Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Matthew 27:4
saying, I have sinned in that I have betrayed the innocent blood. And they said, What [is that] to us? see thou [to that.]
4. I have sinned in that I have betrayed ] Rather, I sinned in betraying.
the innocent blood ] “the” should be omitted.
see thou (to that) ] Lit., thou shalt see, it shall be thy concern. “Impii in facto consortes, post factum deserunt.” (Bengel.)
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
I have sinned – I have been guilty. I have done wrong.
In that I have betrayed the innocent blood – That is, in betraying an innocent being to death. Blood is put here for life, or for the man. The meaning is, that he knew and felt that Jesus was innocent. This confession is a remarkable proof that Jesus was innocent. Judas had been with him for three years. He had seen him in public and private; he had heard his public teaching and his private views; he had seen him in all circumstances; and if he had done anything evil, or advanced anything against the Roman emperor, Judas was competent to testify it. Had he known any such thing he would have stated it. His testimony, being a disciple of Jesus, would have been to the chief priests far more valuable than that of any other man; and he might not only have escaped the horrors of a troubled conscience and an awful death, but have looked for an ample reward. That he did not make such a charge that he fully and frankly confessed that Jesus was innocent – and that he gave up the ill-gotten price of treason, is full proof that, in the belief of Judas, the Saviour was free from crime, and even the suspicion of crime.
What is that to us? – This form of speaking denoted that they had nothing to do with his remorse of conscience, and his belief that Jesus was innocent. They had secured what they wanted – the person of Jesus – and they cared little now for the feelings of the traitor. So all wicked men who make use of the agency of others for the accomplishment of crime or the gratification of passion care little for the effect on the instrument. They will soon cast him off and despise him, and in thousands of instances the instruments of villainy and the panders to the pleasures of others are abandoned to remorse, wretchedness, crime, and death.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 4. Innocent blood.] , a Hebraism, for an innocent man. But instead of , innocent, two ancient MSS., Syriac, Vulgate, Sahidic, Armenian, and all the Itala; Origen, Cyprian, Lucifer, Ambrose, Leo, read , righteous, or just.
What is that to us?] What is it? – A great deal. You should immediately go and reverse the sentence you have pronounced, and liberate the innocent person. But this would have been justice, and that would have been a stranger at their tribunal.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
4. Saying, I have sinned in that Ihave betrayed the innocent bloodWhat a testimony this toJesus! Judas had been with Him in all circumstances for three years;his post, as treasurer to Him and the Twelve (Joh12:6), gave him peculiar opportunity of watching the spirit,disposition, and habits of his Master; while his covetous nature andthievish practices would incline him to dark and suspicious, ratherthan frank and generous, interpretations of all that He said and did.If, then, he could have fastened on one questionable feature in allthat he had so long witnessed, we may be sure that no such speech asthis would ever have escaped his lips, nor would he have been sostung with remorse as not to be able to keep the money and survivehis crime.
And they said, What is thatto us? see thou to that“Guilty or innocent is nothing tous: We have Him nowbegone!” Was ever speech more hellishuttered?
