---
title: "Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible -  Mark 14"
description: "CHAPTER 14   :-. THE
CONSPIRACY OF THE JEWISH
AUTHORITIES TO PUT
JESUS TO DEATH—THE
SUPPER AND THE ANOINTING
AT BETHANY—JUDAS
AGREES WITH THE CHIEF
PRIEST"
image: "/images/missing.jpg"
url: "https://realbiblebelievers.com/commentaries/commentary-critical-and-explanatory-on-the-whole-bible/mark/14"
---

CHAPTER 14

. THE
CONSPIRACY OF THE JEWISH
AUTHORITIES TO PUT
JESUS TO DEATH—THE
SUPPER AND THE ANOINTING
AT BETHANY—JUDAS
AGREES WITH THE CHIEF
PRIESTS TO BETRAY
HIS LORD.
( = [Matthew 26:1-16](../../../kjv/matthew/26/1-16); [Luke 22:1-6](../../../kjv/luke/22/1-6);
[John 12:1-11](../../../kjv/john/12/1-11)).
The events of this section
appeared to have occurred on the fourth day (*Wednesday*) of the
Redeemer's Last Week.
*Conspiracy of the Jewish
Authorities to Put Jesus to Death* ([Mark 14:1](../../../kjv/mark/14/1);
[Mark 14:2](../../../kjv/mark/14/2)).

**1. After two days was the feast of
the passover, and of unleavened bread**—The meaning is, that two
days after what is about to be mentioned the passover would arrive;
in other words, what follows occurred two days *before* the
feast.
**and the chief priests and the
scribes sought how they might take him by craft, and put him to
death**—From Matthew's fuller account () we learn that our Lord announced this to the Twelve as
follows, being the first announcement to them of the precise time:
"And it came to pass, when Jesus had finished all these sayings"
([Matthew 26:1](../../../kjv/matthew/26/1)) —referring to the
contents of [Matthew 24:1-25](../../../kjv/matthew/24/1-25),
which He delivered to His disciples; His public ministry being now
closed: from His *prophetical* He is now passing into His
*priestly* office, although all along He Himself took our
infirmities and bare our sicknesses—"He said unto His
disciples, Ye know that after two days is [the feast of] the
passover, and the Son of man is betrayed to be crucified." The
*first* and the *last* steps of His final sufferings are
brought together in this brief announcement of all that was to take
place. The *passover* was the first and the chief of the three
great annual festivals, commemorative of the redemption of God's
people from Egypt, through the sprinkling of the blood of a lamb
divinely appointed to be slain for that end; the destroying angel,
"when he saw the blood, *passing over*" the
Israelitish houses, on which that blood was seen, when he came to
destroy all the first-born in the land of Egypt ([Exodus 12:12](../../../kjv/exodus/12/12);
[Exodus 12:13](../../../kjv/exodus/12/13)) —bright typical
foreshadowing of the great Sacrifice, and the Redemption effected
thereby. Accordingly, "by the determinate counsel and
foreknowledge of God, who is wonderful in counsel and excellent in
working," it was so ordered that precisely at the passover
season, "Christ our Passover should be sacrificed for us."
On the day following the passover commenced "the feast of
unleavened bread," so called because for seven days only
unleavened bread was to be eaten ([Exodus 12:13](../../../kjv/exodus/12/13)). See on [Exodus 12:13](../../../kjv/exodus/12/13). We
are further told by Matthew ([Exodus 12:13](../../../kjv/exodus/12/13)) that the consultation was held in the palace of Caiaphas
the high priest, between the chief priests, [the scribes], and the
elders of the people, how "they might take Jesus by subtlety and
kill Him."

**2. But they said, Not on the feast
day**—rather, not during the feast; not until the seven days of
unleavened bread should be over.
**lest there be an uproar of
the people**—In consequence of the vast influx of strangers,
embracing all the male population of the land who had reached a
certain age, there were within the walls of Jerusalem at this
festival some two million people; and in their excited state, the
danger of tumult and bloodshed among "the people," who for
the most part took Jesus for a prophet, was extreme. See JOSEPHUS
[*Antiquities,* 20.5.3]. What plan, if any, these ecclesiastics
fixed upon for seizing our Lord, does not appear. But the proposal of
Judas being at once and eagerly gone into, it is probable they were
till then at some loss for a plan sufficiently quiet and yet
effectual. So, just at the feast time shall it be done; the
unexpected offer of Judas relieving them of their fears. Thus, as
BENGEL remarks, did the
divine counsel take effect.
*The Supper and the Anointing at
Bethany Six Days before the Passover* ().
The time of this part of the
narrative is *four days before* what has just been related. Had
it been part of the regular train of events which our Evangelist
designed to record, he would probably have inserted it in its proper
place, before the conspiracy of the Jewish authorities. But having
come to the treason of Judas, he seems to have gone back upon this
scene as what probably gave immediate occasion to the awful deed.

**3. And being in Bethany, in the
house of Simon the leper, as he sat at meat, there came a woman**—It
was "Mary," as we learn from .
**having an alabaster box of
ointment of spikenard**—pure *nard,* a celebrated
aromatic—(See [Song of Solomon 1:12](../../../kjv/song-of-solomon/1/12)).
**very precious**—"very
costly" ([John 12:3](../../../kjv/john/12/3)).
**and she brake the box, and
poured it on his head**—"and anointed," adds John ([John 12:3](../../../kjv/john/12/3)), "the feet of Jesus, and wiped His feet with her hair:
and the house was filled with the odor of the ointment." The
only use of this was to refresh and exhilarate—a grateful
compliment in the East, amid the closeness of a heated atmosphere,
with many guests at a feast. Such was the form in which Mary's love
to Christ, at so much cost to herself, poured itself out.

