TRV
Translation
King James Version
And said, This fellow said, I am able to destroy the temple of God, and to build it in three days.
Complete Jewish Bible
"This man said, `I can tear down God's Temple and build it again in three days.'"
Berean Standard Bible
and declared, “This man said, ‘I am able to destroy the temple of God and rebuild it in three days.’”
American Standard Version
and said, This man said, I am able to destroy the temple of God, and to build it in three days.
World English Bible Messianic
and said, “This man said, ‘I am able to destroy the temple of God, and to build it in three days.’”
Geneva Bible (1599)
And saide, This man saide, I can destroie the Temple of God, and build it in three daies.
Young's Literal Translation
said, `This one said, I am able to throw down the sanctuary of God, and after three days to build it.'
See on the biblical-era map
In the KJVVerse 24,116 of 31,102
Study This Verse
Matthew Henry (1662–1714) — Commentary on the Whole Bible. This section covers . Public domain.
Copy as
John ChrysostomAD 407
Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 84
"But false witnesses came, and said, This fellow said, I will destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it." And indeed He had said, "In three days," but He said not, "I will destroy," but, "Destroy," and not about that temple but about His own body.
John ChrysostomAD 407
Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 84
Wherefore also they were all assembled together, and it was a council of pestilent men, and they ask some questions, wishing to invest this plot with the appearance of a court of justice. For "neither did their testimonies agree together;" so feigned was the court of justice, and all things full of confusion and disorder.
"But false witnesses came, and said, This fellow said, I will destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it." And indeed He had said, "In three days," but He said not, "I will destroy," but, "Destroy," and not about that temple but about His own body.
What then doth the high priest? Willing to press Him to a defense, that by that he might take Him, he saith, "Hearest Thou not what these witness against Thee? But He held His peace."
For the attempts at defense were unprofitable, no man hearing. For this was a show only of a court of justice, but in truth an onset of robbers, assailing Him without cause, as in a cave, or on a road.
Wherefore "He held His peace," but the other continued, saying, "I adjure Thee by the living God, that Thou tell us whether Thou be the Christ, the Son of the living God. But He said, Thou hast said. Nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds. Then the high priest rent his clothes, saying, He hath spoken blasphemy." And this he did to add force to the accusation, and to aggravate what He said, by the act. For since what had been said moved the hearers to fear, what they did about Stephen, stopping their ears, this high priest doth here also.
And yet what kind of blasphemy was this? For indeed before He had said, when they were gathered together, "The Lord said unto my Lord. Sit Thou on my right hand," and interpreted the saying, and they dared say nothing, but held their peace, and from that time forth gainsaid Him no more. Why then did they now call the saying a blasphemy? And wherefore also did Christ thus answer them? To take away all their excuse, because unto the last day He taught that He was Christ, and that He sitteth at the right hand of the Father, and that He will come again to judge the world, which was the language of one manifesting His full accordance with the Father.
Having rent therefore his clothes, he saith, "What think ye?" He gives not the sentence from himself, but invites it from them, as in a case of confessed sins, and manifest blasphemy. For, inasmuch as they knew that if the thing came to be inquired into, and carefully decided, it would free Him from all blame, they condemn Him amongst themselves, and anticipate the hearers by saying, "Ye have heard the blasphemy;" all but necessitating and forcing them to deliver the sentence. What then say they? "He is guilty of death;" that having taken Him as condemned, they should thus work upon Pilate thereupon to pass sentence. In which matter those others also being accomplices say, "He is guilty of death;" themselves accusing, themselves judging, themselves passing sentence, themselves being everything then.
But wherefore did they not bring forward the Sabbaths? Because He had often stopped their mouths; and moreover they wanted to take Him, and condemn Him by the things then said. And the high priest anticipated them, and gave the sentence as from them, and drew them all on by rending his vestments, and having led Him away as now condemned unto Pilate, thus did all.
John Chrysostom (as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)AD 407
Catena Aurea by Aquinas
When the Chief Priests were thus assembled, this conventicle of ruffians sought to give their conspiracy the character of a legal trial. But it was entirely a scene of confusion and uproar, as what follows shows, Though many false witnesses came, yet found they none.
Why did they not bring forward now His breaking the Sabbath? Because He had so often confuted them on this point.
He said this with a design to draw from Him some indefensible answer which might be made a snare for Him. But Jesus held his peace, for defence had availed nothing when none would listen to it. For here was only a mockery of justice, it was in truth nothing more than the anarchy of a den of robbers.
This He did to give weight to the accusation, and to confirm by deeds what He taught in words.
