มัทธิว 27:9 วิจารณ์

When the morning was come,.... Or, as soon as it was day, as Luke says, Luk 22:66. The sanhedrim had been up all night, which, after eating the passover, they had spent in apprehending, trying, and examining Jesus, and the witnesses against him; and had come to an unanimous vote, that he was guilty of death; upon which they either put Jesus out of the room for a while, or went into another themselves, to consult what further steps should be taken: or if they went home to their own houses, they very quickly got together again, and met in the temple, where they seem to be, Mat 27:5, unless the story of Judas is, by anticipation, inserted here; and in their council chamber, where they led Jesus, and examined him again concerning his being the Son of God; see Luk 22:66, all which shows how intent they were upon this business, and with what eagerness and diligence they pursued it; their feet ran to evil, and they made haste to shed blood. This was the time of their morning prayers, of their saying their phylacteries, and reciting the "shema", "hear, O Israel! the Lord our God is one Lord", according to their canon, which is this (e): "from what time do they read the "shema" in the morning? from such time that a man can distinguish between blue and white: says R. Eliezer, between blue and green; and he finishes it before the sun shines out. R. Joshua says, before three hours had elapsed:'' but religion, rites, ceremonies, and canons, must all give way to the accomplishment of what their hearts were so much set upon: all the chief priests and elders of the people. The Syriac and Persic versions leave out the word "all", but it is retained in the Vulgate Latin, Arabic, and Ethiopic versions, and in Munster's Hebrew Gospel, and that very rightly. The Scribes and elders met at Caiaphas's house before, Mat 26:57, but it being in the night, they might not be all together; Annas particularly seems to have been absent, Joh 18:24, but now they all assemble together, as in a case of necessity they were obliged to do: their rule was this (f); "the sanhedrim, consisting of seventy and one (as this was), are obliged to sit all of them as one, (or all, and everyone of them,) in their place in the temple; but at what time there is a necessity of their being gathered together, , "they are all of them assembled"; but, at other times, he who has any business may go, and do his pleasure, and return: yet so it is, that there may not be less than twenty three sitting continually all the time of their sitting; (their usual time of sitting was from the morning daily sacrifice, to the evening daily sacrifice (g);) one that is under a necessity of going out; this looks upon his companions that remain, and if twenty three remain, he may go out; but if not, he may not, until the other returns.'' This being now a case of necessity, and great importance, they are all summoned and gathered together, unless we except Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus; who yet might be there, though they did not consent to their counsel and deed, as is certain of the former, Luk 23:51, these took counsel against Jesus; God's holy child Jesus, his anointed, the Messiah; and which was taking counsel against the Lord himself; and so the prophecy in Psa 2:2, had its accomplishment: what they consulted about was to put him to death; it was not what punishment to inflict upon him, whether scourging or death; that was before determined; they had already condemned him to death: but now they enter into close consultation what death to put him to, and in what manner; whether privately, he being now in their hands; or whether by the means of zealots, or by the Roman magistrate; or whether it should be by stoning, which must have been the case, if they put him to death according to their law; and by their authority; or whether by crucifixion, which they chose as the most ignominious and painful; and therefore determined to deliver him up to the Roman governor, and use their interest with him to put him to death, according to the Roman law. (e) Misn. Beracot, c. 1. sect. 2. (f) Maimon. Hilch. Sanhedrin, c. 3. sect. 2. (g) lb. c. 3. sect. 1. Bernidbar Rabba, sect. 1. fol. 177. 3.

Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremy the prophet,.... Through the purchasing of the potter's field with the thirty pieces of silver, the price that Christ was valued at, a prophecy in the writings of the Old Testament had its accomplishment: but about this there is some difficulty. The evangelist here says it was spoken by Jeremy the prophet; whereas in his prophecy there is no mention of any such thing. There is indeed an account of his buying his uncle Hanameel's son's field, in Jer 32:7, but not a word of a potter, or a potter's field, or of the price of it, thirty pieces of silver; and that as a price at which he, or any other person was valued; but the passage which is manifestly referred to, stands in Zac 11:12, where are these words, "and I said unto them, if ye think good, give me my price, and if not, forbear; so they weighed for my price thirty pieces of silver: and the Lord said unto me, cast it unto the potter, a goodly price that I was prized at of them. And I took the thirty pieces of silver, and cast them to the potter in the house of the Lord": the removing of this difficulty, it might be observed, that the Syriac and Persic versions make no mention of any prophet's name, only read, "which was spoken by the prophet"; and so may as well be ascribed to Zechariah, as to Jeremy, and better: but it must be owned, that Jeremy is in all the Greek copies, in the Vulgate Latin, Arabic, and Ethiopic versions, and in Munster's Hebrew Gospel. Various things are said for the reconciling of this matter: some have thought that Zechariah had two names, and that besides Zechariah, he was called Jeremy; but of this there is no proof. Jerom (y) affirms, that in an Hebrew volume, being an apocryphal work of Jeremy, which was shown him by one of the Nazarene sect, he read these words verbatim: so that though they do not stand in the writings of Jeremy, which are canonical Scripture, yet in an apocryphal book of his, and which may as well be referred to, as the book of Maccabees, the traditions of the Jews, the prophecies of Enoch, and the writings of the Heathen poets. Moreover, Mr. Mede (z) has laboured, by various arguments, to prove, that the four last chapters of Zechariah were written by Jeremy, in which this passage stands; and if so, the reason is clear, for the citation in his name. But what seems best to solve this difficulty, is, that the order of the books of the Old Testament is not the same now, as it was formerly: the sacred writings were divided, by the Jews, into three parts: the first was called the law, which contains the five books of Moses; the second, the prophets, which contains the former and the latter prophets; the former prophets began at Joshua, and the latter at Jeremy; the third was called Cetubim, or the Hagiographa, the holy writings, which began with the book of Psalms: now, as this whole third and last part is called the Psalms, Luk 24:44, because it began with that book; so all that part which contained the latter prophets, for the same reason, beginning at Jeremy, might be called by his name; hence a passage, standing in the prophecy of Zechariah, who was one of the latter prophets, might be justly cited, under the name of Jeremy. That such was the order of the books of the Old Testament, is evident from the following passage (a). "it is a tradition of our Rabbins, that the order of the prophets is, Joshua and Judges, Samuel and the Kings, Jeremiah and Ezekiel, Isaiah, and the twelve.'' Moreover, it is usual with them to say (b), that the spirit of Jeremiah was in Zechariah; and it is very plain, that the latter prophets have many things from the former; and so might Zechariah have this originally from Jeremy, which now stands in his prophecy: all this would be satisfactory to a Jew: and it is to be observed, that the Jew (c), who objects to everything he could in the evangelist, with any appearance on his side, and even objects to the application of this prophecy; yet finds no fault with him for putting Jeremy for Zechariah. That the prophecy in Zechariah belongs to the Messiah, and was fulfilled in Jesus, manifestly appears from the context, for as well as the text itself. The person spoken of is in Zac 11:4, called to "feed the flock of slaughter", which being in a very poor condition, Zac 11:5, the state of the Jews, at the time of Christ's coming, is hereby very aptly represented: he agrees to do it, Zac 11:7, and accordingly furnishes himself for it; but he is despised, abhorred, and rejected by the shepherds, the principal men in church and state; because he severely inveighed against their doctrines and practices, Zac 11:8, upon which he rejects them, and dissolves both their civil and church state; which can suit with no other times than the times of Jesus, Zac 11:9, and lest it should be thought that he used them with too much severity, he gives one single instance of their ingratitude to him, which shows how little they esteemed him; and that is, their valuing him at no greater a price than "thirty pieces of silver", Zac 11:12, which were afterwards "cast unto the potter". The Jews (d) themselves own, that this prophecy belongs to the Messiah, though they interpret it of him in another manner. "Says R. Chanun, the Israelites will have no need of the doctrine of the king Messiah in the time to come; as it is said, Isa 11:10, "to him shall the Gentiles seek", and not the Israelites: if so, for what does the king Messiah come? and what does he come to do? to gather the captives of Israel, and to give them the thirty precepts, as it is said, Zac 11:12, "and I said unto them, if ye think good", &c. Rab says, these are the thirty mighty men; and Jochanan says, these are the thirty commands.'' Should it be objected, that supposing the Messiah is intended, the money is said to be given into his hands, and not into the hands of him that was to betray him; "if ye think good, give me my price", Zac 11:12, it may be replied, that the words , should not be rendered, "give me my price", but "give my price"; i.e. give what you think fit to value me at, into the hands of the betrayer; and accordingly they did: "so they weighed for my price thirty pieces of silver", Zac 11:12; which is the very sum the chief priests agreed with Judas for, and which he received; see Mat 26:15, and if it should be objected to the citation of the evangelist, that it is considerably different from the word of the prophet, it being in the latter, "I took the thirty pieces of silver"; whereas in the former, the words are quoted thus, saying, and they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of him that was valued, whom they of the children of Israel did value: it may be observed, that the word which Matthew uses may be rendered, "I took", as it is in the Syriac version; and that the thirty pieces of silver were the goodly price, at which the Messiah was valued by the children of Israel, is manifest enough; and is an instance of egregious ingratitude, that this should be the price of the "innocent one", as the Arabic Version renders the phrase, "of him that was valued"; of the "honoured one", as the Ethiopic; of the "most precious one", as the Syriac; he who in his person, and the perfections of his nature, is equal to his father, and his fellow; who has all the riches of grace and glory in him, as mediator; who is superior to angels, and fairer than the sons of men in human nature: is the chiefest among ten thousands, and more precious than rubies; and all the things that can be desired are not to be compared with him, and yet sold for a sum of money, the price of a slave, Exo 21:32, and that by the children of Israel, to whom the Messiah was promised; who expected him, and desired his coming; and who sprung from among them, and was sent unto them, and yet they received him not, but undervalued him in this exceeding mean way. Wicked men have no value for Christ; they sell him and themselves for nought; but gracious souls cannot value him enough, nor sufficiently express their esteem of him. (y) In loc. (z) Mede's Works, p. 963, 1022, 1023. (a) T. Bab. Bava Bathra, fol. 14. 2. Vid. Praefat. R. David Kimchici in Jer. (b) Sepher Hagilgulim apud Surenhus. Biblos Katallages, p. 41. (c) R. Isaac Chizzuk Emuna, par. 2. c. 25. p. 412. (d) Bereshit Rabba, sect. 98. fol. 85. 3, 4.

