Matthew 27 commentary

MATTHEW 27 COMME TARY
EDITED BY GLE PEASE
Judas Hangs Himself
1 Early in the morning, all the chief priests and
the elders of the people made their plans how to
have Jesus executed.
BAR ES,"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.
CLARKE, "When the morning was come - As soon as it was light - took counsel
against Jesus. They had begun this counsel the preceding evening, see Mat_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; Mat_26:66. And now they assemble under the pretense 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.”
GILL, "When the morning was come,.... Or, as soon as it was day, as Luke says,
Luk_22:66. The sanhedrim had been up all night, which, after eating the passover, they
had spent in apprehending, trying, and examining Jesus, and the witnesses against him;
and had come to an unanimous vote, that he was guilty of death; upon which they either
put Jesus out of the room for a while, or went into another themselves, to consult what
further steps should be taken: or if they went home to their own houses, they very
quickly got together again, and met in the temple, where they seem to be, Mat_27:5,
unless the story of Judas is, by anticipation, inserted here; and in their council chamber,
where they led Jesus, and examined him again concerning his being the Son of God; see
Luk_22:66, all which shows how intent they were upon this business, and with what
eagerness and diligence they pursued it; their feet ran to evil, and they made haste to
shed blood. This was the time of their morning prayers, of their saying their
phylacteries, and reciting the "shema", "hear, O Israel! the Lord our God is one Lord",
according to their canon, which is this (e):
"from what time do they read the "shema" in the morning? from such time that a man
can distinguish between blue and white: says R. Eliezer, between blue and green; and he
finishes it before the sun shines out. R. Joshua says, before three hours had elapsed:''
but religion, rites, ceremonies, and canons, must all give way to the accomplishment of
what their hearts were so much set upon:
all the chief priests and elders of the people. The Syriac and Persic versions leave
out the word "all", but it is retained in the Vulgate Latin, Arabic, and Ethiopic versions,
and in Munster's Hebrew Gospel, and that very rightly. The Scribes and elders met at
Caiaphas's house before, Mat_26:57, but it being in the night, they might not be all
together; Annas particularly seems to have been absent, Joh_18:24, but now they all
assemble together, as in a case of necessity they were obliged to do: their rule was this
(f);
"the sanhedrim, consisting of seventy and one (as this was), are obliged to sit all of them
as one, (or all, and everyone of them,) in their place in the temple; but at what time there
is a necessity of their being gathered together, ‫כולן‬ ‫,מתקבצין‬ "they are all of them
assembled"; but, at other times, he who has any business may go, and do his pleasure,
and return: yet so it is, that there may not be less than twenty three sitting continually all
the time of their sitting; (their usual time of sitting was from the morning daily sacrifice,
to the evening daily sacrifice (g);) one that is under a necessity of going out; this looks
upon his companions that remain, and if twenty three remain, he may go out; but if not,
he may not, until the other returns.''
This being now a case of necessity, and great importance, they are all summoned and
gathered together, unless we except Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus; who yet might

be there, though they did not consent to their counsel and deed, as is certain of the
former, Luk_23:51, these
took counsel against Jesus; God's holy child Jesus, his anointed, the Messiah; and
which was taking counsel against the Lord himself; and so the prophecy in Psa_2:2, had
its accomplishment: what they consulted about was
to put him to death; it was not what punishment to inflict upon him, whether
scourging or death; that was before determined; they had already condemned him to
death: but now they enter into close consultation what death to put him to, and in what
manner; whether privately, he being now in their hands; or whether by the means of
zealots, or by the Roman magistrate; or whether it should be by stoning, which must
have been the case, if they put him to death according to their law; and by their
authority; or whether by crucifixion, which they chose as the most ignominious and
painful; and therefore determined to deliver him up to the Roman governor, and use
their interest with him to put him to death, according to the Roman law.
HE RY, "We left Christ in the hands of the chief priests and elders, condemned to
die, but they could only show their teeth; about two years before this the Romans had
taken from the Jews the power of capital punishment; they could put no man to death,
and therefore early in the morning another council is held, to consider what is to be
done. And here we are told what was done in that morning-council, after they had been
for two or three hours consulting with their pillows.
I. Christ is delivered up to Pilate, that he might execute the sentence they had passed
upon him. Judea having been almost one hundred years before this conquered by
Pompey, had ever since been tributary to Rome, and was lately made part of the
province of Syria, and subject to the government of the president of Syria, under whom
there were several procurators, who chiefly attended the business of the revenues, but
sometimes, as Pilate particularly, had the whole power of the president lodged in them.
This was a plain evidence that the sceptre was departed from Judah, and that therefore
now the Shilloh must come, according to Jacob's prophecy, Gen_49:10. Pilate is
characterized by the Roman writers of that time, as a man of a rough and haughty spirit,
wilful and implacable, and extremely covetous and oppressive; the Jews had a great
enmity to his person, and were weary of his government, and yet they made use of him
as the tool of their malice against Christ.
JAMISO , "Mat_27:1-10. Jesus led away to Pilate - Remorse and suicide of Judas. (
= Mar_15:1; Luk_23:1; Joh_18:28).
Jesus led away to Pilate (Mat_27:1, Mat_27:2).
For the exposition of this portion, see on Joh_18:28, etc.
HAWKER 1-2, ""When the morning was come, all the chief priests and elders of the
people took counsel against Jesus to put him to death: (2) And when they had bound
him, they led him away, and delivered him to Pontius Pilate the governor."
It should seem pretty evident, that so intent were the Chief Priests and Elders, headed by
Annas and Caiaphas, to destroy Christ, that they sat up all night in council: for Luke
saith, that as soon as it was day, they were again assembled for this purpose. Luk_22:66.
I interrupt the history for a moment, to remind the Reader, what a sweet observation the
Lord Jesus made upon this eagerness of his enemies to kill him, when in answer to what

