COMMENTARY ON MARK
LESSON NUMBER 64
“ Mark 6:17 For Herod himself had sent forth and laid hold upon John, and bound him in prison for Herodias' sake, his brother Philip's wife: for he had married her. 18 For John had said unto Herod, It is not lawful for thee to have thy brother's wife. 19 Therefore Herodias had a quarrel against him, and would have killed him; but she could not: 20 For Herod feared John, knowing that he was a just man and an holy, and observed him; and when he heard him, he did many things, and heard him gladly.”
(Mark 6:17-20; 1:14; Matthew 14:3-5; Luke 3:19-20)
WHEN HEROD ARRESTED JOHN
INTRODUCTION
There are key figures in human history – men who played a key role in “the record God has given of His Son” (1 John 5:10). Our text mentions two of them – John the Baptist, cousin, friend, and forerunner of Jesus, and Herod, worldly king, fickle foe, and enemy of Jesus. According to appearance, Herod was the more prominent of the two, being “king,” and seemingly able to do his own will among the people. John the Baptist appeared to be the weaker. Jesus said of him, “they did to him whatever they wished” NKJV (Mk 9:13). Yet, according to heaven, John the Baptist was the most prominent, with a greater person not having existed before him (Matt 11:11). From heaven’s vantage point, worldly prominence is brief and of no real significance. Those who seek after the world’s approval are foolish indeed, for the world and its desires are going to pass away (1 John 2:17). In this section we will see how absolutely unwise it is to seek the approbation of men. Here, in Herod, we have a sterling example of the flesh and how it reacts in the realm of religion. It is inquisitive yet calloused, seeming interested, yet quite willing to oppose those who declare the truth of God.
HEROD UNJUSTLY IMPRISON’S JOHN
“ Mk 6:17 For Herod himself had sent forth and laid hold upon John, and bound him in prison for Herodias' sake, his brother Philip's wife: for he had married her. 18 For John had said unto Herod, It is not lawful for thee to have thy brother's wife.”
HEROD HIMSELF. The deed that will now be discussed was one willingly committed. This was not something that merely occurred during Herod’s reign – it is something that “Herod himself” did. He is the one who commissioned this, and it is credited to him.
We have here a example of “the books” in which the deeds of men are recorded (Dan 7:10; Rev 20:12). Just as surely as this deed of Herod was recorded, so the deeds of men have been written in the heavenly records. Just as surely as Herod’s deed was made known, so will the deeds of men be chronicled to an assembled universe. The only hope of any person is to have an offsetting entry of repentance and faith in Christ.
JOHN BOUND AND PUT IN PRISON. This took place early in Christ’s ministry, not long after his baptism. Note that Herod not only put John in prison, but bound him there also. It is written, “Now when Jesus had heard that John was cast into prison, He departed into Galilee” (Matt 4:12). Matthew says that Jesus began his ministry after this (Matt 4:12-15). John points out there was a slight overlap in the ministries of John and Jesus: “After these things came Jesus and his disciples into the land of Judaea; and there he tarried with them, and baptized. And John also was baptizing in Aenon near to Salim, because there was much water there: and they came, and were baptized. For John was not yet cast into prison” (John 3:22-24). About 1½ years after Jesus began His ministry it is written, “Now when John had heard in the prison the works of Christ, he sent two of his disciples” (Matt 11:2). This imprisonment, then, was a key point in Scripture. It is the point at which John began to “decrease,” and Jesus began to “increase” (John 3:30). This is certainly not the way men would have made the transition from John the harbinger, or forerunner, to Jesus the Savior.
HERODIAS. “Herodias” is mentioned six times in Scripture (Matt 14:3,6; Mk 6:17,19,22; Lk 3:19). All of them have to do with the incident that is here described. This is all that we know of this woman. She is the opposite of holy women like Elizabeth, Anna, Dorcas, and Phebe – about whom very little is known. Notwithstanding the small amount of information known about Herodias and those holy women, the Spirit delivered to us the kernel of who they were. The Lord left Herodias’ record with not doubt that she was a wicked woman.