What then did that man? When he saw that he was laboring to no profit, and that they would not consent to receive the pieces of silver, "he cast them down in the temple, and went and hanged himself. And the chief priests took the pieces of silver, and said, it is not lawful for to put them into the treasury, because it is the price of blood. And they took counsel, and bought with them the potter's field to bury strangers in. Wherefore that field was called, the field of blood, unto this day. Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremy the prophet, saying, and they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of Him that was valued, and gave them for the potter's field, as the Lord appointed me." Seest thou them again self-condemned by their conscience? For because they knew that they had been buying the murder, they put them not into the treasury, but bought a field to bury strangers in. And this also became a witness against them, and a proof of their treason. For the name of the place more clearly than a trumpet proclaimed their blood-guiltiness. Neither did they it at random, but having taking counsel, and in every case in like manner, so that no one should be clear of the deed, but all guilty. But these things the prophecy foretold from of old. Seest thou not the apostles only, but the prophets also declaring exactly those things which were matters of reproach, and every way proclaiming the passion, and indicating it beforehand? This was the case with the Jews without their being conscious of it. For if they had cast it into the treasury, the thing would not have been so clearly discovered; but now having bought a piece of ground, they made it all manifest even to subsequent generations. Hear ye as many as think to do good works out of murders, and take a reward for the lives of men. These almsgiving are Judaical, or rather they are Satanical. For there are, there are now also they, that take by violence countless things belonging to others, and think that an excuse is made for all if they cast in some ten or a hundred gold pieces.

This is not found at all in Hieremias; but in Zacharias (Zech. 11:13.), who is the last but one of the twelve Prophets, something like it is told, and though the sense is not very different, yet the arrangement and the words are different.

This prophecy does not come from Jeremiah but from a similar passage in Zechariah, who is almost the last of the twelve prophets. Although the meaning does not differ much, Zechariah’s word order and vocabulary do conflict with Matthew’s quotation. In a copy of the Hebrew Scriptures given to me by a member of the Nazarene sect, I recently read an apocryphal edition of the book of Jeremiah in which this quotation from Matthew appeared word for word. Nevertheless it still seems more likely to me that Matthew took this prophecy from Zechariah, since it was the ordinary practice of the Evangelists and apostles to communicate only the meaning of texts from the Old Testament while neglecting to observe their word order.

(Verse 9, 10) Then was fulfilled what was spoken by the prophet Jeremiah, saying, 'And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the value of Him who was priced, whom they of the children of Israel priced, and gave them for the potter's field, as the Lord directed me.' This testimony is not found in Jeremiah. But in Zechariah, who is almost the last of the twelve prophets, a certain similarity is mentioned (Zech. 11). And although the meaning does not differ much, nevertheless both the order and the words are different. I recently read in a certain Hebrew volume, which a Hebrew of the Nazarene sect offered to me, an apocryphal book of Jeremiah, in which I found the following words written verbatim. However, it seems to me more like a testimony taken from Zechariah: just like the Evangelists and Apostles commonly do, who, omitting the order of words, only present the meaning from the Old Testament as an example.

(ad Pam. Ep. lvii. 7.) Far be it then from a follower of Christ to suppose him guilty of falsehood, whereas his business was not to pry into words and syllables, but to lay down the staple of doctrine.

