Sermon and Worship Resources

Mark 6:14-29 · John the Baptist Beheaded

14 King Herod heard about this, for Jesus' name had become well known. Some were saying, "John the Baptist has been raised from the dead, and that is why miraculous powers are at work in him."

15 Others said, "He is Elijah." And still others claimed, "He is a prophet, like one of the prophets of long ago."

16 But when Herod heard this, he said, "John, the man I beheaded, has been raised from the dead!"

17 For Herod himself had given orders to have John arrested, and he had him bound and put in prison. He did this because of Herodias, his brother Philip's wife, whom he had married. 18 For John had been saying to Herod, "It is not lawful for you to have your brother's wife." 19 So Herodias nursed a grudge against John and wanted to kill him. But she was not able to, 20 because Herod feared John and protected him, knowing him to be a righteous and holy man. When Herod heard John, he was greatly puzzled; yet he liked to listen to him.

21 Finally the opportune time came. On his birthday Herod gave a banquet for his high officials and military commanders and the leading men of Galilee. 22 When the daughter of Herodias came in and danced, she pleased Herod and his dinner guests. 23 The king said to the girl, "Ask me for anything you want, and I'll give it to you." And he promised her with an oath, "Whatever you ask I will give you, up to half my kingdom."

24 She went out and said to her mother, "What shall I ask for?" "The head of John the Baptist," she answered.

25 At once the girl hurried in to the king with the request: "I want you to give me right now the head of John the Baptist on a platter."

26 The king was greatly distressed, but because of his oaths and his dinner guests, he did not want to refuse her. 27 So he immediately sent an executioner with orders to bring John's head. The man went, beheaded John in the prison, 28 and brought back his head on a platter. He presented it to the girl, and she gave it to her mother. 29 On hearing of this, John's disciples came and took his body and laid it in a tomb.

When Others Serve Your Head on a Platter

Mark 6:14-29

Sermon
by Leonard Sweet

This summer saw the “resurrection” of an old tale of family rivalry and betrayal. The show that started an industry of prime time “soap operas” is back on the air. Do you know show I’m talking about? . . . . Dallas.

The ever-evil “J.R.” Ewing and all his battling, back-biting, embittered family have returned, with new generations, all of whom are admirably carrying on the family tradition of unabated greed and hatred. Added to yet another season of “Kardashians” and the History channel’s presentation of “The Hatfields and the McCoys,” “family life” is looking pretty grim. That is not even to mention the recent scientific study that put a question mark over the value of nightly meals together as a family. It found that eating together on a regular basis could be bad, not good for teenagers, if the family is dysfunctional. The family routine of eating together is very good for you if the family dynamics are good, very bad for you if the family dynamics are dysfunctional.

But all air-wave examples of families operating at “dysfunction junction” cannot hold a candle to the massive relational meltdown that was taken as “normal” within the first century ruling family of the Herodians. The family tree that sprung from Herod the Great was most frequently “pruned” by fortuitous “accidents” and by flat-out murders. Every famous story of betrayal — from Brutus and the Borgias to the Corlions and the Sopranos were still trying to keep up with the Herodians.

Being brutal and blood-thirsty appears to be a trait that surfaced early and often among Herod’s offspring. In today’s gospel text the one named Salome by historian Josephus, the teen-aged daughter of Herodias, creatively expands on her mother’s demand for “the head of John the baptizer” by insisting that she be brought John’s “head on a platter.” Over two thousand years later it is the teenage Salome’s twisted take on her mother’s well-plotted revenge that survives as the ultimate cultural expression of betrayal and rejection.

We all know, and we will all at sometime experience, the horror of having one’s head served up on a platter. And, as it was for John the Baptist, this service might very well come at the hands of a supposed “fan.”

There is a surprising detail in this story that is easily overlooked. Mark tells us that Herod Antipas was a conflicted, partially convicted, “fan” of John the Baptist. The greatest part of Herod was self-absorbed, self-obsessed, and self-concerned. Yet John the Baptist’s courageous message of repentance and forgiveness fascinated the ruthless ruler. Jewish by birth, the Herodian dynasty ruled according to the whims of Rome and flagrantly disregarded Torah mandates that interfered with their political ambitions. Still Herod Antipas could hear the ring of truth and the clarity of John’s call to repentance in the Baptist’s words. John the Baptist’s words flew in the face of Herod’s absolute royal authority. But they also stuck fast to his heart. Herod arrested and imprisoned John. But then he himself became a “captive audience,” listening to and learning from John’s message.

