The Fallible Study Bible

The Fallible · Synthetic · Study Bible

Matthew26:14–16

Judas Agrees to Betray Jesus

✦ Public-domain source — quoted & attributed⚙ AI synthesis — generated, verify

Matthew 26:14–16 — Judas Agrees to Betray Jesus. Each verse below carries the full apparatus: the Berean Standard Bible, the vocalized original (tap any word), and a parsed breakdown of every term transcribed from the interlinear. Synthesized commentary, canonical threads, and the reading of Christ gather at the end, over the whole unit.

14

Then one of the Twelve, the one called Judas Iscariot, went to the chief priests

Berean Standard Bible · CC0

Greek — tap a word ↓

Tote heis tōn dōdeka ho legomenos Ioudas Iskariōtēs poreutheis pros tous archiereis

Word by word12 · parsed
ΤότεToteThenG5119
√ τότε — the when, iAdverb
tote: at that time, then Matthew's stitching adverb. Pulpit reads it back past the Bethany anointing to the assembling of the authorities at the head of the chapter, which makes the treachery an answer to the rebuke over the ointment; Ellicott, Benson, Gill and Cambridge all make the same join, though for different motives.
εἷςheisoneG1520
√ εἷς — oneAdjectiveNominative Masculine Singular
Numeral heis (G1520), nominative, standing alone as the subject.
τῶνtōnof theG3588
√ ὁ — the (sometimes to be supplied, at others omitted, in English idiom)ArticleGenitive Masculine Plural
δώδεκαdōdekaTwelveG1427
√ δώδεκα — two and ten, iAdjectiveGenitive Masculine Plural
dodeka: twelve A partitive genitive under heis: one out of the twelve. Gill records that the twelve functioned as a fixed designation needing no noun (he compares the rabbinic habit of calling the twelve minor prophets simply the twelve). Henry, Gill and Pulpit all press that the weight of the crime lies in the number and the office, not merely in the deed: the closed circle of the apostolate is where the traitor is found.
ὁhothe [one]G3588
√ ὁ — the (sometimes to be supplied, at others omitted, in English idiom)ArticleNominative Masculine Singular
λεγόμενοςlegomenoscalledG3004
√ λέγω — properly, to "lay" forth, iVerbPresent Participle Middle or PassiveNominative Masculine Singular
legō: to lay forth, to say, to call Present participle, middle or passive, with the article: the one being called. Matthew does not introduce a stranger but identifies a man his readers already know by his tag.
ἸούδαςIoudasJudasG2455
√ Ἰούδας — Judas (iNounNominative Masculine Singular
Ioudas: Judas A common and honourable name (Verifier counts G2455 in 34 verses), which is exactly why the epithet in the next slot is needed. Gill says the surname distinguishes him from the other disciple of the same name.
ἸσκαριώτηςIskariōtēsIscariotG2469
√ Ἰσκαριώτης — inhabitant of KeriothNounNominative Masculine Singular
Iskariōtēs: inhabitant of Kerioth Rare: the Verifier finds G2469 in only 11 verses, and in nearly all of them it stands beside the notice that he handed Jesus over (Matthew 10:4, Mark 3:19, Luke 6:16, John 6:71, John 13:2). A place of origin has hardened into a byword.
πορευθεὶςporeutheiswentG4198
√ πορεύομαι — to traverse, iVerbAorist Participle PassiveNominative Masculine Singular
poreuomai: to traverse, to go Aorist participle passive, subordinate to eipen in verse 15: the going is preparation, the speaking is the act. Gill stresses that no one sent for him; Barnes adds from Luke 22:4 that the approach took in the temple captains as well as the priests, the officers who guarded the temple by night (Acts 4:1), so this was an approach to the men who could make an arrest.
πρὸςprostoG4314
√ πρός — a preposition of directionPreposition
τοὺςtoustheG3588
√ ὁ — the (sometimes to be supplied, at others omitted, in English idiom)ArticleAccusative Masculine Plural
ἀρχιερεῖςarchiereischief priestsG749
√ ἀρχιερεύς — the high-priest (literally, of the Jews, typically, Christ)NounAccusative Masculine Plural
archiereus: the high priest Plural. Barnes reads it as the high priest together with those who had held the office, the ruling men of the Sanhedrin, and suggests Judas may have bargained with several of them separately to raise his price. Pulpit notes that their hostility was public knowledge, so Judas needed no introduction: he simply walked toward a known hatred.
15

and asked, “What are you willing to give me if I hand Him over to you?” And they set out for him thirty pieces of silver.

