Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Mark 14:60
And the high priest stood up in the midst, and asked Jesus, saying, Answerest thou nothing? what [is it which] these witness against thee?
60. And the high priest stood up ] The impressive silence, which our Lord preserved, while false witnesses were being sought against Him (Mat 26:62), was galling to the pride of Caiaphas, who saw that nothing remained but to force Him, if possible, to criminate Himself. Standing up, therefore, in the midst (a graphic touch which we owe to St Mark alone), he adjured Him in the most solemn manner possible (Mat 26:63) to declare whether He was “the Malcha Meschicha” the King Messiah, the Son of the Blessed.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
60. Answerest thou nothing? what isit which these witness against thee?Clearly, they felt thattheir case had failed, and by this artful question the highpriest hoped to get from His own mouth what they had in vaintried to obtain from their false and contradictory witnesses. But inthis, too, they failed.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
And the high priest stood up in the midst,…. Of the sanhedrim, of which he was now president: he sat at the head of them, and Ab Beth Din, or the father of the council, at his right hand; and the rest of the council sat before him, in a semicircular form, as the half of a round corn floor, so that the president, and the father of the council, could see them n; for they were all before him, he being situated in the middle, right against them; so that when he stood up, he might be said to stand in the midst of them:
and asked Jesus, saying, answerest thou nothing? For he had made no reply to the several witnesses, that came against him:
what is it which these witness against thee? Is it true, or false?
[See comments on Mt 26:62].
n Misn. Sanhedrin, c. 4. sect. 3. Maimon. Hiltch. Sanhedrin, c. 1. sect. 3.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Stood up in the midst ( ). Second aorist active participle. For greater solemnity he arose to make up by bluster the lack of evidence. The high priest stepped out into the midst as if to attack Jesus by vehement questions. See on Mt 26:59-68 for details here.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
1) “And the high priest stood up in the midst,” (kai anastas ho archiereus eis meson) “And the high priest stood up in the midst of them,” of the “kangaroo court,” the clandestine, illegal assembly of a packed court, walked out, stood in the semi-circle of the Sanhedrin, as if an irritated baffled man.
2) “And asked Jesus, saying,” (eperotesen ton lesoun legon) “And quizzed Jesus repeatedly saying,” badgering Him, deriding, or scoffing indignantly, Mat 26:62.
3) “Answerest thou nothing?” (ouk apokrine ouden) “Are you not intending to answer anything?” He was stunned, reprimanded by the silence of Jesus, Isa 53:7; 1Pe 2:23. He hoped to incite fresh grounds for accusation against Him, as in Mar 14:62.
4) “What is it which these witnesses against thee?” (ti houtoi sou katamarturousin) “What is it that these witnesses testify against you?” The truth is that Jesus knew that Caiphas, the high priest, had been in on the conspiracy and collusion to put Him to death for some time, and was not interested in giving respect to anything Jesus had to say. Read Mar 14:3-4.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
‘And the high priest stood up among them and asked Jesus saying, “Do you answer nothing? What is it that these witness against you?” But he held his peace and answered nothing.’
Like the Suffering Servant in Isa 53:7 Jesus did not defend Himself. ‘As a sheep that before her shearers is dumb, yes, He opened not his mouth.’ He was not there to defend Himself but to suffer for the sins of others. But it exasperated the High Priest who probably had much experience in tripping up accused persons by their admissions when rebutting witnesses. But by His not answering the examination was reaching stalemate.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
The sentence of the council:
v. 60. And the high priest stood up in the midst and asked Jesus, saying, Answerest Thou nothing? What is it which these witness against Thee?
v. 61. But He held His peace and answered nothing. Again the high priest asked Him and said unto Him, Art Thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?
v. 62. And Jesus said, I am; and ye shall see the Son of Man sitting on the right hand of Power and coming in the clouds of heaven.
v. 63. Then the high priest rent his clothes and saith, What need we any further witnesses?
v. 64. Ye have heard the blasphemy; what think ye? And they all condemned Him to be guilty of death.
