←
Explanation for:
Matthew
26
:
61
And they said: This man said, I am able to destroy the temple of God, and after three days to rebuild it.
11
more explanations
& daily audio-books
spoken by
– enjoy in Theosis App –
Start your
Bible-journey
with explanations
& daily audio-books
only 4$* per month
{"arr":[{"author-name":"John Chrysostom","author-image":"https://cdn.prod.website-files.com/6864003fdf3714da6ff0b33a/68c88ea76859f9f8e2ffd3ee_John%20Chrysostom.png","category":"Holy Fathers and Teachers","century":4,"exegesis-text":"However, the dishonest witnesses appeared and declared, ‘This man claimed, “I will dismantle this temple, and in three days I will restore it” (Matthew 26:61; Mark 14:58; John 2:19). He indeed stated that in three days He would resurrect the temple, but He did not use the word destroy; rather, He said: destroy; and He was not referring to the temple, but to His own body."},{"author-name":"Jerome of Stridon","author-image":"https://cdn.prod.website-files.com/6864003fdf3714da6ff0b33a/68c88dcd3432c6dd41375498_Jerome%20of%20Stridon.png","category":"Holy Fathers and Teachers","century":4,"exegesis-text":"Eventually, two additional false witnesses appeared, claiming, “This man said, ‘I can destroy the temple of God and rebuild it in three days.’” How can they be deemed false witnesses if they report what was genuinely spoken by the Lord? The answer lies in the fact that a false witness misinterprets the meaning of the words as they were intended. The Lord referred to the temple of His own body in this statement. Yet, they misrepresent His words by tweaking or adding to them, attempting to construct a blasphemy. The Savior declared, “Destroy this temple,” but they distort it by saying, “I can destroy the temple of God.” It is you who will destroy it, not I, for it is inconceivable that We would take action against It. They mislead further by asserting that He said He would rebuild it in three days, misleadingly suggesting He was referring to the Jewish temple. However, the Lord clarified that He spoke of a spiritual and living temple when He stated, “And I will raise it up in three days” (John 2:21). There is a significant distinction between creating and raising up."},{"author-name":"Theophylact of Bulgaria","author-image":"https://cdn.prod.website-files.com/6864003fdf3714da6ff0b33a/68c8989296bafed9104677d7_Theophylact%20of%20Bulgaria.png","category":"Holy Fathers and Teachers","century":11,"exegesis-text":"These were truly false witnesses, for Christ did not claim, ‘I can destroy,’ but rather stated ‘destroy’ (John 2:19). He did not refer to ‘the temple of God,’ but instead said, ‘this temple,’ meaning ‘my body.’ Furthermore, He did not declare, ‘I will build,’ but ‘I will raise up.’ Thus, these individuals are clearly false witnesses, who misrepresented what Christ actually said. Recognizing their unjust judgment, Christ remained silent; for if they were unpersuaded by signs, how could they be swayed by mere excuses? Attempting to entrap Christ into blasphemy, the magistrate persists in questioning Him—hoping that if He were to declare, ‘I am the Son of God,’ He could be condemned for blasphemy, or if He refuted it, to trap Him in a self-incriminating statement. Yet the Lord, who exposes the cunning of the wise, responded, ‘thou hast said.’ This indicates, rather than stating, ‘your own mouth has affirmed that I am the Son of God.’"},{"author-name":"Euthymios Zigabenos","author-image":"https://cdn.prod.website-files.com/6864003fdf3714da6ff0b33a/68c96d263b8c22d9c467bdab_no-pic-theosis.png","category":"Christian Authors","century":11,"exegesis-text":"He certainly did, yet he didn’t state, ‘I will destroy,’ but rather ‘Destroy,’ and he was not referring to the temple made by hands but to His own body. This is the reason the evangelist identified them as false witnesses. Mark records that certain individuals stood up and falsely accused Him, claiming, “We have heard Him say, ‘I will destroy this man-made sanctuary, and three days later, I will raise up another not made by human hands.’” Their testimonies varied significantly. Many offered their accounts on this matter, but only two, as noted by Matthew, were in accord, while the others, as Mark indicated, provided testimonies that did not align."