TRV
Translation
King James Version
Then the high priest rent his clothes, and saith, What need we any further witnesses?
Complete Jewish Bible
At this, the cohen hagadol tore his clothes and said, "Why do we still need witnesses?
Berean Standard Bible
At this, the high priest tore his clothes and declared, “Why do we need any more witnesses?
American Standard Version
And the high priest rent his clothes, and saith, What further need have we of witnesses?
World English Bible Messianic
The high priest tore his clothes, and said, “What further need have we of witnesses?
Geneva Bible (1599)
Then the hie Priest rent his clothes, and sayd, What haue we any more neede of witnesses?
Young's Literal Translation
And the chief priest, having rent his garments, saith, `What need have we yet of witnesses?
See on the biblical-era map
In the KJVVerse 24,818 of 31,102
Study This Verse
Commentary on Mark 14 verses 53–65
53 ¶ And they led Jesus away to the high priest: and with him were assembled all the chief priests and the elders and the scribes.
54 And Peter followed him afar off, even into the palace of the high priest: and he sat with the servants, and warmed himself at the fire.
55 And the chief priests and all the council sought for witness against Jesus to put him to death; and found none.
56 For many bare false witness against him, but their witness agreed not together.
57 And there arose certain, and bare false witness against him, saying,
58 We heard him say, I will destroy this temple that is made with hands, and within three days I will build another made without hands.
59 But neither so did their witness agree together.
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.
We have here Christ's arraignment, trial, conviction, and condemnation, in the ecclesiastical court, before the great sanhedrim, of which the high priest was president, or judge of the court; the same Caiaphas that had lately adjudged it expedient he should be put to death, guilty or not guilty (Joh 11:50), and who therefore might justly be excepted against as partial.
I. Christ is hurried away to his house, his palace it is called, such state did he live in. And there, though, in the dead of the night, all the chief priests, and elders, and scribes, that were in the secret, were assembled, ready to receive the prey; so sure were they of it.
II. Peter followed at a distance, such a degree of cowardice was his late courage dwindled into, Mar 14:54. But when he came to the high priest's palace, he sneakingly went, and sat with the servants, that he might not be suspected to belong to Christ. The high priest's fire side was no proper place, nor his servants proper company, for Peter, but it was his entrance into a temptation.
III. Great diligence was used to procure, for love or money, false witnesses against Christ. They had seized him as a malefactor, and now they had him they had no indictment to prefer against him, no crime to lay to his charge, but they sought for witnesses against him; pumped some with ensnaring questions, offered bribes to others, if they would accuse him, and endeavored to frighten others, if they would not, Mar 14:55, Mar 14:56. The chief priests and elders were by the law entrusted with the prosecuting and punishing of false witnesses (Deu 19:16, Deu 19:17); yet those were now ringleaders in a crime that tends to overthrow of all justice. It is time to cry, Help, Lord, when the physicians of a land are its troublers, and those that should be the conservators of peace and equity, are the corrupters of both.
IV. He was at length charged with words spoken some years ago, which, as they were represented, seemed to threaten the temple, which they had made no better than an idol of (Mar 14:57, Mar 14:58); but the witnesses to this matter did not agree (Mar 14:59), for one swore that he said, I am able to destroy the temple of God, and to build it in three days (so it is in Matthew); the other swore that he said, I will destroy this temple, that is made with hands, and within three days, I will build not it, but another made without hands; now these two differ much from each other; oude isē ēn hē marturia - their testimony was not sufficient, nor equal to the charge of a capital crime; so Dr. Hammond: they did not accuse him of that upon which a sentence of death might be founded, no not by the utmost stretch of their law.
