(57) There arose certain.—St. Mark is here less definite than St. Matthew, who, writing for Jews, was apparently anxious to show that the rule which required “two or three witnesses” in support of a criminal charge had barely been complied with.

14:53-65 We have here Christ's condemnation before the great council of the Jews. Peter followed; but the high priest's fire-side was no proper place, nor his servants proper company, for Peter: it was an entrance into temptation. Great diligence was used to procure false witnesses against Jesus, yet their testimony was not equal to the charge of a capital crime, by the utmost stretch of their law. He was asked, Art thou the Son of the Blessed? that is, the Son of God. For the proof of his being the Son of God, he refers to his second coming. In these outrages we have proofs of man's enmity to God, and of God's free and unspeakable love to man.See this fully explained in the notes at Matthew 26:57-75. 57. And there arose certain, and bare false witness against him—Matthew (Mt 26:60) is more precise here: "At the last came two false witnesses." As no two had before agreed in anything, they felt it necessary to secure a duplicate testimony to something, but they were long of succeeding. And what was it, when at length it was brought forward?

saying—as follows:

See Poole on "Mark 14:53"

And there arose certain,.... Two false witnesses, as in Matthew 26:60, who stood up in court; for witnesses were obliged to stand, whilst they gave in their testimony:

"says R. Bo, in the name of R. Hona, witnesses ought "to stand", whilst they bear witness; as it is said, Deuteronomy 19:17. "Both the men shall stand" (m), &c.''

And bare false witness against him, saying; as follows.

(m) T. Herios. Sanhedrin, fol. 21. 3. & Yoma, fol. 43. 2. Maimon. Hilch. Sanhedrin, c. 21. sect. 3.

And there arose certain, and bare false witness against him, saying,