Berean Standard Bible · CC0

Greek — tap a word ↓

eipen Ti thelete dounai moi kagō paradōsō auton hymin de hoi estēsan autō triakonta argyria

Word by word15 · parsed
εἶπενeipen[and] askedG2036
√ ἔπω — to speak or say (by word or writing)VerbAorist Indicative Active3rd Person Singular
epō: to speak, to say Aorist indicative, third singular: the single finite verb that verse 14's participle has been waiting for. Matthew's syntax makes the whole approach subordinate to this one sentence out of Judas's mouth.
ΤίTiWhatG5101
√ τίς — an interrogative pronoun, who, which or what (in direct or indirect questions)Interrogative / Indefinite PronounAccusative Neuter Singular
tis: who, which, what Accusative neuter interrogative, and it is left open. Judas names no figure; he hands the valuation to the court. Gill insists the motion was his own, that the priests did not tempt him with an offer first, which makes this blank the most damning word in the verse.
θέλετέtheleteare you willingG2309
√ θέλω — to determine (as an active option from subjective impulseVerbPresent Indicative Active2nd Person Plural
thelō: to determine as an active option Present indicative active, second plural. Strong's gloss (determination from subjective impulse) fits the question precisely: he does not ask what the man is worth, he asks what they are willing to part with. The price will therefore measure the sellers as much as the goods, which is Ellicott's point about the priests gauging their reward in contempt.
δοῦναιdounaito giveG1325
√ δίδωμι — to give (used in a very wide application, properly, or by implication, literally or figurativelyVerbAorist Infinitive Active
Aorist infinitive of didōmi (G1325), completing the verb of willingness.
μοιmoimeG1473
√ ἐγώ — I, mePersonal / Possessive PronounDative 1st Person Singular
κἀγὼkagōif IG2504
√ κἀγώ — so also the dative case , and accusative case and (or also, even, etcPersonal / Possessive PronounNominative 1st Person Singular
kagō: and I Crasis of kai and egō. The explicit pronoun is unnecessary in Greek and therefore emphatic: the offer's whole value is that it comes from an insider.
παραδώσωparadōsōhandG3860
√ παραδίδωμι — to surrender, iVerbFuture Indicative Active1st Person Singular
paradidōmi: to surrender, to hand over Future indicative active: a promise, not a wish. Barnes notes the verb means simply to deliver up, and Benson fills in the commercial detail Judas is selling, a time and place where Jesus can be taken without alarming the people.
αὐτόνautonHim {over}G846
√ αὐτός — the reflexive pronoun self, used (alone or in the comparative G1438 (ἑαυτοῦ)) of the third person , and (with the proper personal pronoun) of the other personsPersonal / Possessive PronounAccusative Masculine 3rd Person Singular
ὑμῖνhyminto youG4771
√ σύ — thouPersonal / Possessive PronounDative 2nd Person Plural
δὲdeAndG1161
√ δέ — but, and, etcConjunction
οἱhoiG3588
√ ὁ — the (sometimes to be supplied, at others omitted, in English idiom)ArticleNominative Masculine Plural
ἔστησανestēsanthey set outG2476
√ ἵστημι — to stand (transitively or intransitively), used in various applications (literally or figuratively)VerbAorist Indicative Active3rd Person Plural
histēmi: to set, to place, to weigh out Aorist indicative active, third plural. Cambridge glosses it weighed out for him or plainly paid him; Pulpit notes the verb could mean appointed (the Vulgate's constituerunt ei) and that Mark has promised and Luke covenanted, yet argues some silver changed hands at once, since Judas returns it at Matthew 27:3 without a further interview. Barnes argues the opposite, that payment was withheld lest Judas deceive them. Pulpit also records this verb in the Septuagint of Zechariah 11:12.
αὐτῷautōfor himG846
√ αὐτός — the reflexive pronoun self, used (alone or in the comparative G1438 (ἑαυτοῦ)) of the third person , and (with the proper personal pronoun) of the other personsPersonal / Possessive PronounDative Masculine 3rd Person Singular
τριάκονταtriakontathirtyG5144
√ τριάκοντα — thirtyAdjectiveAccusative Neuter Plural
triakonta: thirty Rare in the New Testament: the Verifier finds G5144 in 11 verses, and one of them is Matthew's own return to this sum at 27:9. The number, not the metal, is what the tradition hears.
ἀργύριαargyriapieces of silverG694
√ ἀργύριον — silvery, iNounAccusative Neuter Plural
argyrion: silvery, a silver piece Neuter plural, undenominated. Read as shekels (Gill's rule, Cambridge, Poole, Pulpit), thirty of them is the figure Exodus 21:32 fixes as compensation for a slave gored by an ox, which is why Barnes, Benson, Poole and Pulpit all read the sum as studied contempt. The nineteenth century sterling equivalents the commentators give, three pounds fifteen shillings, are their conversions, not the text's.
16

