Matthew 27:7 · Bible study
Matthew 27:7 Commentary: Blood Money, Potter’s Field, and Providence
Greek · 8 what the commentators say
Meaning in one sentence
Why did the chief priests buy a potter's field with Judas' blood money? Explore the irony, fulfillment of Scripture, and memorial of their guilt.
Research Summary
- Meaning: The chief priests use Judas' betrayal money to buy a worthless field for burying foreigners, turning blood money into a burial ground.
- Key words: agorazō (buy), kerameus (potter), xenos (stranger/foreigner).
- Main debate: Whether the purchase was an act of charity to cover guilt or merely a pragmatic disposal of tainted funds.
- Theological theme: God's sovereignty over evil, blood money provides a resting place for outsiders, anticipating the global scope of Christ's atonement.
- Best use: A case study in the irony of sin and the hidden workings of providence.
Translation Comparison
BSB Berean Standard Bible 2020
After conferring together, they used the money to buy the potter’s field as a burial place for foreigners.
WEB World English Bible 2000
They took counsel, and bought the potter’s field with them to bury strangers in.
KJV King James Version 1769
And they took counsel, and bought with them the potter’s field, to bury strangers in.
ASV American Standard Version 1901
And they took counsel, and bought with them the potter’s field, to bury strangers in.
YLT Young's Literal Translation 1898
and having taken counsel, they bought with them the field of the potter, for the burial of strangers;
Darby Darby Bible 1890
And having taken counsel, they bought with them the field of the potter for a burying-ground for strangers.
Douay-Rheims Douay-Rheims Bible 1899
And after they had consulted together, they bought with them the potter's field, to be a burying place for strangers.
Translations in other languages (10 available)
Mas habido consejo, compraron con ellas el campo del alfarero, por sepultura para los extranjeros.
Então juntamente se aconselharam, e compraram com elas o campo do oleiro, para ser cemitério dos estrangeiros.
Et, après en avoir délibéré, ils achetèrent avec cet argent le champ du potier, pour la sépulture des étrangers.
Sie hielten aber einen Rat und kauften den Töpfersacker darum zum Begräbnis der Pilger.
En te zamen raad gehouden hebbende, kochten zij daarmede den akker des pottenbakkers, tot een begrafenis voor de vreemdelingen.
E tenuto consiglio, comprarono con quel danaro il campo del vasaio da servir di sepoltura ai forestieri.
I naradziwszy się, kupili za nie rolę garncarzową na pogrzeb gościom.
Сделав же совещание, купили на них землю горшечника, для погребения странников;
他們商 議，就用 那銀錢 買了 窯戶 的一塊田，為要 埋葬 外鄉人。
And they made a decision to get with the silver the potter's field, as a place for the dead of other countries.
Verse in Context
Original Language (Koine Greek)
New Testament · Koine Greek · Matthew 27:7
Source: STEPBible TAGNT/TEHB (CC-BY 4.0). Click or tap a morphology code to see the full parsing.
Scholars' Consensus
Commentators agree that Matthew 27:7 records the chief priests' decision to use the thirty silver pieces, now tainted as blood money, to purchase a burial field for strangers. Barnes, Gill, and Wesley note the potter's field was likely a spent clay pit, worth little and unfit for farming or pottery. The term 'strangers' (xenois) is understood as non-residents: Jews from the diaspora, Hellenists, or proselytes visiting Jerusalem (Clarke, Cambridge, Lange). Gill also suggests Roman soldiers may have been included. While the act appears charitable, the commentators see it as a cover for guilt: by providing burial, the priests hoped to sanitize their money and their conscience. But as Barnes and Gill observe, the purchase only fixed their infamy, giving the field the lasting name 'Field of Blood.'
How settled is the interpretation?
Interpretive difficulty: Low
What is clear: The chief priests used the blood money to buy a burial field for foreigners, and this act became a lasting memorial of their guilt and an instrument of God's redemptive plan.
What Scholars Agree and Debate
| Topic | Agreed | Debated |
|---|---|---|
| Identity of 'strangers' | They were non-residents of Jerusalem, likely Jewish pilgrims or proselytes who died during visits. | Some commentators (Wesley, Gill) include Gentiles or Roman soldiers; others limit them to Jews from the dispersion. |
| Motive for the purchase | The chief priests could not keep blood money in the temple treasury. | Barnes and Gill see it as a charitable act intended to cover their guilt; others view it as a cold, practical disposal of tainted funds. |
| Fulfillment of prophecy | The purchase is connected to Zechariah 11:12, 13 and Jeremiah themes (Jer. 18, 19). | How Matthew’s citation of Jeremiah functions, some hold it as direct prophecy, others as typological fulfillment. |
| Significance of 'potter's field' | It was a spent clay pit of little value. | Whether the name alludes to Jeremiah’s potter imagery or simply identifies a known location. |
Historical & Cultural Context
Matthew 27:6 reports the chief priests' scruple: blood money could not go into the temple treasury. This reflects a strict interpretation of Deuteronomy 23:18, which forbids bringing 'the hire of a prostitute, or the wages of a male prostitute, into the house of the LORD.' By extension, the price of betrayal was equally defiling. The priests needed a use for the money that would not violate the law, yet also must not benefit them personally.
The potter's field was likely in the Valley of Hinnom, south of Jerusalem, an area associated with refuse and disgrace (Cambridge, Poole). A potter dug clay there until the pit was exhausted, leaving a hollow, barren site. The field's negligible value, thirty shekels being far below normal land prices, matches Gill's and Barnes' assessment: it was good for nothing but burial. Burial of 'strangers' (xenois) offered a practical service; many pilgrims died while in Jerusalem for festivals, and Jewish law required proper interment.