**4. And there were some that had
indignation within themselves and said**—Matthew says (), "But when His disciples saw it, they had indignation,
saying," c. The spokesman, however, was none of the true-hearted
Eleven—as we learn from John (): "Then saith one of His disciples, Judas Iscariot,
Simon's son, which should betray Him." Doubtless the thought
stirred first in his breast, and issued from his base lips and some
of the rest, ignorant of his true character and feelings, and carried
away by his plausible speech, might for the moment feel some chagrin
at the apparent waste.
**Why was this waste of the
ointment made?**

**5. For it might have been sold for
more than three hundred pence**—between nine and ten pounds
sterling.
**and have been given to the
poor. And they murmured against her**—"This he said,"
remarks John ([John 12:6](../../../kjv/john/12/6)), and
the remark is of exceeding importance, "not that he cared for
the poor but because he was a thief, and had the bag"—the
scrip or treasure chest—"and bare what was put therein"—not
"bare it off" by theft, as some understand it. It is true
that he did this; but the expression means simply that he had charge
of it and its contents, or was treasurer to Jesus and the Twelve.
What a remarkable arrangement was this, by which an avaricious and
dishonest person was not only taken into the number of the Twelve,
but entrusted with the custody of their little property! The purposes
which this served are obvious enough; but it is further noticeable,
that the remotest hint was never given to the Eleven of his true
character, nor did the disciples most favored with the intimacy of
Jesus ever suspect him, till a few minutes before he voluntarily
separated himself from their company—for ever!

**6. And Jesus said, Let her alone;
why trouble ye her? she hath wrought a good work on me**—It was
good in itself, and so was acceptable to Christ; it was eminently
seasonable, and so more acceptable still; and it was "what she
could," and so most acceptable of all.

**7. For ye have the poor with you
always**—referring to [Deuteronomy 15:11](../../../kjv/deuteronomy/15/11).
**and whensoever ye will ye may
do them good: but me ye have not always**—a gentle hint of His
approaching departure, by One who knew the worth of His own presence.

**8. She hath done what she could**—a
noble testimony, embodying a principle of immense importance.
**she is come aforehand to
anoint my body to the burying**—or, as in John (), "Against the day of my burying hath she kept this."
Not that she, dear heart, thought of His burial, much less reserved
any of her nard to anoint her dead Lord. But as the time was so near
at hand when that office would have to be performed, *and she was
not to have that privilege even after the spices were brought for the
purpose* ([Mark 16:1](../../../kjv/mark/16/1)), He
lovingly *regards it as done now.* "In the act of love done
to Him," says OLSHAUSEN
beautifully, "she has erected to herself an eternal monument, as
lasting as the Gospel, the eternal Word of God. From generation to
generation this remarkable prophecy of the Lord has been fulfilled;
and even we, in explaining this saying of the Redeemer, of necessity
contribute to its accomplishment." "Who but Himself,"
asks STIER, "had the
power to ensure to any work of man, even if resounding in His own
time through the whole earth, an imperishable remembrance in the
stream of history? Behold once more here the majesty of His royal
judicial supremacy in the government of the world, in this, 'Verily I
say unto you.'"

**10. And Judas Iscariot, one of the
twelve, went unto the chief priests, to betray him unto them**—that
is, to make his proposals, and to bargain with them, as appears from
Matthew's fuller statement ([Matthew 26:14](../../../kjv/matthew/26/14);
[Matthew 26:15](../../../kjv/matthew/26/15)) which says, he "went
unto the chief priests, and said, What will ye give me, and I will
deliver Him unto you? And they covenanted with him for thirty pieces
of silver." The thirty pieces of silver were thirty shekels, the
fine paid for man- or maid-servant accidentally killed ([Matthew 26:15](../../../kjv/matthew/26/15)), and equal to between four and five pounds sterling—"a
*goodly* price that I was prized at of them!" ([Matthew 26:15](../../../kjv/matthew/26/15)).