So from then on Judas looked for an opportunity to betray Jesus.

Berean Standard Bible · CC0

Greek — tap a word ↓

kai apo tote ezētei eukairian hina paradō auton

Word by word8 · parsed
καὶkaiSoG2532
√ καί — and, also, even, so then, too, etcConjunction
ἀπὸapofromG575
√ ἀπό — "off," iPreposition
τότεtotethen onG5119
√ τότε — the when, iAdverb
tote (G5119) with apo: from that point. Matthew uses the same adverb that opened verse 14, closing the unit as a bracket.
ἐζήτειezētei[Judas] looked forG2212
√ ζητέω — to seek (literally or figuratively)VerbImperfect Indicative Active3rd Person Singular
zēteō: to seek Imperfect indicative active: continuous, unfinished searching. The tense turns a single bargain into a settled occupation, and it is the hinge on which Henry hangs his warning that Judas had time to repent and did not take it.
εὐκαιρίανeukairianan opportunityG2120
√ εὐκαιρία — a favorable occasionNounAccusative Feminine Singular
eukairia: a favorable occasion Built from eu (well) and kairos (season), so the noun is about timing, not access. Pulpit notes that with an insider's help the Sanhedrin no longer needed to wait for the festival to end, which reverses their earlier caution: Judas does not merely sell a man, he sells them a schedule.
ἵναhinatoG2443
√ ἵνα — compare G3588 (ὁ))Conjunction
hina (G2443) introducing purpose: the whole watching has one end in view.
παραδῷparadōbetrayG3860
√ παραδίδωμι — to surrender, iVerbAorist Subjunctive Active3rd Person Singular
paradidōmi: to surrender, to hand over Aorist subjunctive active in the purpose clause: over against the drawn out imperfect of seeking stands one decisive act of delivery. Barnes presses that the verb itself says only deliver up; everything foul in the English word betray comes from the relationship being broken, not from the vocabulary.
αὐτὸνauton[Jesus]G846
√ αὐτός — the reflexive pronoun self, used (alone or in the comparative G1438 (ἑαυτοῦ)) of the third person , and (with the proper personal pronoun) of the other personsPersonal / Possessive PronounAccusative Masculine 3rd Person Singular
Pronoun auton (G846): the object of the whole unit, never once named by Judas.

The verse-by-verse work is done. What follows gathers the whole unit. All three layers below are machine-generated (⚙). Weigh them; they have no authority.

⚙

Grand Commentary — the unit, read whole

synthesis · verify

AI synthesis — woven from the public-domain voices above and the original text; generated and fallible.

i. The hinge: one out of the twelve — 26:14

Matthew's Τότε is a joint, not a timestamp, and the commentators use it to decide what provoked the man. Pulpit dates it to the close of Christ's addresses and calls verses 6 to 13 parenthetical, so that Judas walks out of the Bethany supper straight to the priests; Gill says plainly that he was exasperated because the ointment was not sold and the money never reached his hand; Benson adds from John 12:4 that Judas had been the loudest against the woman and took the rebuke as a personal affront; Ellicott reads shame, anger and a greed robbed of its expected spoil. Cambridge refuses the whole account and argues the motive was disappointed worldly ambition rather than avarice, borrowing Neander's line that a Christ who ceased to attract became repulsive. Barnes and Ellicott both bring in Luke 22:3, that Satan entered into Judas, and Ellicott hears behind it the earlier warning of John 6:70. ⚙ We do not adjudicate: the brief's own witnesses split, and the text itself gives no motive clause at all. What the Greek does give is arithmetic and office. εἷς τῶν δώδεκα, one out of the twelve, with the number used as a name; Henry, Gill and Pulpit all say the crime's horror is positional, and Barnes notes from Luke 22:4 that the approach reached the temple captains too, the men who could actually make an arrest.