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Saying, I have sinned,…. Here was a confession, and yet no true repentance; for he confessed, but not to the right persons; not to God, nor Christ, but to the chief priests and elders; nor over the head of the antitypical scape goat, not seeking to Christ for pardon and cleansing, nor did he confess and forsake sin, but went on adding sin to sin, and so found no mercy. The same confession was made by a like hardened wretch, Pharaoh, Ex 9:27. He proceeds and points out the evil he had committed:
in that I have betrayed innocent blood, or “righteous blood”; so the Vulgate Latin, and Syriac versions, and Munster’s Hebrew Gospel read, and some copies; that is, have betrayed an innocent and righteous person, and been the occasion of his blood being about to be shed, and of his dying wrongfully. So God, in his all-wise providence, ordered it, that a testimony should be bore to the innocence of Christ, from the mouth of this vile wretch that betrayed him; to cut off the argument from the Jews, that one of his own disciples knew him to be a wicked man, and as such delivered him into their hands: for though Judas might not believe in him as the Messiah, and the Son of God, at least had no true faith in him, as such; yet he knew, and believed in his own conscience, that he was a good man, and a righteous and innocent one: and what he here says is a testimony of Christ’s innocence, and what his conscience obliged him to; and shows the terrors that now encompassed him about; and might have been a warning to the Jews to have stopped all further proceedings against him; but instead of that,
they said, what is that to us? see thou to that: signifying, that if he had sinned, he must answer for it himself; it was no concern of theirs; nor should they form their sentiments of Christ according to his: they knew that he was a blasphemer, and deserving of death; and whatever opinion he had of him, it had no weight with them, who should proceed against him as an evildoer, let him think or say what he would to the contrary; and suggest, that he knew otherwise than what he said: so the Syriac and Persic versions render it, “thou knowest”, and the Arabic, “thou knowest better”.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
See thou to it ( ). Judas made a belated confession of his sin in betraying innocent blood to the Sanhedrin, but not to God, nor to Jesus. The Sanhedrin ignore the innocent or righteous blood ( or ) and tell Judas to look after his own guilt himself. They ignore also their own guilt in the matter. The use of as a volitive future, an equivalent of the imperative, is commoner in Latin (tu videris) than in Greek, though the Koine shows it also. The sentiment is that of Cain (Grotius, Bruce).
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
4. What is that to us? Here is described the stupidity and madness of the priests, since even after having been warned by the dreadful example of Judas, still they do not think about themselves. I do acknowledge that hypocrites, as they are accustomed to flatter themselves, had some plausible excuse at hand for distinguishing between their case and that of Judas; for they did not think that they were partakers of his crime, though they abused the treachery of Judas. But Judas not only confesses that he has sinned, but asserts the innocence of Christ; from which it follows, that they had meditated the death of a righteous man, and, therefore, that they were guilty of a detestable murder. Nor is there any room to doubt that God intended to sear their consciences with a hot iron, to discover the hidden corruption. Let us therefore learn, that when we see wicked persons, with whom we have any thing in common, filled with alarm, those are so many excitements to repentance, and that they who neglect such excitements aggravate their criminality. We ought also to believe, that the crime of one man can have no effect in acquitting all those who are in any way involved in it; and still more, that the leading perpetrators of a crime can gain no advantage by distinguishing between themselves and their agents, that they may not suffer the same punishment.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(4) I have sinned in that I have betrayed.More accurately, I sinned in betraying.
What is that to us?We instinctively feel, as we read these words, that deep as was the guilt of Judas, that of those who thus mocked him was deeper still. Speaking after the manner of men, we may say that a word of sympathy and true counsel might have saved him even then. His confession was as the germ of repentance, but this repulse drove him back upon despair, and he had not the courage or the faith to turn to the great Absolver; and so his life closed as in a blackness of darkness; and if we ask the question, Is there any hope? We dare not answer. Possibly there mingled with his agony, as has been suggested by one at least of the great teachers of the Church (Origen, Horn. in Matt. 35), some confused thought that in the world of the dead, behind the veil, he might meet his Lord and confess his guilt to Him.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
4. What is that to us? So unsympathizing are Satan and his agents to the victims they have ruined. He probably stood at the railing between the court of Israel and the court of the priests. (See Temple Plan.) The priests in their own court may have been arranging matters for the passover festivals. Judas flung the money probably over the railing upon the pavement at the feet of the priests.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘Saying, “I have sinned in that I betrayed innocent blood.” But they said, “What is that to us? You see to it.”
Meeting with the Chief Priest’s representatives he declared to them that he had sinned in betraying innocent blood. Compare Deu 27:25 where a curse is pronounced on the one who betrays innocent blood. Thus Judas no doubt belatedly recognised that he had come under that curse. We can, however, also compare 1Sa 19:5 where to kill David is to sin against innocent blood, how much more then to kill the Son of David. Furthermore innocent blood was also connected in Jer 19:4 with the casting of the potter’s clay vessel into the Valley of Hinnom, which connects with the prophecy in Mat 27:10, and which to some extent parallels Judas’ action in Mat 27:5. Thus we are reminded by the phrase ‘innocent blood’, that Judas has put himself under a curse, has betrayed the son of David, and has brought judgment on Jerusalem.
