“And there arose certain, and bare false witness against him, saying, We heard him say, I will destroy this temple that is made with hands, and within three days I will build another made without hands.” Ib. 57, 58.
“But (to the same point still) neither so did their witness agree together.” Ib. 59.
Mr. Salvador, on this subject, says, p. 87: “The two witnesses, whom St. Matthew and St. Mark charge with falsehood, narrate a discourse which St. John declares to be true, so far as respects the power which Jesus Christ attributed to himself.”
This alleged contradiction among the Evangelists does not exist. In the first place, St. Matthew does not say that the discourse was had by Jesus. In chapter xxvi. 61, he states the depositions of the witnesses, but saying at the same time that they were false witnesses; and in chapter xxvii. 40, he puts the same declaration into the mouth of those who insulted Jesus at the foot of the cross; but he does not put it into the mouth of Christ. He is in accordance with St. Mark.
St. John, chapter ii. 19, makes Jesus speak in these words: “Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.” And St. John adds: “He spake of the temple of his body.”
Thus Jesus did not say in an affirmative and somewhat menacing manner, I will destroy this temple, as the witnesses falsely assumed; he only said, hypothetically, Destroy this temple, that is to say, suppose this temple should be destroyed, I will raise it up in three days. Besides, they could not dissemble, that he referred to a temple altogether different [pg 552] from theirs, because he said, I will raise up another in three days, which will not be made by the hands of man.
It hence results, at least, that the Jews did not understand him, for they cried out, “Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days?”
Thus, then, the witnesses did not agree together, and their declarations had nothing conclusive. Mark xiv. 59. We must, therefore, look for other proofs.
“Then the high priest, (we must not forget, that he is still the accuser,) the high priest stood up in the midst, and asked Jesus, saying, Answerest thou nothing? what is it, which these witness against thee? But he held his peace, and answered nothing.” Mark xiv. 60. In truth, since the question was not concerning the temple of the Jews, but an ideal temple, not made by the hand of man, and which was alone in the thoughts of Jesus, the explanation was to be found in the very evidence itself.
The high priest continued: “I adjure thee, by the living God, that thou tell us, whether thou be the Christ, the Son of God.” Matt. xxvi. 63. I adjure thee, I call upon thee on oath! a gross infraction of that rule of morals and jurisprudence, which forbids our placing an accused person between the danger of perjury and the fear of inculpating himself, and thus making his situation more hazardous. The high priest, however, persists, and says to him: Art thou the Christ, the Son of God?[406] Jesus answered, Thou hast said. Matthew xxvi. 64; I am. Mark xiv. 62.