v. 65. And some began to spit on Him, and to cover His face, and to buffet Him, to say unto Him, Prophesy; and the servants did strike Him with the palms of their hands. Caiaphas felt the imperative need of quick action to save the day, for the matter was rapidly coming to a point where the entire council would be obliged to confess its helplessness. Arising therefore from his chairman’s seat, he steps forward into the semicircle formed by the chairs of the members. His first thought was that of browbeating Jesus, and thus provoking Him to some statement which could be used against Him: Answerest Thou nothing to these condemnatory charges? But Jesus kept His silence and answered never a word. In many cases, where the enemies of Christ bring accusations against Christ and the Christian Church, that Christianity is a dangerous religion, that it stultifies the intellect, etc. , this is nothing but false testimony, which they do not believe themselves, where it would be a waste of breath to argue and to try to convince them of the contrary. The helplessness of the witnesses and of the council, the judges, was in this case so obvious. that any argument on Christ’s part would have been useless and would have spoiled the effect. But the high priest feels that he must save the day at all costs. So he finally asks the direct question: Art Thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed? Here is a specimen of high-priestly religion. For the expression was chosen deliberately, a hypocritical term of relevance in refraining from using the actual name of God. In such matters the high priests could be extremely punctilious. Jesus now determined to end this farce, which must have hurt Him to the depths of His soul. He frankly answers: I am. But He adds that these His false accusers and judges would see Him, the Son of Man, sitting at the right hand of the power of God, and coming with the clouds of heaven as His throne. When these hypocrites see Him again, it will be in His capacity as the Judge of the world. And how thoroughly will these unjust blasphemers be filled with terror when this same Christ whom they rejected will sit in judgment upon them and require a full account at their hands! But the high priest had gained his object; he thought he had a word now which he could use to establish a case. In order to get the proper dramatic effect, he took hold of his mantle and perhaps both of his tunics, and tore them open, ripped them to pieces at the top. That was a sign of deep. grief, of intense suffering. He meant his act to. imply that it hurt him more than words could express to hear the prisoner make such a statement. He rejected all further testimony as useless; had they not all heard the blasphemy that this man claimed to be the Son of God? There was but one question to ask yet: What is the fitting penalty, in your opinion, for such a transgression? And with great unanimity the well-instructed hypocrites took their leaders’ cue and condemned Christ to be guilty of death. “Therefore Christ is put to death, not in a tumult, nor by rebels, also not by them that did not possess the proper authority, but by those was He killed that had the proper authority. Just. as it is done in our days: all the harm that is done to the Christian Church is done by those having the proper authority. Just as we must confess and say of our persecutors that they are princes, bishops, rulers that have power, even from God, both as concerns worldly dominion and also the power which they might have in the Church by God’s Word, if they would only use it correctly. Such as have the full and proper authority are now persecuting the Gospel.”
The finding of the court and the sentence based upon it was the signal for a general abandonment of restraint; for with the sentence of death hanging over Him Christ had become an outcast, Lev 24:16. The counselors themselves began the cruel mockery, and the servants were only too willing to follow their example. They spat upon Him as an object of utter contempt; they covered a cloth around and over His head and beat Him with their fists, asking meanwhile in a jeering tone that He should prophesy and designate the offenders. And the servants added to the shame of their masters by receiving Him with slaps of the open hand a cruel and painful torture. “This, then, is the hearing and the accusation which was done in the house of the high priest Caiaphas. And all this is written for our learning that we may know that Christ humbled Himself so deeply for our sake and permitted Himself to be accused, condemned, and killed as the greatest criminal; though He is altogether innocent, so that even His adversaries are obliged to confess secretly, feeling it in their heart that there was no cause of death to be found in Him.”
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
60. ] On the most probable punctuation and construction, see note on Mat 26:62 .
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Mar 14:60 . : a graphic feature in Mk., suggesting that the high priest arose from his seat and advanced into the semi-circle of the council towards Jesus the action of an irritated, baffled man. : on the high priest’s question vide notes on Mt.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
stood up in the midst = stood up [and came down] into the midst. Showing that this was not a formal judicial trial, but only to get sufficient evidence to send the Lord to Pilate (Mar 15:1).
