"At the last came two false witnesses." They did not mean to speak the truth; all that they wished was to please the Priests, who, far from desiring them to speak truly, only wanted something to be said, which would give them an excuse for having Jesus put to death. The two witnesses who now came before them, furnished them with the pretence they sought for: these men "bare false witness against him, saying, We heard him say, I am able to destroy the temple of God, and to build it in three days. I will destroy this temple that is made with hands, and within three days I will build another made without hands."

Now this is an instance of bearing false witness, by misrepresenting the words spoken, and twisting their meaning to something which they were never intended to express. We have read that Jesus did say in reference to His own body, "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up." The Jews did not understand what He meant; but that did not justify these witnesses in what they now said, for Jesus had not said, "I will DESTROY this temple," nor had He said one word of "building." These witnesses meant to make it appear, that He had said that He would destroy the temple so dear to the Jews, and that in three days He would build another. "But neither so did their witness agree together." The Priests and elders were, however, too anxious to condemn Jesus, to be particular about that; for to speak disrespectfully of the temple was looked upon as blasphemy, and blasphemy was a crime to be punished with death. Blasphemy is really speaking disrespectfully of the Majesty and Power of the Almighty—Father, Son, and Holy Ghost; and ascribing to man that power which belongs to God alone.

After these two false witnesses had spoken, "the High Priest arose, and stood up in the midst, and asked Jesus, and said unto him, Answerest thou nothing? what is it which these witness against thee?"

Our Lord would make no reply to charges which even His enemies must have known to be false; and therefore He "held his peace, and answered nothing. Again the High Priest asked him, Art thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed? I adjure thee by the living God, that thou tell us whether thou be the Christ, the Son of God."

To "adjure" was to call upon a person to speak the truth in the Name of God. Any one so adjured was looked upon as bound by the most solemn oath to speak the whole truth. When, therefore, the High Priest called upon Jesus in this solemn manner to say whether He really was the promised Messiah, the Son of God, our Lord kept silence no longer; but in an equally solemn manner answered the question, adding words spoken by the prophet Daniel—words always understood by the Jews to be a prophecy respecting the Messiah: therefore, by applying this prophecy to Himself, Jesus declared most plainly that He was indeed the Messiah. In His answer to the High Priest, as to whether He was the Christ, the Son of the Blessed God Almighty, Jesus used the Jewish form of saying that what had been stated was true. "Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said"; and then He added, "I am: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven."

"Then the High Priest rent his clothes, saying, He hath spoken blasphemy." The High Priest had asked his solemn question without any intention of believing the answer: he must have felt sure what the answer would be, and therefore he had asked the question, that he might be able to accuse Jesus of claiming for Himself, a man, the honour due to God alone. To show his grief and horror at such a dreadful sin as blasphemy, he, according to the Jewish custom, rent his robe.

Then appealing to those around him, Caiaphas asked, "What further need have we of witnesses? behold, now ye have heard his blasphemy. What think ye?"

There could be no doubt of the answer to such questions. The Priests, and Scribes, and elders were bent upon destroying their victim; and gladly seizing the opportunity now given them by the High Priest, "They answered and said, He is guilty of death,"—that is, He is guilty of a crime which the Law of Moses orders to be punished with death. "And they all condemned him to be guilty of death."

The Priests and elders had now accomplished their work, as far as they were concerned; but its final execution did not rest with them. JudÆa was a Roman province, and as such the Jews could put no man to death without the permission of the Roman governor, who was at that time Pontius Pilate. To obtain Pilate's consent was the next step to be taken; and that the Jews determined to set about as soon as possible in the morning. It was now about midnight of the Thursday—the day on which Jesus had eaten the last Supper with His disciples. Some six or seven hours must pass before Jesus could be taken before Pilate, and this time the Jews occupied in ill using and mocking our innocent and holy Lord.

The Priests and elders having passed sentence upon Jesus, now left Him in the hands of the attendants and soldiers, who, as we have said, passed the rest of the night in ill treating Him. "And the men that held Jesus mocked him and smote him: and some began to spit on him, and to cover his face, and to buffet him, and to say unto him, Prophesy unto us, thou Christ, Who is he that smote thee? and the servants did strike him with the palms of their hands."