In the end, however, the Herodian side of Antipas won out. Unwilling to “lose face” in front of a banquet room full of upper crust cronies, Herod orders John the Baptist’s execution and indulges Herodias’ daughter’s whim that has his severed head displayed like some zombie-fest tidbit. Herod Antipas hates doing this to John. But not as much as he hates endangering his own position of power and prestige by not honoring his foolish oath to a teenaged dancer.

Mark’s text doesn’t discuss the relationship between Herod Antipas and John the Baptist. John was a prisoner, but apparently Herod was his audience on a semi-regular basis. Herod “liked to listen to him.” Yet it was his royal edict that silenced John’s voice forever. Despite John’s precarious position, despite his obvious knowledge of Herod’s violent family history and personal guilty, John the Baptist never wavered in his message. Herod was in the wrong. He was breaking God’s law. God demanded repentance and reform, even of Herod..

Tough talk, especially when spoken from the wrong side of a jail cell.

John was brazenly calling Herod on the carpet, specifically spelling out his sins. It left Herod both mesmerized and murderous. Living behind bars John had to know that his words were a recipe for disaster, although hopefully he never fully envisioned his “head on a platter” as a final course presentation. John the Baptist never stopped preaching his message because he fully embodied his calling — to proclaim a baptism of repentance and to offer the possibility of forgiveness, even if he knew that mission put his life in danger.

The world is still a place of personal politics and one-ups-man-ship. Whether you are clinging to a construction ladder or a corporate ladder, the climb is treacherous and the fall is can be fatal. Every since the first “fall,” the faithfulness of all our footing has been exceptionally fragile.

Here is the reality we all live with. Are you ready to hear it? Brace yourself: At some time in our lives we should not be surprised to find our heads served up on a platter.

Yes, you heard me right. If it hasn’t been, it will be: your head served on a platter. Betrayed, rejected, and punished for behaving in a way that threatens those who have, and want to hold onto, personal power.

Maybe you had your head handed to you as a child, when you tried to protect a sibling from harm. Maybe you had your head handed to you as a teenager, when you dared to defy an adult who bullied or abused you. Maybe you had your head handed to you as an adult, because you had the least influence or you were lowest in a pecking order. Maybe your head hit the platter as a sacrifice for some supposed “greater good,” even though decapitation had no possible positives for you.

But even as we all get to feel that bite of steel on our necks — to experience the bitterness of betrayal at the hands of those who claimed to know and admire us the most it is also true that we all wield our own blade against those we call friends and family. We will all face betrayal at some point in our lives. Tell me your twelve closest friends, and I’ll guarantee you that one of them will betray you. You think you’re better than Jesus.

But the even harsher truth is this: we will not all be betrayed; we will all act as betrayers at some point in our lives. We have both John the Baptist and Judas Iscariot running through our veins.

Think you are not a member of the “platter party”? The truth is there are hundreds of ways to chip away at the necks of those we live and work with.

1) When you hear a friend being attacked — their work, their reputation, their person, and you don’t come to their defense — that’s a hack to the neck.

2) When you fail to give credit to one you knows deserves it — that’s a hack to the neck.

3) When you take credit for something that rightfully or more fully belongs t someone else that’s a hack to the neck.

4) When you block out the advice of others because it threatens your personal advancement — that’s a hack to the neck.

5) When fiscal concerns overwhelm faithful connections — when you choose promotions over relationships that’s a hack to the neck.

6) When doing what is safe and sanctioned replaces doing what is right and just that’s a hack to the neck.

7) When forging forward required running roughshod over the small and the weak — that’s a hack to the neck.

Sadly, putting heads on the chopping block is part of the sinful condition of humanity. Whether we are vegetarians or carnivores, vegans or gluten-free, omnivores or “locavores” — we are all serving up heads on platters at almost every meal we take. It takes a change in spirit, not a change in diet, to alter our most vicious (and environmentally unfriendly) dining habit.