Pilate said of his authority: speakest thou not to me, said the poor proud worm, knowest
thou not that I have power to crucify thee, and have power to release thee? Jesus
answered: thou couldst have no power at all against me, except it were given thee from
above. Joh_19:10-11. Oh! how truly blessed is it always to keep in view Jehovah’s hand,
and ordination in the wonders of redemption! Blessedly also to this purport, is the word
of the Lord’s servants after attending to those of the Master. For in that prayer offered
up by the whole college of Apostles, soon after the day of Pentecost, and which was
answered by the Lord, in the place being shaken where they were assembled; we find
those words, in making application of Ps 2: Why did the heathen rage, and the people
imagine vain things? The kings of the earth stood up, and the rulers were gathered
against the Lord and against his Christ. For of a truth against thy holy child Jesus both
Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were gathered
together. But then it is added; For to do whatsoever thy hand, and thy counsel
determined before to be done. Act_4:25-28.
CALVI , "Matthew 27:1.But when it was morning. The high priest, with his
council, after having examined him at an unseasonable hour of the night, finally
resolve, at sunrise, to place him at the bar of the governor. By so doing, they observe
the form of judicial proceedings, that they may not be suspected of undue haste,
when they run to Pilate at an unusually early hour, as usually happens in cases of
tumult. But it is probable, that when Christ had been led away from their council,
they immediately held a consultation, and, without long delay, resolved what they
would do; for we have been already told at what time Christ went out from them
and met Peter, which was after the cock-crowing, and just as day was breaking. The
Evangelists, therefore, do not mean that they removed from the place, (239) but only
relate, that as soon as it was daylight, they condemned Christ to death, and did not
lose a moment in earnestly putting into execution their wicked design. What Luke
formerly stated, (Luke 22:26,) that they assembled in the morning, ought not to be
explained as referring to the very beginning, but to the last act, which is
immediately added: as if he had said, that as soon as it was day, our Lord having
acknowledged that he was the Son of God, they pronounced their sentence of his
death. ow if they had been permitted to decide in taking away life, they would all
have been eager, in their fury, to murder him with their own hands; but as Pilate
had cognizance of capital crimes, they are constrained to refer the matter to his
jurisdiction; only they entangle him by their own previous decision. (240) For the
stoning of Stephen (Acts 7:59) took place in a seditious manner, as happens in cases
of tumult; but it was proper that the Son of God should be solemnly condemned by
an earthly judge, that he might efface our condemnation in heaven.
BE SO , "Matthew 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, John 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 icodemus, 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, Matthew 27:18.
LIGHTFOOT, "1. When the morning was come, all the chief priests and elders of
the people took counsel against Jesus to put him to death:
[When the morning was come, &c.] Let us trace a little the proceedings of this
council:--
I. They spend the night in judging on a capital cause, which is expressly forbid by
their own canon: They handle capital causes in the day time, and finish them by
day. Money matters indeed that were begun by day might be ended in the night,
which is asserted in that place; but capital causes were only to be handled by day:
but here, in sitting upon the life and death of our Saviour, there is need of night and
darkness. This judgment is begun in the night, and carried on all the night through
in a manner.
II. This night was the evening of a feast day, namely, of the first day of the paschal
week, at what time they were also forbid to sit in judgment: "They do not judge on a
feast day." How the lawyers are divided on this point, I will not trouble you now
with recounting. This very canon is sufficient ground for scruple, which we leave to
them to clear, who, through rancour and hatred towards Christ, seem to slight and
trample under feet their own canons.
III. When it was morning. This was the time of saying their phylacteries, namely,
from the first daylight to the third hour...Another business that you had in hand
(effectually to destroy Jesus), either robbed you of your prayers, or robbed your
prayers of charity.
IV. ow appears, the first feast day of the Passover, when they used to present
themselves in the Temple and offer their gifts, Exodus 23:15. But when and how was
this performed by them today? They take heed of going into the judgment (or
Praetor's) hall, lest they should be defiled, but that they might eat the Chagigah, or
Passover: but you will scarce find what time they allowed today for that purpose;
nor indeed was it lawful for them to eat any thing on that day; it being provided by
a canon, "That when the council shall have adjudged any one to die, let them not
taste any thing that day."

[Took counsel to put him to death.] Let that be considered; "Cases of money are
heard in the daytime, and may be determined in the night. Capital causes are tried
in the day, and finished in the day. Judgment in cases of money is passed the same
day, whether it be for fining or acquitting. Judgment in capital causes is passed the
same day, if it be for acquitting: but if it be for condemning, it is passed the day
after." The reason of this difference is given by the Gemarists; whom see. The
reason of the latter is thus expressed: Blessed is the judge who leaveneth his
judgment: that is, as the Gloss, "who delays his judgment, and lets it rest all night,
that he may sift out the truth."
The difference between hear and determine is greater than the reader may perhaps
think at first sight. By the word hear they signify the whole process of the trial, the
examining of the plaintiff and defendant, and of the witnesses, the taking the votes
of the council, and the entering of them by the scribes: determine signifies only the
passing of judgment, or giving a definitive sentence. You may better perceive the
difference from the Glossary on Babyl. Sanhedrin: in the text this is decried, Let
them not judge on the eve of the sabbath, nor on the eve of a feast day; which is also
repeated in other places. The reason of the prohibition is this, namely, that the trials
which were begun on the eve of the sabbath, or a feast day, should not be finished
on the sabbath or feast day. "Which indeed (saith the Gloss), is observed in
pecuniary trials, and care is taken that there be no writing" (for it is forbid to write
so much as a letter on the sabbath): "but in capital causes it takes not place upon
that account; for the votes of those that acquitted or condemned were written the
day before."
You see in the history of the gospel, 1. The trial concerning our Saviour's life, was
not despatched at one and the same sitting. 2. And that too on a feast-day.
BARCLAY, "THE MA WHO SE TE CED JESUS TO DEATH (Matthew 27:1-
2; Matthew 27:11-26)
27:1-2,11-26 When the morning came, all the chief priests and elders of the people
took counsel against Jesus, to put him to death; so they bound him, and led him
away, and handed him over to Pilate the governor.
Jesus stood before the governor, and the governor put the question to him, "Are you
the King of the Jews?" Jesus said to him, "You say so." While he was being accused
by the chief priests and the elders, he returned no answer. Then Pilate said to him,
"Do you not hear the evidence which they are stating against you?" Jesus answered
not a single word, so that the governor was much amazed. At the time of the Feast
the governor was in the habit of releasing one prisoner to the crowd, a prisoner
whom they wished. At that time he was holding a very well-known prisoner called
Barabbas. So, when they were assembled, Pilate said to them. "Whom do you wish
me to release to you? Barabbas? Or, Jesus who is called Christ?" For he was well
aware that they had delivered Jesus to him because of malice. While he was sitting