ii. The bargain: an open question, a weighed answer — 26:15

The question is a blank. Τί θέλετέ δοῦναι μοι: what are you willing to give me. Gill presses that the priests did not solicit him, that Judas made the motion himself and tempted them to name a figure, and that he never once speaks his Master's name. Pulpit hears the emphatic κἀγὼ as the insider's boast. Then the answer, and the answer is weighed: Cambridge corrects the old English to weighed out for him, Pulpit gives they weighed unto him and records the same verb in the Septuagint of Zechariah 11:12. Barnes, Benson, Cambridge, Poole and Pulpit all identify the sum with Exodus 21:32, the statutory compensation for a slave gored by an ox, and all of them read contempt in it: Ellicott says the priests saw through the man's baseness and gauged the reward accordingly. Whether any silver changed hands here is disputed inside the brief: Barnes says payment was withheld lest Judas cheat them, Pulpit says part was paid at once because Judas returns it at 27:3 without a further interview. Poole lifts the price out of the haggling altogether and assigns it to the council of Heaven. ⚙ Our own observation is grammatical: Judas asks about their willingness, so the figure they produce is a self-portrait of the sellers before it is a valuation of the sold.

iii. From that hour: the tense that waits — 26:16

Matthew closes with an imperfect, ἐζήτει, he kept seeking, and a noun about timing, εὐκαιρίαν, a good hour. Gill describes the habit that tense implies, a man narrowly watching and diligently observing for the fitting season; Barnes, Gill and Poole all import Luke's clause, in the absence of the multitude, and explain the difficulty as crowd control rather than access. Pulpit sees the consequence for the other side of the bargain: with an informer the Sanhedrin no longer needed to wait for the feast to be over. Barnes uses the same verse to defend the vocabulary, insisting that παραδίδωμι means only to deliver up and that the treachery is in the relationship, not the word. Henry turns the imperfect into pastoral warning: the long interval was time to repent and revoke, and a conscience already hardened by small dishonesties did not use it. ⚙ Read together with verse 14, the unit is bracketed by the same adverb, then and from then, and inside the bracket nothing happens but a walk, a question, a weighing and a wait.

Read under Sola Scriptura — this tool’s own fallible reading (⚙)

⚙ This is the tool's own fallible reading, offered to be tested by Scripture and by better readers. The passage is a receipt, and the theology is in the figure. Judas names no sum: he asks the chief priests what they are willing to give, and the statute price of a slave killed by an ox is what comes back over the scales. So the number measures the buyers first. Yet the same text refuses to let Judas stand outside the guilt, because Matthew will not stop calling him one of the twelve, and because the closing imperfect shows a man keeping a bargain open for days rather than a man overtaken once. Henry's warning about a conscience hardened in small things and Poole's claim that the price was fixed by the council of Heaven are not the same claim, and we hold both without smoothing them into one: the sellers act freely and are guilty, and the sum is nonetheless the one Zechariah had already written down. We name our own limits too. The brief gives us no motive clause, its commentators disagree about greed against thwarted ambition, and Matthew's own attribution of the prophecy is a question this unit defers to 27:9. The line set apart below is our own sentence, a synthesis line and not Scripture.

Judas named no price; he asked the court what the Son of Man was worth, and the court answered with the law's rate for a gored slave.

⚙

Canonical Threads — out to the whole of Scripture

cross-refs · verify

AI-generated connections. Each carries a verification badge with a recorded basis; contested links are flagged.

The weighed price Zechariah had already named structural / thematic: confirmed

⚙ The verb at the center of verse 15 is ἔστησαν (histēmi, G2476), the scales verb. Cambridge corrects the English to weighed out for him; Pulpit renders it they weighed unto him and records that the Septuagint of Zechariah 11:12 stands the same form over the same sum. Benson points to Zechariah 11:13 for the goodly price, Ellicott to Zechariah 11:12 for the market rate of a slave, and Poole says outright that the bargain was cheap because a prophecy was to be fulfilled, then postpones his full treatment to Matthew 27:9, where Matthew cites the prophecy openly. The link is about as strong as a cross-Testament link can be, and it still cannot be badged verbal: Matthew is Greek and Zechariah is Hebrew, so no shared Strong's lexeme is computable across the pair.