At our meal tables we are increasingly more concerned with what we are putting into our mouths than what is coming out of them. But as aerospace engineer Mark Lake astutely observes, our fixation is one sided. Maybe what goes in should be less processed, and what comes out should be more processed? That way we’d betray less, and bless more?

Before we let this story go, for now, I want you to consider one more aspect to the story. Think of how Jesus must have felt when he heard what happened to John? In almost every way, as we saw in the exegesis, this story is a prelude story and mirror account of Jesus’ own head being served up on a platter by one close to him. How did Jesus deal with this sneak peek into his own future? Well, we know how we felt about Herod: “That fox!” When Jesus called Herod that name (Luke 12:32), he wasn’t calling Herod beautiful (“foxy”) or cunning (“like a fox”). In Hebrew culture a vulpine was an unclean animal because it was seen as shifty, self-serving, and unscrupulous. For Jesus Herod was all that and more.

And yet Jesus did not let other people’s treatment of him dictate his treatment of them. He showed compassion, even to his enemies, even to those who would betray him. In the 1970s, anthropologist Margaret Mead was on the Board of Trustees of Colgate Rochester/Bexley Hall, Crozer Divinity School, the seminary where Martin Luther graduated. One day a seminary student asked her what was the earliest sign of civilization in a given culture. She expected the answer to be a clay pot or perhaps a fish hook or grinding stone.

Mead’s answer stunned: "A healed femur."

Mead explained that no mended bones are found where the law of the jungle, the survival of the fittest, reigns supreme. A healed femur shows that someone cared. Someone had to do that injured person's hunting and gathering until the leg healed.

The evidence of compassion is the first sign of civilization. And Jesus’ whole ministry, and his treatment of everyone he met, was marked by compassion. Even to his betrayers.

The Gospels inform us, over and over again, that Jesus Christ was a human being filled with compassion. What is more, he was compassionate even towards those who would wound him, criticize him, and betray him.

Even though Jesus saw his future of betrayal and death played out in front of his eyes in John the Baptist’s head-on-the-platter, Jesus kept on keeping on. It didn’t deter him from his mission. It didn’t keep him from loving those who would betray him. It didn’t diminish his compassion one iota.

And neither should it us. Even though other people will hack away at you, every day and every way, we keep our eyes fixed on Jesus, “the author and finisher of our faith, who for the joy set before him endured the cross, scorning its shame, and sat down at the right hand of the throne of God” (Hebrews 12:2).

_______________________________
COMMENTARY

This week’s gospel text is unusual in part because it is a lengthy section in which Jesus is neither speaking nor acting. While the focus of this text is on the dramatic story of John the Baptist’s death, Mark manages to remind his readers of Jesus’ own experience. While the awful end that awaits John is one of the most compelling stories in scripture, it also points readers toward the greatest story ever told the story of God’s ultimate saving work through Jesus Christ.

What we do hear about in this unit is the twisted and nefarious nature of family life within the Herodians. Keeping track of the gnarled and nasty family tree that sprung forth from Herod the Great is about as confusing as a family reunion of the child of retired boxer/grillmaster George Foreman, who named all five of his sons “George.” Likewise the name “Herod” is ubiquitous among the many offspring with many different wives that followed Herod the Great into the “family business” of corrupt and conniving ruling. The “Herod” Mark refers to in today’s text is Herod Antipas, who ruled as tetrarch of Galilee and Perea from 4 BCE to 39 CE.

Jesus’ hometown may have rejected him, but throughout the rest of Galilee his works were garnering attention and making him a “name” (that’s the first century equivalent of “celebrity”). Enough recognition, in fact, to bring Jesus to Herod’s attention. The musings over Jesus’ identity, over the reason for the power and authority he wielded, offered three different theories: 1) first, he was a resurrected John the Baptist; 2) second, he was the long-awaited return of Elijah; or 3) third, he was one of God’s other “prophets of old.”

The conjecture by some and conviction of Herod that Jesus is John revived from the dead reminds us how unknown Jesus had been until this recent spate of miracles and missions (4:35-5:43). Anyone who knew that Jesus had been baptized by John would know they were contemporaries, not successors. But as Mark now reveals by inserting another story into the midst of these musings, Herod has a specific reason for seeing John the Baptist alive again in Jesus. An unusual fit of apparent guilt and remorse convinces Herod Antipas that “John whom I beheaded, has been raised” (v.16).

