Matthew

How did Judas Die? – Matthew 27:1-10

As Peter is betraying Jesus in the high priest’s courtyard, Judas sees the results of his own betrayal. When the priests hand Jesus over to be executed, Judas regrets his actions, is driven to despair, and will eventually kill himself. The answer to the question ”How did Judas die?” is not simple because there are two versions of Judas’s death, one in Matthew and another in Acts. Matthew is difficult to reconcile with Acts, although there are many attempts to show the two stories are complementary.

How did Judas Die?

 

The chief priest and the elders decide to put Jesus to death, but rather than order him to be stoned, they hand him over to Pilate, the Roman governor, to be executed as a rebel (Matthew 27:1-2). The chief priests and elders do not recommend Jesus be stoned for blasphemy but handed over to the Romans to be executed as a political criminal. This deflects blame to the Romans and gives them plausible deniability if Jesus’s followers want to start any kind of riot.

Since verse 3 says Judas sees Jesus led away to Pilate and is deeply shaken, regretting his actions. Does this mean Judas was with Jesus during the hearing before the Sanhedrin? It is likely he followed Jesus back to Caiaphas’s house and may have watched everything, including Jesus’s agreement that he is the Messiah and his prediction he will stand at the right hand of the Father in judgment. Maybe that was the exact moment Judas realized what he had done, that Jesus was indeed the Messiah, and he had handed him over to the Gentiles for execution!

Judas was “seized with remorse (NIV) or “changed his mind” (ESV) or “repented” (NRSV; 27:3-4a). Matthew uses a verb (μεταμέλομαι) which refers to being sorry about something. It is rare in the New Testament and can have the sense of repentance like the much more common word for repentance (μετάνοια). For example, this word is used in LXX 1 Samuel 15:35, the Lord regretted he had made Saul king. The middle form (as in Matthew 27:3) refers to “experiencing second thoughts” (BrillDAG). In classic Hellenistic Greek, there is an overlap between remorse and repentance, but in the biblical literature “a change not so much in consciousness as in one’s feelings in relation to a thing or a deed” (EDNT 2:414).

So did Judas regret his actions but not genuinely repent?  His actions seem to lean toward repentance and certainly despair, which drove him to suicide.

Judas tries to return the money to the Temple and in despair, hangs himself (Matthew 27:4b-8). When he returns the money, he confesses, “I have sinned by betraying innocent blood” (27:3-4a). In the Old Testament, shedding innocent blood is a source of pollution. In Genesis 4, Abel’s innocent blood demanded justice. Psalm 106:38, for example, the people shed innocent blood sacrificing to the gods of the Canaanites.

The priests say deny any responsibility and do offer him comfort or absolution (27:4b). Matthew’s focus is not on Judas’s remorse but on how his remorse contrasts with the Jewish authorities (Wilson, Matthew 13-28, 387). They do not express any regret they have caused the death of an innocent man, Jesus. Nor are they bothered by the fact they are going to cause the suicide of Judas.

Judas, in despair, hangs himself (Matthew 27:5b). By hanging himself, Judas is enacting a curse on himself. Deuteronomy 27:25 says, “Cursed be anyone who takes a bribe to shed innocent blood.” Deuteronomy 21:23, “A hanged man is cursed by God.”  In the Dead Sea Scrolls, a traitor was executed by hanging (11Q19, LXIV, 7-9).

In Acts 1:18, Judas “and falling headlong he burst open in the middle and all his bowels gushed out.” The usual strategy is to harmonize the two stories. Judas hung himself from a tree hanging off a cliff, the rope breaking, and his actual death coming when he “fell headlong.”

So how did Judas die? Matthew and Luke seem to remember a slightly different story. Even though the details can be reconciled, it is important to understand that Matthew is interested in showing that Judas’s betrayal fulfills prophecy (27:9-10). Luke also shows Judas fulfilled prophecy, but the focus is on selecting a replacement disciple. This explains the emphasis in his version of the story.