**11. And when they heard it, they
were glad, and promised to give him money**—Matthew alone records
the precise sum, because a remarkable and complicated prophecy, which
he was afterwards to refer to, was fulfilled by it.
**And he sought how he might
conveniently betray him**—or, as more fully given in Luke (), "And he promised, and sought opportunity to betray
Him unto them in the absence of the multitude." That he should
avoid an "uproar" or "riot" among the people,
which probably was made an essential condition by the Jewish
authorities, was thus assented to by the traitor; into whom, says
Luke ([Luke 22:3](../../../kjv/luke/22/3)), "Satan
entered," to put him upon this hellish deed.
[Luke 22:3](../../../kjv/luke/22/3). PREPARATION FOR,
AND LAST
CELEBRATION OF, THE
PASSOVER—ANNOUNCEMENT
OF THE TRAITOR—INSTITUTION
OF THE SUPPER. ( =
[Matthew 26:17-30](../../../kjv/matthew/26/17-30); [Luke 22:7-23](../../../kjv/luke/22/7-23);
[Luke 22:39](../../../kjv/luke/22/39); [John 13:21-30](../../../kjv/john/13/21-30)).
See on [John 13:21-43](../../../kjv/john/13/21-43); [John 13:21-43](../../../kjv/john/13/21-43); and see on
[John 13:21-43](../../../kjv/john/13/21-43); [John 13:21-43](../../../kjv/john/13/21-43); [John 13:21-43](../../../kjv/john/13/21-43).
[John 13:21-43](../../../kjv/john/13/21-43). THE
DESERTION OF JESUS
BY HIS DISCIPLES
AND THE FALL OF
PETER, FORETOLD.
( = [Matthew 26:31-35](../../../kjv/matthew/26/31-35); [Luke 22:31-38](../../../kjv/luke/22/31-38);
[John 13:36-38](../../../kjv/john/13/36-38)).
See on [John 13:36-43](../../../kjv/john/13/36-43).
[John 13:36-43](../../../kjv/john/13/36-43). THE AGONY
IN THE GARDEN. ( =
[Matthew 26:36-46](../../../kjv/matthew/26/36-46); [Luke 22:39-46](../../../kjv/luke/22/39-46)).
See on [Luke 22:39-42](../../../kjv/luke/22/39-42).
[Luke 22:39-42](../../../kjv/luke/22/39-42). BETRAYAL AND
APPREHENSION OF
JESUS—FLIGHT
OF HIS DISCIPLES.
( = [Matthew 26:47-56](../../../kjv/matthew/26/47-56); [Luke 22:47-53](../../../kjv/luke/22/47-53);
[John 18:1-12](../../../kjv/john/18/1-12)).
See on [John 18:1-43](../../../kjv/john/18/1-43).
[John 18:1-43](../../../kjv/john/18/1-43). JESUS
ARRAIGNED BEFORE THE
SANHEDRIM, CONDEMNED
TO DIE, AND
SHAMEFULLY ENTREATED—THE
FALL OF PETER.
( = [Matthew 26:57-75](../../../kjv/matthew/26/57-75); [Luke 22:54-71](../../../kjv/luke/22/54-71);
[John 18:13-18](../../../kjv/john/18/13-18); [John 18:24-27](../../../kjv/john/18/24-27)).
Had we only
the first three Gospels, we should have concluded that our Lord was
led immediately to Caiaphas, and had before the Council. But as the
Sanhedrim could hardly have been brought together at the dead hour of
night—by which time our Lord was in the hands of the officers sent
to take Him—and as it was only "as soon as it was day"
that the Council met ([Luke 22:66](../../../kjv/luke/22/66)),
we should have had some difficulty in knowing what was done with Him
during those intervening hours. In the Fourth Gospel, however, all
this is cleared up, and a very important addition to our information
is made ([John 18:13](../../../kjv/john/18/13); [John 18:14](../../../kjv/john/18/14);
[John 18:19-24](../../../kjv/john/18/19-24)). Let us
endeavor to trace the events in the true order of succession, and in
the detail supplied by a comparison of all the four streams of text.
*Jesus
Is Brought Privately before Annas, the Father-in-Law of Caiaphas*
([John 18:13](../../../kjv/john/18/13); [John 18:14](../../../kjv/john/18/14)).
[John 18:14](../../../kjv/john/18/14):
***And
they led Him away to Annas first; for he was father-in-law to**********Caiaphas, which was the high priest that same year*******—This successful Annas, as ELLICOTT
remarks, was appointed high priest by Quirinus, A.D.
12, and after holding the office for several years, was deposed by
Valerius Gratius, Pilate's predecessor in the procuratorship of Judea
[JOSEPHUS, *Antiquities,*
18.2.1, c.]. He appears, however, to have possessed vast influence,
having obtained the high priesthood, not only for his son Eleazar,
and his son-in-law Caiaphas, but subsequently for four other sons,
under the last of whom James, the brother of our Lord, was put to
death [*Antiquities,* 20.9.1]. It is thus highly probable that,
besides having the title of "high priest" merely as one who
had filled the office, he to a great degree retained the powers he
had formerly exercised, and came to be regarded practically as a kind
of rightful high priest.
[John 18:14](../../../kjv/john/18/14):
***Now
Caiaphas was he which gave counsel to the Jews, that it was expedient
that one man should die for the people.******* See on [John 18:14](../../../kjv/john/18/14). What passed between Annas and our Lord during this
interval the beloved disciple reserves till he has related the
beginning of Peter's fall. To this, then, as recorded by our own
Evangelist, let us meanwhile listen.
*Peter Obtains Access within the
Quadrangle of the High Priest's Residence, and Warms Himself at the
Fire* ([Mark 14:53](../../../kjv/mark/14/53) [Mark 14:54](../../../kjv/mark/14/54)).

**53. And they led Jesus away to the
high priest: and with him were assembled**—or rather, "there
gathered together unto him."
**all the chief priests and the
elders and the scribes**—it was then a full and formal meeting of
the Sanhedrim. Now, as the first three Evangelists place all Peter's
denials of his Lord after this, we should naturally conclude that
they took place *while our Lord stood before the Sanhedrim.* But
besides that the natural impression is that the scene around the fire
took place *overnight,* the *second crowing of the cock,*
if we are to credit ancient writers, would occur about the beginning
of the fourth watch, or between three and four in the morning. By
that time, however, the Council had probably convened, being warned,
perhaps, that they were to prepare for being called at any hour of
the morning, should the Prisoner be successfully secured. If this be
correct, it is fairly certain that only the *last* of Peter's
three denials would take place while our Lord was under trial before
the Sanhedrim. One thing more may require explanation. If our Lord
had to be transferred from the residence of Annas to that of
Caiaphas, one is apt to wonder that there is no mention of His being
marched from the one to the other. But the building, in all
likelihood, was one and the same; in which case He would merely have
to be taken perhaps across the court, from one chamber to another.

