Why is the field called the Field of Blood in Matthew 27:8? Canonical Passages Matthew 27:6-8—“But the chief priests said, ‘It is unlawful to put these into the treasury, since it is blood money.’ After conferring together, they bought the potter’s field as a burial place for foreigners. That is why it has been called the Field of Blood to this day.” Acts 1:18-19—“With the reward of his wickedness, Judas bought a field; and falling headlong, he burst open in the middle and all his intestines spilled out. This became known to all who live in Jerusalem, so that in their own language that field is called Akeldama, that is, Field of Blood.” Immediate Meaning in Matthew Matthew explicitly links the name to “blood money” (tima haimatos, literally “price of blood”)—the thirty pieces of silver paid for Jesus’ betrayal. The priests’ admission of blood guilt sets the narrative’s tone: though they attempt ritual purity by refusing the coins for the Temple treasury, they cannot erase complicity in an unjust execution (cf. Deuteronomy 27:25). Thus the field’s title memorializes culpable bloodshed rather than merely Judas’s gruesome death. Harmony with Acts 1 Acts adds the graphic end of Judas, giving the public event that fixed the name “Akeldama.” The two emphases converge: 1. Same land parcel—Matthew notes purchase by priests; Acts, speaking colloquially, attributes it to Judas because it was his money (legal construct of agency is common in Jewish law, cf. m. Kid. 1.1). 2. Two-fold reason for “blood”: the blood price that secured the plot (judicial aspect) and the bodily blood of Judas (historical spectacle). Early patristic commentators (e.g., Augustine, Harmony of the Gospels III.12) consistently saw complementarity, not contradiction. Prophetic Foundations Jeremiah 19:1-13 predicts that a potter’s vessel will be shattered in the Valley of Hinnom for Judah’s bloodshed; Zechariah 11:12-13 envisions thirty pieces of silver thrown to the potter. Matthew (27:9-10) cites these oracles in composite form. The purchased “potter’s field” crystallizes both prophecies. The vocabulary shift from “potter” to “Field of Blood” signals fulfillment: covenant-breaking Israel repeats Jeremiah’s generation, and the Messiah’s blood triggers the prophesied judgment. Geographical Identification Eusebius (Onomasticon 40.5) and Jerome (Commentary on Matthew 27:8) locate Akeldama on the south-west slope of the Hinnom Valley, immediately south of the Old City walls. Medieval pilgrims, the Crusader cartulary of 1131, and the extant Greek-Orthodox Monastery of St. Onuphrius still preserve the name. Geographic continuity is strengthened by: • A 1st-century chalky marl quarry—ideal for potters’ clay—surveyed by C. Schick (PEFQ 1892:162-166). • Franciscan excavations (D. Bagatti, 1953) that uncovered 1st-century Kokhim tombs showing prolonged use as a burial ground for non-residents, exactly as Matthew states. Archaeological and Extrabiblical Witness Josephus (War 6.316) notes that Hinnom was already a refuse and burial area by the late 60s AD. The Dead Sea Scroll 11QT (Temple Scroll) lists the valley as ritually defiled, corroborating Matthew’s suitability of the spot for foreigners. A 4th-century ostracon found on-site reads Aḳeldama in Greek uncials, preserving the toponym’s antique form. Theological Significance of Blood Guilt 1. Substitutionary Atonement: Judas’s blood money underscores that sin’s price is death (Romans 6:23). In stark contrast, Christ’s blood cleanses (Hebrews 9:14). 2. Corporate Responsibility: The priests’ refusal to return the silver to the treasury illustrates Matthew’s theme of outward religiosity masking inner rebellion (23:27-28). 3. Eschatological Warning: As Jeremiah’s potter prophecy prefigured national desolation, so Akeldama foreshadows Jerusalem’s destruction in AD 70—exactly as Christ predicted (Matthew 24:2). Refutation of Skeptical Objections Objection: Matthew says the priests bought the field; Acts says Judas. Response: Agency in Second Temple jurisprudence accords ownership to the originator of funds (Mekhilta Exodus 21:19). Matthew focuses on legal mechanics; Acts, on popular attribution. No contradiction exists. Objection: Discrepancy in Judas’s death (hanged vs. burst open). Response: A body suspended in the hot Judean climate, decomposing and falling from its support into a rocky ravine, yields the scenario Luke summarizes—harmonized historically by 2nd-century writer Papias (fragment in Apollinaris of Laodicea, §3). Practical and Pastoral Lessons • Betrayal of Christ yields only shame and death; repentance and faith bring life. • Stewardship of wealth gains eternal perspective when contrasted with the hollow purchase of Akeldama. • The believer’s confession—“bought with a price” (1 Corinthians 6:20)—echoes the inverse lesson of blood money condemned at Akeldama. Summary The field is called the Field of Blood because (1) it was acquired with “blood money,” the price of betraying the sinless Messiah; (2) it became the grisly scene of Judas’s death; (3) its name fulfills dual Old Testament prophecies; (4) it stands as a perpetual, locatable witness to the moral and historical reality of Christ’s passion. All available textual, linguistic, archaeological, and prophetic evidence converges to uphold the biblical narrative’s integrity and the theological weight of the term. |
    |