V. He was urged to be his own accuser (Mar 14:60); The high priest stood up in a heat, and said, Answerest thou nothing? This he said under pretence of justice and fair dealing, but really with a design to ensnare him, that they might accuse him, Luk 11:53, Luk 11:54; Luk 20:20. We may well imagine with what an air of haughtiness and disdain this proud high priest brought our Lord Jesus to this question; "Come you, the prisoner at the bar, you hear what is sworn against you; what have you now to say for yourself?" Pleased to think that he seemed silent, who had so often silenced those that picked quarrels with him. Still Christ answered nothing, that he might set us an example, 1. Of patience under calumnies and false accusations; when we are reviled, let us not revile again, Pe1 2:23. And, 2. Of prudence, when a man shall be made an offender for a word (Isa 29:21), and our defence made our offence; it is an evil time indeed when the prudent shall keep silence (lest they make bad worse), and commit their cause to him that judgeth righteously. But,
VI. When he was asked whether he was the Christ, he confessed, and denied not, that he was, Mar 14:61, Mar 14:62. He asked, Art thou the Son of the Blessed? that is the Son of God? for, as Dr. Hammond observes, the Jews, when they named God, generally added, blessed for ever; and thence the Blessed is the title of God, a peculiar title, and applied to Christ, Rom 9:5. And for the proof of his being the Son of God, he binds them over to his second coming; "Ye shall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power; that Son of man that now appears so mean and despicable, whom ye see and trample upon (Isa 53:2, Isa 53:3), you shall shortly see and tremble before." Now, one would think that such a word as this which our Lord Jesus seems to have spoken with a grandeur and majesty not agreeable to his present appearance (for through the thickest cloud of his humiliation some rays of glory were still darted forth), should have startled the court, and at least, in the opinion of some of them, should have amounted to a demurrer, or arrest of judgment, and that they should have stayed process till they had considered further of it; when Paul at the bar reasoned of the judgment to come, the judge trembled, and adjourned the trial, Act 24:25. But these chief priests were so miserably blinded with malice and rage, that, like the horse rushing into the battle, they mocked at fear, and were not affrighted, neither believed they that it was the sound of the trumpet, Job 39:22, Job 39:24. And see Job 15:25, Job 15:26.
VII. The high priest, upon this confession of his, convicted him as a blasphemer (Mar 14:63); He rent his clothes - chitōnas autou. Some think the word signifies his pontifical vestments, which, for the greater state, he had put on, though in the night, upon this occasion. As before, in his enmity to Christ, he said he knew not what (Joh 11:51, Joh 11:52), so now he did he knew not what. If Saul's rending Samuel's mantle was made to signify the rending of the kingdom from him (Sa1 15:27, Sa1 15:28), much more did Caiaphas's rending his own clothes signify the rending of the priesthood from him, as the rending of the veil, at Christ's death, signified the throwing of all open. Christ's clothes, even when he was crucified, were kept entire, and not rent: for when the Levitical priesthood was rent in pieces and done away, This Man, because he continues ever, has an unchangeable priesthood.
VIII. They agreed that he was a blasphemer, and, as such, was guilty of a capital crime, Mar 14:64. The question seemed to be put fairly, What think ye? But it was really prejudged, for the high priest had said, Ye have heard the blasphemy; he gave judgment first, who, as president of the court, ought to have voted last. So they all condemned him to be guilty of death; what friends he had in the great sanhedrim, did not appear, it is probable that they had not notice.
IX. They set themselves to abuse him, and, as the Philistines with Samson, to make sport with him, Mar 14:65. It should seem that some of the priests themselves that had condemned him, so far forgot the dignity, as well as duty, of their place, and the gravity which became them, that they helped their servants in playing the fool with a condemned prisoner. This they made their diversion, while they waited for the morning, to complete their villany. That night of observations (as the passover-night was called) they made a merry night of. If they did not think it below them to abuse Christ, shall we think any thing below us, by which we may do him honour?
Matthew Henry (1662–1714) — Commentary on the Whole Bible. This section covers verses 53–65. Public domain.
Copy as
Pseudo-Jerome (as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)
Catena Aurea by Aquinas
But our God and Saviour Himself, Who brought salvation to the world, and assisted mankind by His love, is led as a sheep to the slaughter, without crying, and remained mute and kept silence yea even from good words. (Ps. 39:3) Wherefore it goes on, But he field his peace, and answered nothing. The silence of Christ is the pardon for the defence or excuse of Adam. (Gen. 3:10.)
But they looked from afar off for Him, whom though near they cannot see, as Isaac from the blindness of his eyes does not know Jacob who was under his hands, but prophesies long before things which were to come to him. It goes on, Jesus said, I am; namely, that they might be inexcusable.