on his judgment seat, his wife sent a message to him. "Have nothing to do with this
just man," she said, "for today I have had an extraordinary experience in a dream
because of him." The chief priests and the elders persuaded the crowds to ask for
the release of Barabbas, and the destruction of Jesus. "Which of the two," said the
governor, "am I to release to you?" "Barabbas," they said. "What then," said Pilate
to them, "am I to do with Jesus who is called Christ." "Let him be crucified," they
all said. "What evil has he done?" he said. They kept shouting all the more: "Let
him be crucified." When Pilate saw that it was hopeless to do anything, and that
rather a disturbance was liable to arise, he took water, and washed his hands in
presence of the crowd. "I am innocent of the blood of this just man," he said. "You
must see to it." All the people answered, "Let the responsibility for his blood be on
us and on our children." Then he released Barabbas to them; but he had Jesus
scourged, and handed him over to be crucified.
Matthew 27:1-2 describe what must have been a very brief meeting of the
Sanhedrin, held early in the morning, with a view to formulating finally an official
charge against Jesus. The necessity for this lay in the fact that, while the Jews could
themselves deal with an ordinary charge, they could not inflict the death penalty.
That was a sentence which could be pronounced only by the Roman governor, and
carried out by the Roman authorities. The Sanhedrin had therefore to formulate a
charge with which they could go to Pilate and demand the death of Jesus.
Matthew does not tell us what that charge was; but Luke does. In the Sanhedrin the
charge which was levelled against Jesus was a charge of blasphemy (Matthew 26:65-
66). But no one knew better than the Jewish authorities that that was a charge to
which Pilate would not listen. He would tell them to go away and settle their own
religious quarrels. So, as Luke tells us, they appeared before Pilate with a threefold
charge, every item in which was a lie, and a deliberate lie. They charged Jesus first
with being a revolutionary, second, with inciting the people not to pay their taxes,
and third, with claiming to be a king (Luke 23:2). They fabricated three political
charges, all of them conscious lies, because they knew that only on such charges
would Pilate act.
So, then, everything hung on the attitude of Pilate. What kind of man was this
Roman governor?
Pilate was officially procurator of the province; and he was directly responsible, not
to the Roman senate, but to the Roman Emperor. He must have been at least
twenty-seven years of age, for that was the minimum age for entering on the office
of procurator. He must have been a man of considerable experience, for there was a
ladder of offices, including military command, up which a man must climb until he
qualified to become a governor. Pilate must have been a tried and tested soldier and
administrator. He became procurator of Judaea in A.D. 26 and held office for ten
years, when he was recalled from his post.
When Pilate came to Judaea, he found trouble in plenty, and much of it was of his
own making. His great handicap was that he was completely out of sympathy with

the Jews. More, he was contemptuous of what he would have called their irrational
and fanatical prejudices, and what they would have called their principles. The
Romans knew the intensity of Jewish religion and the unbreakable character of
Jewish belief, and very wisely had always dealt with the Jews with kid gloves. Pilate
arrogantly proposed to use the mailed fist.
He began with trouble. The Roman headquarters were in Caesarea. The Roman
standards were not flags; they were poles with the Roman eagle, or the image of the
reigning emperor, on top. In deference to the Jewish hatred of graven images, every
previous governor had removed the eagles and the images from the standards
before he marched into Jerusalem on his state visits. Pilate refused to do so. The
result was such bitter opposition and such intransigence that Pilate in the end was
forced to yield, for it is not possible either to arrest or to slaughter a whole nation.
Later, Pilate decided that Jerusalem needed a better water supply--a wise decision.
To that end he constructed a new aqueduct--but he took money from the Temple
treasury to pay for it.
Philo, the great Jewish Alexandrian scholar, has a character study of Pilate--and
Philo, remember, was not a Christian, but was speaking from the Jewish point of
view. The Jews, Philo tells us, had threatened to exercise their right to report Pilate
to the Emperor for his misdeeds. This threat "exasperated Pilate to the greatest
possible degree, as he feared lest they might go on an embassy to the emperor, and
might impeach him with respect to other particulars of his government--his
corruption, his acts of insolence, his rapine, his habit of insulting people, his cruelty,
his continual murders of people untried and uncondemned, and his never-ending
gratuitous and most grievous inhumanity." Pilate's reputation with the Jews stank;
and the fact that they could report him made his position entirely insecure.
We follow the career of Pilate to the end. In the end he was recalled to Rome on
account of his savagery in an incident in Samaria. A certain impostor had
summoned the people to Mount Gerizim with the claim that he would show them
the sacred vessels which Moses had hidden there. Unfortunately many of the crowd
came armed, and assembled in a village called Tirabatha. Pilate fell on them and
slaughtered them with quite unnecessary savagery, for it was a harmless enough
movement. The Samaritans lodged a complaint with Vitellius, the legate of Syria,
who was Pilate's immediate superior, and Vitellius ordered him to return to Rome
to answer for his conduct.
When Pilate was on his way to Rome, Tiberius the Emperor died; and it appears
that Pilate never came to trial. Legend has it that in the end he committed suicide;
his body was flung into the Tiber, but the evil spirits so troubled the river that the
Romans took the body to Gaul and threw it into the Rhone. Pilate's so-called tomb is
still shown in Vienne. The same thing happened there; and the body was finally
taken to a place near Lausanne and buried in a pit in the mountains. Opposite
Lucerne there is a hill called Mount Pilatus. Originally the mountain was called
Pileatus, which means wearing a cap of clouds, but because it was connected with