Zechariah 11:12 · Zechariah 11:13 · Matthew 27:9

basis: Explicit later citation (Matthew names the prophecy at 27:9-10) plus the wording Pulpit records: the Septuagint of Zechariah 11:12 uses the same verb ἔστησαν that stands at Matthew 26:15. Not tierable verbal because the refs cross the Testaments: Greek to Hebrew, so shared Strong's numbers cannot be computed and no verbal basis exists. Verifier confirms only the Greek side of the chain: Matthew 27:9 shares G5144 τριάκοντα (in 11 vv) and G694 ἀργύριον (in 20 vv) with this verse.

The statute rate for a gored slave typological

⚙ Exodus 21:32 fixes thirty shekels as the compensation owed when an ox gores a slave. Barnes, Benson, Cambridge, Poole and Pulpit independently identify the bargain's sum with that statute, and all of them draw the same inference, that the figure was chosen to express contempt: Pulpit calls it the legal price of a slave gored by an ox, Poole the poorest and meanest price of any person's life. Cambridge takes the further step, reading the slave price against Matthew 20:28, where the Son of Man comes to serve and to give his life a ransom for many. ⚙ Our addition is only the ledger logic: a law written to price an accidental death among the powerless is the law the court reached for when asked to value Jesus.

Exodus 21:32 · Matthew 20:28

basis: Figural reading, ancient and widely held in the brief's own witnesses (Barnes, Benson, Cambridge, Poole, Pulpit all cite Exodus 21:32 as the rate). Cross-Testament pair (Greek to Hebrew), so no shared Strong's lexeme is computable and none is claimed; the Verifier offers no basis for this pair.

The silver comes back verbal / quotation: confirmed

⚙ Matthew alone records the sum here, and Matthew alone brings it back: at 27:3 Judas returns the silver, and at 27:9 the evangelist ties the price to prophecy. Barnes argues the money was not handed over at the bargain, lest Judas deceive them, and points to Matthew 27:3 with Acts 1:18 for the settlement afterward; Pulpit argues the reverse, that part was paid on the spot, precisely because Judas can return it at 27:3 without a further interview with the Sanhedrin. Either way the vocabulary is the same within one narrative, which is what the Verifier records.

Matthew 27:3 · Matthew 27:9

basis: Verifier: Matthew 27:9 shares the rare lexemes G5144 τριάκοντα (in 11 vv) and G694 ἀργύριον (in 20 vv) with this verse, and Matthew 27:3 shares G2455 Ἰούδας (in 34 vv) with G5119 τότε (in 158 vv) and G749 ἀρχιερεύς (in 119 vv). Both refs are New Testament Greek, so a verbal badge is available: this is one author repeating his own wording inside one narrative, not a cross-Testament citation. Acts 1:18 is cited in the body as Barnes's cross-reference only and is deliberately kept out of the refs, since the Verifier supplies no lexical basis for it.

The same bargain in Mark and Luke structural / thematic: confirmed

⚙ Poole sets the three accounts side by side: Mark 14:10-11 has the priests glad and promising money, Luke 22:3-6 has Satan entering Judas and the search for a moment in the absence of the multitude. Cambridge notes that Mark, like Matthew, attaches the treachery to the scene in Simon's house. Jamieson, Fausset and Brown give no exposition here at all, referring the reader wholesale to their note on Mark 14:1-11. The shared verbs are real but ordinary, so we claim pattern and not quotation.

Mark 14:10 · Mark 14:11 · Luke 22:3 · Luke 22:6

basis: Verifier: Luke 22:6 shares G3860 παραδίδωμι (in 117 vv) and G2212 ζητέω (in 114 vv) with v16; Luke 22:3 shares G2469 Ἰσκαριώτης (in 11 vv), G2455 Ἰούδας (in 34 vv) and G1427 δώδεκα (in 61 vv) with v14; Mark 14:10 shares G2469 Ἰσκαριώτης (in 11 vv), G749 ἀρχιερεύς (in 119 vv) and G1520 εἷς (in 288 vv). The overlapping verbs are common (over a hundred verses each), so the agreement is synoptic parallelism of pattern, deliberately not badged verbal.

