Matthew 27:4

(Hil. Quæst. V. et N. Test. q. 94.) Since the Chief Priests were employed about the murder of the Lord from the morning to the ninth hour, how is this proved that before the crucifixion Judas returned them the money he had received, and said to them in the temple, I have sinned, in that I have betrayed innocent blood? Whereas it is manifest that the Chief Priests and Elders were never in the temple before the Lord's crucifixion, seeing that when He was hanging on the Cross they were there to insult Him. Nor indeed can this be proved hence, because it is related before the Lord's Passion, for many things which were manifestly done before, are related after, that, and the reverse. It might have been done after the ninth hour, when Judas, seeing the Saviour dead and the veil of the temple rent, the earthquake, the bursting of the rocks, and the elements terrified, was seized with fear and sorrow thereupon. But after the ninth hour the Chief Priests and Elders were occupied, as I suppose, in the celebration of the Passover; and on the Sabbath, the Law would not have allowed him to bring money. Therefore it is to me as yet unproved on what day or at what time Judas ended his life by hanging.

Then Judas, who had betrayed Him, when he saw that Jesus had been condemned, repented, and returned the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and elders, saying, I have sinned in that I have betrayed innocent blood. And they said, What is that …

Saying, I have sinned,.... Here was a confession, and yet no true repentance; for he confessed, but not to the right persons; not to God, nor Christ, but to the chief priests and elders; nor over the head of the antitypical scape goat, not seeking to Christ for pardon and cleansing, nor did he confess and forsake sin, but went on adding sin to sin, and so found no mercy. The same confession was made by a like hardened wretch, Pharaoh, Exo 9:

He made them his confessors, and that was the absolution they gave him; more like the priests of devils than like the priests of the holy living God. [1.] See here how carelessly they speak of the betraying of Christ. Judas had told them that the blood of Christ was innocent blood; and they said, What is that to us?

Innocent blood - Αιμα αθωον, a Hebraism, for an innocent man. But instead of αθωον, innocent, two ancient MSS., Syriac, Vulgate, Sahidic, Armenian, and all the Itala; Origen, Cyprian, Lucifer, Ambrose, Leo, read δικαιον, righteous, or just. What is that to us? - What is it? - A great deal. You should immediately go and reverse the sentence you have pronounced, and liberate the innocent person. But this would have been justice, and that would have been a stranger at their tribunal.

The opening of this chapter describes the delivery of our Lord Jesus Christ into the hands of the Gentiles. The chief priests and elders of the Jews led him away to Pontius Pilate, the Roman governor. We may see in this incident the finger of God: it was ordered by his providence that Gentiles as well as Jews should be concerned in the murder of Christ; it was ordered by his providence that the priests should publicly confess that the “scepter had departed from Judah.”

And they said, What is that to us? see thou to that--"Guilty or innocent is nothing to us: We have Him now--begone!" Was ever speech more hellish uttered?

The opening of this chapter describes the delivery of our Lord Jesus Christ into the hands of the Gentiles. The chief priests and elders of the Jews led him away to Pontius Pilate, the Roman governor. We may see in this incident the finger of God: it was ordered by his providence that Gentiles as well as Jews should be concerned in the murder of Christ; it was ordered by his providence that the priests should publicly confess that the “scepter had departed from Judah.” They were unable to put anyone to death without going to the Romans: the words of Jacob were therefore fulfilled. The Messiah, Shiloh had indeed come ( Genesis 49:10 ). The subject that principally occupies the verses we have read is the melancholy end of the false apostle, Judas Iscariot. It is a subject full of instruction: let us mark well what it contains. We see in the end of Judas a plain proof of our Lord’s innocence of every charge laid against him. If there was any living witness who could give evidence against our Lord Jesus Christ, Judas Iscariot was the man. A chosen apostle of Jesus, a constant companion in all his journeyings, a hearer of all his teaching, both in public and private—he must have known well if our Lord had done any wrong, either in word or deed. A deserter from our Lord’s company, a betrayer of him into the hands of his enemies, it was his interest for his own character’s sake, to prove Jesus guilty. It would extenuate and excuse his own conduct if he could make out that his former Master was an offender and an impostor. Why then did not Judas Iscariot not come forward? Why did he not stand forth before the Jewish council and specify his charges, if he had any to make? Why did he not venture to accompany the chief priests to Pilate, and prove to the Romans that Jesus was a malefactor? There is but one answer to these questions.

I have sinned - I have been guilty. I have done wrong. In that I have betrayed the innocent blood - That is, in betraying an innocent being to death. Blood is put here for “life,” or for the “man.” The meaning is, that he knew and felt that Jesus was innocent. This confession is a remarkable proof that Jesus was innocent. Judas had been with him for three years. He had seen him in public and private; he had heard his public teaching and his private views; he had seen him in all circumstances; and if he had done anything evil, or advanced anything against the Roman emperor, Judas was competent to testify it. Had he known any such thing he would have stated it. His testimony, being a disciple of Jesus, would have been to the chief priests far more valuable than that of any other man; and he might not only have escaped the horrors of a troubled conscience and an awful death, but have looked for an ample reward. That he did not make such a charge that he fully and frankly confessed that Jesus was innocent - and that he gave up the ill-gotten price of treason, is full proof that, in the belief of Judas, the Saviour was free from crime, and even the suspicion of crime. What is that to us? - This form of speaking denoted that they had nothing to do with his remorse of conscience, and his belief that Jesus was innocent. They had secured what they wanted - the person of Jesus - and they cared little now for the feelings of the traitor. So all wicked men who make use of the agency of others for the accomplishment of crime or the gratification of passion care little for the effect on the instrument. They will soon cast him off and despise him, and in thousands of instances the instruments of villainy and the panders to the pleasures of others are abandoned to remorse, wretchedness, crime, and death.