},{"author-name":"Gladkow B.I.","author-image":"https://cdn.prod.website-files.com/6864003fdf3714da6ff0b33a/68c88bf0ceef8c96e09a6521_Gladkow%20B.I..png","category":"Christian Authors","century":19,"exegesis-text":"At last, two individuals came forward and declared, “He stated, ‘I can bring down the temple of God and reconstruct it in three days.’” Some of those who were there began to affirm that they had heard Him assert, “I will dismantle this temple built by human hands, and in three days I will erect another temple not crafted by human hands” (Mark 14:58). This declaration could have provided the Sanhedrin with grounds to impose the death penalty. The term 'human-made' was understood to signify an idol, and when referred to in the context of the temple, it could imply an idol temple. Such blatant irreverence towards the Jerusalem temple, where God Himself resides, might have been interpreted as blasphemy, warranting the death penalty as dictated by the law (Lev. 24:16). However, this testimony appeared to conflict with other statements regarding the temple's destruction—that God’s temple could indeed be torn down and yet rebuilt in three days. Consequently, the combined witness accounts concerning the temple’s destruction were deemed insufficient to justify a death sentence for Jesus."},{"author-name":"Makkaveiski N.K.","author-image":"https://cdn.prod.website-files.com/6864003fdf3714da6ff0b33a/68c96d263b8c22d9c467bdab_no-pic-theosis.png","category":"Christian Authors","century":19,"exegesis-text":"Two additional witnesses then appeared, and their testimony appeared to propel the case forward. “We heard,” each began, “how He spoke,” Mark 14:58. This introduction indicated that the witnesses were grounded in judicial proceedings: first, each aimed to share their direct observations, and second, they both sought to address the same incident. One witness asserted, “He said, I can destroy the temple of God, and in three days build it up,” Matthew 26:61. The context of this accusation is well established. During His first visit to Jerusalem at the Passover after beginning His public ministry, the Lord expelled the merchants and money changers from the temple, condemning the commercialization of His Father's house. To those present, this action seemed a violation of the church leaders’ authority, who, while permitting such disrespect for the temple, demanded proof from Jesus of His right to intervene in such matters. The Lord replied, “Destroy this temple, and I will raise it up in three days,” John 2:19, yet the true meaning behind His words eluded their understanding. “This temple has been under construction for forty-six years, and You will raise it in three days?” questioned the Jews in disbelief, John 2:20. This declaration of supreme authority, made openly three years prior, now served as the basis for the two witnesses to level accusations against the Lord Jesus Christ. While one witness was somewhat vague in his account, the other was more precise: “We have heard,” he claimed, “how He said, I will destroy this temple made with hands, and in three days I will build another temple not made with hands,” Mark 14:58. Reflecting on the case of the archdeacon Stephen, which occurred months later and resulted in the martyrdom of the first Christian martyr, clarifies the implications of this accusation. “This man does not cease to speak blasphemous words against this holy place and the law,” declared the false witnesses against Stephen, as they testified, “For we heard him say that Jesus of Nazareth would destroy this place and change the customs handed down to us by Moses,” Acts 6:13-14. The charges against Stephen closely resemble those brought against the Lord Jesus Christ, being explicitly labeled as “blasphemous words against the holy place and the law.” Hence, Jesus's accusatory claims must also fall within this same category of blasphemy. If the false witnesses aimed to charge Christ with false prophecy, as some claim, they need not have resorted to an incident so distant that it could be easily misrepresented. Any of the more recent miracles performed by the Savior could serve their purpose far more effectively than this older fact. In historical Jewish context, blasphemy was viewed as a significant transgression against divine majesty and was adjudicated by the highest Jewish authorities. Thus, the situation surrounding Jesus Christ was evolving in the serious manner anticipated by the Sanhedrin leaders. Following the usual criminal trial procedure, the testimonies of the last two witnesses underwent scrutiny. The specifics concerning the timing and location of the alleged offense—the Feast of Passover and the Temple