Herod's Violence To The Church

Acts 12:1-4

Now according to the time of this, Herod the king considered how to send out his hands to curse some of these, from the church. So he murdered James, the brother of John, with the sword. And perceiving that this pleased the Jews, he also continued with the arrest of Peter. But because it was the Days of Unleavened Bread, he was arrested and placed in prison, betrayed into four squads of soldiers to guard him, intending after, to bring him before the people of the Passover. (MAST) Now according to the time of this, . . . Luke begins here in the same time frame as the previous context, i.e., according to "these days." Because these "traveling" prophets were having such an impact on the communities, on Herod's part, they needed to be prevented from succeeding in their message. If this message has its intended effect, it will change the will of the people and force the rulers of these communities to change the way they practice government, for the people will no longer be able to be restrained by feeding their idolatrous appetite (Acts 12:20). Therefore, our current context, occurs in the same time frame as the previous, but in a different sphere of sovereignty. So throughout the time that it took for Barnabas to find Paul, and for these traveling prophets to discern the current events and reach Antioch, Herod was also taking the opportunity to slow down the progress of the church. In order for him to do this, he would have to eliminate those who are the mouth piece of this message. According to Acts 12:25 these "specific" event(s) (12:2,5,11,19,20-24) had to occur before Barnabas and Saul even left Antioch to return to Jerusalem. Therefore, this time frame, of the previous context, was and is the introduction to the rest of our study in chapter 12. Think of this as a new screen shot in mystery movie, giving you a broader view and vantage point of the same time frame. . . . Herod the king considered how to send out his hands to curse some of these, . . . This Herod can only be referring to Agrippa I. He is the only king who ruled between two Caesars, Caligula and Claudius. And as we discovered in our previous context, this would make perfect sense in this "time frame." Remember, that there was some special event - a famine - " because of " Claudius. So, we come to understand more clearly here, as I suspected before, that there is a transition of power and authority. Now what we see happening in this scene with Herod seems to correlate that fact. Herod is becoming bolder and prouder in his attitude toward the Christians. And history seems to show, that because of Claudius taking power, Herod's own region of sovereignty is expanded. b. Herod the king; he is Herod Agrippa I., the son of Aristobulus and Berenice, the grandson of Herod the Great, and the nephew of Herod Antipas. He was born about ten years before the Christian era, and was educated at Rome. After many adventures, some of which were by no means of an honorable character, he received as a gift from Caius Caligula, soon after the accession of the latter to the throne, the tetrarchy of Philip (Batanea, Trachonitis and Auranitis), which had been vacant for several years, and also the tetrarchy of Lysanias, together with the title of king. Soon afterwards he obtained also the tetrarchy of Herod Antipas (Galilee and Peræa), when the latter was banished by Caligula to Gaul. And, lastly, the emperor Claudius, soon after the commencement of his reign (A. D. 41), gave him, in addition, Samaria and Judea, so that, like his grandfather at an earlier period, he ruled over all Palestine; his annual revenues amounted, according to Josephus (Antiq. xix. 8. 2) to twelve millions of drachmæ. Comp. Ewald’s Gesch. d. Apost. Zeitalt., 1858, p. 288 ff; p. 313 ff. [History of the Apostolical Age]. Lange, J. P., Schaff, P., Gotthard, V. L., Gerok, C., & Schaeffer, C. F. (2008). A commentary on the Holy Scriptures: Acts (p. 227). Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software. I'm not a historical scholar, so I have to steal someone else's study (2Cor.11:8;Jn.4:38), but it does give us a snap shot into the life of this particular Herod. We see that he is practically raised and educated by Rome, which would explain his behavior that occurs in Caesarea, accepting worship as though he himself alone were Deity (Acts 12:22-23). But what applies more to our context is the extension of his power through the transition of power in Rome. As a result of Claudius coming to power, whom he most likely was able to manipulate easily, Agrippa received the regions of Samaria and Judea. The edicts mentioned were largely due to the intimacy of Claudius with Herod Agrippa, grandson of Herod the Great, who had been living in Rome and had been in some measure instrumental in securing the succession for Claudius. As a reward for this service, the Holy Land had a king once more. Judea was added to the tetrarchies of Philip and Antipas; and Herod Agrippa I was made ruler over the wide territory which had been governed by his grandfather. Whatever concessions to the Jews Claudius may have been induced out of friendship for Herod Agrippa to make at the beginning of his reign, . . . Hutchison, J. (1979–1988). Claudius. In