Then, after rending his garment, he did not give sentence of himself, but asked of others, saying, What think ye? As was always done in undeniable cases of sin, and manifest blasphemy, and as by force driving them to a certain opinion, he anticipates the answer, What need we any further witnesses? Behold, now ye have heard his blasphemy. What was this blasphemy? For before He had interpreted to them as they were gathered together that text, The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, (Matt. 22:44.) and they had held their peace, and had not contradicted Him. How then do they call what He now says blasphemy? They answered and said, He is guilty of death, the same persons at once accusers, examiners, and sentencers.
(Hom. lxxxv.) As hunters who have started their game, so they exhibit a wild and drunken exultation.
Observe how circumstantially the Evangelist recounts all those particulars even which seem most disgraceful, hiding or extenuating nothing, but thinking it the highest glory that the Lord of the earth should endure such things for us. This let us read continually, let us imprint in our minds, and in these things let us boast.
JeromeAD 420
Commentary on Matthew
(Verse 61.) But finally came two false witnesses, and said: He said: I can destroy the temple of God, and after three days rebuild it. How are they false witnesses if they say the things that we read the Lord said? But a false witness is one who does not understand the words in the same sense in which they are spoken. For the Lord had spoken about the temple of his body. But even in the words themselves, they slander, and by adding or changing a few things, they make it seem like a just accusation. The Savior had said: Destroy this temple; those men change it and say: I can destroy the temple of God. You, he said, destroy it, not me, because it is unlawful for us to lay hands on ourselves. Then they turn it: and after three days rebuild it; so that it may seem he had spoken properly about the Jewish temple. But the Lord, in order to show that an animal and breathing temple, had said: And in three days I will raise it up. To build is one thing, to raise is another.
JeromeAD 420
COMMENTARY ON MATTHEW 4.26.61
How can they be false witnesses if they said what we read the Lord had said before? Because a false witness takes the truth and twists its meaning. The Lord had spoken of the temple of his body, but they falsely accused him with those very words. With a few things added or changed, they made it into an understandably false accusation. The Savior had said, “Destroy this temple.” They changed his words to say, “I can destroy God’s temple.” … But the Lord, indicating the living and breathing temple, had said, “And in three days I will raise it up.” It is one thing to build and another to raise up.
Jerome (as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)AD 420
Catena Aurea by Aquinas
He went in, either out of the attachment of a disciple, or natural curiosity, seeking to know what sentence the High Priest would pass, whether death, or scourging.
At last came two false witnesses. How are they false witnesses, when they repeat only what we read that the Lord spoke? A false witness is one who takes what is said in a different sense from that in which it was said. Now this the Lord had spoken of the temple of His Body, and they cavil at His expressions, and by a slight change and addition produce a plausible charge. The Lord's words were, Destroy this temple; (John 2:19.) this they make into, I can destroy the Temple of God. He said, Destroy, not 'I will destroy,' because it is unlawful to lay hands on ourselves. Also they phrased it, And build it again, making it apply to the temple of the Jews; but the Lord had said, And I will raise it up again, thus clearly pointing out a living and breathing temple. For to build again, and to raise again, are two different things.
Headlong and uncontrolled rage, unable to find even a false accusation, moves the High Priest from his throne, the motion of his body showing the emotion of his mind. And the High Priest arose, and said unto him, Answerest thou nothing to the things which these witness against Thee?
For as God, He knew that whatever He said would be twisted into an accusation against Him. But at this His silence before false witnesses and ungodly Priests, the High Priest was exasperated, and summons Him to answer, that from anything He says he may raise a charge against Him.
The same fury which drew the High Priest from his seat, impels him now to rend his clothes; for so it was customary with the Jews to do whenever they heard any blasphemy, or any thing against God.
And by this rending his garments, he shows that the Jews have lost the priestly glory, and that their High Priest's throne was vacant. For by rending his garment he rent the veil of the Law which covered him.
They spit in his face, and buffeted him, to fulfil the prophecy of Esaias, I gave my cheek to the smiters, and turned not away my face from shame and spitting. (Isa. 50:6.)
But it would have been foolish to have answered them that smote Him, and to have declared the smiter, seeing that in their madness they seem to have struck Him openly.
Glossa Ordinaria (as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)AD 1274
Catena Aurea by Aquinas
(ord) Prophesy unto us is said in ridicule of His claim to be held as a Prophet by the people.
Source: Quotations drawn from early Church Fathers and historical Christian theologians (AD 100–1500). Some quotes address the surrounding passage context rather than this verse alone.
Copy as
Continue studying Matthew 26:61 across the web’s major study libraries — every link below opens this exact verse, chapter, or book on the destination site.
Read & Compare
BibleGatewayThis verse in more than 200 translations and 70 languages.
