And said, This fellow said, I am able to destroy the temple of God, and to build it in three days.
This saying was false and malicious testimony that twisted His figurative prophecy about the temple of His body into a threat to destroy the Jewish temple and rebuild it in three days, when He was foretelling His own death and resurrection and victory. It came from bribed witnesses whose evidence was vague and contradictory, at last from two men, and it was the only saying of His the priests could turn to use against Him. Spoken as He uttered it, the words were truth with nothing offensive or worthy of death in them and did not constitute blasphemy, becoming an offense only by misstatement and misapplication. The priests pressed this charge because Romans and Jews, Pharisees and Sadducees all held the temple in great veneration and pride as a work of science and art, so the claim would stir indignation and unite them on common ground. The false testimony was arranged because the chief priests and elders feared He would surpass them in authority and draw the people away, and God overruled their crime for His glory and humanity's good without lessening their guilt, while a charge of Sabbath breaking could not truthfully be made against Him.
Setting and False Charge
Matthew 26:61 belongs to the night when Jesus, bound and closely guarded, was hurried past midnight over the brook Kedron past gardens and olive groves and through the sleeping city to the palace of Annas for preliminary examination before His formal trial before the Sanhedrim. The priests were seeking proof of blasphemy by which to condemn Him before the Jews and of sedition by which to condemn Him before the Romans. The saying stands within His appearing before Annas and the court of Caiaphas.
It was a secret mock trial, kept from the people lest they testify to His mighty works, condemn the Sanhedrim's course, and secure His release with renewed honor. The council was fully assembled, with Caiaphas presiding from the throne of judgment, Jesus standing at its foot, judges and those specially interested in the trial on either side, Roman soldiers ranged on the platform below the throne, and the multitude watching with wild excitement. The verse records a charge made against Him during this hostile examination before Caiaphas amid accusation and mockery.
In that examination He stood calm, serene, dignified and majestic, with a holy influence emanating from Him and pervading the atmosphere. He wore coarse clothing, though He had reigned in the courts of heaven crowned and with garments of brightness attended by holy angels. This was in strong contrast to Caiaphas in gorgeous robe with glittering tiara and costly breastplate, and to the excited, agitated, malignant, sneering and haughty deportment of Annas and Caiaphas and His accusers and judges. Caiaphas himself was struck with sudden admiration for Jesus and conviction that He was akin to God, before banishing the thought, and even the hardened multitude compared the two and questioned whether a man of God-like presence should be sentenced as a common criminal, so that Caiaphas perceived the influence and hastened the trial.
The verse records false and malicious testimony twisting His words to make them sound like a threat against the Jewish temple. He had spoken in figurative prophetic language concerning the temple of His body, foretelling His own death and resurrection after three days, His conflict and victory. His hearers mistook the saying for a claim about the Jewish temple, and His enemies misconstrued and misapplied it to suit their purpose.
The testimony came from bribed, corrupt witnesses whose evidence was vague and contradictory, and at last from two witnesses. One was a corrupt man who had sold his honor for money and spoke contemptuously of Christ as on his own low level, as on a level with himself.
This was the only saying of His the priests could turn to use against Him and the only charge brought against Him. They could find nothing else to use, since accusations that He denounced priests and scribes as hypocrites and murderers, disregarded traditions and ordinances, or broke the Sabbath would weigh nothing with Romans or Sadducees and would bring His healing miracles to light.
The priests pressed the temple charge because Romans and Jews, Pharisees and Sadducees all held the temple in great veneration. The Romans had engaged in rebuilding and embellishing it and took great pride in it as a work of science and art. The claim that a humble man could rebuild it in three days if destroyed would therefore stir Roman and Jewish indignation and unite them on common ground.
Reported accurately as uttered, His words were truth and had nothing offensive in them, nothing worthy of death, and did not constitute blasphemy. Even on the assumption that He were a mere man the declaration would only have indicated an unreasonable, boastful spirit and could not have been construed into blasphemy. Only by misconstruing the words could the witnesses present them as an offense.
His enemies misstated His statement that if this temple were destroyed He would build it again in three days. That distorted version was repeated in mockery at the cross, which publicized the saying and made it more impressive while the statement itself was being fulfilled.
Purpose and Present Lessons
The false testimony to which this saying belongs was arranged by the chief priests and elders because they feared He would surpass them in authority and draw the people away from them. Their murderous opposition brought about the very outcome they meant to prevent, for He became the Redeemer of mankind and Saviour of the world. God overruled their crime for His own glory and for humanity's good, but that overruling providence did not lessen their guilt.
The accusation about destroying the temple and rebuilding it served as a pretext for condemning Him, while a charge of Sabbathbreaking could not truthfully be made against Him. That inability to accuse Him on that ground shows that He and His followers respected the Sabbath of the fourth commandment. The verse shows Him portrayed in the worst possible light through false statements and accusations during His trial, and repeating such accusations stirs up the unsanctified heart and reflects the spirit of those who opposed Him. That same spirit is repeated when ministers prejudice people by telling them that Seventh-day Adventists do not believe in Christ.