Traditional site of Akeldema, the field of Blood

Traditional site of Akeldema, the field of Blood

 

Peter Denies Jesus – Matthew 26:69-75

In Gethsemane, Jesus prayed three times, committing himself to the will of the Father, while the most faithful of his disciples fell asleep three times. After Jesus is arrested, he stands before the high priest and declares that he is the Messiah, the one expected from Daniel 7:14. Peter, on the other hand, cannot stand before a young slave girl and declare his loyalty to Jesus.  Peter denies Jesus three times on the very night he swore to die with Jesus.

Peter Denies Jesus

When Jesus predicted all the disciples would fall away, Peter twice declared he would never disown Jesus (Matthew 26:31-35). Jesus had already told the disciples that one of them would betray him (26:23-25).

Peter is undoubtedly offended. He has been faithful to Jesus from the beginning and is willing to go to prison and die with Jesus. In Matthew 26:35, Peter uses a strong negative. He will certainly NOT deny his Lord. The verb (ἀπαρνέομαι) can have the sense of denying a fact, but it is used for repudiating something, such as turning from idols (Isa 31:7, casting away an idol).  

Despite the strong declaration of loyalty to Jesus, Jesus says Peter will deny Jesus three times before dawn that very day! For Romans, the rooster crowed three times during the night (12:30, 1:30, and 2:30 AM).

Despite this bold declaration of loyalty, he quickly denies Jesus three times (26:69-7). Peter is wavering between cowardice and courage, not yet denying, yet not standing next to Jesus at the trial either.

First, while Peter waits outside, “a single young girl” approaches him and says, perhaps innocently, that Peter was with “Jesus of Galilee” (26:69-70). The girl’s age is not specific, but the wording implies she is a child. Since she is a serving girl, she is perhaps no older than a teen. Her question includes a hint of superiority. Peter’s denial is “to all of them,” indicating that more than just the young girl is listening. 

Second, as Peter goes further outside, another servant girl tells some bystanders that Peter was with Jesus of Nazareth.” Peter denied this with an oath (26:71-72). He leaves the courtyard, maybe thinking that sitting in the dark would prevent people from recognizing him. Another girl talks to him, this time stating to those around the entrance to the house Peter was with Jesus. He denies it with an oath this time. Oaths were considered binding; he claims what he says is the truth in powerful language. In Matthew 5:33, Jesus tells his disciples not to swear oaths; if one does swear an oath, it is “from the evil one” (5:37). 

Third, bystanders approach Peter and ask him once again if he is a follower of Jesus, and he denies it for the third time with an oath and a curse (26:73-74a). The bystanders have evidence: Peter’s accent gives him away as a Galilean. Those from Galilee were said to have a vulgar accent. His third denial is the strongest. He not only swears an oath but also “invokes a curse” (καταθεματίζω). Even though the word is not in the middle voice, most translations add the words “on himself.” It is not that he swears at the bystanders (like modern “cursing at someone”). Mark used a slightly different word (ἀναθεματίζω). In both cases, this is the act of cursing yourself if what you say is not true. For example, in Acts 23, ἀναθεματίζω used to intensify an oath, something like “may we be cursed (by God) if we do not kill Paul by tomorrow.” 

Just as Peter makes this third and strongest denial, he hears the crowing of the rooster, and he realizes what he has done (26:74b-75). Now Peter remembers the words of Jesus, that he would deny the Lord three times, and he realized that he had in fact, fulfilled that prophecy. These three denials match the three times that Peter failed to stay awake and pray with Jesus. Now he has lied and cursed himself. He has fallen into that temptation that the Lord had predicted. 

Matthew reports that Peter went out and “wept bitterly.” Peter is not named again in the gospel. Peter has “gone out” three times, further away from where Jesus is and further into the darkness.

Is “weeping bitterly” a sign Peter repented? Most readers understand this bitter weeping as indicating that he realized his sin and truly repented. However, the word “repent” does not appear here (although it does for Judas!) Matthew moves Peter further outside into the darkness with each denial.

A common theme in Matthew is that not all disciples are true disciples. In Matthew 7:21-23, “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.” Similarly, Matthew 8:12 says, “while the sons of the kingdom will be thrown into the outer darkness. In that place, there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” In the conclusion to the wedding banquet parable, one guest is found without wedding garments and is cast out “into the outer darkness. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth” (Matthew 22:1-12).