Iscariot: the rare tag that follows him through the Gospels structural / thematic: confirmed

⚙ The epithet is scarce (the Verifier finds G2469 in only 11 verses) and it travels in company: in the apostle lists of Matthew 10:4, Mark 3:19 and Luke 6:16 it is attached to the clause about handing Jesus over, and in John 6:71 and John 13:2 it marks the man the Lord had already identified. Barnes simply refers the reader back to his note at Matthew 10:4; Ellicott hears in John 6:70 a warning about the devil nature already at work; Cambridge notes that the word devil was applied to Peter too, and, he argues, for the same reason, an earthly kingdom preferred. ⚙ A rare shared lexeme would normally license a verbal badge, but a proper name is not a quotation, so we hold the tier down.

Matthew 10:4 · Mark 3:19 · Luke 6:16 · John 6:71 · John 13:2

basis: Verifier: G2469 Ἰσκαριώτης is rare (in 11 vv) and is shared with Mark 3:19, Matthew 10:4, Luke 6:16, John 6:71 and John 13:2, usually alongside G2455 Ἰούδας (in 34 vv) and G3860 παραδίδωμι (in 117 vv). Rarity alone would allow a verbal tier; downgraded deliberately because the rare lexeme is a proper epithet (inhabitant of Kerioth), not quoted language.

Whose words? the question Poole defers to 27:9 flagged: verify source

⚙ The brief's witnesses agree that the price is Zechariah's, and they do not settle how Matthew ascribes it. Poole quotes the prophet's clause about casting it to the potter and then says explicitly that he will discourse that text further when he comes to Matthew 27:9; Benson cites Zechariah 11:13, Ellicott 11:12. Nothing in this unit's sources records how the prophet is named at 27:9, and the attribution has long been argued over in the tradition. We therefore record the citation and withhold the provenance judgment rather than assert it, and we flag the thread so that it is checked at 27:9 itself.

Matthew 27:9 · Zechariah 11:13

basis: Provenance of the Old Testament citation is contested in the tradition and is not settled by this unit's sources: Poole explicitly postpones the discussion to Matthew 27:9, and no Verifier basis can cross from Greek Matthew to Hebrew Zechariah. Flagged for verification at Matthew 27:9 rather than asserted here.

Another Judah, twenty pieces of silver typological

⚙ Pulpit lists earlier shadows of this bargain: another Judas, he says, sold his brother Joseph for twenty pieces of silver (Genesis 37:27-28), and Ahithophel gave counsel against David, his familiar friend (2 Samuel 16). The reading is figural and inexact, and we say so: Joseph's price is twenty pieces and not thirty, the seller is a brother rather than a disciple, and the Verifier computes no basis for the pair because the languages differ. What holds the pattern together is not a number but a shape, betrayal by the intimate, priced in silver.

Genesis 37:27 · Genesis 37:28

basis: Figural reading recorded by Pulpit, which names the sale of Joseph by his brother Judah (Genesis 37:27-28) and Ahithophel's counsel against David as shadows of this transaction. Cross-Testament pair (Greek to Hebrew): no shared Strong's lexeme is computable and none is claimed, and the sums differ (twenty against thirty), so the link is pattern only. Attested in the older tradition through Pulpit; not confirmed by the Verifier.

⚙Christ in the Unittypology · verify

AI-generated reading; weigh it against the text.

Priced as a slave, and a ransom for many ancient/widely-held

⚙ The redemptive-historical weight of this unit sits in a figure on a scale. Cambridge draws the line itself: thirty shekels was the price of a slave under Exodus 21:32, and that fact gives force to Matthew 20:28, where the Son of Man comes to serve, to be a slave, and to give his life a ransom for many. Pulpit says that Christ had taken on the form of a bondservant and was here reckoned as such; Poole says the price was fixed by the council of Heaven, so that as he took the form of a servant his life should be valued at an ordinary servant's rate. ⚙ We add only the canonical echo both men are reaching for: the phrase about the form of a servant is Paul's at Philippians 2:7, and Matthew 26:15 is, in effect, the market's receipt for that self emptying. The court thought it was insulting a Galilean teacher; on this reading it was filling in the price line of his own stated mission.

Exodus 21:32 · Matthew 20:28 · Philippians 2:7

The traitor inside the twelve, already named ancient/widely-held

⚙ Matthew will not let the reader forget the office: one out of the twelve. Gill lists what that office had included, calling, qualifying, sending out to preach and to work miracles, and says it was one of these who meditated the delivery of his Master. Ellicott remembers that even earlier in the discipleship the Lord had spoken of a devil nature at work in him (John 6:70); Cambridge notes that Jesus called him a devil, the same word once turned on Peter; Barnes, Ellicott and Pulpit all bring in Luke 22:3, that Satan entered into Judas. The Verifier independently lists John 6:71 as a candidate for this unit on the rare epithet G2469. ⚙ The christological point is that the betrayal is not an accident that overtakes Jesus from outside. It comes from the table, from a man he chose, and he had said so before it happened, which is why Henry's note that no accusation of any crime could be brought against him even by this insider carries weight: the closest hostile witness had nothing.

