Matthew 27:4 · Bible study
Matthew 27:4 Commentary: Judas's Confession
Greek · 10 what the commentators say
Meaning in one sentence
Analyze Judas's confession of betraying innocent blood and the priests' dismissive response, exploring the difference between remorse and true repentance.
Research Summary
- Meaning: Judas confesses betraying innocent blood, but the priests reject responsibility.
- Key words: ἥμαρτον (I sinned, aorist indicative, past act), αἷμα ἀθῷον (innocent blood, variant δίκαιον/righteous), σὺ ὄψῃ (you yourself will see, future indicative with emphatic pronoun).
- Main debate: Whether Judas's confession is genuine repentance or mere regret.
- Theological theme: The distinction between worldly sorrow (2 Cor 7:10) and repentance that leads to life.
- Best use: Preaching on the nature of repentance and the danger of hardening one's heart.
Translation Comparison
BSB Berean Standard Bible 2020
“I have sinned by betraying innocent blood,” he said. “What is that to us?” they replied. “You bear the responsibility.”
WEB World English Bible 2000
saying, “I have sinned in that I betrayed innocent blood.” But they said, “What is that to us? You see to it.”
KJV King James Version 1769
Saying, I have sinned in that I have betrayed the innocent blood. And they said, What is that to us? see thou to that.
ASV American Standard Version 1901
saying, I have sinned in that I betrayed innocent blood. But they said, What is that to us? see thou to it.
YLT Young's Literal Translation 1898
`I did sin, having delivered up innocent blood;' and they said, `What--to us? thou shalt see!'
Darby Darby Bible 1890
saying, I have sinned [in] having delivered up guiltless blood. But they said, What is that to us? see thou [to that].
Douay-Rheims Douay-Rheims Bible 1899
Saying: I have sinned in betraying innocent blood. But they said: What is that to us? Look thou to it.
Translations in other languages (10 available)
Diciendo: Yo he pecado entregando la sangre inocente. Mas ellos dijeron: ¿ Qué se nos da á nosotros? Viéras lo tú.
e disse: Pequei, traindo sangue inocente. Porém eles disseram: Que nos interessa? Isso é problema teu!
en disant: J’ ai péché, en livrant le sang innocent. Ils répondirent: Que nous importe? Cela te regarde.
und sprach: Ich habe übel getan, daß ich unschuldig Blut verraten habe.
Zeggende: Ik heb gezondigd, verradende het onschuldig bloed! Maar zij zeiden: Wat gaat ons dat aan? Gij moogt toezien.
dicendo: Ho peccato, tradendo il sangue innocente. Ma essi dissero: Che c’importa?
Mówiąc: Zgrzeszyłem, wydawszy krew niewinną! A oni rzekli: Cóż nam do tego? ty ujrzysz!
говоря: согрешил я, предав кровь невинную. Они же сказали ему: что нам до того? смотри сам.
「我賣了 無辜之人 的血 是有罪了。」 他們說：「那與 我們 有甚麼相干？你自己 承當吧！」
Saying, I have done wrong in giving into your hands an upright man. But they said, What is that to us? it is your business.
Verse in Context
Original Language (Koine Greek)
New Testament · Koine Greek · Matthew 27:4
Source: STEPBible TAGNT/TEHB (CC-BY 4.0). Click or tap a morphology code to see the full parsing.
Scholars' Consensus
Commentators agree that Judas's confession, while acknowledging his sin, does not constitute true repentance. As Barnes notes, Judas had been with Jesus for three years and had every opportunity to observe his character; his admission of Christ's innocence becomes a powerful testimony against the chief priests. Gill points out that Judas confessed to the wrong persons, the chief priests and elders, not to God, and he did not seek pardon nor forsake his sin. Matthew Henry echoes that this was a forced confession born of terror, not a broken heart. On the priests' response, Calvin describes it as “stupidity and madness”, they wash their hands of responsibility even after hearing that Jesus is innocent. The Cambridge Bible adds that the priests' reply “What is that to us?” shows their utter abandonment of the traitor whom they used. All agree that the scene starkly contrasts worldly regret with godly sorrow, and religious hypocrisy with the truth that the priests knew but suppressed.
How settled is the interpretation?
Interpretive difficulty: Medium
Main views:
- Remorse without repentance: Judas's confession is to the wrong people, he does not seek God's forgiveness, and he goes on to suicide (Gill, Matthew Henry, Barnes).
- Partial repentance: His admission of guilt could be a genuine step, but he lacked faith and hope in God's mercy, which would have changed the outcome (a minority view).
What is clear: Judas unequivocally affirms Jesus' innocence, which stands as a powerful witness against the priests and as a lesson that spiritual knowledge alone does not save.
