Acts Chapter 1 verse 18 Holy Bible
(Now this man obtained a field with the reward of his iniquity; and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out.
read chapter 1 in ASV
(Now this man, with the reward of his evil-doing, got for himself a field, and falling head first, came to a sudden and violent end there.
read chapter 1 in BBE
(This [man] then indeed got a field with [the] reward of iniquity, and, having fallen down headlong, burst in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out.
read chapter 1 in DARBY
Now this man purchased a field with the reward of iniquity; and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out.
read chapter 1 in KJV
read chapter 1 in WBT
Now this man obtained a field with the reward for his wickedness, and falling headlong, his body burst open, and all his intestines gushed out.
read chapter 1 in WEB
this one, indeed, then, purchased a field out of the reward of unrighteousness, and falling headlong, burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed forth,
read chapter 1 in YLT
Acts 1 : 18 Bible Verse Songs
Pulpit Commentary
Pulpit CommentaryVerse 18. - Obtained for purchased, A.V., an unnecessary change; his iniquity for iniquity, A.V. It is obvious that this verso and ver. 19, which are placed in a parenthesis in the R.V., are not part of St. Peter's discourse, but are explanatory words inserted by St. Luke for the instruction of Theophilus and his other readers. Falling headlong; i.e. from the tree or gallows on which he hung himself (see Matthew 27:3-8). The only apparent discrepancies in the accounts of St. Matthew and St. Luke in regard to the purchase of the field, and the name given to it, are that, according to St. Matthew's more detailed account, it was the chief priests who actually purchased the field with Judas's money, whereas St. Luke says, less accurately, that Judas purchased it. Again, St. Matthew explains the name Akel-dama as being given to the field because it was the price of the "innocent blood" of Jesus betrayed by Judas, whereas St. Luke's account rather suggests that it was Judas's own blood shed in his fall which gave the name. But both accounts of the name might be true, some understanding the name in one sense and some in the other. (Compare the different accounts of the name of Beer-sheba in Genesis 21:31 and Genesis 26:32, 33; of the origin of the proverb, "Is Saul among the prophets?" 1 Samuel 10:11, 12 and 1 Sam 20:24; and other similar cases.) Though, however, there is no serious discrepancy between St. Luke and St. Matthew, it is probable, from the variations above named, that St. Luke had not seen St. Matthew's account.
Ellicott's Commentary
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers(18, 19) Now this man purchased a field.--Better, acquired, got possession of, a field, the Greek not necessarily including the idea of buying. On the difficulties presented by a comparison of this account with that in Matthew 27:5-8, see Note on that passage. Here the field bought with Judas's money is spoken of as that which he gained as the reward of his treachery. The details that follow are additions to the briefer statement of St. Matthew, but are obviously not incompatible with it. Nor is there any necessity for assuming, as some have done, that there were two fields known as Aceldama, one that which the priests had bought, and the other that which was the scene of Judas's death. The whole passage must be regarded as a note of the historian, not as part of the speech of St. Peter. It was not likely that he, speaking to disciples, all of whom knew the Aramaic, or popular Hebrew of Palestine, should stop to explain that Aceldama meant "in their proper tongue, The field of blood."