Bible.comThe YouVersion reader — hundreds of translations, reading plans, and highlights.
ESV.orgCrossway's official English Standard Version reader.
NET BibleThe NET translation with 60,000+ translators' notes on every rendering decision.
STEP BibleTyndale House's free study tool — original text, vocabulary, and scholarly resources.
BibliaLogos Bible Software's free web reader.
USCCBThe New American Bible (Revised Edition) with the U.S. bishops' study notes.
Commentaries
BibleHub CommentariesDozens of classic commentaries on this verse, gathered on one page.
StudyLightMore than 100 commentary sets — the largest collection on the web.
BibleRefPlain-English commentary on what this verse means, verse by verse.
Enduring WordDavid Guzik's free commentary on this chapter, widely used by Bible teachers.
Bible Study ToolsVerse commentary alongside Greek and Hebrew study aids.
Original Language & Research
- BibleHub InterlinearThe verse word by word — original language, transliteration, and English.
- BibleHub LexiconEvery word's original-language definition and Strong's entry.
Blue Letter BibleDeep-study tools — Strong's numbers, concordance, and word studies.
CNTR CollationThe earliest Greek manuscripts of this verse, collated letter by letter.
Sermons, Hymns & Audio
TrulyRandomVerse is not affiliated with these sites and doesn’t control their content. They’re linked because they’re genuinely useful.
SUMMARY
Matthew 26:61 records the false testimony brought against Jesus during His trial before the Sanhedrin, accusing Him of claiming He could destroy the temple of God and rebuild it in three days. This accusation, a deliberate distortion of Jesus' earlier prophetic words concerning His own body and resurrection, was a central piece of fabricated evidence used by the religious leaders in their determined effort to secure a death sentence against Him, highlighting the profound injustice and spiritual blindness of His accusers.
CONTEXT
Literary Context: This verse is situated within the climactic narrative of Jesus' passion, specifically His unjust trial before Caiaphas and the Sanhedrin. Following His betrayal by Judas and arrest in the Garden of Gethsemane, Jesus is brought before the highest Jewish religious court. The preceding verses (Matthew 26:57-60) describe the frantic search for false witnesses, indicating the Sanhedrin's pre-determined intent to condemn Jesus, rather than genuinely seek justice. The testimony presented in Matthew 26:61 is one of several inconsistent and fabricated charges, designed to provide a legal pretext for His execution, despite the lack of credible evidence. This scene sets the stage for Peter's denial and Jesus' eventual condemnation.
Historical & Cultural Context: The trial of Jesus before the Sanhedrin was a pivotal moment, steeped in the legal and religious customs of first-century Judaism under Roman occupation. The Sanhedrin, composed of chief priests, elders, and scribes, held significant judicial authority in religious matters, though capital punishment required Roman approval. Accusing Jesus of threatening the Temple was a grave charge, potentially punishable by death, as the Temple was the spiritual and national heart of Jewish life, representing God's presence among His people. Furthermore, such a claim could be twisted into an act of sedition against Roman authority, which upheld the sanctity of the Temple. The accusation in Matthew 26:61 was particularly potent because it played on the deep reverence the Jewish people held for the Temple, aiming to incite public opinion against Jesus.
Key Themes: Matthew 26:61 contributes significantly to several key themes within the Gospel of Matthew and the broader biblical narrative. Firstly, it powerfully illustrates the theme of false accusation and injustice, revealing the lengths to which Jesus' adversaries would go to condemn Him, even resorting to perjury, a direct violation of the Ninth Commandment (Exodus 20:16). Secondly, it highlights the misunderstanding and distortion of Jesus' words and identity. While the witnesses twisted Jesus' statement about the Temple, Jesus was in fact referring to the temple of his body, foreshadowing His death and resurrection. This misunderstanding underscores the spiritual blindness of those who rejected Him. Finally, the verse implicitly points to the theme of Jesus as the true Temple and the new center of worship. By speaking of His body as the Temple that would be destroyed and rebuilt, Jesus was asserting His divine authority and His role as the ultimate dwelling place of God, superseding the physical Temple and its sacrificial system (John 2:19-21).
EXPOSITION AND ANALYSIS
Key Word Analysis
Verse Breakdown
Literary Devices
The passage employs several significant literary devices. Most prominently, there is Irony, as the false witnesses, in their attempt to condemn Jesus, unwittingly speak a partial truth about His destiny. While they refer to the physical Temple, Jesus' original statement, which they distorted, was indeed about His body being destroyed and raised in three days, a prophecy that would be literally fulfilled. This creates a profound Dramatic Irony, as the audience knows the true meaning of Jesus' words, while His accusers remain ignorant. Furthermore, the passage relies on Misrepresentation and Distortion, as the witnesses deliberately alter Jesus' original statement (an imperative "Destroy this temple," implying they would destroy it, and He would raise it) into a self-incriminating claim of His own destructive power. This manipulation of truth underscores the moral depravity of Jesus' accusers.