The whole story of John the Baptist’s arrest and ultimate fate is now told. John’s arrest, merely mentioned in 1:14, was ordered by Herod for both personal and political reasons. Herod Antipas had convinced his half-brother’s wife, Herodias, to divorce Herod Philip and to marry him. Antipas himself had to first divorce his own wife, who was a daughter of King Aretas of Nabatea, a move that ultimately led to war between the two rulers in 39 CE. Typical of the Herodian family tree, Herodias was not only Herod Antipas’ brother’s wife, she was also his niece. Despite Herod Antipas’ well-established reputation for eliminating rivals through murder, John the Baptist publically reprimanded the ruler for breaking Torah law by marrying his brother’s wife (Leviticus 18:16, 20-21). Not only was John’s message a judgment against Herod’s personal life, his repeated reminding of the people that their ruler was in violation of God’s law may have incited local rebellion (a point made explicit in Josephus’ telling of John the Baptist’s fate — Ant. 18:116-119)

Little wonder Herodias “had a grudge” (“eneichen”), or more literally, “had it in for” John the Baptist. Mark’s depiction of Herodias’ death-wish for John would certainly remind his readers of Jezebel’s murderous malice against Elijah (1 kings 19:1-3). While Herodias’ reaction is hardly surprising, Herod Antipas’ own response is strangely ambiguous. Once Herod has John arrested and so safely under wraps, he refuses to kill him. Instead of feeling free of John the Baptist, he is fearful of him. He knows John is a “just and holy man.” The same personal magnetism and powerful message of John the Baptist that had drawn great crowds out to him in the wilderness attracts Herod as well. The conniving and cruel ruler is both convicted and confused by John’s preaching. The text itself is a bit confused here as well, although in vs. 20 “perplexed” is the most accepted description of Herod’s reaction. The translation that “he heard the many things he was doing” is simply awful.

If Herod is conflicted throughout this tale, Herodias is focused and fixated on her virulent vendetta. An opportunity at last comes in the form of a birthday bash. Ironically the Greek term for “birthday” (“genesia”) was used to describe both an actual birthday and for a memorial of a birthday of one who was deceased. The events that now transpire will make both meanings of the term applicable. The assemblage at this event was strictly upper crust. Only those with either political, military, or community power and prestige were invited. Even the entertainment is provided by royalty, for it is Herodias’ daughter who dances for them.

The text of v.22 is rendered as “his daughter Herodias” in some manuscripts. In others the text reads “Herodias’ daughter,” which of course best fits with the rest of the story. Josephus’ account of this story names the young woman as “Salome.” Although Mark’s version does not explicitly state this was part of a plot hatched by Herodias, the inference of her influence is heavily suggested. Later artists’ renditions of this scene paint the daughter’s dancing as sensuous and seductive, but Mark’s text does not offer any comment on the content of her dance, noting only the remarkable response her performance elicited from Herod.

With effusive enthusiasm Herod promises to give the young girl anything she wants, “even half of my kingdom.” Herod’s pledge recalls that of Ahasuerus to Esther (Esther 5:3,6). Although his promise of property was mere braggadocios posing (since he “ruled” only at the pleasure of the true land-owner, Rome), his solemnly declared oath to the young girl would be seen as binding.

Herodias’ influence over this whole scene is once again inferred by the daughter’s immediate rush to her to find out what she should request. Herodias states succinctly what she wants: “the head of John the baptizer.” The dancing daughter outdoes her mother with a flair for the theatrical. With a kind of teenage slasher-movie delight in the gruesome and grisly, the young girl demands John’s head be brought to her “on a platter.”

Herod’s response is to be “deeply grieved” (“perilypos”). This term is used only one other time by Mark, when it is used to describe Jesus’ own spiritual state as he prayed in the Garden of Gethsemane (14:34). It is truly a wrenching sorrow, a personal agony, which Herod experiences. Yet the weight of Herod’s social status among the elites gathered as witnesses, and the self-importance of his royal oath, are heavier than his heart. Despite all of Herodias’ plots and ploys, it is Herod himself who ultimately gives the order for John’s beheading. The parallel to Pilate’s bowing to the shouts of the crowd to crucify Jesus is evident. Likewise, not unlike crucifixion, beheading was a form of execution designed to dishonor and belittle the reputation of the one being executed. Finally, even as Jesus’ body was claimed by Joseph of Arimethea, John’s disciples claim his corpse and “lay it in a tomb.”