**54. And Peter followed him afar off,
even into**—or "from afar, even to the interior of."
**the palace of the high
priest**—"An oriental house," says ROBINSON,
"is usually built around a quadrangular interior court; into
which there is a passage (sometimes arched) through the front part of
the house, closed next the street by a heavy folding gate, with a
smaller wicket for single persons, kept by a porter. The interior
court, often paved or flagged, and open to the sky, is the *hall,*
which our translators have rendered 'palace,' where the attendants
made a fire; and the passage beneath the front of the house, from the
street to this court, is the *porch.* The place where Jesus
stood before the high priest may have been an open room, or place of
audience on the ground floor, in the rear or on one side of the
court; such rooms, open in front, being customary. It was close upon
the court, for Jesus heard all that was going on around the fire, and
turned and looked upon Peter ()."
**and he sat with the servants,
and warmed himself at the fire**—The graphic details, here
omitted, are supplied in the other Gospels. :
***And the servants and
officers stood there*******—that is, in the hall, within
the quadrangle, open to the sky.
***who had made a fire of
coals*******—or charcoal (in a brazier probably).
***for it was cold*******—John alone of all the Evangelists mentions the *material,*
and the *coldness* of the night, as WEBSTER
and WILKINSON remark. The
elevated situation of Jerusalem, observes THOLUCK,
renders it so cold about Easter as to make a watch fire at night
indispensable.
***And
Peter stood with them and warmed himself*******—"He
went in," says Matthew (), "and sat with the servants *to see the end.*"
These two minute statements throw an interesting light on each other.
His wishing to "see the end," or issue of these
proceedings, was what led him into the palace, for he evidently
feared the worst. But once in, the serpent coil is drawn closer; it
is a cold night, and why should not he take advantage of the fire as
well as others? Besides, in the talk of the crowd about the
all-engrossing topic he may pick up something which he would like to
hear. Poor Peter! But now, let us leave him warming himself at the
fire, and listening to the hum of talk about this strange case by
which the subordinate officials, passing to and fro and crowding
around the fire in this open court, would while away the time; and,
following what appears the order of the Evangelical Narrative, let us
turn to Peter's Lord.
*Jesus
Is Interrogated by Annas—His Dignified Reply—Is Treated with
Indignity by One of the Officials—His Meek Rebuke*
([John 18:19-23](../../../kjv/john/18/19-23)).
We
have seen that it is only the Fourth Evangelist who tells us that our
Lord was sent to Annas first, overnight, until the Sanhedrim could be
got together at earliest dawn. We have now, in the same Gospel, the
deeply instructive scene that passed during this non-official
interview.
[John 18:19-43](../../../kjv/john/18/19-43):
***The
high priest*******—Annas.
***then
asked Jesus of His disciples and of His doctrine*******—probably
to entrap Him into some statements which might be used against Him at
the trial. From our Lord's answer it would seem that "His
disciples" were understood to be some secret party.
[John 18:19-43](../../../kjv/john/18/19-43).
***Jesus
answered him, I spake openly to the world*******—compare [John 18:19-43](../../../kjv/john/18/19-43). He speaks of His public teaching as now a past thing—as
now all over.
***I
ever taught in the synagogue and in the temple, whither the Jews**********always resort*******—courting publicity, though
with sublime noiselessness.
***and
in secret have I said nothing*******—rather, "spake I nothing";
that is, nothing different from what He taught in public: all His
private communications with the Twelve being but explanations and
developments of His public teaching. (Compare [Isaiah 45:19](../../../kjv/isaiah/45/19);
[Isaiah 48:16](../../../kjv/isaiah/48/16)).
[Isaiah 48:16](../../../kjv/isaiah/48/16):
***Why
askest thou Me? ask them which heard Me what I have said to**********them*******—rather, "what I said unto
them."
***behold,
they know what I said*******—From this mode of replying,
it is evident that our Lord saw the attempt to draw Him into
self-crimination, and resented it by falling back upon the right of
every accused party to have some charge laid against Him by competent
witnesses.
[Isaiah 48:16](../../../kjv/isaiah/48/16):
***And
when He had thus spoken, one of the officers which stood by**********struck Jesus with the palm of his
hand, saying, Answerest Thou the**********high priest so?*******—(see [Isaiah 48:16](../../../kjv/isaiah/48/16)). It would seem from [Isaiah 48:16](../../../kjv/isaiah/48/16) that this summary and undignified way of punishment what was
deemed insolence in the accused had the sanction even of the high
priests themselves.
[Isaiah 48:16](../../../kjv/isaiah/48/16):
***Jesus
answered him, If I have spoken evil*******—rather, "If
I spoke evil," in reply to the high priest.
***bear
witness of the evil; but if well, why smitest thou Me?*******—He does not say "if *not*
evil," as if His reply had been merely unobjectionable; but "if
*well,*"
which seems to challenge something altogether fitting in the
remonstrance. He had addressed to the high priest. From our Lord's
procedure here, by the way, it is evident enough that His own precept
in the Sermon on the Mount—that when smitten on the one cheek we
are to turn to the smiter the other also ([Isaiah 48:16](../../../kjv/isaiah/48/16)) —is not to be taken to the letter.
*Annas
Sends Jesus to Caiaphas* ([Isaiah 48:16](../../../kjv/isaiah/48/16)).
[Isaiah 48:16](../../../kjv/isaiah/48/16).
***Now
Annas had sent Him bound unto Caiaphas the high priest*******—On the meaning of this verse there
is much diversity of opinion; and according as we understand it will
be the conclusion we come to, whether there was but *one
hearing* of our Lord before Annas and
Caiaphas together, or whether, according to the view we have given
above, there were *two hearings*—a
preliminary and informal one before Annas, and a formal and official
one before Caiaphas and the Sanhedrim. If our translators have given
the right sense of the verse, there was but one hearing before
Caiaphas; and then [John 18:24](../../../kjv/john/18/24)
is to be read as a *parenthesis,*
merely supplementing what was said in [John 18:24](../../../kjv/john/18/24). This is the view of CALVIN,
BEZA,
GROTIUS,
BENGEL,
DE
WETTE,
MEYER,
LUCKE,
THOLUCK.
But there are decided objections to this view. First: We cannot but
think that the *natural*
sense of the whole passage, embracing [John 18:13](../../../kjv/john/18/13);
[John 18:14](../../../kjv/john/18/14); [John 18:19-24](../../../kjv/john/18/19-24),
is that of a preliminary non-official hearing before "Annas
first," the particulars of which are accordingly recorded; and
then of a transference of our Lord from Annas to Caiaphas. Second: On
the other view, it is not easy to see why the Evangelist should not
have inserted [John 18:24](../../../kjv/john/18/24)
immediately after [John 18:13](../../../kjv/john/18/13);
or rather, how he could well have done otherwise. As it stands, it is
not only quite out of its proper place, but comes in most
perplexingly. Whereas, if we take it as a simple statement of fact,
that after Annas had finished his interview with Jesus, as recorded
in [John 18:19-23](../../../kjv/john/18/19-23), he
transferred Him to Caiaphas to be formally tried, all is clear and
natural. Third: The pluperfect sense "*had*
sent" is in the translation only; the sense of the original word
being simply "sent." And though there are cases where the
aorist here used has the sense of an English pluperfect, this sense
is not to be put upon it unless it be obvious and indisputable. Here
that is so far from being the case, that the pluperfect "had
sent" is rather an unwarrantable *interpretation*
than a simple *translation*
of the word; informing the reader that, *according
to the view of our translators,* our
Lord "had been" sent to Caiaphas *before*
the interview just recorded by the Evangelist; whereas, if we
translate the verse literally—"Annas *sent*
Him bound unto Caiaphas the high priest"—we get just the
information we expect, that Annas, having merely "*precognosced*"
the prisoner, hoping to draw something out of Him, "sent Him to
Caiaphas" to be formally tried before the proper tribunal. This
is the view of CHRYSOSTOM
and AUGUSTINE
among the Fathers; and of the moderns, of OLSHAUSEN,
SCHLEIERMACHER,
NEANDER,
EBRARD,
WIESELER,
LANGE,
LUTHARDT.
This brings us back to the text of our second Gospel, and in it to
*The Judicial Trial and
Condemnation of the Lord Jesus by the Sanhedrim* ([John 18:19-43](../../../kjv/john/18/19-43)).
But let the reader observe, that
though this is introduced by the Evangelist before any of the denials
of Peter are recorded, we have given reasons for concluding that
probably the *first two denials* took place while our Lord was
with Annas, and the last only during the trial before the Sanhedrim.