Perhaps Judas hoped that even now he could change their attitude towards Jesus by declaring His innocence. He quite probably actually believed that they were men of principle and conscience, who could be convinced of their error. He soon discovered his mistake. Their reply indicated his error. They could not have cared less. ‘That’s your affair’, was their callous reply. ‘What’s it got to do with us? You see to it.’ In fact it should, of course, have had a great deal to do with them, for here was a soul in torment for whom they were supposed to show concern. But they wanted to wash their hands of the whole affair. They had got what they wanted. Judas no longer mattered.
But for Matthew there is also a deliberate contrast here with Pilate’s declaration of his own innocence. Compare “I have sinned in that I betrayed innocent blood” with “I am innocent of the blood of this righteous man” (Mat 27:24). ‘Righteous man’ indicated that Pilate agreed with Judas about Jesus’ innocence. In contrast with Judas, however, he does not feel blood guilty, but he undoubtedly was. For a man given judicial responsibility cannot wash his hands in innocency when he fails to fulfil it. Note that both end with ‘see you to it’ (one singular ‘you’, one plural ‘you’). The Chief Priests and Elders were trying to deny responsibility, as, in a similar way, was Pilate. But both failed to achieve their purpose. Interestingly only Judas appears as honest in this sequence, even if his honesty is an admission of guilt.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Mat 27:4 ] see on Mat 26:12 .
] , Euthymius Zigabenus; comp. Deu 27:25 ; 1Ma 1:37 ; Mal 1:8Mal 1:8 ; Phalar. ep . 40; Heliod. viii. 10.
] sc . ; what is it as regards us? i.e. what matters it to us? we are in no way called upon to concern ourselves about what thou hast done. Comp. Joh 21:22 f.; the words are also frequently used in this sense by Greek authors.
] Thou wilt see to it thyself , thou wilt have to consider for thyself what is now to be done by thee; comp. Mat 27:24 ; Act 18:15 ; 1Sa 25:17 ; 4Ma 9:1 . “Impii in facto consortes, post factum deserunt,” Bengel.
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
“Saying, I have sinned in that I have betrayed the innocent blood. And they said, What is that to us? see thou to that. (5) And he cast down the pieces of silver in the temple, and departed, and went and hanged himself. (6) And 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. (7) And they took counsel, and bought with them the potter’s field, to bury strangers in. (8) Wherefore that field was called, The field of blood, unto this day. (9) Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremy the prophet, saying, And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of him that was valued, whom they of the children of Israel did value; (10) And gave them for the potter’s field, as the Lord appointed me.”
The awful termination of the life of the traitor, is very properly introduced here, as if to shew, that before the dreadful deed which was to follow his perfidy, in the death of his Master, had taken place; his own death, and that of the most horrible kind, in self-murder, at which, universally considered, nature, uninfluenced by the devil, must always shrink, should be accomplished. And as if abhorred, both of God and man; when having hanged himself, his very body shall have another mark of infamy, and his bowels shall gush out. Act 1:18 .
I refer the Reader to the “Poor Man’s Concordance, ” respecting the field bought with the traitor’s money. See Aceldama. And the repenting himself, as it was very properly named, is proper to notice, for there was no act of God’s grace in it but simply an horror of soul, in the consciousness of the dreadful deed he had committed; an agony of mind, which from the fearful expectation of misery forever, compelled him to leap at once into hell, unable to bear the stings of a conscience worse than hell itself? The mistake as some have supposed, in applying to the Prophet Jeremiah what was delivered by Zechariah concerning the thirty pieces of silver, is easily rectified, by only supposing, what is most likely to have been the case, that Zechariah’s prophecy on this subject, was gathered from some sermon of Jeremiah; or that, as hath been said, the four last Chapters of Zechariah had been written before Jeremiah. But in either case it doth not lessen the authority of the words themselves, or make the least alteration in their importance.
