involvement in His arrest and torture. So instead, they invested the bribe money in real estate.

Chrysostom had something to say about their actions. He writes: “If they had put the blood money into the treasury, their deed might have remained relatively more hidden. But the religious leaders make clear their guilt to all subsequent generations by buying the piece of land for burial. They thereby unconsciously declare their guilt. So do not imagine that someone might do a good work through murder and use the reward for some supposed good purpose. Such alms are satanic. Such reasoning is twisted. Do not be naive about this. There are still many who imagine that they are permitted to violently take countless things that belong to others. Then they make an excuse for their violence if they give some ten or a hundred gold pieces to charity. Of these the prophet has said, ‘You have covered my altar with tears.’⁶ Christ is not willing to be fed by covetousness. He does not accept these gifts. Why do you insult your Lord by offering these unclean things? It is better to leave people to pine with hunger than to feed them from these polluted sources.”⁷

And Origen offers his insights: “Because the quality of resting places for the dead varies (for many are buried in their ancestral tombs which were secured by a pledge, but those who suffer misfortune are often buried in the graves of the homeless), those who received payment in exchange for the blood of Jesus used it to acquire a potter’s field for the purpose of having a place in which to bury those foreigners who could not supply a pledge to secure a proper tomb. If it is suitable to interpret these foreigners typologically, we can consider those persons to be foreigners who remained strangers to God until the end and alien to His covenants. Vagabonds such as these meet their end buried in a potter’s field acquired with blood money. The righteous are able to say, ‘We are buried with Christ in a new tomb cut from the rock in which no dead body had yet been laid,’ but those foreigners who remain finally estranged from Christ and alien to God will have to say, ‘We are buried with strangers in the field which is called the “Field of Blood.’”⁸

Verses 7-8: So they decided to use the money to buy a field called Potter’s Field. This field would be a place to bury people who died while visiting in Jerusalem. That is why that field is still called the Field of Blood.

Matthew says that this piece of land became known as Potter’s Field, known in Aramaic as “Aceldama or Hakeldama,” meaning “Field of blood.” In fact, one early Church scholar reported that while living in Bethlehem in 386 AD, such a field was pointed out as existing on the south side of Mount Zion in the infamous Hinnom Valley that became a symbol of hell.⁹ We also see that Matthew links the purchase of this field with 30 pieces of silver to a saying by the prophet Jeremiah.

Verses 9-10: This showed the full meaning of what Jeremiah the prophet said: “They took 30 silver coins. That was how much the people of Israel decided to pay for his life. They used those 30 silver coins to buy the potter’s field, as the Lord commanded me.”

While there is certainly a mention of the LORD saying: “Jeremiah, go and buy a clay jar from a potter,”¹⁰ and also a plea for Jeremiah to buy the field of his uncle, Hanamel ben Shallum,¹¹ there is no mention of 30 pieces of silver. However, there is a remark about 30 pieces of silver being thrown into the Temple treasury, but it does not involve buying a field.¹²

Some scholars try to explain it this way: “The words here quoted are not found in Jeremiah, but in Zechariah; and a variety of conjectures have been formed, in order to reconcile this discrepancy. The most probable opinion seems to be, that the name of the prophet was originally omitted by the Evangelist, and that the name of Jeremiah was added by some subsequent copyist. It is omitted in two MSS. of the twelfth century, in the Syriac, later Aramaic, two of the Italian, and in some other Latin copies.”

By removing the name, it then allows for this quote by Matthew to be ascribed to Zechariah. On the other hand, St. Jerome reports that when reading an apocryphal work, contributed to the prophet Jeremiah, which was shown to him by a Nazarene sect, he did read about Jeremiah buying a potter’s field for 30 pieces of silver. Another argument is that in the early coalition of the Old Testament documents, they were not identified in the same way then as now. For instance, 1 & 2 Samuel and 1 & 2 Kings were once one book. In fact, Jewish Rabbis taught: “The order of the Prophets is, Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Isaiah, and the Twelve Minor Prophets.”¹³ But, because of Judas Iscariot’s chosen end, this becomes only an asterisk in the real story of what happens next.