The High Priest indeed asks the Son of God, but Jesus in His answer speaks of the Son of Man, that we may by this understand that the Son of God is also the Son of Man; and let us not make a quaternityx in the Trinity, but let man be in God and God in man. And He said, Sitting on the right hand of power, that is, reigning in life everlasting, and in the Divine power. He says, And coming with the clouds of heaven. He ascended in a cloud, He will come with a cloud; that is, He ascended in that body alone, which He took of the Virgin, and He will come to judgment with the whole Church, which is His body and His fulness.
They condemned Him to be guilty of death, that by His guiltiness He might absolve our guilt. It goes on: 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; that is, that by being spit upon He might wash the face of our soul, and by the covering of His face, might take away the veil from our hearts, and by the buffets, which were dealt upon His head, might heal the head of mankind, that is, Adam, and by the blows, by which He was smitten with the hands, His great praise might be testified by the clapping of our hands and by our lips, as it is said, O clap your hands together, all ye people. (Ps. 47:1)
Leo the Great (as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)AD 461
Catena Aurea by Aquinas
(Serm. 5. de Pass.) But Caiaphas, to increase the odiousness of what they had heard rent his clothes, and without knowing what his frantic action meant, by his madness, deprived himself of the honour of the priesthood, forgetting that command, by which it is said of the High Priest, He shall not uncover his head or rend his clothes. For there follows: Then the High Priest rent his clothes, and saith, What need we any further witnesses? Ye have heard the blasphemy: what think ye?
Bede (as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)AD 735
Catena Aurea by Aquinas
(ubi sup.) The more Jesus remained silent before the false witnesses who were unworthy of His answer, and the impious priests, the more the High Priest, overcome with anger, endeavoured to provoke Him to answer, that he might find room for accusing Him, from any thing whatever which He might say. Wherefore it is said, And the High Priest stood up in the midst, and asked Jesus, saying, Answerest thou nothing? what is it which these witness against thee? The High Priest, angry and impatient at finding no room for accusation against Him, rises from his seat, thus showing by the motion of his body the madness of his mind.
(ubi sup.) If therefore to thee, O Jew, O Pagan, and heretic, the contempt, weakness, and cross in Christ are a subject of scorn, see how by this the Son of Man is to sit at the right hand of the Father, and to come in His majesty on the clouds of heaven.
(ubi sup.) But it was also with a higher mystery, that in the Passion of our Lord the Jewish priest rent his own clothes, that is, his ephod, whilst the garment of the Lord could not be rent, even by the soldiers, who crucified Him. For it was a figure that the Jewish priesthood was to be rent on account of the wickedness of the priests themselves. But the solid strength of the Church, which is often called the garment of her Redeemer, can never be torn asunder.
(ubi sup.) By saying, Prophesy, who is he that smote thee, they mean to insult Him, because He wished to be looked upon as a prophet by the people.
BedeAD 735
On the Gospel of Mark
But the high priest, rending his garments, said: Why do we still need witnesses? You have heard the blasphemy. The same fury that had shaken him from the priestly throne provokes him to rend his garments. He rends his garments to show that the Jews had lost priestly glory and had an empty seat of the high priest. It is also a custom among the Jews, when they hear something blasphemous and seemingly against God, to rend their garments. We read that Paul and Barnabas did this too when they were honored with divine worship in Lycaonia. However, because Herod did not give honor to God but acquiesced to the excessive favor of the people, he was immediately struck by an angel. But in a higher mystery, it happened that during the Lord’s passion, the high priest of the Jews himself rent his garments, while the tunic of the Lord could not be rent by even the soldiers who crucified him. It was prefigured that the priesthood of the Jews would be rent for the crimes of their priests and completely dissolved from its state of integrity; however, the solidity of the holy universal Church, which is often called the garment of its Redeemer, could never be rent. Rather, even if the Jews, the Gentiles, the heretics, or the wicked Catholics despise the humility of the Lord Savior, its inviolate chastity will remain until the end of the age in those whom He finds chosen.
Theophylact of Ohrid (as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)AD 1107
Catena Aurea by Aquinas
But He remained silent because He knew that they would not attend to his words; wherefore He answered according to Luke, If I tell you, ye will not believe. (Luke 22:67) Wherefore there follows, Again the High Priest asked him, and said unto him, Art thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed? The High Priest indeed puts this question, not that he might learn of Him and believe, but in order to seek occasion against Him. But he asks, Art thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed, because there were many Christs, that is, anointed persons, as Kings and High Priests, but none of these was called the Son of the Blessed God, that is, the Ever-praised.