G. W. Bromiley (Ed.), The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Revised (Vol. 1, p. 717). Wm. B. Eerdmans. We find here, as a continuation from our last study, that this same Herod had influence on securing the reign of Claudius; but Agrippa's actions resemble more of his childhood friend, Caius Caligula, who also accepted and believed in his heart that he alone was Deity. And so, during this time frame, political favors were taking place. This explains the rash boldness of Herod's response to the already persecuted Christians. Therefore, this continues to reveal a good chunk of time between Barnabas leaving Jerusalem for Antioch and returning again with Saul. Acts 12:19 reveals that Herod already ruled Judea. So the reign of Claudius had already been transferred from Caligula at this point. And so Agabus was most likely reporting these blasphemous events, as an eyewitness to Antioch, while Herod began to suck up the wealth of the regions, knowing the obvious result would be a famine. So it only makes sense, later, that we find Herod using food to control the labor and direction of the people. But to Herod this Christian message must be stopped, or the people will rebel against his blasphemous will. Now that we uncovered the motive, we come to the blasphemous deed. Herod "considered" in his heart to curse the people of God with his power, as king of the regions. The policies that he began to make were specifically designed to curse those who served this so-called risen Christ (in his eyes). They would not be allowed to work; and if needed, they would have strict restraints upon them, to bury them under a heavy work-load. But those who were the head of this tail of misfits would be openly chastised or put to death for specifically spreading the Christian message. Surely, this would create a famine in the land of Judea. But is he more powerful than the prayers of the saints? Will he be able to silence them? Now to defend why I added some extra English to the "translations;" if we do not see the depth and use of this Greek verb, epebalen, we wouldn't see the motive alongside the deed; but this word, I believe, is offered for that purpose. In other words, he purposed in his heart to curse the saints. This same verb is used in Mark 14:72 when Peter contemplated in his heart about his actions in denying Jesus. The verb can mean to literally lay hands on, to cast on or to throw over; but can also be used metaphorically within one's thoughts, as Mark used it. So as Herod considers all these events, he "casts" his thoughts on the new authority given to him and is lifted up with pride to act against, specifically, the Jerusalem Christians. This reveals the specific attitude and motive of his heart.

Now, I believe, all the translations work together to define the curse that occurred as a result of Herod's actions. The original AV uses the term vex to expound the "motive" for a "widespread" result. The purpose was to curse the work efforts of the prophets and Apostles. But we also see the violence and literal laying on of hands to restrain particular characters of the church. So this is more than a mere curse on their efforts and labor, but an open violence to James and Peter, to the point of making a spectacle of them, to show what will happen to those who open their mouth against Herod's authority and ability to rule. This contemplation, Herod's pride, of this new received power, has risen above even the reasoning of the Hebrew God, the God of the Jews, the people whom he vowed to protect. It is sure that the spirit of this generation, specifically this time frame, is at an all time low in those of authority. The only thing that could restrain this behavior are the intercessory prayers of the saints. And so we need to consider the principle of blessing and cursing. Is it always an absolute rule to bless and not to curse? 1 "And now, O priests, this command is for you. 2 If you will not listen, if you will not take it to heart to give honor to My Name, says the LORD of hosts, then I will send the curse upon you and I will curse your blessings. Indeed, I have already cursed them, because you do not lay it to heart. (Malachi 2:1, ESV) Beginning with this verse, we see that God Himself requires a particular honoring of His Name, or He Himself will curse the blessings that the people bestow on the priests. In other words, He will not be in them as a sanctifying reward, but only to further harden their heart against the truth. Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse them. (Romans 12:14, ESV) To further answer this question, we must understand the proper context. Paul is not saying that we are never “to pray” for the curse of God, which subjects the whole of creation to futility, to be made alive, realized in their persecutors. What he is saying, however, is that we are to go out of our way not to be the instrument of that curse. We are to labor to be a blessing and not a curse to others. Of course we are not to curse and/or slander, for that is against the revealed will of God. But this doesn’t mean we are to avoid preaching and praying for the curse of God to have its proper effect and purpose upon all men, both believer and unbeliever. Also, the Greek verb is not being used here, as the English translation “to persecute” is commonly to be understood. The Greek verb simply means, to follow hard after; or, to come under/behind to strive. Therefore, in this context, it only applies to those who have come under the authority of the discipleship of the gospel in order to learn, but often become a heavy weight, and are difficult to strive together alongside with, for not all grow at the same pace. These are those who are not an intentional curse to the discipleship, nor have a motivation to slander the integrity of the Gospel, but are hungry to learn. But there are times when the root of this word is used to describe the motivation of those to curse the operation of the saints who do the work of ministry (2Tim.4:14). Instead of following hard after to strive with the saints; they follow hard after to strive against the saints. 27 "But I say to you who hear, Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, 28 bless those who curse you, pray for those who abuse you. (Luke 6:27, ESV) Again, to further answer this question, we must dig below the surface of these statements, also. First, Jesus is speaking to those who hear, i.e., those who have ears to hear. Second, these are those who are counted as enemies that, indeed, do curse and abuse the goodwill of the saints toward all people. So, though these are a hindrance, they are counted as enemies that are ignorant of their cursings and abuses, like Saul before the encounter on the Damascus road. A closer look at the context also reveals that this abuse and cursing is the result of the so-called legal plunder of the government that God has placed over "the land" of the Jewish people. So this simply means those unbelieving institutions that do not practice righteous Christian principles. In other words, pray for their repentance and continue to bless with the conviction of the truth, and continue to do good in paying back what is borrowed. In other words, these so-called persecutors are not intentionally being a hindrance to the practice of the Christian life; they just are and that means, it is what it is. 11 "Blessed are you when others revile you and persecute you and utter all kinds of evil against you falsely on my account. 12 Rejoice and be glad, for your reward is great in heaven, for so they persecuted the prophets who were before you. (Matthew 5:11, ESV) And even still further, to answer this question, we shall look at those who just hate the message. Jesus doesn't say anything here about praying or doing good to those who hate the message. He only calls those who suffer for this purpose blessed. He also reminds them of what the prophets of old suffered; but did the prophets bless those who cursed the message and labored to distort it? We can recall countless times the prophets cursed those who labored to distort the purpose of the message, and labored to lead the people of Israel and Judah astray from trusting in the Word of the Lord. Jeremiah 29:21–32 (NKJV) 21 Thus says the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel, concerning Ahab the son of Kolaiah, and Zedekiah the son of Maaseiah, who prophesy a lie to you in My name: Behold, I will deliver them into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon, and he shall slay them before your eyes. 22 And because of them a curse shall be taken up by all the captivity of Judah who are in Babylon, saying, “The Lord make you like Zedekiah and Ahab, whom the king of Babylon roasted in the fire”; 23 because they have done disgraceful things in Israel, have committed adultery with their neighbors’ wives, and have spoken lying words in My name, which I have not commanded them. Indeed I know, and am a witness, says the Lord. 24 You shall also speak to Shemaiah the Nehelamite, saying, 25 Thus speaks the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel, saying: You have sent letters in your name to all the people who are at Jerusalem, to Zephaniah the son of Maaseiah the priest, and to all the priests, saying, 26 “The Lord has made you priest instead of Jehoiada the priest, so that there should be officers in the house of the Lord over every man who is demented and considers himself a prophet, that you should put him in prison and in the stocks. 27 Now therefore, why have you not rebuked Jeremiah of Anathoth who makes himself a prophet to you? 28 For he has sent to us in Babylon, saying, ‘This captivity is long; build houses and dwell in them, and plant gardens and eat their fruit.’ ” 29 Now Zephaniah the priest read this letter in the hearing of Jeremiah the prophet. 30 Then the word of the Lord came to Jeremiah, saying: 31 Send to all those in captivity, saying, Thus says the Lord concerning Shemaiah the Nehelamite: Because Shemaiah has prophesied to you, and I have not sent him, and he has caused you to trust in a lie—32 therefore thus says the Lord: Behold, I will punish Shemaiah the Nehelamite and his family: he shall not have anyone to dwell among this people, nor shall he see the good that I will do for My people, says the Lord, because he has taught rebellion against the Lord. So here, we have a case of a Jeremiah cursing a false prophet and his whole family for causing the people to trust in a lie, also teaching them to rebel against the Word of the LORD, which alone can be trusted. But we also have a case when the Apostle Paul cursed a false prophet for distorting the ways of the Lord. Acts 13:4–12 (NKJV) 4 So, being sent out by the Holy Spirit, they went down to Seleucia, and from there they sailed to Cyprus. 