asked = further asked.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
60.] On the most probable punctuation and construction, see note on Mat 26:62.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Mar 14:60. ; ; answerest thou not? What is it that, etc.?) Two distinct interrogations.[4]
[4] But Tischend, has but one interrogation at the end of ; Lachm. says in his Preface that to introduce an interrogation after (;) here, where the is used for the relative, is subversive of the sense. Breads . But ADPd, . Vulg. non respondes quicquam ad ea qu tibi objiciuntur.-ED. and TRANSL.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
Mar 15:3-5, Mat 26:62, Mat 26:63, Joh 19:9, Joh 19:10
Reciprocal: 1Pe 2:23 – when he was
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
0
The high priest was surprised that Jesus did not reply.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Mar 14:60. On the questions of the high-priest, see on Mat 26:62.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Mar 14:60-62. The high-priest stood up in the midst, &c. See notes on Mat 26:62-64, where this paragraph is largely explained. Art thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed Here one of the peculiar attributes of the Deity is used to express the divine nature. Supreme happiness is properly considered as belonging to God: and as all comfort flows from him, suitable ascriptions of praise and glory are his due. But this form of speech was conformable to the ancient custom of the Jews, who, when the priest in the sanctuary rehearsed the name of God, used to answer, Blessed be his name for ever. The title of the Blessed One, signified as much as the Holy One; and both, or either of them, the God of Israel. Hence such expressions are frequent in the rabbis. See also Rom 1:25; 2Co 11:31. This is a very sublime and emphatical method of expressing the happiness of God. It conveys such an idea of the divine blessedness, that, comparatively speaking, there is none happy but he. Macknight.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
THE ACCUSATION
60 And the high priest stood up in the midst, and asked Jesus, saying, Answerest thou nothing? what is it which these witness against thee? 61 But he held his peace, and answered nothing. Again the high priest asked him, and said unto him, Art thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?
62 And Jesus said, I am: and ye shall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven. 63 Then the high priest rent his clothes, and saith, What need we any further witnesses? 64 Ye have heard the blasphemy: what think ye? And they all condemned him to be guilty of death. 65 And some began to spit on him, and to cover his face and to buffet him, and to say unto him, Prophesy: and the servants did strike him with the palms of their hands.
It seems that the truth has little standing in the court of prejudice. Christ told them exactly who He was and they condemned Him for it.
It is of note that in the previous passage Peter was sitting with the servants, but here the servants are beating on the Lord. One is left to wonder if Peter was just all of a sudden sitting alone whether he left or whether he moved into some other segment of the crowd. Since all seem to be condemning the Lord it would make one wonder where he was and if he wasn’t rather prominent in his standing alone.
Actually the next passage tells us exactly what was going on. It seems that he was rather conspicuous and people started pointing him out as one of the apostles and we have recorded for us the denials of Peter as the Lord had predicted. He was standing out from the crowd but was in fear for his life and denied the Lord three times.
We all know that we would never deny the Lord if placed under pressure to do so, but even Peter failed. We should hope and plan to take a strong stand for Christ, but only that situation will allow us to know for sure what we would do or not do.
The Lord is condemned on His own words, even if they were totally true. He admitted to beingwho they thought he believed He was, but because it was heresy to suggest such a thing He was condemned for His statements.
He laid claim to being God and they rejected totally that claim and held that He should die for such a claim.
With laws like that the Messiah can never come for if they find one that claims to be he is automatically condemned to death. Seems they will eternally look forward to the Messiah – well until He opens their eyes and they realize that He is the One which they had been looking for over the generations.
Fuente: Mr. D’s Notes on Selected New Testament Books by Stanley Derickson
Apparently Caiaphas decided to question Jesus hoping to get Him to incriminate Himself since he could not get two witnesses to agree against Jesus. Jesus did not need to respond to the high priest’s first question. No one had offered any real proof against Him.
"His [Jesus’] resolute silence loudly declared to the Sanhedrin His disdain for their lying efforts to establish a charge against Him." [Note: Hiebert, p. 371.]
Then Caiaphas, trying a new strategy, asked if Jesus was the Messiah. "The Blessed One" is a synonym for God that the Jews used instead of the holy name of God. [Note: Mishnah Berachoth 7:3.] The popular Jewish concept of Messiah was that he would be a human descendant of David. Caiaphas was not asking if Jesus claimed to be God, only a human Messiah.
"In the formulation ’the Messiah, the son of the Blessed One,’ the second clause stands in apposition to the first and has essentially the same meaning. In Jewish sources contemporary with the NT, ’son of God’ is understood solely in a messianic sense. Jewish hopes were situated in a messianic figure who was a man." [Note: Lane, p. 535.]
"A Messiah imprisoned, abandoned by his followers, and delivered helpless into the hands of his foes represented an impossible conception. Anyone who, in such circumstances, proclaimed himself to be the Messiah could not fail to be a blasphemer who dared to make a mockery of the promises given by God to his people." [Note: Ibid., p. 536.]