For He knew that they would not believe, nevertheless He answered them, lest they should afterwards say, If we had heard any thing from Him, we would have believed on Him; but this is their condemnation, that they heard and did not believe.
As if He had said, Ye shall see Me as the Son of Man sitting on the right hand of the Father, for He here calls the Father power. He will not however come without a body, but as He appeared to those who crucified Him, so will He appear in the judgment.
The High Priest does after the manner of the Jews; for whenever any thing intolerable or sad occurred to them, they used to rend their clothes. In order then to show that Christ had spoken great and intolerable blasphemy, he rent his clothes.
The Jewish priesthood was to be rent from the time that they condemned Christ as guilty of death; wherefore there follows, And they all condemned him to be guilty of death.
Source: Quotations drawn from early Church Fathers and historical Christian theologians (AD 100–1500). Some quotes address the surrounding passage context rather than this verse alone.
Copy as
Continue studying Mark 14:63 across the web’s major study libraries — every link below opens this exact verse, chapter, or book on the destination site.
Read & Compare
BibleGatewayThis verse in more than 200 translations and 70 languages.
Bible.comThe YouVersion reader — hundreds of translations, reading plans, and highlights.
ESV.orgCrossway's official English Standard Version reader.
NET BibleThe NET translation with 60,000+ translators' notes on every rendering decision.
STEP BibleTyndale House's free study tool — original text, vocabulary, and scholarly resources.
BibliaLogos Bible Software's free web reader.
USCCBThe New American Bible (Revised Edition) with the U.S. bishops' study notes.
Commentaries
BibleHub CommentariesDozens of classic commentaries on this verse, gathered on one page.
StudyLightMore than 100 commentary sets — the largest collection on the web.
BibleRefPlain-English commentary on what this verse means, verse by verse.
Enduring WordDavid Guzik's free commentary on this chapter, widely used by Bible teachers.
Bible Study ToolsVerse commentary alongside Greek and Hebrew study aids.
Original Language & Research
- BibleHub InterlinearThe verse word by word — original language, transliteration, and English.
- BibleHub LexiconEvery word's original-language definition and Strong's entry.
Blue Letter BibleDeep-study tools — Strong's numbers, concordance, and word studies.
CNTR CollationThe earliest Greek manuscripts of this verse, collated letter by letter.
Sermons, Hymns & Audio
TrulyRandomVerse is not affiliated with these sites and doesn’t control their content. They’re linked because they’re genuinely useful.
SUMMARY
Mark 14:63 captures the climactic moment of Jesus' trial before the Sanhedrin, where High Priest Caiaphas, upon hearing Jesus' direct affirmation of His divine identity, dramatically tears his robes. This act, a public display of extreme outrage and a declaration of perceived blasphemy, signified that, in Caiaphas's judgment, no further testimony was needed to condemn Jesus, sealing His fate in the eyes of the Jewish religious leadership.
CONTEXT
EXPOSITION AND ANALYSIS
Key Word Analysis
Verse Breakdown
Literary Devices
The verse effectively employs Symbolism and Irony. The act of Caiaphas tearing his clothes is highly Symbolic, representing not only his personal outrage but also the symbolic tearing of the covenant between God and the religious leadership that rejected His Son. It signifies a profound break, a public disavowal of Jesus' claim. Furthermore, there is deep Irony in Caiaphas's declaration, "What need we any further witnesses?" The very "witness" they sought was standing before them, the Son of God, yet they rejected Him. His words, intended to end the trial, ironically underscore the truth that Jesus' own identity and mission were the ultimate "witness" to His divine nature, a truth the Sanhedrin utterly failed to comprehend. The High Priest, meant to mediate between God and humanity, became the chief instrument of condemning God incarnate, a profound Dramatic Irony for the audience who understood Jesus' true identity.