**55. And the chief priests and all
the council sought for witness against Jesus to put him to
death**—Matthew ([Matthew 26:59](../../../kjv/matthew/26/59))
says they "sought *false* witness." They knew they
could find nothing valid; but having their Prisoner to bring before
Pilate, they behooved to *make a case.*
**and found none**—none
that would suit their purpose, or make a decent ground of charge
before Pilate.

**56. For many bare false witness
against him**—From their debasing themselves to "*seek*"
them, we are led to infer that they were *bribed* to bear false
witness; though there are never wanting sycophants enough, ready to
sell themselves for naught, if they may but get a smile from those
above them: see a similar scene in . How is one reminded here of that complaint, "False
witnesses did rise up: they laid to my charge things that I knew not"
([Psalms 31:11](../../../kjv/psalms/31/11))!
**but their witness agreed not
together**—If even *two* of them had been agreed, it would
have been greedily enough laid hold of, as all that the law insisted
upon even in capital cases ([Psalms 31:11](../../../kjv/psalms/31/11)). But even in this they failed. One cannot but admire the
providence which secured this result; since, on the one hand, it
seems astonishing that those unscrupulous prosecutors and their ready
tools should so bungle a business in which they felt their whole
interests bound up; and, on the other hand, if they *had*
succeeded in making even a plausible case, the effect on the progress
of the Gospel might for a time have been injurious. But at the very
time when His enemies were saying, "God hath forsaken Him;
persecute and take Him; for there is none to deliver Him" ([Psalms 31:11](../../../kjv/psalms/31/11)), He whose Witness He was and whose work He was doing was
keeping Him as the apple of His eye, and while He was making the
wrath of man to praise Him, was restraining the remainder of that
wrath ([Psalms 76:10](../../../kjv/psalms/76/10)).

**57. And there arose certain, and
bare false witness against him**—Matthew () 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:

**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**—On this charge, observe,
first, that eager as His enemies were to find criminal matter against
our Lord, they had to go back to the outset of His ministry, His
first visit to Jerusalem, more than three years before this. In all
that He said and did after that, though ever increasing in boldness,
they could find nothing. Next, that even then, they fix only on one
speech, of two or three words, which they dared to adduce against
Him. Further, they most manifestly pervert the speech of our Lord. We
say not this because in Mark's form of it, it differs from the report
of the words given by the Fourth Evangelist () —the only one of the Evangelists who reports it all,
or mentions even any visit paid by our Lord to Jerusalem before His
last—but because the one report bears truth, and the other
falsehood, on its face. When our Lord said on that occasion, "Destroy
this temple, and in three days I will raise it up," they *might,*
for a moment, have understood Him to refer to the temple out of whose
courts He had swept the buyers and sellers. But *after* they had
expressed their astonishment at His words, in that sense of them, and
reasoned upon the time it had taken to rear the temple as it then
stood, since *no answer* to this appears to have been given by
our Lord, it is hardly conceivable that they should continue in the
persuasion that this was really His meaning. But finally, even if the
more ignorant among them had done so, it is next to certain that *the
ecclesiastics,* who were *the prosecutors* in this case, *did
not believe that this was His meaning.* For in less than three
days after this they went to Pilate, saying, "Sir, we remember
that that deceiver said, while he was yet alive, *after three days
I will rise again*" (). Now what utterance of Christ known to His enemies, *could*
this refer to, if not to this very saying about destroying and
rearing up the temple? And if so, it puts it beyond a doubt that by
this time, at least, they were perfectly aware that our Lord's words
referred to *His death by their hands and His resurrection by His
own.* But this is confirmed by .

**59. But neither so did their witness
agree together**—that is, not even as to so brief a speech,
consisting of but a few words, was there such a concurrence in their
mode of reporting it as to make out a decent case. In such a charge
*everything depended on the very terms alleged to have been used.*
For every one must see that a very slight turn, either way, given to
such words, would make them either something like *indictable
matter,* or else a *ridiculous ground for a criminal
charge*—would either give them a colorable pretext for the
charge of impiety which they were bent on making out, or else make
the whole saying appear, on the worst view that could be taken of it,
as merely some mystical or empty boast.

**60. Answerest thou nothing? what is
it which these witness against thee?**—Clearly, they felt that
*their case had failed,* and by this artful question the high
priest hoped to get *from His own mouth* what they had in vain
tried to obtain from their false and contradictory witnesses. But in
this, too, they failed.

**61. But he held his peace, and
answered nothing**—This must have nonplussed them. But they were
not to be easily baulked of their object.
**Again the high priest**—arose
([Matthew 26:62](../../../kjv/matthew/26/62)), matters having now
come to a crisis.
**asked him, and said unto him,
Art thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?**—Why our Lord
should have answered this question, when He was silent as to the
former, we might not have quite seen, but for Matthew, who says ([Matthew 26:62](../../../kjv/matthew/26/62)) that the high priest *put Him upon solemn oath,*
saying, "I adjure Thee by the living God, that Thou tell us
whether Thou be the Christ, the Son of God." Such an adjuration
was understood to render an answer legally necessary ([Matthew 26:62](../../../kjv/matthew/26/62)). (Also see on [Matthew 26:62](../../../kjv/matthew/26/62).)