ChristianGlobe Networks, Inc., Leonard Sweet Commentary, by Leonard Sweet

Overview and Insights · The Martyrdom of John the Baptizer (6:14–29)

Overview · Righteous people are sometimes persecuted by the powerful people of this world. Such was the case when wicked Herod Antipas executed John the Baptizer. What happened to John will soon happen to Jesus and could also happen to Jesus’s followers. Mark undoubtedly feels an urgent need to remind his Roman audience of these sober realities. When Herod hears about the successful mission of Jesus and the Twelve (6:14), his guilt-ridden conscience concludes that Jesus is actually John who has come back from the dead to haunt him (6:16). Here Mark provides a flashback of the grisly banquet scene where Herod is pressured into beheading John (6:17–29).

Insight: John the Baptist · According to Luke 3:1-2, John began his ministry around AD 28. His nickname, "The Baptizer," must have stuck ear…

The Baker Bible Handbook by , Baker Publishing Group, 2016

Mark 6:14-29 · John the Baptist Beheaded

14 King Herod heard about this, for Jesus' name had become well known. Some were saying, "John the Baptist has been raised from the dead, and that is why miraculous powers are at work in him."

15 Others said, "He is Elijah." And still others claimed, "He is a prophet, like one of the prophets of long ago."

16 But when Herod heard this, he said, "John, the man I beheaded, has been raised from the dead!"

24 She went out and said to her mother, "What shall I ask for?" "The head of John the Baptist," she answered.

25 At once the girl hurried in to the king with the request: "I want you to give me right now the head of John the Baptist on a platter."

Commentary · John the Baptist Beheaded

Before Mark reports the return of the Twelve in verse 30, he inserts the account of the martyrdom of John the Baptizer. There are only two stories in the Gospel of Mark that are neither from nor about Jesus. Both, however, are about John, and both foreshadow Jesus. The first, in 1:2–8, foreshadows Jesus’s ministry, and the second, here in 6:14–29, foreshadows his death. Mark reported John’s imprisonment in 1:14, and now in a flashback he recounts his death. Jesus’s fame reaches King Herod, who fears that he is a reincarnation of John the Baptizer, whom he beheaded (6:14–16). “King Herod” was Herod Antipas, the son of Herod the Great, ruler of Galilee and Perea from 4 BC until AD 39. Herodias, the wife of Antipas’s half brother Herod Philip (not the tetrarch Philip of Luke 3:1), was actually the granddaughter of Herod the Great and thus a niece of Antipas. The opinion of Antipas that Jesus is Elijah or the Baptizer returned to life or one of the ancient prophets (6:15) is widespread and is later voiced by Jesus’s own disciples (8:28). Josephus, who also recounts the death of the Baptizer at the hands of Antipas (Jewish Antiquities 18.116–19), also attributes John’s arrest to Antipas’s fears of John’s influence on the people, though Mark includes the additional reason of John’s denunciation of the treacherous marriage between Antipas and Herodias (6:18).

A tentative ruler whose actions were determined by the influences of others, Herod Antipas cannot risk allowing John to remain at large, nor can he bring himself to eliminate him. Herodias, cunning and calculating, emerges as the prime mover in the story by exploiting Antipas’s impotence and by sacrificing the honor of her daughter in order to eliminate the Baptizer. The daughter, whom Josephus identifies as Salome, inflames the celebrities, officials, and leaders of Galilee with an explicit dance at Antipas’s birthday banquet. Desiring to impress his glittering guests, Antipas promises the girl “up to half my kingdom” (6:23) for her performance—a promise that Rome would not possibly allow. At the order of Herodias, the girl requests the head of John. Mark does not record whether John is executed at Antipas’s palace at Machaerus, east of the Dead Sea (as reported by Josephus), or in Sepphoris, the capital of Galilee. John—who is not granted a word in the story—meets his end by a cold sword wielded by petty functionaries at the command of a treacherous ruler who seeks to please the crowd. By appending the return of the Twelve to the death of John in 6:30, Mark signals that, in following Jesus, one must reckon with the fate of John, as Jesus will teach in 8:34: “If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross and follow me.”