Pilate the name was changed to Pilatus.
Later Christian legend was sympathetic to Pilate and tended to place all the blame
for the death of Jesus on the Jews. ot unnaturally, legend came to hold that Pilate's
wife, who it is said was a Jewish proselyte, and was called Claudia Procula, became
a Christian. It was even held that Pilate himself became a Christian; and to this day
the Coptic Church ranks both Pilate and his wife as saints.
We conclude this study of Pilate with a very interesting document. Pilate must have
sent a report of the trial and death of Jesus to Rome; that would happen in the
normal course of administration. An apocryphal book called The Acts of Peter and
Paul contains an alleged copy of that report. This report is actually referred to by
Tertullian and Justin Martyr and Eusebius. The report as we have it can hardly be
genuine, but it is interesting to read it:
Pontius Pilate unto Claudius greeting.
There befell of late a matter of which I myself made trial; for
the Jews through envy have punished themselves and their
posterity with fearful judgments of their own fault; for
whereas their fathers had promises that their God would send
them out of heaven his Holy One, who should of right be called
king, and did promise he would send him on earth by a virgin;
he then came when I was governor of Judaea, and they beheld him
enlightening the blind, cleansing lepers, healing the palsied,
driving devils out of men, raising the dead, rebuking the winds,
walking on the waves of the sea dry-shod, and doing many other
wonders, and all the people of the Jews calling him the Son of
God; the chief priests therefore moved with envy against him,
took him and delivered him unto me and brought against him one
false accusation after another, saying that he was a sorcerer
and that he did things contrary to the law.

But I, believing that these things were so, having scourged him,
delivered him to their will; and they crucified him, and, when
he was buried, they set their guards upon him. But while my
soldiers watched him, he rose again on the third day; yet so
much was the malice of the Jews kindled, that they gave money
to the soldiers saying: Say ye that his disciples stole away his
body. But they, though they took the money, were not able to
keep silence concerning that which had come to pass, for they
also have testified that they saw him arisen, and that they
received money from the Jews. And these things have I reported
unto thy mightiness for this cause, lest some other should lie
unto thee, and thou shouldest deem right to believe the false
tales of the Jews.
Although that report is no doubt mere legend, Pilate certainly knew that Jesus was
innocent; but his past misdeeds gave the Jews a lever with which to compel him to
do their will against his wishes and his sense of justice.
PILATE'S LOSI G STRUGGLE (Matthew 27:1-2; Matthew 27:11-26 continued)
This whole passage gives the impression of a man fighting a losing battle. It is clear
that Pilate did not wish to condemn Jesus. Certain things emerge.
(i) Pilate was clearly impressed with Jesus. Plainly he did not take the King of the
Jews claim seriously. He knew a revolutionary when he saw one, and Jesus was no
revolutionary. His dignified silence made Pilate feel that it was not Jesus but he
himself who was on trial. Pilate was a man who felt the power of Jesus--and was
afraid to submit to it. There are still those who are afraid to be as Christian as they
know they ought to be.
(ii) Pilate sought some way of escape. It appears to have been the custom at the time
of the Feast for a prisoner to be released. In gaol there was a certain Barabbas. He
was no sneak-thief; he was most probably either a brigand or a political
revolutionary.
There are two interesting speculations about him. His name Barabbas means Son of

the Father; father was a title by which the greatest Rabbis were known; it may well
be that Barabbas was the son of an ancient and distinguished family who had
kicked over the traces and embarked on a career of magnificent crime. Such a man
would make crime glamorous and would appeal to the people.
Still more interesting is the near certainty that Barabbas was also called Jesus. Some
of the very oldest versions of the ew Testament, for example the ancient Syriac and
Armenian versions, call him Jesus Barabbas; and both Origen and Jerome knew of
that reading, and felt it might be correct. It is a curious thing that twice Pilate refers
to Jesus who is called Christ (Matthew 27:17; Matthew 27:22), as if to distinguish
him from some other Jesus. Jesus was a common name; it is the same name as
Joshua. And the dramatic shout of the crowd most likely was: " ot Jesus Christ,
but Jesus Barabbas."
Pilate sought an escape, but the crowd chose the violent criminal and rejected the
gentle Christ. They preferred the man of violence to the man of love.
(iii) Pilate sought to unshoulder the responsibility for condemning Jesus. There is
that strange and tragic picture of him washing his hands. That was a Jewish custom.
There is a strange regulation in Deuteronomy 21:1-9. If a dead body was found, and
it was not known who the killer was, measurements were to be taken to find what
was the nearest town or village. The elders of that town or village had to sacrifice a
heifer and to wash their hands to rid them of the guilt.
Pilate was warned by his sense of justice, he was warned by his conscience, he was
warned by the dream of his troubled wife; but Pilate could not stand against the
mob; and Pilate made the futile gesture of washing his hands. Legend has it that to
this day there are times when Pilate's shade emerges from its tomb and goes through
the action of the hand-washing once again.
There is one thing of which a man can never rid himself--and that is responsibility.
It is never possible for Pilate or anyone else to say, "I wash my hands of all
responsibility," for that is something that no one and nothing can take away.
This picture of Pilate provokes in our minds pity rather than loathing; for here was
a man so enmeshed in his past, and so rendered helpless by it, that he was unable to
take the stand he ought to take. Pilate is a figure of tragedy rather than of villainy.
BROADUS, "I. Matthew 27:1 f. The Formal Meeting Of The Sanhedrin
Mark 15:1, Luke 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, (Matthew
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
Matthew 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. (Matthew 27:25.)â€”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 Matthew 26:59); notice especially that Luke 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 (Matthew 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 "Matthew
26:59") the right to inflict capital punishment, and this could be managed only
through Pilate the governor (see on "Matthew 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, (Luke 23:2) and that
he stirred up the populace. (Luke 23:5, Luke 23:14) The further charge of
blasphemy (John 19:7) they would bold in reserve. The Com. text has 'Pontius
Pilate,' as in Luke 3:1, Acts 4:27, 1 Timothy 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 "Matthew 27:11". When they had, bound him. So Mark. He had
also been bound when they arrested him at Gethsemane, John 18:12, John 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 (Matthew 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." (Luke 23:1, Rev. Ver.) He was not yet on
the way to execution, and they need not keep the Sanhedrin in session.
COFFMA , "This occurred on the morning of the day of preparation for the
Passover, which had technically begun the night before at sunset. That was the day
on which the paschal lambs would be ceremonially slain in the temple; but on
THAT day of preparation, God himself would slay the Lamb slain from the