**62. And Jesus said, I am**—or,
as in Matthew ([Matthew 26:64](../../../kjv/matthew/26/64)),
"Thou hast said [it]." In Luke, however ([Matthew 26:64](../../../kjv/matthew/26/64)), the answer, "Ye say that I am," should be
rendered—as DE WETTE,
MEYER, ELLICOTT,
and the best critics agree that the preposition requires—"Ye
say [it], for I am [so]." Some words, however, were spoken by
our Lord before giving His answer to this solemn question. These are
recorded by Luke alone ([Luke 22:67](../../../kjv/luke/22/67);
[Luke 22:68](../../../kjv/luke/22/68)): "Art Thou the
Christ [they asked]? tell us. And He said unto them, If I tell you,
ye will not believe: and if I also ask [interrogate] "you, ye
will not answer Me, nor let Me go." This seems to have been
uttered before giving His direct answer, as a calm remonstrance and
dignified protest against the prejudgment of His case and the
unfairness of their mode of procedure. But now let us hear the rest
of the answer, in which the conscious majesty of Jesus breaks forth
from behind the dark cloud which overhung Him as He stood before the
Council. (Also see on [Luke 22:68](../../../kjv/luke/22/68).)
**and**—in that character.
**ye shall see the Son of man
sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of
heaven**—In Matthew ([Matthew 26:64](../../../kjv/matthew/26/64))
a slightly different but interesting turn is given to it by one word:
"Thou hast said [it]: nevertheless"—We prefer this sense
of the word to "besides," which some recent critics decide
for—"I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sit
on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven."
The word rendered "hereafter" means, not "at some
future time" (as to-day "hereafter" commonly does),
but what the English word originally signified, "after here,"
"after now," or "from this time." Accordingly, in
[Luke 22:69](../../../kjv/luke/22/69), the words used mean
"from now." So that though the reference we have given it
to the day of His glorious Second Appearing is too obvious to admit
of doubt, He would, by using the expression, "From this time,"
convey the important thought which He had before expressed,
immediately after the traitor left the supper table to do his dark
work, "*Now* is the Son of man glorified" ([Luke 22:69](../../../kjv/luke/22/69)). At this moment, and by this speech, did He "witness
*the* good confession" emphatically and properly, as the
apostle says in [1 Timothy 6:13](../../../kjv/1-timothy/6/13). Our
translators render the words there, "Who *before* Pontius
Pilate witnessed"; referring it to the admission of His being a
*King,* in the presence of Cæsar's own chief representative.
But it should be rendered, as LUTHER
renders it, and as the best interpreters now understand it, "Who
*under* Pontius Pilate witnessed," c. In this view of it,
the apostle is referring not to what our Lord confessed *before*
Pilate—which, though noble, was not of such primary importance—but
to that sublime confession which, under Pilate's administration, He
witnessed before the only competent tribunal on such occasions, the
Supreme Ecclesiastical Council of God's chosen nation, that He was
THE MESSIAH,
and THE SON
OF THE BLESSED ONE
in the former word owning His Supreme *Official,* in the latter
His Supreme *Personal,* Dignity.

**63. Then the high priest rent his
clothes**—On this expression of *horror of blasphemy,* see
[2 Kings 18:37](../../../kjv/2-kings/18/37).
**and saith, What need we any
further witnesses?** (Also see on [2 Kings 18:37](../../../kjv/2-kings/18/37).)

**64. Ye have heard the blasphemy**—(See
[John 10:33](../../../kjv/john/10/33)). In Luke ([John 10:33](../../../kjv/john/10/33)), "For we ourselves have heard of His own mouth"—an
affectation of religious horror. (Also see on [John 10:33](../../../kjv/john/10/33).)
**what think ye?**—"Say
what the verdict is to be."
**they all condemned him to be
guilty of death**—or of a capital crime, which *blasphemy*
against God was according to the Jewish law ([John 10:33](../../../kjv/john/10/33)). Yet *not absolutely all;* for *Joseph* of
Arimathea, "a good man and a just," was one of that
Council, and "*he was not a consenting party* to the
counsel and deed of them," for that is the strict sense of the
words of [Luke 23:50](../../../kjv/luke/23/50); [Luke 23:51](../../../kjv/luke/23/51).
Probably he absented himself, and *Nicodemus* also, from this
meeting of the Council, the temper of which they would know too well
to expect their voice to be listened to; and in that case, the words
of our Evangelist are to be taken strictly, that, without one
dissentient voice, "all [present] condemned him to be guilty of
death."
*The Blessed One Is Now
Shamefully Entreated* ([Luke 23:51](../../../kjv/luke/23/51)).
Every word here must be carefully
observed, and the several accounts put together, that we may lose
none of the awful indignities about to be described.

**65. And some began to spit on
him**—or, as in [Matthew 26:67](../../../kjv/matthew/26/67),
"to spit in [into] His face." Luke ([Matthew 26:67](../../../kjv/matthew/26/67)) says in addition, "And the men that held Jesus mocked
him"—or cast their jeers at Him. (Also see on [Matthew 26:67](../../../kjv/matthew/26/67).)
**to cover his face**—or
"to blindfold him" (as in [Matthew 26:67](../../../kjv/matthew/26/67)).
**to buffet him**—Luke's
word, which is rendered "smote Him" ([Matthew 26:67](../../../kjv/matthew/26/67)), is a stronger one, conveying an idea for which we have an
exact equivalent in English, but one too colloquial to be inserted
here.
**began to say unto him,
Prophesy**—In Matthew ([Matthew 26:67](../../../kjv/matthew/26/67)) this is given more fully: "Prophesy unto us, thou
Christ, Who is he that smote Thee?" The sarcastic fling at Him
as "*the Christ,*" and the demand of Him in this
character to name the unseen perpetrator of the blows inflicted on
Him, was in them as infamous as to Him it must have been, and was
intended to be, stinging.
**and the servants did strike
him with the palms of their hands**—or "struck Him on the
face" ([Luke 22:64](../../../kjv/luke/22/64)). Ah!
Well did He say prophetically, in that Messianic prediction which we
have often referred to, "I gave My back to the smiters, and My
cheeks to them that plucked off the hair: I hid not My face from
shame and spitting!" ([Luke 22:64](../../../kjv/luke/22/64)). "And many other things blasphemously spake they
against Him" ([Luke 22:65](../../../kjv/luke/22/65)).
This general statement is important, as showing that virulent and
varied as were the *recorded* affronts put upon Him, they are
but a *small specimen* of what He endured on that dark occasion.
*Peter's* FIRST
DENIAL *of His Lord*
([Mark 14:66-68](../../../kjv/mark/14/66-68)).