To spit upon a person, was the greatest affront and indignity that could be offered by one man to another: it signified the utmost scorn and contempt. Then, in mockery of our blessed Lord's claim to be the Messiah, the Son of God, He was blindfolded, and then desired to show His divine power, by telling the names of those who struck Him on the face. It is most painful to think of Jesus being so treated: for our sakes He bore meekly and patiently this savage treatment. He might with one word have put an end to it, and struck dead those who thus insulted Him. But these indignities were a part of the cup appointed for Him by the Father, and this cup He was ready to drink to the last drop, for the redemption of man. Should we not love the Lord in heart and in deed, for all that He has done and suffered for us?

"And many other things blasphemously spake they against him." Thus passed the hours of this terrible night.

All this time Peter sat in some part of the Palace; "and there cometh one of the maids of the High Priest, the damsel that kept the door, unto Peter: and when she saw Peter warming himself, she looked earnestly upon him," as if trying to remember where she had seen him before. Then she said to those around, "This man was also with him"; and, referring to Peter himself to confirm her statement, she asked, "Art not thou also one of this man's disciples?" We may well believe that Peter was horrified at the treatment he had seen inflicted upon his Master; and most probably, in spite of all Jesus had said, Peter was disappointed at His not taking some signal measures to check His persecutors. This for a time weakened his faith, and made him fearful that if he confessed himself to be a disciple, he might bring upon himself similar treatment, to that which Jesus was silently and calmly undergoing. In his perplexity and fear, therefore, he committed a fearful sin; for in answer to the damsel's question, "Art not thou also one of this man's disciples?" "he saith, I am not." But the damsel was not convinced, and presently said, "And thou also wast with Jesus of Nazareth, of Galilee." One departure from truth is sure to lead to another: and now Peter even pretends not to understand what she can possibly mean by charging him with being one of Christ's disciples: thus "he denied him before them all, saying, Woman, I know him not. I know not, neither understand I what thou sayest."

Perhaps Peter now hoped that he had silenced his accusers, and should be left in peace; but he was shortly undeceived. "The servants and officers stood there, who had made a fire of coals; for it was cold: and they warmed themselves: and Peter stood with them, and warmed himself. They said therefore unto him, Art not thou also one of his disciples? He denied it, and said, I am not. One of the servants of the High Priest, being his kinsman whose ear Peter cut off," seems, however, to have recognized Peter as the person who did this act, and saith, "Did not I see thee in the garden with him?" What had been denied before was not likely to be confessed now. "Peter then denied again; and he went out into the porch; and immediately the cock crew."

These three denials,—first, to the damsel; secondly, to the servants and officers; and thirdly, to the kinsman of Malchus,—which are related in the different Gospels, all took place much at the same time, and are therefore to be looked upon as one act: thus we see how every word spoken by Jesus on the subject of Peter's denial came true. He said that before it was time for the cock to crow at all, Peter would have denied Him three times; and this he had done, and the warning voice of the cock had been heard for the first time.

If we resist the Devil, he will flee from us: if we give way to one temptation, we shall be more likely to fall again: so it was with Peter. "When he was gone out into the porch, after a little while another saw him, and said, Thou art also of them. And Peter said, Man, I am not. And another maid saw him, and began to say to them that stood by, This fellow was also with Jesus of Nazareth. This is one of them." Peter now added to his sin, "for he denied with an oath, I do not know the man,"—thus calling upon God as a witness to the truth of what he was saying. This was Peter's second denial of his Lord and Master.

About an hour afterwards, when it was nearly three o'clock in the morning, Peter seems to have been again in the hall, where the soldiers were waiting with Jesus, until it should be time for them to take Him before Pontius Pilate, the Roman governor. Here the third denial took place.

Before we go further, some little explanation is necessary. You know that in different countries, as in France, Spain, China, &c., the people speak different languages; so that without learning one another's language, the natives of different countries cannot talk to each other. But even in different parts of the same country, the people often pronounce their words in such a different manner as to make it almost a different language, so that the "dialect," or manner of speaking, in one province, would be hardly understood in another province of the same country. Even in England we have something of the same kind; and if you were to hear the people of Yorkshire or of Somersetshire talking to each other, you would not understand much of their conversation.