THEOLOGICAL AND THEMATIC CONNECTIONS
Mark 14:63 is a profound theological statement on the clash between divine truth and human perception, particularly when clouded by prejudice and self-interest. Caiaphas's reaction, while culturally appropriate for perceived blasphemy, highlights the tragic spiritual blindness of those who, entrusted with guarding God's law, failed to recognize the Lawgiver Himself. This moment underscores that true blasphemy is not Jesus' claim to deity—for He is indeed God—but rather the rejection of God's self-revelation in Christ. The High Priest's tearing of his garments, meant to signify the ultimate horror of Jesus' words, ironically foreshadows the tearing of the temple veil at Jesus' death (Mark 15:38), symbolizing the end of the old sacrificial system and the opening of a new, direct way to God through Christ's ultimate sacrifice. This act of human condemnation, driven by a misinterpretation of divine truth, ultimately serves to fulfill God's sovereign plan for redemption.
REFLECTION AND APPLICATION
The scene in Mark 14:63 serves as a sobering reminder of the profound dangers of spiritual blindness, especially when coupled with religious zeal and institutional power. Caiaphas, the highest religious authority, was so entrenched in his predetermined view of the Messiah and so threatened by Jesus' true identity that he could not recognize the divine truth standing before him. His dramatic tearing of clothes, intended to condemn Jesus, stands as a testament to humanity's capacity to reject God's clearest revelation. For us today, this challenges us to examine our own hearts: are we truly open to God's truth, even when it challenges our preconceptions, traditions, or comfort zones? Do we prioritize our interpretations or institutional structures over the living Word of God? This passage calls us to cultivate humility, discernment, and a genuine hunger for truth, lest we, like Caiaphas, unwittingly stand in opposition to God's purposes. It also reminds us of Jesus' unwavering commitment to truth, even when it led directly to His unjust suffering and death, demonstrating the ultimate cost of faithfulness.
Questions for Reflection
FAQ
Why was it considered blasphemy for Jesus to say "I am" and claim to be the Son of Man coming in the clouds?
Answer: From the perspective of the Jewish religious leaders, Jesus' declaration in Mark 14:62 was perceived as blasphemy because He was a man claiming to be God. The phrase "I am" (Greek: ego eimi) directly echoes God's self-revelation to Moses in Exodus 3:14 and is used throughout the Gospel of John to denote Jesus' divine nature (e.g., John 8:58). Furthermore, His claim to be the "Son of Man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven" directly references powerful messianic and divine imagery from Daniel 7:13-14 and Psalm 110:1. For the Sanhedrin, a human claiming such divine prerogatives and equality with God was the ultimate offense against God's holiness, punishable by death according to Jewish law (Leviticus 24:16).
Was Caiaphas's act of tearing his clothes permissible for a High Priest?
Answer: While Leviticus 21:10 generally prohibited the High Priest from tearing his garments as a sign of mourning or grief, rabbinic tradition and custom allowed, and even mandated, the tearing of clothes in response to hearing blasphemy. This was considered an act of profound indignation and a public demonstration of horror at such a grave offense against God. Caiaphas's action was therefore a culturally understood and legally sanctioned (within their interpretation) response to what he genuinely believed was the most serious form of blasphemy. It served to signal to the other members of the Sanhedrin that a decisive judgment was required.
CHRIST-CENTERED FULFILLMENT
The dramatic tearing of Caiaphas's clothes in Mark 14:63, intended to condemn Jesus for blasphemy, ironically points to Jesus' ultimate fulfillment as the true High Priest and the perfect sacrifice. Caiaphas, in his misguided zeal, acted as the representative of a system that could not recognize its own divine fulfillment. His tearing of garments, a ritualistic act of horror, foreshadows the tearing of the temple veil at Jesus' death (Mark 15:38), symbolizing the end of the old covenant and the opening of direct access to God through Christ's once-for-all sacrifice. Jesus, the one condemned as a blasphemer, is in fact the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world, the great High Priest who entered the true tabernacle with His own blood, securing eternal redemption (Hebrews 9:11-14). Caiaphas's judgment, meant to seal Jesus' fate, instead propelled Him toward the cross, where He would ultimately be vindicated by His resurrection (Acts 2:36) and exalted to the right hand of God, precisely as He had prophesied (Philippians 2:9-11). Thus, this moment of human rejection becomes a pivotal step in God's redemptive plan, revealing Jesus as the Christ, the Son of the Blessed, whose suffering brings salvation.