This saying was false and malicious testimony that twisted His figurative prophecy about the temple of His body into a threat to destroy the Jewish temple and rebuild it in three days, when He was foretelling His own death and resurrection and victory.
It came from bribed witnesses whose evidence was vague and contradictory, at last from two men, and it was the only saying of His the priests could turn to use against Him.
Spoken as He uttered it, the words were truth with nothing offensive or worthy of death in them and did not constitute blasphemy, becoming an offense only by misstatement and misapplication.
The priests pressed this charge because Romans and Jews, Pharisees and Sadducees all held the temple in great veneration and pride as a work of science and art, so the claim would stir indignation and unite them on common ground.
The false testimony was arranged because the chief priests and elders feared He would surpass them in authority and draw the people away, and God overruled their crime for His glory and humanity's good without lessening their guilt, while a charge of Sabbath breaking could not truthfully be made against Him.
Setting and False Charge
Matthew 26:61 belongs to the night when Jesus, bound and closely guarded, was hurried past midnight over the brook Kedron past gardens and olive groves and through the sleeping city to the palace of Annas for preliminary examination before His formal trial before the Sanhedrim. The priests were seeking proof of blasphemy by which to condemn Him before the Jews and of sedition by which to condemn Him before the Romans. The saying stands within His appearing before Annas and the court of Caiaphas.
It was a secret mock trial, kept from the people lest they testify to His mighty works, condemn the Sanhedrim's course, and secure His release with renewed honor. The council was fully assembled, with Caiaphas presiding from the throne of judgment, Jesus standing at its foot, judges and those specially interested in the trial on either side, Roman soldiers ranged on the platform below the throne, and the multitude watching with wild excitement. The verse records a charge made against Him during this hostile examination before Caiaphas amid accusation and mockery.
In that examination He stood calm, serene, dignified and majestic, with a holy influence emanating from Him and pervading the atmosphere. He wore coarse clothing, though He had reigned in the courts of heaven crowned and with garments of brightness attended by holy angels. This was in strong contrast to Caiaphas in gorgeous robe with glittering tiara and costly breastplate, and to the excited, agitated, malignant, sneering and haughty deportment of Annas and Caiaphas and His accusers and judges. Caiaphas himself was struck with sudden admiration for Jesus and conviction that He was akin to God, before banishing the thought, and even the hardened multitude compared the two and questioned whether a man of God-like presence should be sentenced as a common criminal, so that Caiaphas perceived the influence and hastened the trial.
The verse records false and malicious testimony twisting His words to make them sound like a threat against the Jewish temple. He had spoken in figurative prophetic language concerning the temple of His body, foretelling His own death and resurrection after three days, His conflict and victory. His hearers mistook the saying for a claim about the Jewish temple, and His enemies misconstrued and misapplied it to suit their purpose.
The testimony came from bribed, corrupt witnesses whose evidence was vague and contradictory, and at last from two witnesses. One was a corrupt man who had sold his honor for money and spoke contemptuously of Christ as on his own low level, as on a level with himself.
This was the only saying of His the priests could turn to use against Him and the only charge brought against Him. They could find nothing else to use, since accusations that He denounced priests and scribes as hypocrites and murderers, disregarded traditions and ordinances, or broke the Sabbath would weigh nothing with Romans or Sadducees and would bring His healing miracles to light.
The priests pressed the temple charge because Romans and Jews, Pharisees and Sadducees all held the temple in great veneration. The Romans had engaged in rebuilding and embellishing it and took great pride in it as a work of science and art. The claim that a humble man could rebuild it in three days if destroyed would therefore stir Roman and Jewish indignation and unite them on common ground.
Reported accurately as uttered, His words were truth and had nothing offensive in them, nothing worthy of death, and did not constitute blasphemy. Even on the assumption that He were a mere man the declaration would only have indicated an unreasonable, boastful spirit and could not have been construed into blasphemy. Only by misconstruing the words could the witnesses present them as an offense.
His enemies misstated His statement that if this temple were destroyed He would build it again in three days. That distorted version was repeated in mockery at the cross, which publicized the saying and made it more impressive while the statement itself was being fulfilled.
Purpose and Present Lessons
The false testimony to which this saying belongs was arranged by the chief priests and elders because they feared He would surpass them in authority and draw the people away from them. Their murderous opposition brought about the very outcome they meant to prevent, for He became the Redeemer of mankind and Saviour of the world. God overruled their crime for His own glory and for humanity's good, but that overruling providence did not lessen their guilt.
The accusation about destroying the temple and rebuilding it served as a pretext for condemning Him, while a charge of Sabbathbreaking could not truthfully be made against Him. That inability to accuse Him on that ground shows that He and His followers respected the Sabbath of the fourth commandment. The verse shows Him portrayed in the worst possible light through false statements and accusations during His trial, and repeating such accusations stirs up the unsanctified heart and reflects the spirit of those who opposed Him. That same spirit is repeated when ministers prejudice people by telling them that Seventh-day Adventists do not believe in Christ.