(in loc.) I have lately read in a Hebrew book given me by a Hebrew of the Nazarene sect, an apocryphal Hieremias, in which I find the very words here quoted. After all, I am rather inclined to think that the passage was taken by Matthew out of Zacharias, in the usual manner of the Apostles and Evangelists when they quote from the Old Testament, neglecting the words, and attending only to the sense.

(in loc.) I have lately read in a Hebrew book given me by a Hebrew of the Nazarene sect, an apocryphal Hieremias, in which I find the very words here quoted. After all, I am rather inclined to think that the passage was taken by Matthew out of Zacharias, in the usual manner of the Apostles and Evangelists when they quote from the Old Testament, neglecting the words, and attending only to the sense.

(de Cons. Ev. iii. 7.) But if any one thinks this lowers the historian's credit, first let him know that not all the copies of the Gospels have the name Hieremias, but some simply by the Prophet. But I do not like this defence, because the more, and the more ancient, copies have Hieremias, and there could be no reason for adding the name, and thus making an error. But its erasure is well accounted for by the hardihood of ignorance having heard the foregoing objection urged. It might be then, that the name Hieremias occurred to the mind of Matthew as he wrote, instead of the name Zacharias, as so often happens; and that he would have straightway corrected it, when pointed out to him by such as read this while he yet lived in the flesh, had he not thought that his memory, being guided by the Holy Spirit, would not thus have called up to him one name instead of another, had not the Lord determined that it should thus be written. And why He should have so determined, the first reason is, that it would convey the wonderful consent of the Prophets, who all spake by one Spirit, which is much greater than if all the words of all the Prophets had been uttered through the mouth of one man; so that we receive without doubt whatever the Holy Spirit spake through them, each word belongs to all in common, and the whole is the utterance of each. Suppose it to happen at this day, that in repeating another's words one should mention not the speaker's name, but that of some other person, who however was the other's greater friend, and then immediately recollecting himself should correct himself, he might yet add, Yet am I right, if you only think of the close unanimity that exists between the two. How much more is this to be observed of the holy Prophets! There is a second reason why the name Hieremias should be suffered to remain in this quotation from Zacharias, or rather why it should have been suggested by the Holy Spirit. (Jer. 32:9.) It is said in Hieremias, that he bought a field of his brother's son, and gave him silver for it, though not indeed the sum stated in Zacharias, thirty pieces of silver. That the Evangelist has here adapted the thirty pieces of silver in Zacharias to this transaction in the Lord's history, is plain; but he may also wish to convey that what Hieremias speaks of the field is mystically alluded to here, and therefore he puts not the name of Zacharias who spoke of the thirty pieces of silver, but of Hieremias who spoke of the purchase of the field. So that in reading the Gospel and finding the name of Hieremias, but not finding there the passage respecting the thirty pieces of silver, but the account of the purchase of the field, the reader might be induced to compare the two together, and so extract from them the sense of the prophecy, how far it refers to what was now accomplished in the Lord. For what Matthew adds to the prophecy, Whom they of the children of Israel did value, and gave them for the potter's field, as the Lord appointed me, this, as the Lord appointed me, is found neither in Zacharias nor Hieremias. It must then be taken in the person of the Evangelist as inserted with a mystic meaning, that he had learned by revelation that the prophecy referred to this matter of the price for which Christ was betrayed.

This field then is this entire world, in which we who have been dispersed and scattered bear the fruit of good work for the Lord.Yet perhaps you would inquire of me, if the field is the world, who the potter might be who could have the ownership of the world. Unless I am mistaken, the potter is the one who made the vessels of our body from clay. Scripture says of him, “Then the Lord God formed the man from the dust from the earth.” The potter is the one who, with the warmth of his own breath, made alive the slimy clay of our flesh and with fiery heat put together the fluid and earthly matter of our bodies. The potter, I say, is the one who fashioned us unto life with his own hands and who is refashioning us unto glory through his Christ. The apostle says, “We are being changed into his likeness from one degree of glory to another.” That is to say, we who from our previous condition have broken to pieces because of our own misdeeds are restored in a second birth through the loving kindness of this same potter. We who have been struck by death because of Adam’s transgression rise anew through the grace of the Savior. Clearly this potter is the one of whom the blessed apostle says, “Will what is molded say to its molder?” And again, “Has the potter no right over the clay to make out of the same lump one vessel for beauty and another for menial use?” For from the same clay of our body God preserves some persons for the kingdom on account of their individual merits and keeps others for punishment. The field of this potter, then, was bought with Christ’s blood for travelers. For travelers, I say, who were without home or country and were cast about as exiles throughout the earth, rest is provided by the blood of Christ, so that those who have no possession in the world might have a burial place in Christ. Who do we say that these travelers are if not very devout Christians who, renouncing the world and possessing nothing in the world, rest in the blood of Christ? For the Christian who does not possess the world utterly possesses the Savior. Christ’s burial place then is promised to travelers so that the one who preserves himself from fleshly vices like a traveler and stranger may merit Christ’s rest. For what is Christ’s burial place if not the Christian’s rest? We therefore are travelers, in this world, and we sojourn in this life as passersby, as the apostle says: “While we are in this body we are away from the Lord.” We are travelers, I say, and a burial place has been bought for us at the price of the Savior’s blood. “We have been buried with him,” the apostle says, “through baptism in his death.” Baptism therefore is Christ’s burial place for us, in which we die to sins, are buried to evil deeds and are restored to a renewed infancy, the conscience of the old person having been dissolved in us for the sake of another birth.