5 And when they arrived in Salamis, they preached the word of God in the synagogues of the Jews. They also had John as their assistant. 6 Now when they had gone through the island to Paphos, they found a certain sorcerer, a false prophet, a Jew whose name was Bar-Jesus, 7 who was with the proconsul, Sergius Paulus, an intelligent man. This man called for Barnabas and Saul and sought to hear the word of God. 8 But Elymas the sorcerer (for so his name is translated) withstood them, seeking to turn the proconsul away from the faith. 9 Then Saul, who also is called Paul, filled with the Holy Spirit, looked intently at him 10 and said, “O full of all deceit and all fraud, you son of the devil, you enemy of all righteousness, will you not cease perverting the straight ways of the Lord? 11 And now, indeed, the hand of the Lord is upon you, and you shall be blind, not seeing the sun for a time.” And immediately a dark mist fell on him, and he went around seeking someone to lead him by the hand. 12 Then the proconsul believed, when he saw what had been done, being astonished at the teaching of the Lord. So here, we have a case where a cursing upon one individual was for the blessing of another individual by the will of God. For this cursing was for the greater blessing of the Word being established in this local magistrate, who would be a key individual for doing a greater good and become a blessing for the whole of the community. So the Word of the Lord is a blessing in and of itself, but those who resist and work against it receive its curse; because now that Christ has fulfilled the whole of the Law, only the promises are the yes in Him (2Cor.1:20), but the curses remain on those who reject His Word. Deuteronomy 11:26–28 (NKJV) 26 “Behold, I set before you today a blessing and a curse: 27 the blessing, if you obey the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you today; 28 and the curse, if you do not obey the commandments of the Lord your God, but turn aside from the way which I command you today, to go after other gods which you have not known. Deuteronomy 30:19 (NKJV) 19 I call heaven and earth as witnesses today against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing; therefore choose life, that both you and your descendants may live; Joshua 8:34 (NKJV) 34 And afterward he read all the words of the law, the blessings and the cursings, according to all that is written in the Book of the Law. So to conclude our answer to this question, we must submit to the whole counsel of God, and hear both the blessings and the cursings of this Word. If we reject the Christ of His Word, we take on the judgement of His curse. Galatians 3:10–14 (NKJV) 10 For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse; for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who does not continue in all things which are written in the book of the law, to do them.” 11 But that no one is justified by the law in the sight of God is evident, for “the just shall live by faith.” 12 Yet the law is not of faith, but “the man who does them shall live by them.” 13 Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us (for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree”), 14 that the blessing of Abraham might come upon the Gentiles in Christ Jesus, that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith. John 8:24 (NKJV) 24 Therefore I said to you that you will die in your sins; for if you do not believe that I am He, you will die in your sins.” What we find here, is a double imputation of sin. First, man sins because God made him, i.e., imputed to him the nature of sin (Rom.5:19). This is what a man is -- a sinner. Adam, though created in the image and likeness of God, was also created in the nature of the flesh with the free potential to sin, but this "nature of sin" was not imputed where there was no law (Rom.5:13). It wasn't until he partook of the "forbidden" fruit of evil that this nature, which already existed in his desires (Gen.3:6), was imputed to him (as sin). For as long as the Holy Spirit was in him to do good, having been made upright (Ecc.7:29), he was justified in the sight of God. But what was the promise of the result of partaking of this fruit? It wasn't just the imputation of the sin nature, but the consummation of death. For the Lord said, "You will die die," i.e, "In dying, you will die." Therefore it's a promise of double imputation if they do not receive the Seed of the promise. Jesus merely reiterated this truth in John's Gospel. This will be helpful as we consider later in our study how the church prays for Peter's release from prison, and for justice of the unwarranted death of James. . . . from the church. The intent of this vexation was to purge these high profile leaders out of the church, so that those who remained would forever have their hopes put to death of becoming a recognized "party" among the Jews, specifically in Jerusalem. In this manner, it was in Herod's best interest to please the Jews and satisfy their demands to keep the peace and order of his growing reign and authority. So he murdered James, the brother of John, with the sword. So, in order to make an example of those who resist his authority, he murdered James, one of the original twelve of Jesus. James, along with his brother John, was named a "son of thunder" by the Lord himself. This was both an encouragement and a jest of caution, because James, along with his brother, was rebuked for attempting to call down fire from heaven, as Elijah had done. But Jesus commented that James didn't yet understand what spirit he was asking this out of, for the purpose of Christ was not to destroy life but to save it. So, even here, we have an example in James, that should examine what spirit we are of when we seek the Lord's blessing to curse an individual.

But my point here, is not to expose wrong motives of cursing in James, but rather the rashness of his cursing, for his motives were pure. Nevertheless, James was a forward and outspoken man, which is most likely why Herod did not hesitate to put him to death. There was probably no reserve to him at all when confronting the hyper-hypocrisy of the Jews, which elevated the hard-heartedness of their resistance to the Gospel. The question as to why little is said about James, being the only one of the original twelve, compared to the details of Stephen--who was only one of the appointed seven that resulted from the first outpouring of the Spirit, recorded to be put to death for the faith, is often asked. Luke has his historical and spiritual reasons for such, as we already uncovered, if you've been following along; but consider why James is even mentioned here at all. Consider his outspoken fearlessness to confront the Jews face to face for their deceit and twisted applications of the Law. Little is said of what he did, but he is chosen here to be a byword by the nation (Jer.24:9;Ezk.14:8), not only of what will happen if the church continues to openly preach the Christian message, but by God to be fearless (of man) to do so; only that the church may learn to do this with meekness and trembling (in the fear of God) (1Pet.3:15). So Luke uses James here, as both a good and bad example of the cost of open rebuke (Prov.27:5). Over exposing yourself may lead to a swift destruction (2Pet.2:1;James 3:1), as it did the brother of John. Now I'm not suggesting that James was a false prophet, but only that, at the beginning of the foundation of the church in Jerusalem, his spirit of "thunder" was merely youthful immaturity. CHAPTER IX The Martyrdom of James the Apostle 1 “10Now about that time” (it is clear that he means the time of Claudius) “Herod the King11 stretched forth his hands to vex certain of the Church. And he killed James the brother of John with the sword.” 2 And concerning this James, Clement, in the seventh book of his Hypotyposes,12 relates a story which is worthy of mention; telling it as he received it from those who had lived before him. He says that the one who led James to the judgment-seat, when he saw him bearing his testimony, was moved, and confessed that he was himself also a Christian [i.e., as James was]. 3 They were both therefore, he says, led away together; and on the way he begged James to forgive him. And he, after considering a little, said, “Peace be with thee,” and kissed him. And thus they were both beheaded at the same time. 4 And then, as the divine Scripture says,1 Herod, upon the death of James, seeing that the deed pleased the Jews, attacked Peter also and committed him to prison, and would have slain him if he had not, by the divine appearance of an angel who came to him by night, been wonderfully released from his bonds, and thus liberated for the service of the Gospel. Such was the providence of God in respect to Peter. Eusebius of Caesaria. (1890). The Church History of Eusebius. In P. Schaff & H. Wace (Eds.), A. C. McGiffert (Trans.), Eusebius: Church History, Life of Constantine the Great, and Oration in Praise of Constantine (Vol. 1, pp. 110–111). New York: Christian Literature Company. We find here an account, according to Eusebius, that a fellow Jew was led to Christ through the testimony of James, but it was on account his rashness that he was "delivered" to the authorities. But in the end, this fellow countryman appears to have found forgiveness for his betrayal, while confessing Jesus as truly God of very God in the fullness of His sovereignty. And so Luke makes this known here, as a remembrance to be watchful of the spirit of our delivery, and to seek more of the image of Christ in our secret prayers before we become rash with our words. Later we will see how the meekness of prayer can be like "warm air" to heat up the heart to the condition of sin and go before the prophet in preparation of the message, which comes "to cool" down the prideful opposition to it. And so "thunder" is not a one size fits all approach to evangelism. Sometimes a light covering of snow or rain is enough to soak into the heart the will to repent. But that is not what the doctor ordered for this particular Herod.