THE MORAL TRANSGRESSION OF HEROD. Herod has married his brother’s wife. Even when Herodias was married to Herod, Matthew refers to her as “his brother Philip’s wife” (Matt 14:3). Luke also refers to her in exactly the same way (Lk 3:19). History tells us that Herodias was the daughter of one of the sons of Herod the great, Herod’s father. Philip was also one of the son’s of Herod the Great, as well as the Herod of our text. The whole matter is fraught with transgression and sensuality, and is very grievous. The Law forbade a brother to lie with his brother’s wife (Lev 18:16), or take her as his wife (Lev 20:21). It did permit someone to marry their brother’s wife until he had died (Deut 25:5). At this point, Philip was still alive, and Herod had taken his wife Herodias unto himself, to be his own wife.
JOHN’S WORD AGAINST HIM. Herod was not a Jew, and was not in covenant with God. Yet, he was not above the Law of God, and John knew it. John had said to Herod himself, “It is not lawful for thee to have thy brother’s wife.” Matthew reads, “It is not lawful for thee to have her” (Matt 14:4). Luke says of John the Baptist that Herod was “reproved by him” (Lk 3:19). He goes on to say that this was not the only matter concerning which John reproved Herod: “AND for all the evils which Herod had done” (Lk 3:19). Luke also adds that the imprisonment of John was an additional “evil” charged to Herod’s account: “Added yet this above all, that he shut up John in prison” (Luke 3:20).
Although John’s primary ministry was to “prepare the way of the Lord,” readying the people to recognize and receive Him (Mk 1:3), he was a general herald of righteousness as well. No true servant of God can blithely, or casually, disregard iniquity. In a day when transgression is easily tolerated in the church itself, John the Baptist, “filled with the Holy Spirit even from birth” NIV (Lk 1:15), stands in stark contrast to the insipid preachers who now dominate the religious scene. He was surely a thorn in the side of public sinners – even a government official. You may remember that he once said to a “multitude that came forth to be baptized of him, ‘O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come? Bring forth fruits worthy of repentance” (Lk 3:7-8). Matthew says this multitude was “many of the Pharisees and Sadducees” (Matt 3:7). It is challenging to ponder how John would preach in our time.
One of the evidences of a falling away is when professed “Christians” become tolerant of and indifferent about iniquity. As David well said, “Ye that love the Lord, hate evil” (Psa 97:10). One of the marks of a wicked person is this: “he abhorreth not evil”(Psa 36:4). Those in Christ are exhorted, “Abhor that which is evil”(Rom 12:12:9). John the Baptist was such a person.
HERODIAS CANNOT DO WHAT SHE DESIRES
“ 19 Therefore Herodias had a quarrel against him, and would have killed him; but she could not.”
It is interesting that Herod was not the one that was upset with John, but his wife Herodias. Herod laid hold of John, bound him, and threw him into prison, “for Herodias’ sake, his brother Philips’s wife” (Matt 14:3). It is also arresting to consider that even though Herod “had married” Herodias, the Spirit refers to her as “Philip’s wife.” In the eyes of the Lord, this was not a legal marriage, even though it was honored by men. Jesus did allow for divorce under certain conditions – namely that of fornication (Matt 5:32). Paul also adds that a believer is not under “bondage” to remain married to an unbeliever if they are not willing to dwell peaceably with them (1 Cor 7:15). Even then, however, Paul presented the possibility that the believer might “save” the unbeliever (1 Cor 7:16). It is the business of the body of Christ to be informed in this area, and to conduct themselves in a God-glorifying manner. Today, we are told, there are actually more divorces among professing Christians than among unbelievers.
I understand that this is a very sensitive subject, and that professing believers are by no means agreed concerning it. However, we do well to adopt the kind of spirit made known in John the Baptist. Immorality is not to be tolerated as though it did not even exist.