foundation of the world and would lay upon him "the iniquity of us all."
The "counsel" mentioned in Matthew 27:1 is probably Matthew's summary of the
official trial before the Sanhedrin, held and concluded very early that same
morning; but it could also refer to a caucus held shortly before confrontation with
the governor in order for the priests to determine the best way to present their case
to Pilate. The devious and hypocritical procedure they decided upon was unfolded
in the ensuing events and only worsened the evil reputation which ever since has
properly belonged to those wicked men.
Pontius Pilate, the fifth procurator of Judaea, or governor as he was called, was
appointed by Tiberius, 26 A.D.; and his administration was often in conflict with the
Hebrews whom he doubtless despised. He insulted their traditions by bringing the
Roman standards into the Holy City (the standards had images); but under threat
of widespread disorder, he yielded and withdrew them. o one knew better than
Pilate the hypocrisy of the Sanhedrin in professing to take Caesar's part against
Christ. A number of conflicting traditions exist relative to Pilate's death. A 52-foot
pyramid stands at Vienna on the Rhone which purports to mark the place of his
suicide. He was also supposed to have drowned himself in Lake Lucerne, where an
adjacent mountain is called Pilatus. It is known that he was summoned to Rome to
face charges; but when he arrived, Tiberius had been succeeded by Caligula, and
Pilate was deposed. Eusebius affirmed that soon afterward Pilate, "wearied with
misfortunes, killed himself." As for his character, he was probably no better or
worse than the rank and file of imperial deputies who held the sprawling empire in
check; but it was his fate to be memorialized forever in the creeds of Christendom.
"Suffered under Pontius Pilate" has echoed down nearly two millennia, embalming
his name in perpetual infamy. There were many others who deserved the fate as
much as he, and yet there can be no doubt that he deserved the odium which fell
upon his name. After all, he put to death an innocent man, in full knowledge of his
innocence, and did so for purely personal and expedient considerations. That he did
not truly know the full identity of Christ does not mitigate his guilt.
COKE, "Matthew 27:1-2. When the morning was come, &c.— The preceding
transactions of this malignant night being over, as soon as the day dawned, the
priests and elders, having condemned Jesus, resolved to carry him, loaded with
chains, before the governor, that hemightlikewisegivesentenceagainsthim:they could
not otherwise accomplish their purpose, the power of life and death being now taken
out of their hands. From the history of the Acts it appears, that the Roman
governors of Judea resided commonlyat Caesarea, and that there was only an
inferior officer at Jerusalem, with a single legion to keep the peace of the city. At the
great festivals, however, they came up to suppress or prevent tumults, and to
administer justice; for the governors
ofprovincesfrequentlyvisitedtheprincipaltownsundertheirjurisdictiononthislatter
account. See John 18:39 and Lardner's Credibility, part 1: b. 1. Pilate was, properly
speaking, no more than procurator of Judea; but he was called governor, because
this name was better known, and because Pilate discharged all the offices of a

governor, namely, in taking cognizance of criminal causes, as his predecessors had
done, and as was usual with the procurators in the smaller provinces of the empire,
where there were no proconsuls. See Joseph. War, b. 2 and Tacitus, lib. 15. 100: 44.
Our Saviour ate the paschal supper in the evening; then he went into the garden,
where he was apprehended, and was in the high priest's palace the rest of the night.
In the morning they hurry him away, bound with fetters to the common magistrate.
BIBLICAL ILLUSTRATOR 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 God’s 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 Christ’s
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.)
Iscariot’s 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
man’s 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 Pilate’s 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 God’s Messenger. They had no perception of the beauty and gentleness of
Christ’s 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 God’s 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 Christ’s death, then is the moment for showing him his life in Christ’s 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
potter’s 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 God’s 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 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 God’s 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 Iscariot’s 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.)
Iscariot’s 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 misery’s 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 artist’s 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 Maundrell’s 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 τοሞ 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.)
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 bear’s 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 man’s “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.)