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
4 Saying, I have sinned in that I have betrayed the innocent blood. And they said, What is that to us? see thou to that .
Ver. 4. I have sinned, &c. ] Here was contrition, confession, restitution (most men go not so far, that yet profess large hopes of heaven); there was wanting that transmentation, conversion, obedience of faith that should have completed his repentance. He died in the birth, as that foolish child Ephraim. He confessed to men, and not to God; and by his confession he sought no more than to ease his heart, as drunkards by vomiting rid their stomachs. So Latemus of Louvain confessed, inter horrendos mugitus, se contra conscientiam adversatum esse veritati, roaring and crying out, that against his conscience he had persecuted the truth of God. a In trouble of mind, all will out. Conscience, like Samson’s wife, conceals not the riddle: like Futvia, a whorish woman, who declared all the secrets of her foolish lover Cneius, a noble Roman. Sallust. in Bel. Catil.
What is that to us? See thou to that ] Miserable comforters, physicians of no value. “To him that is afflicted pity should be showed from his friend: but he forsaketh the fear of the Almighty,”Job 6:14Job 6:14 . The devil and his imps love to bring men into the briers, and there leave them; as familiar devils forsake their witches, when they have brought them once into fetters. Thus the old Bethelite, that had been at pains to fetch back the prophet, would not go back with him. Thus the Papists burnt Cranmer recanting, and the present prelates cast off their great anti-Sabbatarian, White, when they had served their turns on him. David, when he was hunted from Samuel the prophet, fled to Abimelech the priest, as one that knew that justice and compassion should dwell in those breasts that are consecrated to God. But Judas met with no such matter in the priests of his time. Those mischievous men left him, when they had led him to his bane.
a Melancth. in Chronic.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Mat 27:4 . , I sinned, I did wrong. . . explains how. The sinning and the betraying are one, therefore the participle does not point to an act antecedent to that of the main verb. , innocent blood, for the blood of an innocent person. So in Deu 27:25 . Palairet cites examples to prove that Greek writers used as = . : that is not our concern. , look thou to that = “tu videris,” a Latinism. The sentiment itself a Cainism . “Ad modum Caini loquuntur vera progenies Caini” (Grotius).
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
sinned. App-128. Literally “I sinned”.
the innocent. (No Art.) The innocence of the Lord affirmed by six witnesses, three in Matthew and three in Luk :1. Judas (Mat 27:4);
2. Pilate (Mat 27:24);
3. Pilate’s wife (Mat 27:19);
4. Herod (Luk 23:15);
5. the malefactor (Luk 23:41);
6. the Roman centurion (Luk 23:47).
innocent. Greek. athoos. Occurs only here, and Mat 27:24.
blood. Put by Figure of speech Synecdoche (of the Part), App-6, for the whole person, with a latent reference to Mat 27:6. Compare verses: Mat 24:25. Psa 94:21. Pro 1:11.
What . . . &c. Ignoring both the Lord’s innocence and Judas’s guilt. see thou to that = thou wilt see [to it]. see. App-133.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Mat 27:4. , I have sinned) Thus also the damned will feel in hell.[1171]- , innocent blood) Miserably involved in his own darkness, he no longer acknowledges Jesus as the Messiah.- , what is that to us?) See how they dismiss, without remark, the question as to the innocence of their Victim.[1172]- , see thou to that) The ungodly, though associating in the commission of a crime, desert their associates when it has been accomplished:[1173] the godly, though not taking part in the crime, endeavour, after its commission, to save the sinners soul. Comp. Mat 27:24.
[1171] And O that the friends of Christ, moved by faith, love, and hope, would confess the truth as openly as men in despair are wont at times to do, when they feel that they have now no longer any opportunity of earning merit in the eyes of the world!-Harm., p. 542.