A QUARREL AGAINST JOHN. Herodias did not have a “grudge” NASB against John because multitudes of people went out to hear him (Matt 3:5). It was not because John called men to repentance, announcing that the kingdom of heaven was at hand (Matt 3:2), or because he baptized Jesus (Mk 1:9). Her objection was to John’s rebuke of Herod – a stinging rebuke, indeed, because he said it was not lawful, or right, for him to be married to her. Her marriage to Herod was unlawful in the eyes of God. Rather than repenting, Herodias “set herself against” ASV John, and was “bitter” BBE toward him.
Accenting the word “against,” some versions read that she “laid wait against him,” GENEVA and “laid snares” DOUAY for him. Other versions point out how her hatred of John festered in her wicked heart: “Herodias nursed a grudge against John.” NIB
Like wayward Israel, Herodias “refused to return” from her waywardness (Hos 11:5), and “hardened” her “neck, and would not hear” (Neh 9:29). That is the manner of “the flesh.” It “refuseth reproof” (Prov 10:17) and “instruction” (Prov 13:18), and will not give heed to the word of the Lord. She viewed what was “not lawful” as being right, and was thus classed among those who “call evil good, and good evil” (Isa 5:20).
It is the nature of flesh to oppose those who expose it – whether it is political flesh or religious flesh. It is well said of the “carnal mind” that it “is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be” (Rom 8:7). Whether it is childish flesh, nonreligious flesh, or religious flesh, “the carnal mind” always sides against God and for self.
SHE WOULD HAVE KILLED HIM. How far will “the flesh” or “the carnal mind” go in its opposition to the truth? The “flesh” is like a “bottomless pit,” the depth of which is beyond all imagination. In the case of Herodias, she “wanted to put him to death.” NASB
Herodias was to Herod what Jezebel was to Ahab. When that wicked queen heard what Elijah had done to the prophets of Baal, she sent a messenger to him who said, “So let the gods do to me, and more also, if I make not thy life as the life of one of them by tomorrow about this time” (1 Kgs 19:2). The flesh does not hesitate to express itself vehemently.
Taking the life of the righteous is not a strange reaction. Cain, who was a child of the devil (1 John 3:12), carried out his despotic desire, killing righteous Abel (Gen 4:8). The “chief priests and scribes sought how they might kill” Jesus (Lk 22:2). Some Jews who heard “Peter and the other apostles,” were “cut to the heart, and took counsel to slay them” (Acts 5:33). When Saul of Tarsus was converted and “spake boldly in the name of the Lord Jesus,” the Jews “went about to slay him” (Acts 9:29).
All of this confirms that the truth has an abrasive effect upon the carnal mind. It so agitates the flesh that it will go to virtually any length to quiet the voice of the person of God. Today, in our country, “the flesh” has come up with some more sophisticated ways of opposing those who speak in the name of the Lord. Character assassination or turning the deaf ear to the man of God is common. Yet, all such reactions are regarded in heaven to be in the same category as Herodias, who looked for an opportunity to kill John the Baptist.
BUT SHE COULD NOT. Other versions read, “She was not able to do so,” NIV “she was powerless,” NLT and “But she could not have it to be done.” WILLIAMS Herodias could very well have sought to kill John the Baptist for over a year – from the time of his word to Herod until he was finally beheaded. Her will, however, was subverted, or sabotaged, by the God of heaven until John had completed his course. There is a sense in which godly mortals are immortal until their work is done. Thus John remained like a thorn in Herodias’ side, and there was not a thing she could do about it. “The heaven s DO rule” (Dan 4:26).
THE SENTENCE OF DEATH DELAYED
“ 20 For Herod feared John, knowing that he was a just man and an holy, and observed him; and when he heard him, he did many things, and heard him gladly.”
HEROD FEARED JOHN. It may not have appeared this way outwardly, but “Herod was afraid of John.” NASB Other versions read he “was in awe of John,” NJB “respected John,” NLT and “had a reverential fear of John.” AMPLIFIED Although wicked men are not forward to acknowledge it, there is something about a righteous person that is intimidating to the flesh. It is a portion of the Divine nature that is shining forth through the godly to the ungodly. This kind of fear is not sufficient to turn a person to the Lord, and is finally overcome by unbelief. It is the kind of fear that made some people afraid to join with the disciples after Ananias and Sapphira had been killed by the Lord (Acts 5:13). This kind of fear is all but absent in our time because of the gross carnality that is found among professing believers.