THEOLOGICAL AND THEMATIC CONNECTIONS
Matthew 26:61, though a record of false witness, paradoxically points to profound theological truths about Jesus' identity and mission. The accusation, centered on the Temple, inadvertently highlights Jesus' unique claim to be the ultimate dwelling place of God, replacing the old covenant's physical sanctuary. His prophecy of destroying and rebuilding the "temple" in three days was not about a stone structure but about His own body and His impending death and glorious resurrection. This connects directly to the core Christian message: that salvation is found not through rituals in a physical temple, but through the person and work of Jesus Christ, who is the new and living way to God. His resurrection, the "rebuilding" in three days, validates His divine authority and establishes Him as the cornerstone of a new spiritual temple, the Church.
REFLECTION AND APPLICATION
The false accusation against Jesus in Matthew 26:61 serves as a potent reminder of the dangers of misrepresentation and the importance of discerning truth, especially in matters of faith. It challenges us to look beyond superficial appearances and deliberate distortions, seeking the true meaning of God's word and the authentic person of Jesus Christ. Just as Jesus was falsely accused, we too may face misunderstandings or unjust criticisms, and His patient endurance provides a model for how to respond with grace and trust in God's ultimate justice. More profoundly, this verse redirects our focus from outward religious performance or physical structures to the living Christ. Our faith is not in a building or a set of rituals, but in the resurrected Lord who is the true Temple, the meeting place between God and humanity. This truth should inspire us to live as His spiritual temple, embodying His presence in the world and trusting in the power of His resurrection to overcome all injustice and death.
Questions for Reflection
FAQ
What was the "temple" Jesus referred to in His original statement that the witnesses distorted?
Answer: In His original statement, found in John 2:19, Jesus said, "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up." The Gospel of John clarifies that Jesus "spoke of the temple of his body" (John 2:21). The false witnesses in Matthew 26:61 deliberately twisted this spiritual prophecy, which referred to His death and resurrection, to make it sound as if He threatened to physically destroy Herod's Temple in Jerusalem.
Why was the accusation of destroying the temple considered such a serious charge?
Answer: The Temple in Jerusalem was not merely a building; it was the sacred center of Jewish worship, the place where God's presence was believed to dwell, and a powerful symbol of Jewish national and religious identity. To threaten its destruction was considered an act of profound sacrilege and blasphemy against God (Acts 6:13). Moreover, such a claim could be interpreted as a revolutionary or seditious act against Roman authority, which protected the Temple's sanctity. The Jewish leaders used this accusation to portray Jesus as a dangerous radical who deserved death.
How does Jesus' statement about the temple relate to His resurrection?
Answer: The "three days" in Jesus' prophecy (and the false accusation) directly refers to His resurrection from the dead on the third day after His crucifixion. His death was the "destruction" of the temple of His body, and His resurrection was the "rebuilding." This fulfillment, as recorded in Matthew 28:1-10, validated His divine authority and proved Him to be the Son of God. The resurrection transformed the understanding of the Temple, revealing that God's true dwelling place is now in the person of Jesus Christ and, by extension, in His body, the Church (Ephesians 2:19-22).
CHRIST-CENTERED FULFILLMENT
The false accusation in Matthew 26:61 serves as a profound paradox, inadvertently pointing to the Christ-centered fulfillment of God's redemptive plan. While the Sanhedrin sought to condemn Jesus for threatening the physical Temple, Jesus' true meaning, as revealed in John 2:21, was that He Himself was the ultimate Temple, the very dwelling place of God among humanity. His death was the "destruction" of this physical "temple" (His body), and His resurrection on the third day was its glorious "rebuilding," signifying His triumph over sin and death. This event abolished the need for a physical temple and its sacrificial system, as Christ's perfect sacrifice became the once-for-all atonement (Hebrews 9:11-12). Through His resurrected body, Jesus established a new covenant, making Himself the sole mediator between God and humanity (1 Timothy 2:5). Believers are now incorporated into His body, becoming living stones in a spiritual temple where God dwells by His Spirit (1 Peter 2:4-5), thereby fulfilling the ancient promises of God's presence among His people in a way far grander than any earthly structure. Ultimately, this accusation, meant for His demise, underscored Jesus' unique identity as the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world (John 1:29) and the resurrected Lord who is the new and eternal center of worship for all eternity (Revelation 21:22).