**66. And as Peter was beneath in the
palace**—This little word "*beneath*"—one of our
Evangelist's graphic touches—is most important for the right
understanding of what we may call the topography of the scene. We
must take it in connection with Matthew's word (): "Now Peter sat *without* in the palace"—or
quadrangular court, in the center of which the fire would be burning;
and crowding around and buzzing about it would be the menials and
others who had been admitted within the court. At the upper end of
this court, probably, would be the memorable chamber in which the
trial was held—*open to the court,* likely, and *not far
from the fire* (as we gather from ), but *on a higher level;* for (as our verse says) the
court, with Peter in it, was "beneath" it. The ascent to
the Council chamber was perhaps by a short flight of steps. If the
reader will bear this explanation in mind, he will find the intensely
interesting details which follow more intelligible.
**there cometh one of the maids
of the high priest**—"the damsel that kept the door"
([John 18:17](../../../kjv/john/18/17)). The Jews seem to
have employed women as porters of their doors ([John 18:17](../../../kjv/john/18/17)).

**67. And when she saw Peter warming
himself, she looked upon him**—Luke () is here more graphic; "But a certain maid beheld him
as he sat by the fire"—literally, "by the *light,*"
which, shining full upon him, revealed him to the girl—"and
earnestly looked upon him"—or, "fixed her gaze upon him."
His demeanor and timidity, which must have attracted notice, as so
generally happens, "leading," says OLSHAUSEN,
"to the recognition of him."
**and said, And thou also wast
with Jesus of Nazareth**—"with Jesus the Nazarene," or,
"with Jesus of Galilee" (). The *sense* of this is given in John's report of it
([John 18:17](../../../kjv/john/18/17)), "Art not
thou also one of this man's disciples?" that is, thou as well as
"that other disciple," whom she knew to be one, but did not
challenge, perceiving that he was a privileged person. In Luke ([John 18:17](../../../kjv/john/18/17)) it is given as a remark made by the maid to one of the
by-standers—"this man was also with Him." If so expressed
in Peter's hearing—drawing upon him the eyes of every one that
heard it (as we know it did, [John 18:17](../../../kjv/john/18/17)), and compelling him to answer to it—that would explain
the different forms of the report naturally enough. But in such a
case this is of no real importance.

**68. But he denied**—"before
all" ([Matthew 26:70](../../../kjv/matthew/26/70)).
**saying, I know not, neither
understand I what thou sayest**—in Luke ([Matthew 26:70](../../../kjv/matthew/26/70)), "I know Him not."
**And he went out into the
porch**—the vestibule leading to the street—no doubt finding
the fire-place too *hot* for him; possibly also with the hope of
escaping—but that was not to be, and perhaps he dreaded that, too.
Doubtless by this time his mind would be getting into a sea of
commotion, and would fluctuate every moment in its resolves.
**AND THE COCK CREW**—(See
on [Matthew 26:70](../../../kjv/matthew/26/70)). This, then, was the
First Denial.
*Peter's* SECOND
DENIAL *of His Lord*
([Mark 14:69](../../../kjv/mark/14/69); [Mark 14:70](../../../kjv/mark/14/70)).
There is here a verbal difference
among the Evangelists, which without some information which has been
withheld, cannot be quite extricated.

**69. And a maid saw him again**—or,
"a girl." It might be rendered "the girl"; but
this would not necessarily mean the same one as before, but might,
and probably does, mean just the female who had charge of the door or
gate near which Peter now was. Accordingly, in , she is expressly called "another [maid]." But in
Luke ([Luke 22:58](../../../kjv/luke/22/58)) it is a *male*
servant: "And after a little while [from the time of the first
denial] another"—that is, as the word signifies, "another
male" servant. But there is no real difficulty, as the
challenge, probably, after being made by one was reiterated by
another. Accordingly, in John ([Luke 22:58](../../../kjv/luke/22/58)), it is, "*They* said therefore unto him, &c.—as
if more than one challenged him at once.
**and began to say to them that
stood by, This is one of them**—or, as in [Luke 22:58](../../../kjv/luke/22/58) —"This [fellow] was also with Jesus the Nazarene."

**70. And a little after**—"about
the space of one hour after" ().
**they that stood by said again
to Peter, Surely thou art one of them: for thou art a Galilean, and
thy speech agreeth thereto**—"bewrayeth [or 'discovereth']
thee" ([Matthew 26:73](../../../kjv/matthew/26/73)). In Luke
([Luke 22:59](../../../kjv/luke/22/59)) it is, "Another
confidently affirmed, saying, Of a truth this [fellow] also was with
him: for he is a Galilean." The Galilean dialect had a more
*Syrian* cast than that of Judea. *If Peter had held his
peace,* this peculiarity had not been observed; but hoping,
probably, to put them off the scent by joining in the *fireside
talk,* he was thus discovered. The Fourth Gospel is particularly
interesting here: "One of the servants of the high priest, being
his kinsman [or kinsman to him] whose ear Peter cut off, saith, Did
not I see thee in the garden with Him?" ([Luke 22:59](../../../kjv/luke/22/59)). No doubt his relationship to Malchus drew his attention
to the man who had smitten him, and this enabled him to identify
Peter. "Sad reprisals!" exclaims BENGEL.
Poor Peter! Thou art caught in thine own toils; but like a wild bull
in a net, thou wilt toss and rage, filling up the measure of thy
terrible declension by one more denial of thy Lord, and that the
foulest of all.

**71. But he began to
curse**—"anathematize," or wish himself accursed if
what he was now to say was not true.
**and to swear**—or to take
a solemn oath.
**saying, I know not this man
of whom ye speak.**