EBC, "III - THE MORNING. (Mat_27:1-26)
The formal meeting of the council in the morning would not occupy many minutes. The
death sentence had been already agreed upon, and it only remained to take the necessary
steps to carry it into effect. Hence the form in which the Evangelist records the morning
session: "All the chief priests and elders of the people took counsel against Jesus to put
Him to death." This could not have passed as a minute of the meeting; but it was none
the less a true account of it. As, however, the law forbade their inflicting the death
penalty, "when they had bound Him, they led Him away, and delivered Him to Pontius
Pilate the governor."
This delivering up of Jesus is a fact of the Passion on which special stress is laid in the
sacred records. It seems, indeed, to have weighed on the mind of Jesus Himself as much
as the betrayal, as would appear from the manner in which, as He was nearing
Jerusalem, He told His disciples what He should suffer there: "Behold, we go up to
Jerusalem; and the Son of man shall be delivered unto the chief priests and scribes, and
they shall condemn Him to death, and shall deliver Him unto the Gentiles to mock, and
to scourge, and to crucify." (Mat_20:18-19; see also Mar_10:33, and Luk_18:32) Long
before this, indeed, "He came unto His own, and His own received Him not." With the
sorrow of that rejection He was only too familiar; but it was a new heartbreak to be
delivered up to the Gentiles. It was a second betrayal on a much larger scale. So Stephen
puts it in the impassioned close of his defence, where he charges the council with being
"the betrayers and murderers" of "the Just One"; and indeed the thought is suggested
here, not only by the association with what follows in regard to the traitor’s end, but by
the use of the very same word as applied to the traitor’s act; for the word translated
"betrayed" in verse 3 (Mat_27:3) is the very same in the original as that translated
"delivered up" in verse 2 (Mat_27:2). Judas is about to drop out of sight into the abyss;
but the nation is one Judas now.
It may be, indeed, that it was the seeing of his own sin as mirrored in the conduct of the
council which roused at last the traitor’s sleeping conscience. As he saw his late Master
led away bound "as a lamb to the slaughter," these very words may have come back to
his memory: "They shall deliver the Son of man to the Gentiles to mock, and to scourge,
and to crucify." It is quite possible, indeed, that the man of Kerioth was too good a Jew
to have been willing to sell his Master to Pilate directly. But now he sees that that is just
what he has done. We have no sympathy with those who imagine that Judas only
intended to give his Master an opportunity of displaying His power and asserting His
rights in a manner that would secure at once the allegiance of the people; but though-we
see no evidence of any good intentions, we can readily believe that in the act of betrayal
his mind did not go beyond the immediate consequences of his action-on the one hand
the money; and on the other what was it but the banding of his Master to the chief
priests and elders, who were after all His ecclesiastical superiors; and had they not the
right to put Him on His trial? But now that he sees Jesus, Whom by long acquaintance
he knows to be without spot or stain, bound as a common criminal and led away to
execution, his act appears in a new and awful light, he is smitten with a measureless fear,
and can no longer bear to think of what he has done.
"He repented himself," so we read in our version; but that it is no true repentance the
more expressive Greek makes plain, for the word is quite distinct from that which
indicates "repentance after a godly sort." Had there been in his heart any spring of true
repentance its waters would have been unsealed long ere this-at the Table, or when in
the Garden he heard his Master’s last appeal of love. Not love, but fear, not godly sorrow,

but very human terror, is what moves him now; and therefore it is not to Jesus that he
flies, -had he even now gone up to Him, and fallen at His feet and confessed his sins, he
would have been forgiven, -but to his accomplices in crime. Fain would he undo what he
has done; but it is impossible! What he can do, however, he will; so he tries to get the
chief priests to take back the silver pieces. But they will have nothing to do with them or
with him. To his piteous confession they pay no heed; let him settle his own accounts
with his own conscience: "What is that to us? see thou to that."
He is now alone; shut up to himself; alone with his sin. Even the thirty pieces of silver,
which had such a friendly sound as he first dropped them in his purse, have turned
against him; now he hates the very sight of them, and must be rid of them. As the priests
will not take them back, he will cast them "into the sanctuary" (R.V), and so perhaps find
some relief. But oh, Judas! it is one thing to get the silver out of your hands, and quite
another to get the stain out of your soul. The only effect of it is to make the solitude
complete. He has at last come to himself; and what a self it is to come to! No wonder that
he "went and hanged himself."
The chief priests have not yet come to themselves. They will by-and-by, whether after the
manner of the prodigal or after the manner of the traitor time will show; but meanwhile
they are in the full career of their sin, and can therefore as yet consult to very good
purpose. It was not at all a bad way of getting out of their difficulty with the money
found in the sanctuary, to buy with it a place to bury strangers in; but little did they
dream that when the story of it should be told thereafter to the world they would be
discovered to have unconsciously fulfilled a prophecy, (Zec_11:12-13) which on the one
hand gibbeted their crime as a valuing of the Shepherd of Israel at the magnificent price
of thirty pieces of silver, and on the other carried with it the suggestion of those awful
woes which Jeremiah had pronounced at the very spot they had purchased with the
price of blood. (Jer_19:1-15)
From the end of the traitor Judas we return to the issue of the nation’s treason. "Now
Jesus stood before the governor." The full study of Jesus before Pilate belongs rather to
the fourth Gospel, which supplies many most interesting details not furnished here. We
must therefore deal with it quite briefly, confining our attention as much as possible to
the points touched in the record before us.
As before the council, so before Pilate, our Lord speaks, or is silent, according as the
question affects His mission or Himself. When asked of His Kingdom, He answers in the
most decided manner ("Thou sayest" was a strong affirmation, as if to say "Certainly I
am"); for on this depends the only hope of salvation for Pilate-for His accusers-for all.
He will by no means disown or shrink from acknowledging the mission of salvation on
which His Father has sent Him, though it may raise against Him the cry of blasphemy in
the council, and of treason in the court; but when He is asked what He has to say for
Himself, in the way of answer to the charges made against Him, He is silent: even when
Pilate himself appeals to Him in the strongest manner to say something in His own
defence, "He gave him no answer, not even to one word" (R.V). "Insomuch that the
governor marvelled greatly; for how could he understand? How can a cautious, cunning,
timeserving man of the world understand the selflessness of the Son of God?"
Pilate had no personal grudge against Jesus, and had sense enough to recognise at once
that the claims of Kinghood advanced by his prisoner did not touch the prerogatives of
Caesar-had penetration also to see through the motives of the chief priests and elders
(Mat_27:18), and therefore was not at all disposed to acquiesce in the demand made on
him for a summary condemnation. Besides, he was not without fears, which inclined
him to the side of justice. He was evidently impressed with the demeanour of his

