Mark 14 59

Mark 14:59 kjv

But neither so did their witness agree together.

Mark 14:59 nkjv

But not even then did their testimony agree.

Mark 14:59 niv

Yet even then their testimony did not agree.

Mark 14:59 esv

Yet even about this their testimony did not agree.

Mark 14:59 nlt

But even then they didn't get their stories straight!

Mark 14 verses

Mark 14 59 Meaning

Mark 14:59 highlights the complete failure of the false witnesses brought against Jesus during His trial before the Sanhedrin. Their testimonies were inconsistent and contradictory, thereby failing to meet the basic legal requirement for conviction under Jewish law. This fact underscored the malicious intent and injustice of the proceedings, demonstrating that the religious leaders were determined to condemn Jesus regardless of due process or truth.

Mark 14 59 Context

Mark chapter 14 describes Jesus' final Passover, His betrayal by Judas, His arrest, and His subsequent trials. Verses 53-65 detail Jesus' appearance before the Sanhedrin, the supreme Jewish religious council. The immediate preceding context (Mark 14:55-58) specifically describes the chief priests and the entire council seeking "testimony against Jesus to put him to death, but they found none." Many false witnesses came forward, yet their testimonies "did not agree." This verse, 14:59, emphatically concludes the evaluation of these initial false testimonies, highlighting their failure to provide a legally sufficient basis for conviction due to their internal inconsistencies. This setting demonstrates the clear intent of the Sanhedrin to condemn Jesus regardless of evidence, violating their own legal requirements derived from Old Testament law which mandated consistent testimony from at least two or three witnesses for a capital offense (Deut 19:15; Num 35:30).

Mark 14 59 Word analysis

• And (καὶ - kai): A simple conjunction connecting the prior attempt to find testimony (Mk 14:55-58) with the outcome. It indicates a continuation or consequence of the preceding actions. In this context, it functions almost as an adversative, linking the intent to find evidence with the actual failure to do so, underscoring the impasse they faced due to the inconsistent witness.
• their (αὐτῶν - autōn): Possessive pronoun referring directly to the "many false witnesses" (πολλοὶ ψευδομάρτυρες - polloi pseudomartyres) mentioned in Mark 14:56. This emphasizes the multitude of accusers, yet collectively their individual testimonies were worthless.
• witness (ἡ μαρτυρία - hē martyria): From the Greek term meaning "testimony," "evidence," or "witness-bearing." This is a crucial legal term in both Old and New Testaments. In a court of law, martyria is the foundation upon which judgments are made, particularly for life-or-death decisions. The inadequacy of their martyria implies a fundamental flaw in the prosecution's case.
• did not agree (οὐδὲ... ἴση ἦν - oude... isē ēn):
  • οὐδὲ (oude): "nor," "not even," "and not." This strong negative conjunction emphasizes the absolute lack of agreement or consistency among the testimonies. It goes beyond mere non-agreement to highlight a categorical failure.
  • ἴση (isē): "equal," "similar," "consistent," "alike." In a legal context, it specifically means "agreeing" or "corresponding." For testimony to be valid, especially in a capital case, the accounts must be isē – congruent and non-contradictory in substance. The absence of isē meant the charges were invalid.
  • ἦν (ēn): The imperfect form of the verb "to be," indicating a state of being or a continuous situation. The ongoing failure of agreement, even after multiple attempts, shows a fundamental breakdown of their strategy.
• Words-group analysis:
  • "their witness did not agree": This phrase precisely identifies the legal and moral failure of the Sanhedrin's strategy. By failing to procure legally valid (i.e., consistent) witness testimony, they immediately rendered the trial unjust according to their own Law (Deut 19:15). It shows their desperation and disregard for justice in their predetermined quest to condemn Jesus. This phrase reveals that despite their numerical strength and the clear desire to convict, they could not produce a credible, unified accusation, fundamentally undermining the legitimacy of their proceedings.

Mark 14 59 Bonus section

The speed and secrecy of the trial of Jesus by the Sanhedrin also stand out. Jewish law typically prohibited capital trials from taking place at night or on feast days. However, Jesus' trial was conducted both at night and during the Passover festival, further illustrating the religious leaders' profound disregard for their own established legal procedures. The inconsistencies of the witnesses' testimonies not only proved the false nature of their claims but also confirmed that Jesus' condemnation was pre-ordained by the council, rooted in their jealousy and fear of His influence (Mk 15:10). This deliberate pursuit of false testimony highlights a profound irony: those who were meant to uphold God's law were themselves violating fundamental tenets of justice, including the Ninth Commandment against bearing false witness. The silence of Jesus in the face of these inconsistent and false accusations (Mk 14:61), as foretold in Isaiah 53:7, further contrasts His divine truth and composure with the chaotic malice of His accusers.

Mark 14 59 Commentary

Mark 14:59 provides a crucial detail exposing the corruption and illegitimacy of Jesus' trial before the Sanhedrin. In seeking "false testimony" (Mk 14:56), the religious leaders revealed their preconceived malice and their complete abandonment of due legal process, which, under Mosaic Law, required the concurrent, consistent witness of two or three individuals for conviction, especially in a capital case (Deut 19:15; Num 35:30). The phrase "their witness did not agree" is a damning indictment of the trial's validity. It demonstrates that even with a pre-arranged objective to kill Jesus, and a parade of individuals willing to perjure themselves, the witnesses were so haphazardly managed or so profoundly dishonest that they could not even feign consistency. This inconsistency effectively nullified their collective testimony, rendering the entire charge invalid from a legal standpoint. The verse highlights the depth of human sin in its pursuit of innocent blood and underscores that God allowed even this legal absurdity to pave the way for His Son's sacrifice. Despite the human efforts to contrive guilt, the inherent injustice of the process was manifest. This served not only to highlight Jesus' innocence but also the desperate and unethical lengths to which His enemies would go to achieve their evil objective, fulfilling prophetic psalms about false accusers (Ps 27:12; Ps 35:11).