**72. And the second time the cock
crew**—The other three Evangelists, who mention but one crowing
of the cock—and that not the first, but the second and last one of
Mark—all say the cock crew "immediately," but Luke () says, "Immediately, while he yet spake, the cock
crew." Alas!—But now comes the wonderful sequel.
*The Redeemer's Look upon Peter,
and Peter's Bitter Tears* ([Mark 14:72](../../../kjv/mark/14/72);
[Luke 22:61](../../../kjv/luke/22/61); [Luke 22:62](../../../kjv/luke/22/62)).
It has been
observed that while the beloved disciple is the only one of the four
Evangelists who does not record the repentance of Peter, he is the
only one of the four who records the affecting and most beautiful
scene of his complete restoration ([Luke 22:62](../../../kjv/luke/22/62)).
[Luke 22:62](../../../kjv/luke/22/62):
***And
the Lord turned and looked upon Peter*******—How? it will be asked. We answer,
From the chamber in which the trial was going on, in the direction of
the court where Peter then stood—in the way already explained. See
on [Mark 14:1](../../../kjv/mark/14/1). Our Second
Evangelist makes no mention of this look, but dwells on the warning
of his Lord about the double crowing of the cock, which would
announce his triple fall, as what rushed stingingly to his
recollection and made him dissolve in tears.
**And Peter
called to mind the word that Jesus said unto him, Before the cock
crow twice, thou shalt deny me thrice. And when he thought thereon,
he wept**—To the same effect is the statement of the First
Evangelist ([Matthew 26:75](../../../kjv/matthew/26/75)), save
that like "the beloved physician," he notices the
"bitterness" of the weeping ([Matthew 26:75](../../../kjv/matthew/26/75)). The most precious link, however, in the whole chain of
circumstances in this scene is beyond doubt that "look" of
deepest, tenderest import reported by Luke alone ([Matthew 26:75](../../../kjv/matthew/26/75)). Who can tell what lightning flashes of wounded love and
piercing reproach shot from that "look" through the eye of
Peter into his heart!
***And
Peter remembered the word of the Lord, how He had said unto**********him, Before the cock crow, thou shalt deny Me thrice.*******
[Matthew 26:75](../../../kjv/matthew/26/75):
***And
Peter went out and wept bitterly*******—How different from the sequel of
Judas' act! Doubtless the hearts of the two men towards the Saviour
were perfectly different from the first; and the treason of Judas was
but the consummation of the wretched man's resistance of the blaze of
light in the midst of which he had lived for three years, while
Peter's denial was but a momentary obscuration of the heavenly light
and love to his Master which ruled his life. But the immediate cause
of the blessed revulsion which made Peter "weep bitterly"
([Matthew 26:75](../../../kjv/matthew/26/75)) was, beyond all
doubt, this heart-piercing "look" which his Lord gave him.
And remembering the Saviour's own words at the table, "Simon,
Simon, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat;
*but I prayed for thee, that thy faith
fail not*" ([Luke 22:31](../../../kjv/luke/22/31);
[Luke 22:32](../../../kjv/luke/22/32)), may we not say that
*this prayer fetched down all that there
was in that look* to pierce and break
the heart of Peter, to keep it from despair, to work in it
"repentance unto salvation not to be repented of," and at
length, under other healing touches, to "restore his soul?"
(See on [Mark 14:1](../../../kjv/mark/14/1)).

```json
{"@context":"https://schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https://realbiblebelievers.com/#website","url":"https://realbiblebelievers.com","name":"Real Bible Believers","description":"RBB","publisher":{"@id":"https://realbiblebelievers.com/#/schema/person/e966585dde703268e7f6ae890ea98509"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":"https://realbiblebelievers.com/search?q={search_term_string}","query-input":"required name=search_term_string"}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"ImageObject","@id":"https://realbiblebelievers.com/commentaries/commentary-critical-and-explanatory-on-the-whole-bible/mark/14#primaryimage","inLanguage":"en-US","url":"https://realbiblebelievers.com/images/missing.jpg","contentUrl":"https://realbiblebelievers.com/images/missing.jpg","width":640,"height":370,"caption":"Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible -  Mark 14"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https://realbiblebelievers.com/commentaries/commentary-critical-and-explanatory-on-the-whole-bible/mark/14#webpage","url":"https://realbiblebelievers.com/commentaries/commentary-critical-and-explanatory-on-the-whole-bible/mark/14","name":"Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible -  Mark 14","isPartOf":{"@id":"https://realbiblebelievers.com/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https://realbiblebelievers.com/commentaries/commentary-critical-and-explanatory-on-the-whole-bible/mark/14#primaryimage"},"datePublished":null,"dateModified":null,"author":{"@id":"https://realbiblebelievers.com/#/schema/person/e966585dde703268e7f6ae890ea98509"},"description":"CHAPTER 14   :-. THE\nCONSPIRACY OF THE JEWISH\nAUTHORITIES TO PUT\nJESUS TO DEATH—THE\nSUPPER AND THE ANOINTING\nAT BETHANY—JUDAS\nAGREES WITH THE CHIEF\nPRIEST","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https://realbiblebelievers.com/commentaries/commentary-critical-and-explanatory-on-the-whole-bible/mark/14#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https://realbiblebelievers.com/commentaries/commentary-critical-and-explanatory-on-the-whole-bible/mark/14"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https://realbiblebelievers.com/commentaries/commentary-critical-and-explanatory-on-the-whole-bible/mark/14#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"item":{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https://realbiblebelievers.com/","url":"https://realbiblebelievers.com/","name":"Home"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"item":{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https://realbiblebelievers.com/commentaries","url":"https://realbiblebelievers.com/commentaries","name":"Commentaries"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":3,"item":{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https://realbiblebelievers.com/commentaries/commentary-critical-and-explanatory-on-the-whole-bible","url":"https://realbiblebelievers.com/commentaries/commentary-critical-and-explanatory-on-the-whole-bible","name":"Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":4,"item":{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https://realbiblebelievers.com/commentaries/commentary-critical-and-explanatory-on-the-whole-bible/mark","url":"https://realbiblebelievers.com/commentaries/commentary-critical-and-explanatory-on-the-whole-bible/mark","name":"Mark"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":5,"item":{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https://realbiblebelievers.com/commentaries/commentary-critical-and-explanatory-on-the-whole-bible/mark/14","url":"https://realbiblebelievers.com/commentaries/commentary-critical-and-explanatory-on-the-whole-bible/mark/14","name":"14"}}]},{"@type":["Person","Organization"],"@id":"https://realbiblebelievers.com/#/schema/person/e966585dde703268e7f6ae890ea98509","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","@id":"https://realbiblebelievers.com/#personlogo","inLanguage":"en-US","url":"https://realbiblebelievers.com/android-chrome-512x512.png","contentUrl":"https://realbiblebelievers.com/android-chrome-512x512.png","width":512,"height":512},"logo":{"@id":"https://realbiblebelievers.com/#personlogo"},"sameAs":["https://twitter.com/RBiblebeliever","https://www.facebook.com/RBibleBelievers"]}]}
```