What Scholars Agree and Debate
| Topic | Agreed | Debated |
|---|---|---|
| Nature of Judas's confession | All recognize that Judas admitted Jesus was innocent, which is a powerful testimony to Christ's purity. | Most commentators (Barnes, Gill, Matthew Henry) see it as mere remorse without saving repentance, pointing to his suicide as evidence. A minority (some modern readings) suggest it could have been a first step toward repentance that was cut short by despair. |
| Priests' moral responsibility | All agree the priests bear guilt for Jesus' death. They used Judas and then abandoned him. | Calvin emphasizes their willful blindness and God's judgment in hardening them. Others (Matthew Henry) focus on their hypocrisy and religious scrupulosity masking murder. |
| Meaning of 'innocent blood' | The phrase refers to Jesus' lack of guilt for any capital offense. | The textual variant 'righteous blood' (δίκαιον) is preferred by some ancient witnesses (Clarke lists Syriac, Vulgate, Armenian). It shifts emphasis from legal innocence to moral righteousness, but both readings affirm Christ's sinlessness. |
Historical & Cultural Context
The events of Matthew 27:4 take place early on Friday morning, after the Sanhedrin's nighttime trial of Jesus. Judean law required that capital cases be tried during the day, and the leaders were rushing to present Jesus to Pontius Pilate, the Roman governor, who held the power of execution. Judas, seeing that Jesus was condemned, experiences what Matthew calls “remorse” (v.3), a term that in Greek (μεταμεληθείς) suggests a change of mind or regret rather than the deeper repentance (μετάνοια) that turns to God.
The phrase “innocent blood” carries heavy weight in Jewish Scripture. The law explicitly forbade shedding innocent blood (Deut 27:25), and the prophets condemned Israel's leaders for doing so (Jer 22:17). By confessing that Jesus' blood was innocent, Judas places himself, and by extension the priests, under that curse. Some ancient manuscripts read “righteous blood” instead of “innocent,” a variant noted by Clarke and Gill. The word ἀθῷος means “not guilty, unpunished”; the variant δίκαιος emphasizes Jesus' moral righteousness. Either reading underlines that Jesus did not deserve death.
The priests' dismissive reply, τί πρὸς ἡμᾶς; (“What is that to us?”) and σὺ ὄψῃ (“You yourself will see”, the pronoun σὺ is emphatic) reflects a calculated attempt to distance themselves. In Jewish legal thought, responsibility for bloodshed fell on those who initiated the false charge. Yet here they deflect, leaving the matter to Judas alone. This sets up the purchase of the potter's field with the blood money (vv.6-8), a land that becomes a perpetual witness against them.
Textual Notes
Most Greek manuscripts read αἷμα ἀθῷον (“innocent blood”). However, as Clarke notes, “two ancient MSS., Syriac, Vulgate, Sahidic, Armenian, and all the Itala; Origen, Cyprian, Lucifer, Ambrose, Leo, read δικαιον, righteous, or just.” Gill also mentions that the Syriac and Vulgate read “righteous blood.” The variant does not change the basic meaning, both affirm that Jesus did not deserve death, but “righteous” may underscore his positive moral character rather than merely his legal innocence. The majority text supports “innocent,” and the weight of evidence is solid, but the variant is worth noting for its ancient attestation.
Reception History
This verse has been read across Christian traditions as a sobering example of false repentance and religious hardness. Early church fathers such as Chrysostom used it to warn against the despair that leads to suicide, contrasting Judas with Peter. Medieval Passion plays portrayed Judas's remorse and the priests' coldness in vivid scenes, making the passage memorable to lay audiences. The Protestant reformers Calvin and Luther highlighted the verse to distinguish law from gospel: the law terrifies (Judas) while the gospel invites (Peter). In Catholic tradition, this scene appears in the Sorrowful Mysteries (the betrayal), and in examinations of conscience about the difference between contrition and attrition. The shared emphasis across traditions is the danger of knowing the truth but refusing to turn to God in faith.
Preaching This Verse
Three-point outline
- Judas's confession: a testimony to Christ's innocence but not saving repentance. He says the right words but goes to the wrong audience.
- The priests' rejection: hardness of heart that refuses moral responsibility. They hear the truth and dismiss it.
- The aftermath: Judas's despair and suicide contrasting with Peter's repentance. Remorse alone leads to death; turning to God leads to life.
Five-point outline
- The sincerity of Judas's words, he knew Jesus was innocent (Barnes: a remarkable proof).
- The inadequacy of confession without turning to God, he confessed to men, not to God (Gill).
- The priests' culpability, they had heard the truth and rejected it (Calvin: stupidity and madness).
- The tragic end, remorse leads to death, not life; Judas hanged himself.
- The invitation to true repentance, even deep sin can be forgiven when we turn to Christ.
Illustration hooks
- The cheater's confession: A student who cheats on an exam is caught and admits it to the teacher, but only because he is afraid of the consequences. He feels regret but does not change his habits. True repentance would mean owning the wrong and choosing integrity going forward.
- The corporate blame game: When a scandal breaks, leaders often say, “That's on him, not us.” Like the priests, they try to wash their hands of responsibility while still benefiting from the crime.
- Religious scrupulosity: A person who is meticulous about church rules but ignores justice or mercy. The priests would not put blood money in the treasury, but they had no problem shedding innocent blood.