in Jerusalem—were unmistakable. However, the issue of blasphemy necessitated a critical examination of how the supposed offense was committed, particularly the form in which the blasphemy was articulated. The witnesses, who had answered preliminary questions in separate chambers, reunited in the courtroom to reiterate the blasphemy they had reported. Meanwhile, the public was excused from the courtroom, as they should not hear the alleged blasphemous words. Moreover, not all witnesses were required to state the exact words; typically, only one—the primary witness—was tasked with recounting them, while others might simply affirm what was heard. However, a division emerged that undermined the entire testimony of these two false witnesses. If the first witness, upon being asked to repeat the blasphemous words, had articulated them more emphatically—“I will destroy this man-made temple…”—the second witness could have simply stated, “and I heard what he heard,” and their testimony would have fulfilled the legal criteria. It appears, however, that the testimony was delivered out of order. The milder charge (“I can destroy the temple of God”) was mentioned first, and only afterward did the second witness, seeing the ambiguity in the initial claim, intensify the accusation. Given that the law strictly forbade witnesses from altering their statements, this discrepancy rendered the testimony of both witnesses insufficient under Hebrew legal standards, resulting in a declaration that it “was not sufficient,” Mark 14:59."},{"author-name":"Abbot Panteleimon about the Trinity","author-image":"https://cdn.prod.website-files.com/6864003fdf3714da6ff0b33a/68c96d263b8c22d9c467bdab_no-pic-theosis.png","category":"Christian Authors","century":19,"exegesis-text":"They claimed that He spoke irreverently regarding the temple of God. The members of the Sanhedrin were pleased; these false testimonies sought to transform the words of the Savior, spoken two years earlier in the Jerusalem temple, into a criminal charge. He had proclaimed, \\"Destroy this temple, and I will raise it up in three days\\" (John 2:19), referring not to the physical temple but to His own body, thereby prophesying His crucifixion and resurrection. However, both false witnesses maliciously or due to misunderstanding distorted the words of Jesus. One testified, He said: \\"I CAN DESTROY THE TEMPLE OF GOD, AND IN THREE DAYS BUILD IT UP.\\" Innocent, Archbishop of Kherson, pointed out that this misrepresentation aimed to show arrogance and disrespect toward the sacred, such as the temple. Another false witness claimed he heard the Lord say, \\"I will destroy this man-made temple, and in three days I will build another, not made with hands.\\" Such a distorted representation suggested rebellion and indicated that Jesus held a low view of the Jerusalem temple—since \\"man-made\\" in Scripture often describes an idol and idol temple—and that He intended to demolish it in favor of constructing an unknown temple, likely nonexistent. This was perceived as a blatant act of blasphemy against the temple, comparable to offenses against God and Moses, which the Law prescribed as deserving of death for the blasphemer. Truly, these were false witnesses! Christ did not claim, \\"I can destroy,\\" but rather \\"I will destroy.\\" He did not refer to the church of God but rather to \\"this temple,\\" meaning His body; and He did not say \\"I will build\\" but \\"I will raise up.\\" It is evident that the false witnesses misattributed statements to Jesus that He never made, as noted by Blessed Theophylact. Despite the judges' eagerness to condemn the Lord Jesus, they found this testimony lacking—unclear, confused, and inconsistent. Throughout this time, the Lord remained silent. In His profound silence, the judges might have felt, even reluctantly, that they themselves were the ones on trial, with Christ serving as their judge. Innocent, Archbishop of Kherson, commented that this silence appeared to their small egos as an unforgivable disregard or disdain. Had the Lord spoken in His defense, they might have tried to extract from His words something contrary to the Law, as the chief priests and scribes had previously felt the weight of His rebukes, which they interpreted as insolence and blasphemy. Eventually, Caiaphas, who had been sitting there as the reluctant head of the corrupt council, was the first to lose his composure."