56<\/strong>. but their witness agreed not together<\/em> ] “e witnessingis weren not couenable<\/em>,” Wyclif. The Law required that at least two witnesses must agree. See Deu 17:6<\/span>; Deu 19:15<\/span>. But now some who came forward had nothing relevant to say, and others contradicted themselves.<\/p>\n 56. For many bare false witnessagainst him<\/B>From their debasing themselves to “seek<\/I>“them, we are led to infer that they were bribed<\/I> to bear falsewitness; though there are never wanting sycophants enough, ready tosell themselves for naught, if they may but get a smile from thoseabove them: see a similar scene in Ac6:11-14<\/span>. How is one reminded here of that complaint, “Falsewitnesses did rise up: they laid to my charge things that I knew not”(Ps 31:11<\/span>)! <\/P> but their witness agreed nottogether<\/B>If even two<\/I> of them had been agreed, it wouldhave been greedily enough laid hold of, as all that the law insistedupon even in capital cases (De17:6<\/span>). But even in this they failed. One cannot but admire theprovidence which secured this result; since, on the one hand, itseems astonishing that those unscrupulous prosecutors and their readytools should so bungle a business in which they felt their wholeinterests bound up; and, on the other hand, if they had<\/I>succeeded in making even a plausible case, the effect on the progressof the Gospel might for a time have been injurious. But at the verytime when His enemies were saying, “God hath forsaken Him;persecute and take Him; for there is none to deliver Him” (Ps71:11<\/span>), He whose Witness He was and whose work He was doing waskeeping Him as the apple of His eye, and while He was making thewrath of man to praise Him, was restraining the remainder of thatwrath (Ps 76:10<\/span>).<\/P><\/p>\n For many bare false witness against him<\/strong>,…. The word “false”, is not expressed in the Syriac, Persic, and Ethiopic versions: which only signify, that they bore witness against him, accused him of, and laid many things to his charge:<\/p>\n but their witness agreed not together<\/strong>; which showed it to be false, and so not to be admitted; for witnesses were to be as one in their testimony, or not to be received: the, rules concerning them with the Jews, are these l;<\/p>\n “the tradition is, for ever let not their testimony be joined together, unless they both see, , “as one”: says R. Joshua ben Korcha, even one after another; and their testimony is not ratified in the council, until they both witness “as one”.”<\/p>\n Though this is not much the sense of the passage here; it was not the falsehood of their testimony, which this council was unconcerned about, or the contradiction that was in it, which does not appear; but their testimonies were not, , “equal”, or answerable to the wishes of the council; they were not sufficient to prove a capital crime upon him, in order to, put him to death, which was what they wanted: they only respected some light and trivial matters, and did not amount to a charge of blasphemy, or sedition.<\/p>\n l T. Bab. Sanhedrin, fol. 30. 1. Maimon. Hilch. Eduth, c. 4. sect. 1.<\/p>\n Their witness agreed not together <\/B> ( <\/SPAN><\/span>). Literally, the testimonies were not equal. They did not correspond with each other on essential points.<\/P> Many were bearing false witness <\/B> (<\/SPAN><\/span>, imperfect, repeated action)<\/P> against him <\/B>. No two witnesses bore joint testimony to justify a capital sentence according to the law (De 19:15<\/span>). Note imperfects in these verses (55-57<\/span>) to indicate repeated failures. <\/P> <\/p>\n Their witness agreed not. Peculiar to Mark. Lit., their testimonies were not equal. Hence the difficulty of fulfilling the requirement of the law, which demanded two witnesses. See Deu 27:6<\/span>; and compare Mt 28:16<\/span>; 1Ti 5:19<\/span>; Heb 10:28<\/span>.<\/P> <\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n 1) “For many bare false witness against Him,”<\/strong> (polloi gar epseudomarturoun kat’ autou) “For many falsely witnessed, (lied) against Him,” in collusion with, and perhaps hired by, the priests, elders, and Sanhedrin council, Mat 26:59<\/span>; as they later did, regarding His resurrection, Mat 28:11-15<\/span>.<\/p>\n 2) “But their witness agreed not together.”<\/strong> (kai isai hoi marturiai ouk esan) ”And their testimonies were not in agreement,” but contradicted one another, as they appeared in the mock trial, the ”fixed trial,” brought to fruition by “desperately wicked-hearted men,” Jer 17:9<\/span>. Their testimony, if not directly contradictory with one another, at least was not of sufficiently serious criminal nature against Jesus, to merit His death. At least two or three agreeing or reliable witnesses were required for such a trial and condemnation under Moses Law, Deu 17:16<\/span>; Deu 19:15<\/span>.<\/p>\n (56) Their witness agreed not together.<\/strong>St. Mark gives what St. Matthew only implies as the cause of the failure.<\/p>\n 56<\/strong>. <\/strong> Agreed not together <\/em> The original Greek is by many understood to mean that the witness or testimony was not adequate, <\/em> that is, sufficient to make out a criminal case. As the variations between the testimonies do not seem to be essential, this is probably the true meaning.