Questions your congregation is asking
- Is Judas in hell? What does his suicide mean for his salvation?
- How can I know whether my sorrow is godly repentance or just regret?
- Why did the priests reject Judas's confession? Could they have saved Jesus at that point?
Leading a Discussion
This passage forces us to examine the nature of our own confessions. Judas said the right words, “I have sinned”, but he did not bring them to God. The priests heard the truth and dismissed it. As you discuss, consider where your trust lies when guilt comes.
Discussion questions
- What does Judas's confession reveal about what he believed about Jesus?
- Why do you think Judas went to the priests instead of to God?
- How do the priests' words “What is that to us?” reflect their character?
- Compare Judas's remorse with Peter's repentance in Luke 22:61-62. What made the difference?
- What does this passage teach about the difference between confession and repentance?
- Have you ever been tempted to dismiss someone else's guilt to avoid your own? How does this passage challenge that?
- How can we ensure that our sorrow over sin leads us to God rather than to despair?
Word Study
The key original-language words in this verse. Select any word for its full lexicon entry — meaning, every occurrence in Scripture, and related words.
Cross-References
Source: Treasury of Scripture Knowledge (TSK, public domain)
| Genesis 42:21 | They said to one another, “We are certainly guilty concerning our brother, in that we saw the distress of his soul, when he begged us, and we wouldn’t listen. Therefore this distress has come upon us.” |
| Genesis 42:22 | Reuben answered them, saying, “Didn’t I tell you, saying, ‘Don’t sin against the child,’ and you wouldn’t listen? Therefore also, behold, his blood is required.” |
| Exodus 9:27 | Pharaoh sent and called for Moses and Aaron, and said to them, “I have sinned this time. Yahweh is righteous, and I and my people are wicked. |
| Exodus 10:16 | Then Pharaoh called for Moses and Aaron in haste, and he said, “I have sinned against Yahweh your God, and against you. |
| Exodus 10:17 | Now therefore please forgive my sin again, and pray to Yahweh your God, that he may also take away from me this death.” |
| Exodus 12:31 | He called for Moses and Aaron by night, and said, “Rise up, get out from among my people, both you and the children of Israel; and go, serve Yahweh, as you have said! |
| I Samuel 15:24 | Saul said to Samuel, “I have sinned; for I have transgressed the commandment of Yahweh and your words, because I feared the people and obeyed their voice. |
| I Samuel 15:30 | Then he said, “I have sinned; yet please honor me now before the elders of my people and before Israel, and come back with me, that I may worship Yahweh your God.” |
Interlinear and lexical data from STEPBible (CC BY 4.0). Cross-reference data from OpenBible.info (CC BY 4.0). Commentaries are public domain.
For personal reflection
Read the devotional page — prayer, application, and "for families"
What the Commentators Say
8 public-domain commentaries, condensed into plain language.
Adam Clarke's Commentary Methodist/Wesleyan 1826
Clarke highlights a textual variant where some early manuscripts read "righteous" instead of "innocent." He then zeroes in on the dismissive question "What is that to us?" — pointing out that the tribunal ought to have reversed the sentence and freed the innocent person, but justice was a stranger in that court.
Barnes' Notes on the Bible Protestant 1832
Barnes points out that Judas's confession of betraying innocent blood is powerful proof of Jesus's innocence. Having lived with Jesus for three years, Judas could have exposed any wrongdoing, but instead he admitted his guilt. The chief priests' indifferent reply shows how evildoers abandon their accomplices after using them.
Calvin's Commentaries Reformed 1564
Calvin points out that the priests mistakenly
Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges Anglican 1880
The commentator corrects the translation, noting that Judas said "I sinned in betraying" rather than "I have sinned in that I have betrayed," and that "the" before "innocent blood" should be omitted. Bengel's Latin observation is then applied: the impious are partners in the deed but desert each other afterward.
Geneva Bible Notes Reformed 1599
The Geneva note highlights the callous response of the chief priests. When Judas confesses his sin, they coldly refuse any responsibility, telling him to handle the matter himself. Their dismissal reveals a hardened conscience that cares nothing for justice, only for avoiding personal trouble.
Gill's Exposition of the Bible Baptist 1748
Gill notes that Judas made a confession of sin but without true repentance; he confessed to the wrong people, the chief priests and elders, not to God or Christ. Yet God in providence used this vile man's words as a testimony to Christ's innocence, cutting off any claim that a disciple considered him wicked.
Matthew Henry's Commentary Reformed/Presbyterian 1710
Henry highlights that the Jewish leaders could not legally execute Jesus themselves, since the Romans had taken the power of capital punishment from them years earlier. This political reality forced them to bring him to Pilate, and Henry notes their morning council came after they had spent the night consulting with their pillows.
Wesley's Explanatory Notes Methodist/Wesleyan 1754
Wesley highlights the twisted conscience of the religious leaders: they scruple about putting blood money into the treasury, yet had no scruple about condemning an innocent man to die. Their selective morality shows how easily they could ignore the far greater evil they had just committed.