[1172] In the original, Vide, quam transiliant innocentem; literally, See how they leap over the innocent; referring to the words of Judas, INNOCENT blood.-(I. B.)
[1173] But still punishment at last awaits all severally, according to the part which each took in the deed.-V. g.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
sinned
Sin. (See Scofield “Rom 3:23”).
Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes
I have sinned: Gen 42:21, Gen 42:22, Exo 9:27, Exo 10:16, Exo 10:17, Exo 12:31, 1Sa 15:24, 1Sa 15:30, 1Ki 21:27, Rom 3:19
the innocent: Mat 27:19, Mat 27:23, Mat 27:24, Mat 27:54, 2Ki 24:4, Jer 26:15, Jon 1:14, Luk 23:22, Luk 23:41, Luk 23:47, Joh 19:7, Act 13:28, Heb 7:26, 1Pe 1:19
What: Mat 27:25, Act 18:15-17, 1Ti 4:2, Tit 1:16, 1Jo 3:12, Rev 11:10
see: 1Sa 28:16-20, Job 13:4, Job 16:2, Luk 16:25, Luk 16:26
Reciprocal: Lev 19:16 – stand Lev 22:19 – General Num 21:7 – We have Num 22:34 – I Have sinned Deu 19:10 – General Deu 27:25 – General Jos 7:20 – Indeed 1Sa 19:5 – sin against innocent 1Sa 24:17 – Thou art 1Sa 26:21 – I have sinned 2Sa 19:19 – did perversely 2Ki 6:33 – this evil is of the Lord 1Ch 10:4 – Saul took Job 20:15 – swallowed Psa 37:15 – sword Psa 55:23 – bloody and deceitful men shall not live out half their days Psa 69:27 – Add Psa 109:6 – Set thou Pro 1:18 – General Pro 11:5 – direct Pro 12:8 – he Pro 28:13 – and forsaketh Pro 28:17 – General Isa 59:3 – your hands Jer 7:6 – and shed Jer 20:4 – I will make Jer 36:25 – made Mat 26:2 – betrayed Mar 6:16 – It is Mar 15:14 – Why Luk 23:14 – have found Joh 19:4 – that ye 2Co 7:10 – the sorrow Eph 5:15 – See 1Pe 2:22 – did
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
27:4
Judas knew from the start that Jesus was innocent, but expected him to resort to his miraculous power to escape from the hands of the mob. He had a guilty conscience but it was overruled by the effect of his disappointment so that he did not have the moral courage to do the right thing. What is that to us means they were not concerned about the affairs of his conscience.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Mat 27:4. I sinned. Erred is too weak. Although Judas had no real conception of the sinfulness of sin, his feeling was intense. All notions that he tried to make his guilt appear small seem to come from wrong views of his motives and of his remorse. Fearful sorrow for the consequences of sin may coexist with entire sinfulness.
In that I betrayed, lit, in betraying, innocent blood. No sign of affection for his Master, but even Judas may testify to the sinless perfection of our Lord. Nothing in the three years intercourse could now be used to appease his conscience.
What is that to us? see thou to it. Tools of crime are lightly thrown away after the crime. The rulers have no remorse. Was Judas then worse than his employers?
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Judas’ testimony to Jesus’ innocence is an important part of Matthew’s witness that Jesus was the Messiah. The response of the Sanhedrin members likewise proved their guilt. It should have meant something to them that Judas said that Jesus was innocent. Judas betrayed innocent blood, and they condemned innocent blood. [Note: Carson, "Matthew," p. 561.] They were wrong in thinking they could avoid responsibility for Jesus’ death because of Judas’ guilt in betraying Him.
"They are ’guileful’ and ’callous,’ purchasing the services of Judas to betray Jesus yet leaving Judas to his own devices in coming to terms with his burden of guilt (Mat 26:14-16; Mat 27:3-4)." [Note: Kingsbury, Matthew as . . ., pp. 22-23.]