prisoner. This appears even in the brief narrative of our Evangelist; but it comes out very
strikingly in the fuller record of the fourth Gospel. His wife’s influence, too, was used in
the same direction. She evidently had heard something about Jesus, and had taken some
interest in Him, enough to reach the conviction that He was a "righteous man." It was as
yet quite early in the morning, and she may not have known till after her husband had
gone out that it was for the trial of Jesus he was summoned. Having had uneasy dreams,
in which the Man Who had impressed her so much was a leading figure, it was natural
that she should send him a hasty message, so as to reach him "while he was sitting on
the judgment seat" (R.V). This message would reinforce his fears, and increase his desire
to deal justly with his extraordinary prisoner. On the other hand, Pilate could not afford
to refuse point-blank the demand of the Jewish leaders. He was by no means secure in
his seat. There had been so many disturbances under his administration, as we learn
from contemporary history, that his recall, perhaps something more serious than recall,
might be expected from Rome, if he should again get into trouble with these turbulent
Jews; so he did not dare to run the risk of simply doing what he knew was right.
Accordingly he tried several expedients, as we learn from the other accounts, to avoid
the necessity of pronouncing sentence, one of which is here set forth at length (Mat_
27:15, seq.), probably because it brings into strong relief the absolute rejection of their
Messiah alike by the rulers and by the people. It was a most ingenious device, and
affords a striking example of the astuteness of the procurator. Barabbas may have had
some following in his "sedition"; but evidently he was no popular hero, but a vulgar
robber or bandit, whose release was not at all likely to be clamoured for by the
multitude; and it was moreover reasonably to be expected that the chief priests, much as
they hated Jesus, would be ashamed to even hint that He was worse than this wretched
criminal. But he did not know how deep the hatred was with which he had to deal. "He
knew that for envy they had delivered Him"; but he did not know that at the root of that
envy lay the conviction that either Jesus must perish or they must. They felt that He was
"of purer eyes than to behold evil, and could not look upon iniquity"; and inasmuch as
they had made up their minds to keep their iniquity, they must get rid of Him; they must
seal up these eyes which searched them through and through, they must silence these
tones which, silvery as they were, were to them as the knell of judgment. They had no
liking for Barabbas, and, to do them justice, no sympathy whatever with his crimes; but
they had no reason to be afraid of him: they could live, though he was free. It must have
been a hard alternative even for them; but there is no hesitation about it. Themselves
and their emissaries are busy among the mob, persuading them "that they should ask
Barabbas, and destroy Jesus."
The multitudes are only too easily persuaded. Not that they had the dark envy, or
anything like the rooted hatred, of their leaders; but what: will a careless mob not be
prepared to do when excitement prevails and passions are inflamed? It is not at all
unlikely that some of the same people who followed the multitude in shouting "Hosanna
to the Son of David!" only five days before, would join in the cry which some of the baser
sort would be the first to raise, "Crucify Him! crucify Him! "Those who know human
nature best-at its basest; as in the hatred of the chief priests and elders; at its shallowest,
as in the passions of the fickle crowd-will marvel least at the way in which the alternative
of Pilate was received. There is no touchstone of human nature like the cross of Christ;
and in the presence of the Holy One of God, sin is forced, as it were, to show itself in all
its native blackness and enormity; and what sin is there, however small it seem to be,
which if allowed to develop its latent possibility of vileness, would not lead on to this
very choice-"Not Jesus, but Barabbas"?
And Pilate, you may wash your hands before the multitude, and say, "I am innocent of

the blood of this just Person"; but it is all in vain. There is a Searcher of hearts Who
knows you through and through. "See ye to it," you say; and so said to Judas the chief
priests and elders, using the very same words. But both they and you must see to that
which each fain would put aside for ever. Aye, and it will be less tolerable for you and for
them than even for the thoughtless crowd who cry, "His blood be upon us and on our
children." It was in vain to ask of people like these, "What shall I do, then, with Jesus
which is called Christ?" There was only one thing to do: the thing which was right.
Failing to do this, you had no alternative but to share in the sin of all the rest. Even Pilate
must take a side, as all must do. Neutrality here is impossible. Those who persist in
making the vain attempt will find themselves at last on the same side as Pilate took when
he "released unto them Barabbas; but Jesus he scourged and delivered to be crucified."
2 So they bound him, led him away and handed
him over to Pilate the governor.
BAR ES,"And when they had bound him - He was “bound” when they took him
in the garden, Joh_18:12. Probably when he was tried before the Sanhedrin in the palace
of Caiaphas, he had been loosed from his bonds, being there surrounded by multitudes,
and supposed to be safe. As they were about to lead him to another part of the city now,
they again bound him. The binding consisted, probably, in nothing more than tying his
hands.
Pontius Pilate, the governor - The governor appointed by the Romans over Judea.
The governor commonly resided at Caesarea; but he came up to Jerusalem usually at the
great feasts, when great numbers of the Jews were assembled, to administer justice, and
to suppress tumults if any should arise. The “title” which Pilate received was that of
“governor or procurator.” The duties of the office were, chiefly, to collect the revenues
due to the Roman emperor, and in certain cases to administer justice. Pilate was
appointed governor of Judea by Tiberius, then Emperor of Rome. John says Joh_18:28
that they led Jesus from Caiaphas to the hall of judgment - that is, to the part of the
“praetorium,” or governor’s palace, where justice was administered. The Jews did not,
however, enter in themselves, lest they should be defiled, but that they might eat the
Passover. In Num_19:22 it is said that whosoever touched an unclean thing should be
unclean. For this reason they would not enter into the house of a pagan, lest they should
contract some defilement that would render them unfit to keep the Passover.
CLARKE, "They - delivered him to Pontius Pilate - The Sanhedrin had the
power of life and death in their own hands in every thing that concerned religion; but as
they had not evidence to put Christ to death because of false doctrine, they wished to
give countenance to their conduct by bringing in the civil power, and therefore they
delivered him up to Pilate as one who aspired to regal dignities, and whom he must put