The purchase thus solved an immediate problem, but it created a permanent monument. Verse 8 notes the field was called 'Field of Blood' (Akeldama in Acts 1:19). The very money that condemned an innocent man now bought a place of rest, but only for outsiders, mirroring the priests' rejection of the true King who came for all nations.
Textual Notes
The consulted sources note no significant textual variants for Matthew 27:7.
Reception History
Throughout church history, the potter's field, called Akeldama in Acts 1:19, became a site of pilgrimage and reflection. Early Christian writers saw in it a symbol of how God brings redemption out of human sin. Preachers during Holy Week have often used this verse to highlight the irony of the chief priests' legalism: they would not soil the treasury but had no qualms about shedding innocent blood. In the medieval period, the field was venerated as a burial ground for pilgrims. Modern readers continue to find in this episode a sobering reminder that no amount of religious cover-up can hide guilt, but that the same blood money can be redeemed to serve God's mercy toward outsiders.
Preaching This Verse
Three-Point Outline
- The Dilemma of Guilty Money. The priests cannot keep the blood money or return it to the treasury, so they must find a use that appears lawful. Conscience is twisted into legalism.
- The Debased Property. The potter's field, worthless, exhausted, fits the tainted sum. It becomes a burial ground, a place of death bought by the price of death.
- The Dignity of Strangers. The field welcomes those without a home. In an irony only God could write, the price of the Savior’s life provides rest for foreigners, an early echo of the gospel going to the nations.
Five-Point Outline
- Blood money defiles everything it touches. The priests are trapped by the silver they so eagerly accepted.
- Hypocrisy masquerades as piety. They honor ceremonial law while crucifying the Lawgiver.
- God uses even wicked transactions to serve His purposes. The potter’s field becomes a sign of redemption for outsiders.
- A purchase meant to bury guilt only memorializes it. The field’s name, ‘Blood,’ continues to accuse them.
- What was intended for evil, God uses for good. The burial ground for strangers foreshadows the cross, where Christ’s blood buys a place for all who are far off.
Illustration Hooks
- Tainted inheritance. A family inherits money from a crooked business. They don’t want it, but they can’t give it back. They donate it to a charity they despise, still trying to look good while feeling dirty.
- Clunker car lot. A dealer buys a lot full of wrecked cars for a pittance, sets up a ‘charity repair’ program, mostly to clean up the neighborhood and his own reputation.
- Guilt gift. Someone buys an expensive present for a person they’ve wronged, hoping the gift will erase the wrong. It never does; the gift just becomes a reminder.
Questions Your Congregation Is Asking
- Why didn’t the chief priests just give the money back to Judas’ family?
- Was buying a burial field for strangers a good deed, or just a cover-up?
- What does this story tell us about how God works through sinful choices?
Leading a Discussion
This passage exposes the twisted logic of sin. The chief priests are scrupulous about tainted money but blind to their betrayal of an innocent man. Yet God weaves even their cover-up into a prophecy of the cross. As you guide your group, help them see both the human corruption and the divine sovereignty at work.
Discussion Questions
- Read Matthew 27:3, 10. What does the priests’ response to Judas reveal about their priorities?
- Why was it “not lawful” to put the money into the treasury (v.6)? What does their legalism hide? (See Deuteronomy 23:18 for background.)
- The potter’s field became a burial place for strangers. Who are these strangers? Why does Matthew include this detail?
- In your own words, what is the irony of buying a “potter’s field” with blood money? (Consider Jeremiah 18 and 19.)
- How does the naming of the field “Field of Blood” (v.8) function as both a memorial of guilt and a prophecy?
- God uses this sinister transaction to fulfill Scripture (v.9, 10). How does this give you confidence in God’s control over your own failures?
- How can the church today be a place where “foreigners” and outsiders find rest, similar to the unintended service the priests provided?
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.
Interlinear and lexical data from STEPBible (CC BY 4.0). Commentaries are public domain.
For personal reflection
Read the devotional page — prayer, application, and "for families"
What the Commentators Say
7 public-domain commentaries, condensed into plain language.
Adam Clarke's Commentary Methodist/Wesleyan 1826
Clarke notes the striking irony that the very money used to betray Jesus was later used to buy a burial field for strangers, turning a cruel transaction into mercy. He extends this to a spiritual parallel: Christ's blood, shed as a ransom, opens
Barnes' Notes on the Bible Protestant 1832
Barnes resolves the apparent contradiction between Matthew and Acts by explaining that Judas is said to have purchased the field only because his money made the purchase possible; Scripture often credits a person with an action they caused. He also suggests the low price reflects a depleted clay pit, making the land nearly worthless.
Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges Anglican 1880
the potter ’s field ] Tradition places Aceldama in the valley of Hinnom, south of Jerusalem. strangers ] i. e. Jews of the dispersion, Hellenists and proselytes.
Geneva Bible Notes Reformed 1599
The Geneva annotators highlight the priests' twisted conscience: they refused to put Judas's blood money into the temple treasury, yet had no misgivings about using it for a burial field for strangers. This action, though done in ignorance
Gill's Exposition of the Bible Baptist 1748
Gill highlights that the priests bought a worthless clay pit as a burial ground for strangers, hoping this act of public charity would disguise their guilt in purchasing Jesus’s blood. But divine providence ensured the field became a permanent monument to their crime rather than a cover for it.
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 explains that the potter’s field held little agricultural value because its soil had already been removed for making pottery, leaving it neither fit for farming nor grazing. Its low purchase price reflected this, and the field was used for burying foreigners, particularly the many Gentiles living in Jerusalem.