And perceiving that this pleased the Jews, he also continued with the arrest of Peter. Again, we are looking at the motivations of Herod's heart. We find here that it is not because he wants to rule justly but because he wants to please the Jews and tout his reign. So we see his boldness and pride increasing with each step of success in vexing the church. But Peter was of greater reluctance for him, having a large favor of the "working" converts, but because the Jews backed him, he did not withdraw from pursuing the arrest of Peter. Therefore we see Herod having a strong ambition to get this done and so receive the glory due (his) reign. But because it was the days of Unleavened Bread, he was arrested and placed in prison, betrayed into four squads of soldiers to guard him, intending after, to bring him before the people of the Passover. If I didn't know any better . . . this, almost looks like cage stage, but it's not. Nor is it a descriptive imperative to do so. But what we do have is an illustration and an example of waiting upon the Spirit to move in order to demonstrate the power of God. The following context gives us the example of what to do when your preaching pastor (prophet) is in the vulnerability of the public eye. You are to pray for him. But that is not what Luke is expecting us to expound here. We are still looking at the motivations of Herod. We understand here, that because it was the days of Unleavened Bread, Peter was given over to the prison guards until the feast days were over, in order to avoid disruption of the traditional ceremonies. And so while Herod has the favor of the Jews, he will make a spectacle of Peter before all those who traveled here to keep the Passover, making the most of the "opportunity," for he may not have this chance again. I chose to translate the Greek verb paradidomi as betrayed because Herod is acting as king of the Jews but under the responsibility to uphold the justice of the Hebrew Law. This verb can be translated three ways: to hand over; to betray; and to deliver. Herod avoids this to please those who have twisted the Law. Nothing is said as to Peter being given a trial or an opportunity to defend himself. And so Peter is reserved to be most likely be executed, as James was, before those in attendance for the Passover. But in the Providence of God this should scream out loud a demonstration of the symbol of the Gospel; to those who have ears to hear. While it's alluded to here, it's more fully realized when Peter is set free by the angel of the Lord. The very term Passover and a proper understanding of the sacrificial lamb is not only pictured in background of these days of Unleavened Bread, but is in the image of James being killed by the sword, enduring the justice of God and Peter being set free by the angel, receiving the mercy of God. Nevertheless, that's not the point. Rather, the point is that Peter is betrayed to be held under the watchful eyes of the Roman guard, stripped naked of his national rights as a Jew, waiting to be publicly raped and pierced in his heart by the accusations of the Jewish mob; a similar betrayal to that of Jesus whom Peter denied three times.

So, are we willing to pray and wait upon the sovereign Spirit of the Lord to grant us the opportunity to be set free? Or, are we going to go beyond the revelation and create our own way out of the chains that shackle us to our sin? Will we create a legalistic/moralistic approach to redeeming our sinful nature? As one prophet noted, "There is no mathematical formula to redemption." [Unless of course it's the number 6 ;-) ] "Salvation is solely of the Lord" (Jonah 2:9), said a man trapped in a giant fish. Will we betray our convictions that are born truly from the mouth of God in order to please a mob of ignorance? Shall we betray the faith that set us free to avoid such temporary afflictions? Surely, then, what follows, is an example and a pattern for us to conform our anxieties under, in the peace and sound-mindedness of the Gospel.