The Baker Illustrated Bible Commentary by Gary M. Burge, Baker Publishing Group, 2016

Big Idea: All followers of Jesus are called to mission. Yet when the kingdom news of the gospel is presented, there is both authority from God and inevitable opposition to it when people reject the good news, sometimes even costing the lives of those sent to speak for God.

Understanding the Text

This begins the fourth section of the Galilean ministry in Mark (after 1:16–3:6; 3:7–35; 4:1–6:30) and constitutes the third sandwiching episode thus far (after 3:20–35; 5:21–43). The sending of the Twelve (6:7–13) is not completed until 6:30, when the disciples return and report the results of their successful mission. The intervening material begins with Herod’s response to Jesus and the mission of the disciples (6:14–16) and continues with a lengthy flashback to the arrest and death of the Baptist (vv. 17–29). Clearly, mission (that of the Baptist, Jesus, or the disciples) involves opposition.

Interpretive Insights

6:7 he began to send them out two by two and gave them authority over impure spirits. After being rejected by his former neighbors, Jesus goes around Galilee “from village to village” teaching (6:6b), repeating his earlier foray in 1:38–39. He decides to include his disciples in his work and so calls them to come. This is the last of the three-part movement from 1:16–20 (calling) to 3:13–19 (commissioning) to here (sending). They are sent “two by two” as official witnesses (cf. Num. 35:30; Deut. 17:6; 19:15), and this became common practice (John 1:37; Acts 8:14; 9:38; 13:2–3), allowing mutual companionship and protection. The authority over demons is repeated from 3:15 and is a primary Markan theme.

6:8–9 Take nothing for the journey except a staff . . . sandals. Jesus allows only the absolute minimum items needed for travel: a walking stick and sandals. Even the prohibited items—bread, bag, money, extra shirt—would usually be considered basic necessities. The bag is a kind of knapsack for carrying items such as food or extra clothes (which would also serve as pillow/blanket at night). They are to go out depending on God for their needs, allowing those to whom he sends them to provide for them. The thrust is twofold: do not use ministry for profit or self-aggrandizement, and go entirely to serve and glorify God.

6:10 Whenever you enter a house, stay there until you leave that town. The goal of mission is not to find the nicest living arrangements but rather to bring people into the kingdom. They are to depend on the hospitality of each village they visit, and they must be content with whatever living conditions they experience. To leave one home for another would insult their hosts and bring disrepute on the gospel.

6:11 if any place will not welcome or listen to you . . . shake the dust off your feet. Those who reject the gospel are to be treated as unclean (cf. Matt. 7:6: “Do not give dogs what is sacred”). Even the dust of their town is unworthy. Jews returning from pagan lands would shake the dirt from their feet, so this is saying to these Jewish towns that they have become pagan Gentiles to God. To do so “as a testimony against them” implies also that divine judgment awaits.

6:14–16 King Herod heard about this. The disciples are preaching like the Baptist, and Jesus has become quite famous, so Herod becomes inquisitive. This is Herod Antipas, son of Herod the Great (all his sons bore his name) and tetrarch of Galilee and Perea (in the Transjordan) from 4 BC (when his father died) to AD 39 (when he was exiled), which means he ruled throughout Jesus’s life. He had wanted to be king like his father, but the emperor Augustus allowed him only to be tetrarch, a minor ruler of “one-fourth” of a Roman territory.

John the Baptist . . . raised from the dead . . . Elijah . . . a prophet. This sums up the popular understanding of Jesus at that time. These are not well-thought-out opinions but popular legends. Certainly any view that Jesus was John redivivus (revived from the dead) could be held only by those who knew nothing about John’s birth and death vis-à-vis Jesus. Still, that is the view that Antipas embraces. We know from 1:14 (cf. Matt. 4:12) that John was arrested just before Jesus began his Galilean ministry, so undoubtedly John had died some time earlier, and this is a flashback. The basis of the comparison is Jesus’s powerful prophetic message and perhaps also his miracles. John did not perform miracles, but if he were raised from the dead, it seems they expect he would have that power.