At this point, Peter knows he has ultimately denied the Lord and has no hope of reconciliation. If he has rejected association with Jesus and Jesus is about to die, there will be no opportunity for him to beg for forgiveness or to die along with Jesus (as he had recently boasted). Only after the resurrection does Peter realize the Lord has forgiven his denial. John records his “restoration,” and Luke tells us that Peter is the first to enter the tomb and discover the empty grave clothes. The book of Acts demonstrates that Peter was truly repentant and restored as the leader of Jesus’s disciples.

The Charge of Blasphemy – Matthew 26:65-68

When asked if he is the Messiah, Jesus replied, “You have said so.” If the answer was ambiguous in English, the meaning was not lost on the high priest, he immediately tears his clothes and cried out that Jesus spoke blasphemy (Matthew 26:65-66).

Jesus Blasphemy

Typically the tearing of clothes is a symbol of mourning, but it was also practiced when someone blasphemed in one’s presence. Davies and Allison cite m. Sanhedrin. 7:5, which “tells of judges who, as a symbolic, ritual act, rend their clothes in response to blasphemy” (Matthew, 3:533) But the high priest was not supposed to tear his clothes (Lev 21:10), although this may not apply if he is not wearing the priestly vestments at the time.

The high priest calls for the group to render their verdict, and they answer that he is “worthy of death” (KJV, “guilty of death”). The word ἔνοχος is used in judicial contexts for a punishment (“worthy of death” in this case). According to Leviticus 24:16, anyone who blasphemes the Lord should be put to death. The chief priest and scribe gathered all agree, what Jesus has said qualifies as blasphemy and that he ought to be put to death.

Could the Sanhedrin execute criminals? Most scholars agree they did not, only the Romans had the right to execute people. This should be nuanced since in Acts 7 Stephen is executed for blasphemy with some official oversight (Saul was giving approval). Stephen’s death might be considered a lynching, an illegal execution. But it was over a religious matter so the Romans might have looked the other way.

The real issue is not whether the Sanhedrin or the High Priest had the authority to kill Jesus, but whether he could risk the political ramifications of executing someone the huge Passover crowd thought was a prophet, and possibly the Messiah. As with the arrest, the group meeting to decide what to do with Jesus does not know whether Jesus has armed disciples hiding out in and around Jerusalem who would be willing to defend him to the death.

This means the High Priest and his group of advisors need to find a way to hand Jesus over to the Romans. If there are armed disciples of Jesus willing to start an insurrection, let the Romans slaughter them! Politically, they can wash their hands of any blame for the death of the beloved holy prophet and teacher.

After the group condemns Jesus, they begin to spit on him and slap him (26:67-68). In Mark, we are told at this point Jesus was blindfolded, and those that hit him taunted him by demanding Jesus prophesy. This is all to mock him for claiming to be the Messiah. The true Messiah, to their mind, would have destroyed those that tried to do this to him. Something like, “You claim to be the Messiah, but this proves you are not! “Cruel and vindictive belittlement” is the fate of the discredited prophet (Nolland, Matthew, 1136). The temple authorities decided to hand Jesus over to the Romans, to Pilate as a politically dangerous insurrectionist who ought to be executed publicly by crucifixion.

Jesus stood before his accusers and boldly confirmed he is the Messiah and he will be the eschatological judge who inaugurates the coming kingdom. At the same time, Peter has been also boldly confirming in the outer courtyard; but his boldness is a denial that he has anything to do with Jesus.

Did Jesus Claim He Would Destroy the Temple?  Matthew 26:59-61

The chief priests sought evidence to put Jesus to death and were willing to use false witnesses. The false witnesses will say Jesus threatened to destroy the temple. As Robert Gundry says, “In Matthew, the Sanhedrin does not face the problem of discovering true testimony” (Matthew, 542).

They find two false witnesses willing to say Jesus claimed he was going to destroy the Temple of God and rebuild it in three days. Since the verses in Matthew imply that Jesus said this kind of thing was spoken among Jesus’s followers, it is possible these false witnesses were part of the larger group of followers who heard Jesus teach (probably not the twelve). On the other hand, these could simply be political cronies willing to say whatever the chief priests need to hear (and maybe get a “gift” as Judas did?).