},{"author-name":"Tichon (Pokrovski)","author-image":"https://cdn.prod.website-files.com/6864003fdf3714da6ff0b33a/68c96d263b8c22d9c467bdab_no-pic-theosis.png","category":"Christian Authors","century":19,"exegesis-text":"They claimed, He declared, \\"I can dismantle the temple of God, and in three days I will restore it.\\" These statements were twisted by deceitful witnesses: \\"Destroy this temple,\\" the Lord proclaimed three years prior, indicating the temple of His body, \\"and I will resurrect it in three days\\" (John 2:19, 21), meaning I will rise again. The deceitful witnesses, however, misapplied His words to the constructed temple, framing His statement in a manner that disrespected the house of God and undermined its sanctity. Yet, even such testimony was insufficient (Mark 14:56-59) to condemn Jesus Christ to death."},{"author-name":"Lopuchin A.P.","author-image":"https://cdn.prod.website-files.com/6864003fdf3714da6ff0b33a/68c891400ee1341634d2276d_Lopuchin%20A.P..png","category":"Christian Authors","century":19,"exegesis-text":"They provided false testimonies against Him, claiming, “We have heard Him say, I will destroy this temple made with hands, and in three days I will build another temple not made with hands.” Although this statement significantly misrepresented what Christ had said, it could have been used as the foundation for accusing the Prisoner of dishonoring the most revered Jewish sanctuary and violating the sanctity of public and national resources. However, the unjust judges faced a dilemma, as these false witnesses presented their accusations in such a conflicting manner that even the biased court lacked the courage to pursue the matter further."},{"author-name":"Michail (Lusin)","author-image":"https://cdn.prod.website-files.com/6864003fdf3714da6ff0b33a/68c89550c567e172d15b3055_Michail%20(Lusin).png","category":"Christian Authors","century":19,"exegesis-text":"The statement points to the teachings of Jesus Christ delivered in Jerusalem during His initial cleansing of the temple, coinciding with the first Passover after He embarked on His public ministry. However, these words have been misrepresented, and an alternative interpretation has been imposed upon them (cf. Jn. 2:19ff.). They argue, \\"If He indeed claimed that He would raise the church in three days, what is this accusation? He did not say 'I will destroy,' but rather 'destroy,' and His reference was not to the church but to His own body\\" (Zlat.). Indeed, they were false witnesses! For Christ did not declare, \\"I can destroy,\\" but simply \\"destroy\\"; nor did He mention \\"the temple of God,\\" but rather \\"this temple,\\" meaning His body; furthermore, He did not say, \\"I will build,\\" but \\"I will raise up.\\" Thus, it is clear that these individuals are false witnesses who misrepresented the words of Jesus."},{"author-name":"Philaret (Gumilevski)","author-image":"https://cdn.prod.website-files.com/6864003fdf3714da6ff0b33a/68c896f4b6fd32caa244b5d7_Philaret%20(Gumilevski).png","category":"Holy Fathers and Teachers","century":19,"exegesis-text":"Speaking against God's temple was deemed as serious as blaspheming against God and Moses, warranting capital punishment. The Savior once addressed the Jews regarding the temple of His body, declaring, ‘Destroy this church, and in three days I will raise it up’ (John 2:19-22). These were the statements the false witnesses brought before the Sanhedrin. In what manner did they convey this? The Savior remarked to the Jews, If ye destroy this temple. Thus, if they had truly comprehended that Christ Jesus referenced His own body rather than the Jerusalem temple, it would have been clear that only the Jews possessed the authority to bring about the temple's destruction. Who but the morally corrupt could charge Jesus with attempting to dismantle the Jerusalem temple? The so-called 'truthful' witnesses distorted His words and twisted their implications, an act only justifiable by a guilty conscience. Consequently, the Sanhedrin determined that the testimonies of these individuals were also lacking. This is often the case on earth regarding divine truth. Driven by their passions, they bombard it with malice and falsehood, misinterpreting its meaning and subjecting it to the most capricious judgment. Yet deep within, they recognize their inability to stand against the truth of heaven."}]}
Support this project and get full access for only 4$/month
Commentarie text can’t be scrolled on PC at the moment. Please use your phone. We’re working on a fix.