And the chief priests took the silver pieces, and said, It is not lawful to put them into the corban, because it is the price of blood. And they took counsel, and bought with them the potter's field, to bury strangers in. Wherefore that field was called, The field of blood, unto this day. Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremiah the prophet, saying, And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of Him that was valued, Whom they of the sons of Israel did value, and gave them for the potter's field, as the Lord appointed me. The corban was the treasury in the temple in which they put the gifts offered to God. See how God brings to naught their schemes by exposing their bloodstained minds. For to this day, it says, that field is called "The field of blood," as a reminder to all that they murdered the Lord. Learn this as well, that the Jews were so diligent in providing hospitality that they purchased a plot where even strangers could be buried. Let us be ashamed, then, we who think we live a more perfect life while disregarding strangers. "The price of Him that was valued," it says, that is to say, the price of Christ. He was beyond price, yet the sons of Israel set a price on Him, having agreed to give Judas thirty pieces of silver.

(non occ.) He then confirms the event by the testimony of the Prophet; Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremy the Prophet, &c.

Then he confirms it from authority: "then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremias the prophet." But there is a question: why does he say "by Jeremias the prophet saying," because the words, as they stand there, are not written in all of Sacred Scripture. Yet something similar is found at Zechariah 11:12: "they weighed my wages, thirty pieces of silver." There is therefore a question why it is attributed to Jeremias, when it was said by Zechariah. Augustine says that in some places it is found written "by the prophet" and not "by Jeremias," yet it seems that this one is Jeremias, as is found in the text. Jerome touches on the solution that the prophets wrote some books which were canonized among the Jews. Hence there are some books of the prophets which are not in the canon of the Bible, just as Jude mentions certain things in his canonical epistle, and the apostles also received all these. Hence he says that a certain person brought him a book of Jeremias where these words were written word for word, and the evangelist wrote according to what he found in the apocryphal work. Augustine resolves it thus: it sometimes happens that when one wishes to express the name of one author, the name of another comes to mind; therefore it may be that when he wished to write Zechariah, he wrote Jeremias. But there were many Jews at that time who knew the law; why did they not correct it? Because they thought it was said by divine inspiration, because all the prophets spoke by the Holy Spirit, and the words of a prophet have no efficacy except from the Holy Spirit; therefore, to insinuate this mystery, they did not correct it. Another solution which he suggests is that although they are not the words of Jeremias, yet there is a similar deed there, as is found at Jeremiah 32:6 ff., that he received the command to buy a field. Or the Holy Spirit moved Matthew to the same deed, as he had moved Jeremias.

Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremy the prophet, saying-- (Zac 11:12-13). Never was a complicated prophecy, otherwise hopelessly dark, more marvellously fulfilled. Various conjectures have been formed to account for Matthew's ascribing to Jeremiah a prophecy found in the book of Zechariah. But since with this book he was plainly familiar, having quoted one of its most remarkable prophecies of Christ but a few chapters before (Mat 21:4-5), the question is one more of critical interest than real importance. Perhaps the true explanation is the following, from LIGHTFOOT: "Jeremiah of old had the first place among the prophets, and hereby he comes to be mentioned above all the rest in Mat 16:14; because he stood first in the volume of the prophets [as he proves from the learned DAVID KIMCHI] therefore he is first named. When, therefore, Matthew produceth a text of Zechariah under the name of JEREMY, he only cites the words of the volume of the prophets under his name who stood first in the volume of the prophets. Of which sort is that also of our Saviour (Luk 24:41), "All things must be fulfilled which are written of Me in the Law, and the Prophets, and the Psalms," or the Book of Hagiographa, in which the Psalms were placed first."