6:17 Herod . . . had him bound and put in prison. We now begin the flashback. This expands the brief comment at 1:14, telling how and why Herod had arrested John. He was imprisoned in Antipas’s fortress-palace at Machaerus in Perea. The reason for the arrest was John’s denunciation of Herod’s tryst with and subsequent marriage to Herodias, his niece who at the time was married to his half brother Philip. Herodias divorced Philip on the basis of Roman law, and Herod divorced his wife, who was the daughter of Aretas IV, king of Perea. Aretas was so incensed that he went to war against Herod and defeated him.1

6:18 It is not lawful for you to have your brother’s wife. Leviticus 18:16; 20:21 makes it unlawful for a man to marry his brother’s wife. The one exception was levirate marriage (Deut. 25:5 [see on Mark 12:18–27]), but this could not apply because Philip was still alive. So the new marriage clearly was immoral, and the Baptist’s rebuke bespoke a national scandal. Herod considered this seditious because it further stirred up the nation against him.

6:19–20 Herodias . . . wanted to kill him. . . . Herod . . . protected him. Needless to say, Herodias was incensed that John had turned the people against her. To her, the only answer was his death, but her husband stood in her way. His weakness is seen in his realizing that John was “a holy and righteous man,” yet being unwilling to take a stand on this. Still, he “protected” him for a time, undoubtedly from Herodias’s murderous plots. There are parallels between Herodias and Jezebel in 1 Kings 21 and between Herod and a vacillating Pilate in Mark 15.

When Herod heard John, he was greatly puzzled; yet he liked to listen to him. This brings to mind the governor Felix, who was afraid of Paul but conversed with him often for two years. In Felix’s case, he was also hoping for a bribe (Acts 24:24–26). Herod did not understand the “righteous” truths John told him and was deeply “puzzled” or “perplexed” by them (perhaps “greatly disturbed”). Clearly, he was under some conviction, yet like Herod Agrippa in Acts 26:28–29, he was unwilling to act on it.

6:21 Herod gave a banquet for his high officials and military commanders and the leading men of Galilee. Herodias’s opportunity came at a lavish birthday party for her husband. Like all Roman rulers, Herod enjoyed extravagant parties. It is difficult to see why Galilean leaders are featured in a party far away in Perea, but it is possible that both territories were involved, and Mark centered on the Galilean members because Jesus’s ministry was there.

6:22–23 When the daughter of Herodias came in and danced, she pleased Herod. Undoubtedly a lascivious dance, this added to the scandal, for such dances normally were done by courtesans. Probably a younggirl of twelve to fourteen (named “Salome” in Josephus, Ant.18:136–137), she greatly pleased Herod, who was honored that the princess would dance for him. Herod impetuously (and likely due to a drunken state) went beyond the usual practice of rewarding performers who please and promised with an oath, “Whatever you ask I will give you, up to half my kingdom.” There is a likely allusion to Esther 5:2–3, where Xerxes, the Persian king, promises Esther “up to half the kingdom.” The contrast is stark, however, as Esther saves her people from death, whereas Salome, prompted by Herodias (6:24), will ask for the death of John.

6:25 I want you to give me right now the head of John the Baptist on a platter. Although it is possible that this was a spur-of-the-moment request, the plot of the story, with Herodias all along plotting John’s death, makes it more likely this was the plan from the beginning. Otherwise, one would expect Herodias’s daughter to make her own request rather than ask her mother what to do.

6:27 sent an executioner with orders to bring John’s head. “Executioner” (spekoulat?r) is a special term used for a bodyguard/soldier sent on a “black ops” type of mission, in this case to execute a prophet. Beheading was the normal Roman form of execution, and it was also the one form of death that could be immediately carried out. The one righteous man in the palace was sacrificed at the whim of pagans! To have his head brought in on a “platter” like a delectable delicacy at the feast demonstrates the deplorable depravity of Herod’s court. In his death John wins and Herod loses, as the king becomes forever a symbol of wickedness and excess.

6:29 John’s disciples came and took his body and laid it in a tomb. John did not stop having a definable group of disciples after he died, for Acts 18:25; 19:1–7 show a group of his followers in Ephesus over twenty years later, and there were followers in later centuries claiming that he was the Messiah (Ps.-Clem.1.60). The Mandaeans in Iraq and Iran still identify themselves as his followers.

