What did Judas do with the blood money for betraying Jesus? He bought a field (Acts 1:18) and threw it into the temple; priests used it to buy a burial field (Matthew 27:5). I. Introduction to the Blood Money Incident The accounts of Judas’s final acts with the thirty pieces of silver appear in Matthew 27:3–10 and Acts 1:16–20. Both passages explain how these coins gained the designation “blood money” and detail how they ultimately financed the purchase of a specific piece of land. While the Gospel of Matthew emphasizes Judas’s remorse and the priests’ decision to buy a potter’s field, the Book of Acts describes Judas as having “acquired” the field through the guilt-ridden payment he received. Taken together, these passages offer a consistent, though multifaceted, testimony of the final ignoble chapter in Judas’s life. II. Background: Judas’s Betrayal Judas Iscariot’s agreement to betray Jesus for thirty pieces of silver is recorded in Matthew 26:14–16 and paralleled in Mark 14:10–11, and Luke 22:3–6. This sum of money, widely referred to as “blood money” (Matthew 27:6), was the bounty for handing Jesus over to the religious leaders who sought His execution. In the Hebrew Scriptures, thirty pieces of silver correspond to the compensation for a slave who has been gored by an ox (Exodus 21:32). Early Christian writers often noted this parallel to indicate the low valuation placed on Jesus’s life. Following Jesus’s arrest, Judas realized the weight of his sin and sought to undo his actions. III. Two Biblical Accounts of the Money’s Fate 1. Matthew’s Account (Matthew 27:3–10) • Judas, seized with remorse, attempted to return the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and elders. • When the religious leaders refused the money, Judas threw it into the temple. • The priests deemed the coins defiled (“blood money”), so they chose to purchase the potter’s field as a burial place for strangers. • Judas then went away and ended his own life. Quoting from the Berean Standard Bible (Matthew 27:5–7): “So Judas threw the silver into the temple and left. Then he went away and hanged himself. The chief priests picked up the coins and said, ‘It is not lawful to put this into the treasury, since it is blood money.’ So they conferred together and used the money to buy the potter’s field as a burial place for foreigners.” 2. Acts’ Account (Acts 1:18–19) • Luke reports that Judas “acquired a field with the reward of his wickedness.” • Judas died in a tragic manner, referred to as falling headlong and his body bursting open. Quoting from the Berean Standard Bible (Acts 1:18): “With the reward for his wickedness Judas bought a field; and there he fell headlong, his body burst open and all his intestines spilled out.” When these two accounts are read in tandem, they describe the same sequence of events from different angles. Judas initiated the deal to betray Jesus, and he was ultimately responsible for the “purchase” of the potter’s field (even though he physically threw the money back at the temple). Because the money was still regarded as Judas’s funds, the priests’ use of these coins to buy the field can be attributed to him. IV. Resolution of the Apparent Discrepancy Although Matthew explicitly says that the chief priests bought the field, and Acts 1 states that Judas “bought” it, these details do not contradict each other: - Judas’s act of throwing the silver into the temple left the religious leaders with a sum that technically came from him. - Because the priests did not want to deposit “blood money” in the temple treasury, they used it for the only permissible legal purpose—purchasing a field for burying strangers. - Under Jewish law, the money remained tied to Judas even after he discarded it, so legally, figuratively, and morally, Judas was seen as the one who “acquired” the field. This unity of details reflects the careful preservation of historical data in the Gospel accounts and in the Book of Acts. Scholars point out that first-century readers often understood property transactions in a collective sense—if money originally belonged to an individual, that individual was viewed as the purchaser, even if intermediaries actually completed the transaction. V. Significance of the Field and the Term “Blood Money” 1. The Potter’s Field Early sources indicate that a potter’s field was typically an abandoned tract of land where potters obtained clay for their craft. Barren, marred land was cheaper and less likely to be repurposed for agriculture. By using it as a burial place for strangers—i.e., foreigners or the poor who had no family to claim them—the religious leaders achieved a practical solution for an otherwise wasted space. 2. “Blood Money” In Matthew 27:6, the priests declare the silver to be defiled. The money had been used to facilitate the betrayal of innocent blood, and according to Jewish tradition, funds tainted by sin could not be rightfully put into the temple treasure. This underscores the moral and spiritual seriousness of betrayal and murder in the Jewish context. VI. Archaeological Notes and Historical Perspectives • Some historians refer to the field in question as “Akeldama,” an Aramaic term meaning “Field of Blood,” mentioned in Acts 1:19. • The Jewish historian Josephus (first century AD) describes burial grounds around Jerusalem that were designated for those who had perished without family or means, reinforcing the plausibility of such a location’s existence. • Church tradition and some archaeological surveys point to a region south of Jerusalem near the Valley of Hinnom as the likely site of this field. This area is known for potters’ clay deposits and evidence of an ancient cemetery. These findings do not offer absolute proof of which field was purchased specifically with Judas’s blood money, but they do provide contextual confirmation that such fields existed, could be acquired affordably, and were often used for the burial of unknown travelers. VII. Connecting the Account with Prophecy Some interpreters see in Matthew 27:9–10 a fulfillment of prophecies from Zechariah 11:12–13. Though Matthew references Jeremiah—likely a broader reference to the prophetic tradition that includes related themes of potters (Jeremiah 18–19) and the value ascribed to life—this passage underscores that God’s overarching plan and message are woven throughout Scripture. VIII. Lessons and Implications 1. Sobering Reminder Judas’s dealings with the religious authorities illustrate how sin can distort moral judgment. Guilt ensued quickly once Judas realized the gravity of betraying the Messiah. 2. Integrity of Scripture The cohesive picture from Matthew and Acts shows how different eyewitness accounts can naturally emphasize various aspects of an event. Far from contradicting, these details create a harmonious whole that underscores Scripture’s reliability. 3. Seriousness of Betrayal The label “blood money” highlights the moral and spiritual ramifications of aiding in an unjust execution. The process of discarding those coins and buying land with them shows the tangible outcome of complicity in grievous sin. IX. Scriptural Excerpts “So Judas threw the silver into the temple and left. Then he went away and hanged himself. The chief priests picked up the coins and said, ‘It is not lawful to put this into the treasury, since it is blood money.’ So they conferred together and used the money to buy the potter’s field as a burial place for foreigners.” • Acts 1:18–19: “With the reward for his wickedness Judas bought a field; and there he fell headlong, his body burst open and all his intestines spilled out. This became known to all who lived in Jerusalem; so they called that field in their own language Akeldama, that is, Field of Blood.” X. Conclusion Judas, upon realizing his betrayal of innocent blood, threw the thirty pieces of silver into the temple. Although the religious leaders physically made the purchase of the potter’s field, Scripture attributes the acquisition to Judas because the funds were rightly his. The field consequently became a burial place for strangers, fulfilling prophetic overtones found in the Hebrew Scriptures and cementing a lasting reminder of the tragic results of Judas’s choice. Both Matthew and Acts fit together when understood in context: Judas’s guilt-laden payment is the actual source of the purchase, while the priests’ actions ensured that the silver, now declared “blood money,” would not contaminate the temple treasury. This episode testifies to the historical and moral seriousness of betrayal in the Christian narrative and stands as a stark witness to the cost of sin. |
    |