John 6:70 · John 6:71 · Luke 22:3

Handed over: the verb that carries the passion ancient/widely-held

⚙ One verb runs through both halves of this unit, παραδίδωμι (G3860): Judas promises to hand him over in verse 15 and seeks the hour to hand him over in verse 16, and the same verb is welded to his name in the apostle lists (Matthew 10:4, Mark 3:19, John 13:2). Barnes insists on its plainness, that it means simply to deliver up or to give into their hands. ⚙ Offered as our own reading, not as a computed link: Paul uses this same verb of the Father in Romans 8:32, so that the act Judas sells for silver is also, at another level entirely, the act by which the Son is given. We keep the two levels distinct rather than merging them, and we note honestly that the Verifier computed no basis for the Romans pair, since a cross-book Greek link there was not among the candidates supplied.

Matthew 10:4 · Matthew 27:3 · Romans 8:32

Apparatus & Provenance

The biblical text is the Berean Standard Bible (BSB), public domain (CC0). Hebrew/Greek text, transliteration, morphology and Strong’s are transcribed from the Berean interlinear (CC0) + Strong’s lexicons (PD); the literal renderings, divergence notes, word notes and all synthesis are this tool’s own work (⚙) — fallible; verify them.

Named voices, quoted verbatim from public-domain works:

  • Albert Barnes, Notes on the Bible (1834)
  • Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges, — (1880s)
  • Charles Ellicott, Commentary for English Readers (1878)
  • John Gill, Exposition of the Entire Bible (1746–63)
  • Joseph Benson, Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1810s)
  • Matthew Henry, Concise Commentary on the Whole Bible (1706)
  • Matthew Poole, Annotations upon the Holy Bible (1685)
  • The Pulpit Commentary, Spence & Exell, eds. (1880s)

Text: Berean Standard Bible for the English, with the Berean interlinear and Strong's numbers for the Greek of Matthew 26:14-16. Commentary is verbatim public domain material quoted by anchor, never retyped.

Source coverage for this unit is uneven, and it shapes what could be quoted. Jamieson, Fausset and Brown supply only a chapter heading here and refer the reader to their note on Mark 14:1-11, so there was nothing pointed to excerpt; the Geneva marginal notes for all three verses carry no gloss beyond the verse text and a heading; Poole's notes at verses 14 and 15 are pointers to his single long note at verse 16, which is where we quote him. Eight of the ten authors present are therefore represented in the voices (Ellicott, Benson, Henry, Barnes, Poole, Gill, Cambridge, Pulpit).

What is uncertain. First, motive: the brief's own witnesses disagree, Benson, Barnes, Henry and Gill reading avarice, Cambridge reading disappointed worldly ambition, and the Greek text supplies no motive clause at all. Second, payment: Barnes holds that no silver changed hands at the bargain, Pulpit that some did. Third, the money: every sterling equivalent in these notes is a nineteenth century commentator's conversion, not a datum of the text, and the denomination of the thirty pieces is inferred (shekels) rather than written. Fourth, provenance: how Matthew names the prophet at 27:9 is not recorded in this unit's sources, Poole deliberately defers it, and we have flagged the thread accordingly instead of deciding it.

Tiering discipline. No thread pairing this Greek text with a Hebrew text is badged verbal, because shared Strong's lexemes cannot be computed across the Testaments; the Zechariah 11:12-13 link is badged structural despite being an explicit, later named citation, and the Exodus 21:32 and Genesis 37 links are badged typological. The one verbal badge in this unit is internal to Matthew. The Iscariot thread was deliberately held down from verbal even though its shared lexeme is rare, because a proper epithet is not a quotation. The entries for Gill, Poole and Pulpit are capped in the brief; we did not fetch their full text, and no claim here rests on the capped remainder.

✦ = human, public-domain source, quoted and named. ⚙ = machine synthesis, to be verified. Flagged cross-references are left visible on purpose — the verifier working in the open. “Search the Scriptures daily, whether those things were so.” (Acts 17:11)