<\/p>\n 56 For many bare false witness against him, but their witness agreed not together. <\/p>\n<\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n Ver. 56. Agreed not<\/strong> ] . Were not matches, or amounted not to an accusation of death. <\/p>\n 56.<\/strong> ] <\/strong> consistent with one another. It was necessary that two witnesses should agree. Deu 17:6<\/span> . ( should not be accentuated as in Homer, , but as in later writers, .)<\/p>\n Mar 14:56<\/span> . , equal, to the same effect, as the testimonies of true witnesses would, of course, be. Grotius takes the word as meaning, not equal to one another, but equal to the demands of weighty evidence and justifying condemnation. Elsner agrees, arguing from the use of the word again, in reference to the evidence about the temple logion<\/em> of Jesus. These witnesses, he holds, are not represented as making conflicting statements, but simply as making statements not sufficiently weighty not equal to the occasion. There is some force in this.<\/p>\n bare = were bearing. <\/p>\n witness = testimonies. <\/p>\n agreed not = were not alike. A Divine supplement, here. <\/p>\n 56.] -consistent with one another. It was necessary that two witnesses should agree. Deu 17:6. ( should not be accentuated as in Homer, , but as in later writers, .)<\/p>\n Reciprocal: 1Ki 21:13 – the men of Belial Mat 26:59 – sought Mar 14:59 – General Luk 23:2 – forbidding 1Jo 5:8 – and these<\/p>\n 6<\/p>\n There were plenty of men who would have been disposed to give such testimony, but since they were falsifying their statements did not agree and hence their pretended testimony was rejected.<\/p>\n For many bare false witness against him, but their witness agreed not together. <\/p>\n [Their witness agreed not together.] The traditional canons, in these things, divide testimonies into three parts: — <\/p>\n I. There was a vain testimony; which being heard, there is no more inquiry made from that witness, there is no more use made of him, but he is set aside, as speaking nothing to the business.<\/p>\n II. There was a standing testimony; for let me so turn it here, which, although it proved not the matter without doubt, yet it was not rejected by the judges, but admitted to examination by citation; that is, others being admitted to try to disprove it if they could.<\/p>\n III. There was the testimony of the words of them that agreed or fitted together (this also was a standing evidence ), when the words of two witnesses agreed, and were to the same purpose: an even evidence. Of these, see the tract Sanhedrin; where also discourse is had concerning exact search and examination of the witnesses by inquisition; and scrutiny; and citation; by which curious disquisition if they had examined the witnesses that babbled and barked against Christ, Oh! The unspeakable and infinite innocence of the most blessed Jesus, which envy and madness itself, never so much sworn together against his life, could not have fastened any crime upon!<\/p>\n It is said, Mar 14:55; they sought for witness against Jesus. This is neither equal, O fathers of the Sanhedrim! nor agreeable to your rule: In judgments about the life of any man, they begin first to transact about quitting the party who is tried; and they begin not with those things which make for his condemnation. Whether the Sanhedrim now followed that canon in their scrutiny about Christ’s case, let them look to it: by their whole process it sufficiently appears, whither their disquisition tended. And let it be granted, that they pretended some colour of justice and mercy, and permitted that any one who would, might come forth, and testify something in his behalf; where was any such now to be found? when all his disciples turned their backs upon him, and the Fathers of the Traditions had provided, that whosoever should confess him to be Christ should be struck with the thunder of their excommunication, Joh 9:22.<\/p>\n Mar 14:56. Agreed not together; were not equal. Not necessarily implying contradiction. No two agreed on one point, so as to give the evidence necessary for a legal conviction.<\/p>\n For many bare false witness against him, but their witness agreed not together. 56. but their witness agreed not together ] “e witnessingis weren not couenable,” Wyclif. The Law required that at least two witnesses must agree. See Deu 17:6; Deu 19:15. But now some who came forward had nothing relevant to say, and others … Continue reading “Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Mark 14:56”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-24796","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-commentary"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/24796","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=24796"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/24796\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=24796"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=24796"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=24796"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible <\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Greek Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Lightfoot Commentary Gospels<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"