The high priest tore his clothes, and said, “What further need have we of witnesses?
Parallel Translations
-
The high priest tore his clothes, and said, “What further need have we of witnesses?
-
Then the hyest preste rent his cloothes and sayd: what nede we eny further of witnes?
-
Then the hie Priest rent his clothes, and sayd, What haue we any more neede of witnesses?
Cross-references (6)
Passages linked to Mark 14:63 in the Treasury of Scripture Knowledge, ordered by reader-vote popularity; verse text shown in World English Bible.
- Matthew 26:65 Then the high priest tore his clothing, saying, “He has spoken blasphemy! Why do we need any more witnesses? Behold, now you have heard his blasphemy.
- Leviticus 21:10 “ ‘He who is the high priest among his brothers, upon whose head the anointing oil is poured, and who is consecrated to put on the garments, shall not let the hair of his head hang loose, or tear his clothes.
- Numbers 14:6 Joshua the son of Nun and Caleb the son of Jephunneh, who were of those who spied out the land, tore their clothes.
- Isaiah 36:22–37:1 Then Eliakim the son of Hilkiah, who was over the household, and Shebna the scribe, and Joah, the son of Asaph, the recorder, came to Hezekiah with their clothes torn, and told him the words of Rabshakeh. When king Hezekiah heard it, he tore his clothes, covered himself with sackcloth, and went into Yahweh’s house.
- Jeremiah 36:23-24 When Jehudi had read three or four leaves, the king cut it with the penknife, and cast it into the fire that was in the brazier, until all the scroll was consumed in the fire that was in the brazier. The king and his servants who heard all these words were not afraid, and didn’t tear their garments.
- Acts 14:13-14 The priest of Jupiter, whose temple was in front of their city, brought oxen and garlands to the gates, and would have made a sacrifice along with the multitudes. But when the apostles, Barnabas and Paul, heard of it, they tore their clothes, and sprang into the multitude, crying out,
Cross-references from openbible.info (CC BY 4.0)
Explain this verse (9 sources)
Historical commentary, presented as a primary source — not an endorsement.
Private notes
Saved on this device only — never synced or sent anywhere.
John Trapp 1656 · Public Domain 63 Then the high priest rent his clothes, and…
63 Then the high priest rent his clothes, and saith, What need we any further witnesses?
Ver. 63. Rent his clothes] So they used to do in case of blasphemy, to signify that their very hearts were rent with grief at so sad a hearing.
John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
John Gill 1763 · Public Domain And when she saw Peter warming himself,.... At the…
And when she saw Peter warming himself,.... At the life which was in the midst of the hall:
she looked upon him; very earnestly, knowing him to be the same, she had let in at the motion of one, that was known in the high priest's family; and suspecting him, by being a stranger, and by his looks:
Read full note →
and said, and thou also wast with Jesus of Nazareth; that is, one of his disciples; See Gill on Mat 26:69.
John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
Joseph Benson 1811 · Public Domain Mar 14:63-65. Then the high-priest rent his clothes —…
Mar 14:63-65. Then the high-priest rent his clothes — Rending of clothes was an expression sometimes of deep grief, sometimes of holy zeal. The precepts, Lev 10:8; Lev 21:10; forbidding the high-priest to rend his clothes, relate only to the pontifical garments and to private mourning: that is, mourning on account of the calamities befalling himself or friends. Griefs of this kind the chief minister of religion was not to make public by any outward sign whatever. But it was neither unlawful nor unusual for him to rend his ordinary garments on account of public calamities, or instances of gross wickedness, as a testimony of his grief for the one and abhorrence of the other. See 1Ma 11:71. That the high-priest was clothed in his ordinary apparel on this occasion, appears from Exo 29:29-30, where the pontifical garments are ordered to descend from father to son; and therefore were to be worn only at their consecration, and when they ministered. And saith, What need we any further witnesses — Namely, of his being guilty of blasphemy. Ye have heard the blasphemy: what think ye? — What punishment do you judge him to have deserved? They all condemned him, to be guilty of death — Namely, all present; for it is probable Nicodemus, Joseph of Arimathea, and some more, who were his disciples, or favourably disposed toward him, were not present: or if they were, they doubtless remonstrated against the iniquity of this sentence. And some began to spit on him — See note on Mat 26:67-68.
Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary 1859 · Public Domain Caiphas, in order to excite their hatred against what…
Caiphas, in order to excite their hatred against what was said, rent his garments, and thus deprived himself of the priestly dignity, by transgressing the precept; which, speaking of the high priest says: He shall not uncover his head, and his garments he shall not rend. (Leviticus xxi. 10.) (St. Leo the Great) --- By the high priest rending his garments he shews, that the Jewish priesthood, on account of their crimes, was now dissolved; whereas the tunic of Christ, by which the one true Catholic Church is prefigured, was seamless, and not to be divided. (Ven. Bede)
George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges 1878 · Public Domain 63. Then the high priest] Caiaphas had now gained…
63. Then the high priest] Caiaphas had now gained his end. The Accused had spoken. He had criminated Himself. All was uproar and confusion. The high-priest rent his linen robes. This was not lawful for him to do in cases of mourning (Lev_10:6; Lev_21:10), but was allowable in cases of blasphemy (see 2Ki_18:37). It was to be performed standing, and so that the rent was to be from the neck straight downwards. The use of the plural “his clothes,” by St Mark, seems to intimate that he tore all his clothes, except that which was next his body.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers 1878 · Public Domain (63) Then the high priest rent his clothes.—It is…
(63) Then the high priest rent his clothes.—It is noticeable that St. Mark uses the word for the inner garment, St. Matthew that for the outer.
A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Pulpit Commentary 1880 · Public Domain And the high priest rent his clothes (diarrhxav tou);…
And the high priest rent his clothes (diarrhxav tou); literally, his tunics.; St. Matthew (Mat_26:65) has ta imatia literally, his garments. None but people of rank wore two tunics. The Greek verb here rendered "rent" implies violent dramatic action. The Jewish tunic was open under the chin, and large enough to receive the head, so that it could easily be placed over the shoulders, by inserting the head. When the wearer wished to give this sign of indignation or grief, he would seize the garment at this opening with both hands, and violently tear it asunder down to the waist. But it was unlawful for the high priest to do this in a private grief. (Lev_10:6) Some of the Fathers think that by this action Caiaphas involuntarily typified the rending of the priesthood from himself and from the Jewish nation.
The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
unfoldingWord translationNotes 2017 · CC BY-SA 4.0 tore his garments
tore his garments
The high priest tore his clothes purposefully to show his outrage and horror at what Jesus has said. AT: "tore his garments in outrage"
Read full note →
Do we still need witnesses?
This can be written as a statement. AT: "We certainly do not need any more people who will testify against this man!" (See: Rhetorical Question)
You have heard the blasphemy
This refers to what Jesus said, which the high priest called blasphemy. AT: "You have heard the blasphemy he has spoken" (See: Assumed Knowledge and Implicit Information)
They all ... Some began to
These phrases refer to the people in the crowd.
to cover his face
They covered his face with a cloth or blindfold, so he could not see. AT: "to cover his face with a blindfold" (See: Assumed Knowledge and Implicit Information)
Prophesy
They mocked him, asking him to prophesy who was hitting him. AT: "Prophesy who hit you" (See: Assumed Knowledge and Implicit Information)
officers
men who guarded the governor's house
translationWords
high priest
blasphemy
condemn
die
prophet
unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.
Tyndale Open Study Notes 2022 · CC BY-SA 4.0 14:63-64 The high priest tore his clothing at Jesus’…
14:63-64 The high priest tore his clothing at Jesus’ response. This was a judicial act that indicated a guilty verdict and signified that there was no need to find other witnesses. The rest of the Sanhedrin agreed that Jesus was guilty and deserved to die. • Exactly what was blasphemous in Jesus’ reply is unclear. Perhaps it was his reply “I Am,” which was the way God referred to himself in Exod 3:14 (see John 8:58). However, Mark is not necessarily repeating the actual words Jesus said at his trial (cp. Matt 26:64; Luke 22:70), so these words could simply be indicating Jesus’ affirmative response to the high priest’s question. He was the Messiah, the Son of God. During the second Jewish revolt against Rome, Bar Kokhba (AD 132–135) claimed to be the Messiah, and it was not considered blasphemous. Jesus’ identification of himself as the Son of Man cannot have been considered blasphemous, for we have over fifty instances before Jesus’ trial in which he used this title, and the charge of blasphemy was never raised. Yet it was too much for the high priest and the Sanhedrin when Jesus clearly claimed to be the Son of Man of Dan 7:13 coming in God’s name to judge the world. This declaration was also added to the fact that, during his ministry, Jesus forgave sins (Mark 2:5-7; Luke 7:48-50), claimed to be the Son of God (Mark 12:6), pronounced judgment upon the Temple (14:58), and claimed to be Lord of the Sabbath (2:28). Already convinced that Jesus should be put to death, the religious leaders now pronounced the predetermined guilty verdict (14:55).
Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.