HE WAS JUST AND HOLY. Here the Spirit informs us of the qualities that moved Herod to be afraid of John: “he was a righteous and holy man.” NIV “Just,” or “righteous,” refers to the conduct of John – to how he appeared before men. There was nothing about his conduct that moved people to connect him with “this present evil world.” “Holy” emphasizes separation from the world and unto God. Not only was it obvious that John did not belong to this world, it was also conspicuous that he belonged to God Almighty. He was not merely a person who conducted his life in an unconventional manner – like a hermit, or weird recluse. His words and his manners spoke loudly of his devotion to the Lord.
Matthew tells us a little more of Herod’s response to John. “And when he would have put him to death, he feared the multitude, because they counted him as a prophet” (Matt 14:5). Thus, when Herod would have carried out the desires of wicked Herodias, he could not do so because he was afraid of the retaliation of the people. They considered John to be a “prophet,” sent forth from God. The same thing was said of those who sought to kill Jesus. “And the scribes and chief priests heard it, and sought how they might destroy Him: for they feared Him, because all the people was astonished at His doctrine” (Mark 11:18). And again, “And He taught daily in the temple. But the chief priests and the scribes and the chief of the people sought to destroy Him, and could not find what they might do: for all the people were very attentive to hear Him” (Luke 19:47-48).
An Observation. If all who were professing “Christians” were actually convinced of the truth of God, and of the need for His messengers, it would be far more difficult to oppose the truth, or pass laws that inhibit the expression of that truth.
HE OBSERVED HIM. Here, “observe” does not mean “looked at him.” It rather means he kept John in a state where he could be observed – that is, he did not kill him. Therefore, other versions read, “protected him,” NKJV “kept him safe,” NASB and “kept him in custody.” NAB In other words, until John finished his course, the Lord used Herod to protect him from Herodias.
WHEN HE HEARD HIM. Apparently, while John was imprisoned, Herod took the opportunity to hear him. When he heard him, “he did many things” – that is, did many strange and inconsistent things. Other versions read that when he heard John he was “very perplexed,” NASB “greatly puzzled,” NIV “much troubled,” BBE “disturbed,” NLT and “was in doubt.” IE The idea here is that Herod could never settle in on John’s words. He was pulled between good and evil, never quite able to embrace the truth, but never able to push it from himself either. Of course, the consequences of such a reaction are just as condemning as outright unbelief and rejection. This is the condition to which Elijah referred when he said to the people, “How long halt ye between two opinions”(1 Kgs 18:21)? Joel referred to it as being “in the valley of decision” (Joel 3:14). It is a condition in which one waffles back and forth between interest and disinterest.
AND HEARD HIM GLADLY. Notwithstanding his perplexity and lack of decision when he listened to John, there was something about the man of God that was intriguing to Herod – “he used to enjoy listening to him.” NASB and “found a pleasure in listening to him.” WEYMOUTH To Herod, there was a kind of fascination about John and his words. In a sense, Herod was like Agrippa, another member of the Herodian family, who was “almost persuaded” (Acts 26:28). To Herod, John the Baptist was something of a refreshing novelty – like a lion-tamer in a circus. He liked to hear him – but not good enough to abandon his sin and call upon the name of the Lord. He was willing to hear John, but not willing to repent.
How often I have seen this kind of person – one who likes to hear what is said in the name of Jesus, but only from a novel point of view. There is something different about the Gospel that tugs at the human spirit – the idea of repentance that leads to remission, and of separating from the world and a consequent reception by the Lord. In a sense, it is challenging to hear a message that speaks of throwing inferior things away in order to appropriate superior things. But, alas, it takes faith to actually discard the cursed and embrace the blessed – to cease to linger between two opposing opinions, or remain sitting in the valley of decision. Herod has a staggering number of offspring who remain until this very hour!