How “false” is this evidence? Jesus did say that he would destroy the temple and that he would build it back up again in three days. In Matthew 23:38, Jesus weeps over Jerusalem and says the house “is left desolate.” In Matthew 24:1-3 (the very next paragraph), Jesus predicts that not one stone of the buildings of the Temple will be left on another. Jesus does not state that he will destroy the temple in Matthew 24:2, but the words give the false witnesses something to twist.  In Matthew’s gospel, Jesus did not directly say he would destroy the temple and build it in three days. He does say this in John 2:19, although John is clear that Jesus is talking about his body, so this foreshadows his own death and resurrection.

Any threat to the temple is a threat against the power of the aristocratic priests and scribes gathered to decide what to do with Jesus. By threatening the temple, Jesus is threatening a powerful group of political leaders.

Biblically speaking, only God can destroy the Jewish temple. Daniel 1:1-2 states that God delivered Jerusalem and the temple items to Nebuchadnezzar. Babylon did not destroy the Temple by their own might and power; God allowed Babylon to destroy Jerusalem.

There are several lines of evidence for this. First, Jeremiah 7:12-15 compares the temple to Shiloh, the sanctuary where God “first made his name to dwell.” Jeremiah says the temple is in danger of being destroyed because the leadership has turned it into a “den of thieves,” the verse Jesus quoted during the temple action (Matt 21:12-13). The Temple Action was a prophetic condemnation of the leadership using language from Jeremiah, the prophet who lived through the destruction of Jerusalem.

Ezekiel sees the glory of God leave the temple (Ezek 10), which allows Babylon to successfully attack and destroy Jerusalem and to destroy the temple because Israel has become like the nations (Ezek 11:1-13). It is probably significant that Jesus departed the temple for the last time in Matthew 24 by traveling east to the Mount of Olives, the same way the Glory of God left the Temple in Ezekiel 10.

The prophets and apocalyptic literature of the first century anticipated the temple’s rebuilding in the eschatological age (Isaiah 60:4-7, 17; Zechariah 6:12-13; Sanders, Jesus and Judaism, 77-90). Ezekiel 40-48 describes a future temple in the eschatological kingdom, as does Revelation 21:10, the New Jerusalem is a new city/temple built by God.

1 Enoch 90:28-29 Then I stood still, looking at that ancient house being transformed: All the pillars and all the columns were pulled out; and the ornaments of that house were packed and taken out together with them and abandoned in a certain place in the South of the land. I went on seeing until the Lord of the sheep brought about a new house, greater and loftier than the first one, and set it up in the first location which had been covered up—all its pillars were new, the columns new; and the ornaments new as well as greater than those of the first, (that is) the old (house) which was gone. All the sheep were within it.

Sib. Or. 5.414–433 For a blessed man came from the expanses of heaven 415 with a scepter in his hands which God gave him, and he gained sway over all things well, and gave back the wealth to all the good, which previous men had taken. He destroyed every city from its foundations with much fire and burned nations of mortals who were formerly evildoers. 420 And the city which God desired, this he made more brilliant than stars and sun and moon, and he provided ornament and made a holy temple, exceedingly beautiful in its fair shrine, and he fashioned a great and immense tower over many stadia 425 touching even the clouds and visible to all, so that all faithful and all righteous people could see the glory of eternal God, a form desired. East and West sang out the glory of God. For terrible things no longer happen to wretched mortals, 430 no adulteries or illicit love of boys, no murder, or din of battle, but competition is fair among all. It is the last time of holy people when God, who thunders on high, founder of the greatest temple, accomplishes these things.

Jubilees 1.29 And the angel of the presence, who went before the camp of Israel, took the tablets of the division of years from the time of the creation of the law and testimony according to their weeks (of years), according to the jubilees, year by year throughout the full number of jubilees, from [the day of creation until] the day of the new creation when the heaven and earth and all of their creatures shall be renewed according to the powers of heaven and according to the whole nature of earth, until the sanctuary of the Lord is created in Jerusalem upon Mount Zion. And all of the lights will be renewed for healing and peace and blessing for all of the elect of Israel and in order that it might be thus from that day and unto all the days of the earth.