to death, if he professed to be Caesar’s friend. Pontius Pilate governed Judea ten years
under the Emperor Tiberius; but, having exercised great cruelties against the
Samaritans, they complained of him to the emperor, in consequence of which he was
deposed, and sent in exile to Vienna, in Dauphiny, where he killed himself two years
after.
GILL, "And when they had bound him,.... The captain, and officers, bound him
when they first took him, and brought him to Annas, and Annas sent him bound to
Caiaphas, Joh_18:12. Perhaps he might be unloosed whilst he was examining before the
high priest, under a show of freedom to speak for himself; or they might bind him faster
now, partly greater security, as he passed through the streets, and partly for his greater
reproach; as also, that he might be at once taken to be a malefactor by the Roman judge;
they led him away: the chief priests and elders of the people led him, at least by their
servants, and they themselves attending in person, that they might awe the people from
attempting a rescue of him, as they passed along; and that they might influence the
Roman governor speedily to put him to death; and lest he should be prevailed upon to
release him, through his own commiseration, the innocence of Jesus, and the entreaty of
his friends.
And delivered him to Pontius Pilate the governor; and so fulfilled what Christ
had predicted, Mat_20:19. This they did, either because the power of judging in cases of
life and death was taken away from them; or if it was not, they chose that the infamy of
his death should be removed from them, and be laid upon a Gentile magistrate; and
chiefly because they were desirous he should die the death of the cross. The Syriac,
Arabic, and Persic versions leave out the first name Pontius, and only call him Pilate: the
Ethiopic version calls him Pilate Pontinaeus; and Theophylact suggests, that he was so
called because he was of Pontus. Philo the Jew (h) makes mention of him:
"Pilate, says he, was επιτροπος της Ιουδαιας, "procurator of Judea"; who not so much in
honour of Tiberius, as to grieve the people, put the golden shields within the holy city in
the palace of Herod.''
And so Tacitus (i) calls him the procurator of Tiberius, and Josephus also (k). It is said
(l) of him, that falling into many calamities, he slew himself with his own hand, in the
times of Caligula, and whilst Publicola and Nerva were consuls; which was a righteous
judgment of God upon him for condemning Christ, contrary to his own conscience.
HE RY, "1. They bound Jesus. He was bound when he was first seized; but either
they took off these bonds when he was before the council, or now they added to them.
Having found him guilty, they tied his hands behind him, as they usually do with
convicted criminals. He was already bound with the bonds of love to man, and of his
own undertaking, else he had soon broken these bonds, as Samson did his. We were
fettered with the bond of iniquity, held in the cords of our sins (Pro_10:22); but God had
bound the yoke of our transgressions upon the neck of the Lord Jesus (Lam. 50:14), that
we might be loosed by his bonds, as we are healed by his stripes.
2. They led him away in a sort of triumph, led him as a lamb to the slaughter; so was
he taken from prison and from judgment, Isa_53:7, Isa_53:8. It was nearly a mile from
Caiaphas's house to Pilate's. All that way they led him through the streets of Jerusalem,

when in the morning they began to fill, to make him a spectacle to the world.
3. They delivered him to Pontius Pilate; according to that which Christ had often said,
that he should be delivered to the Gentiles. Both Jews and Gentiles were obnoxious to
the judgment of God, and concluded under sin, and Christ was to be the Saviour both of
Jews and Gentiles; and therefore Christ was brought into the judgment both of Jews and
Gentiles, and both had a hand in his death. See how these corrupt church-rulers abused
the civil magistrate, making use of him to execute their unrighteous decrees, and inflict
the grievance which they had prescribed, Isa_10:1. Thus have the kings of the earth
been wretchedly imposed upon by the papal powers, and condemned to the drudgery of
extirpating with the sword of war, as well as that of justice, those whom they have
marked for heretics, right or wrong, to the great prejudice of their own interests.
3 When Judas, who had betrayed him, saw that
Jesus was condemned, he was seized with remorse
and returned the thirty pieces of silver to the chief
priests and the elders.
BAR ES,"Then Judas, when he saw that he was condemned, repented
himself - This shows that Judas did not suppose that the affair would have resulted in
this calamitous manner. He probably expected that Jesus would work a miracle to
deliver himself, and not suffer this condemnation to come upon him. When he saw him
taken, bound, tried, and condemned - when he saw that all probability that he would
deliver himself was taken away - he was overwhelmed with disappointment, sorrow, and
remorse. The word rendered “repented himself,” it has been observed, does not of
necessity denote a change “for the better,” but “any” change of views and feelings. Here it
evidently means no other change than that produced by the horrors of a guilty
conscience, and by deep remorse for crime at its unexpected results. It was not saving
repentance. That leads to a holy life this led to an increase of crime in his own death.
True repentance leads the sinner to the Saviour. This led away from the Saviour to the
gallows. Judas, if he had been a true penitent, would have come then to Jesus; would
have confessed his crime at his feet, and sought for pardon there. But, overwhelmed with
remorse and the conviction of vast guilt, he was not willing to come into his presence,
and added to the crime of treason that of self-murder. Assuredly such a man could not
be a true penitent.
CLARKE, "Judas - when he saw that he was condemned, repented - There
is much of the wisdom and goodness of God to be seen in this part of Judas’s conduct.

Matthew 27 commentary

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (18)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (15)

Similar to Matthew 27 commentary

Similar to Matthew 27 commentary (20)

More from GLENN PEASE

More from GLENN PEASE (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Matthew 27 commentary