Matthew 27:7

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 through Jeremiah the prophet, saying, And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of him that was priced, whom certain of the children of Israel did price; and they gave them for the potter's field, as the Lord hath appointed me.

Still ignorant of what they were doing, the enemies of Jesus continued to fulfill Zechariah's prophecy (Zechariah 11:12,13); Judas cast the money "in the house of the Lord," and they made it "unto the potter."

Acts 1:19 gives the Aramaic name for the field, popularly known as Akeldama.

"Jeremiah" was the name of a larger grouping of the Hebrew Scriptures which contained both Jeremiah and Zechariah, along with other books including all the minor prophets. Thus, Matthew is guilty of no error in the use of the term "Jeremiah." An equivalent case today would be a quotation credited to "Romans" or to the "New Testament." Some commentators believe that Matthew quoted from some of the traditional sayings of Jeremiah, since it is not said that Jeremiah wrote the saying but that he spoke it. The quotation, exhibiting several variations from the words in Zechariah, may then be understood either as an exact quotation from Jeremiah, now lost, or a paraphrase of Zechariah. In any case, the objection is not important.

The exact fulfillment of Zechariah's prophecy by the betrayal events is fully discussed under Matthew 26:15. As for the alleged contradiction between the Acts and Matthew accounts of the manner of Judas' death and the persons purchasing the field, note the following:

MATTHEW

He departed and went away and hanged himself ... The chief priests took the silver ... and bought with them the potter's field to bury strangers in.

ACTS

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.

Haley said:

Neither of these statements excludes the other. Matthew does not deny that Judas, after hanging himself, fell and burst asunder; Luke does not assert that Judas did not hang himself prior to his fall. Probably the circumstances are much as follows: Judas suspended himself from a tree on the brink of the precipice overhanging the valley of Hinnom, and the limb or the rope gave way; and he fell and was mangled as described in Acts.[1]

If Judas hanged himself, as plainly said, the only way he could have come down was by falling, or by tender and loving removal at the hands of others. To say that he did not fall, as plainly said, one would have to be able to affirm that some person or persons prevented it. Furthermore, if the body remained suspended until it fell of natural causes, which was likely, the bursting of the body as it fell would have been a certainty.

Now, note the so-called contradiction in Acts which ascribes the obtaining of the field to JUDAS as contrasted with Matthew's recording that the "PRIESTS bought the potter's field." This too is one of those artificial "contradictions" So delightful to skeptics. Since Judas provided the money to buy the field, it is highly proper to say that he "obtained" it. That the actual purchase and arranging of the legal transfer of the property was done by the priests makes it true also that they actually "bought" it. Today, on the campuses of a thousands colleges, are buildings "bought" by various donors whose names are inscribed on the buildings; yet in every case, it was the college or university which literally "bought" the building, signing all the contracts, making the legal transfers, etc. Furthermore, if a donor dies before all the legal details are completed, he is still said to have "given" or "obtained" for the school the new student center, or dormitory, or science building. That the same purchase is under consideration in both Matthew and Acts is implicit in the name "field of blood," which is the same in both.