2 Baruch 31.1–5 And it happened after these things, that I went to the people and said to them: Assemble to me all our elders and I shall speak words to you. 2 And they all assembled in the valley of the Kidron. 3* And I began to speak and said to them: Hear, O Israel, and I shall speak to you, and you, O seed of Jacob, pay attention, and I shall teach you. 4* Do not forget Zion but remember the distress of Jerusalem. 5 For, behold, the days are coming, that all that has been will be taken away to be destroyed, and it will become as though it had not been.

While the evidence is true, (Jesus did say that he would destroy and rebuild the temple), the witnesses twist the evidence to make Jesus sound like a dangerous leader of a revolutionary movement. The decision to kill Jesus is already made. Two witnesses are required to follow the Law, so they find two witnesses to make the trial look legitimate. This is all they need to hand Jesus over to Pilate.

Are You the Messiah, the Son of God? Matthew 26:62-64

After false witnesses claim Jesus threatened the Temple, the High Priest speaks directly to Jesus, asking him to defend himself. This is to provide the illusion of legality (Matthew 26:62-63). The high priest directly asks Jesus: Are you the Messiah? Jesus does not answer the false accusations, in fulfillment of the Old Testament prophet of the Messiah as a suffering servant, quiet as a lamb sent to slaughter. See Isaiah 53:7; Psalm 38:13-14 (in response to friends’ betrayal, violence, etc.)

Are you the Messiah?

Caiaphas is frustrated by Jesus’s silence and tries to bind him with an oath: “I adjure you by the living God.” This is a rare word in the New Testament. The verb ἐξορκίζω is only used here and in Acts 19:13-14 (and then in a textual variant, ὁρκίζω appears in the text). The word is used “to compel someone to do something by invoking a transcendent power” (BDAG). This explains why it is used in the context of an exorcism in Acts 19. In LXX Gen 24:3, Abraham compels his servant to swear an oath to God to obtain a wife for Isaac. Remember, Jesus taught his disciples not to swear oaths (Matt 5:37). In this context, Jesus does not swear an oath on God, as the high priest demands. Yet in the following story, Peter denies the Lord with an oath.

The high priest again asks Jesus (under oath) to answer the question: Is Jesus really the Messiah or not? This forces Jesus to claim directly that he is the Messiah or swear by God that he is not the Messiah (destroying his credibility with his followers).

Jesus agrees with Caiaphas but goes well beyond a confirmation that he is the messiah by quoting two messianic passages and applying them to this situation (26:64). “It is as you have said” is the same ambiguous statement that Jesus used when Judas asked if he was the betrayer. In Mark, Jesus simply says, “I am” (Mark 14:62). Brown and Roberts suggest, “if you say so” (Matthew, THNTC, 244).

The second part of his answer shocks the temple leadership. Jesus combines Daniel 7:13 and Psalm 110:1 to claim they will not see him until he is standing in judgment as the Messiah. In Psalm 110:1 David is exalted to the right hand of God “until I make your enemies your footstool.” Jesus inserts the “Son of Man” as the subject, the Son of man will be seated at the right hand of Power (God). Jesus regularly referred to himself as the Son of Man during his public ministry, so he is saying, “I am going to be seated at the right hand of God,” like the Messiah in Psalm 110. Read the rest of Psalm 110, the enemies will be shattered on the day of wrath (verses 5-6 are particularly apocalyptic).

Who are the enemies when Jesus quotes this verse? The high priest, chief priests, and scribes. The Temple aristocracy has put themselves into the position of “enemies of God” (like Jeremiah 7). They will be shattered along with the nations “on the day of his wrath.” (Later in Acts, the apostles quote Psalm 2, “why do the nations rage,” and apply it to the persecution coming from the high priest).

Daniel 7:13 is one of the most important passages for understanding messianic ideas in the first century. Jesus has used the Son of Man as a title throughout his ministry. In the context of Daniel 7, the son of man comes on a cloud before the ancient of days to receive authority to judge the nations (the four beasts in Daniel 7:1-8).

Jesus, therefore, does not directly say, “why yes, I am the Messiah.” Instead, he claims to be the Danielic Son of Man who will stand at the right hand of the father in heaven and render justice on the nations who oppose God, inaugurating the eschatological age (including destroying and rebuilding the temple).

The reaction to Jesus’s claim is to charge him with blasphemy (Matthew 26:65-68).