6:30 The apostles gathered around Jesus and reported to him all they had done and taught. The sandwiching of episodes (6:7–13, 30 intercalated with 6:14–29) is complete. The disciples were designated “apostles” in 3:14 (see on that verse and 6:7), and here they return having completed their first mission as “sent ones” or official agents representing Jesus. Jesus had inaugurated their mission as part of his own in 6:6b–7. As they engaged in their ministry, they replicated his own, with “all that they had done” referring to the miracles that they had performed according to 6:13, and “taught” referring to their kingdom preaching in 6:12.

Theological Insights

Simply put, this section of Mark teaches that mission involves opposition and rejection. Surrounding the sending of the Twelve (6:7–13) is the rejection of Jesus in his hometown of Nazareth (6:1–6) and the death of John the Baptist (6:14–29). All who serve God must expect opposition from the world. At the same time, mission also involves authority from God in the proclamation of the kingdom truths. Since we are officially “sent” (the meaning of “apostle” in 3:14) as official representatives of the Triune Godhead, we go out with their authority. Finally, mission involves sacrifice. We must depend entirely on Christ, not ourselves, and we surrender all to him.

Teaching the Text

1. Discipleship involves being immersed in Jesus’s teaching and ministry. This is one of the major themes of the book of Acts, where Luke emphasizes that the history of the early church involved reliving the life and ministry of Jesus. Most of the miracles in Acts are replicas of the miracles of Jesus. The road to Rome taken by Paul replicates the road to Jerusalem taken by Jesus. The trials of Paul are parallel to the trials of Jesus. In other words, the meaning of discipleship (Mark 3:14: “be with him”) is that we become one with Jesus, and our lives will be built upon him as our model. Ephesians 4:13 speaks of “the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ.” Here this means that the apostles would reproduce Jesus’s miracles and proclaim his teaching throughout Galilee, and in 6:13 they were successful in doing so. Note that the emphasis here is not on how many responded and became Jesus’s followers but rather on the disciples’ faithfulness to their calling.

2. Mission is conducted with the authority of Christ. Many, maybe most, Christians feel inferior, that they have little to offer the Lord and little to give in his service. And in fact, they are correct. None of us have much to offer, but that is all for the better. In our weakness the power of God is made all the more evident (2 Cor. 12:9–10). The truth is that we do not have power in our own strength and merely with our own gifts. God has made us all individually and given each of us a unique combination of gifts that is perfect for what he wants to accomplish through us. We go out with his authority and under the presence of his Spirit. God is present in a powerful way, and we conduct ourselves under and with his authority.

3. Gospel proclamation often is met with opposition and even death. This is a dominant theme, not only in Jesus’s teaching but also throughout the New Testament. We saw some of Jesus’s teaching on this earlier (see “Teaching the Text” on 6:1–6), so here we consider some of the rest of the New Testament. In Acts hostility and suffering are everywhere. In Acts 4–5 the disciples are arrested twice and beaten with rods the second time, but they respond with joy “because they had been counted worthy of suffering disgrace for the name” (5:41). Both Stephen and James were martyred (Acts 7; 12), and Paul was repeatedly driven out of cities by persecution (Acts 14:5–6, 19–20; 16:39–40; 17:10, 13–14; 20:1). Paul further dealt with animosity for several years in Jerusalem, Caesarea, and Rome as he was on trial for his life in Acts 21–28. Clearly, most churches went through serious suffering for the Lord, and Paul treats this as something almost to be expected. In Hebrews it was the basic problem; these second-generation house churches had become lazy (5:11; 6:12) and in the midst of persecution were tempted to renounce Christ and return to Judaism. The letter of 1 Peter has been labeled “the epistle of suffering” and addresses discouraged Christians who were “surprised” by the hard times (4:12) but needed to realize that such trials are used by God to strengthen one’s faith (1:6–7; cf. James 1:2–4).

Illustrating the Text

Discipleship: carrying on the ministry of Jesus

Hymn: “Living for Jesus,” by Thomas O. Chisholm. In this great twentieth-century hymn of commitment we read in the second verse that in light of what Jesus has done,

Such love constrains me to answer His call,
Follow His leading and give Him my all.

And then the refrain,

O Jesus, Lord and Savior, I give myself to Thee,
for Thou, in Thy atonement, didst give Thyself for me.
I own no other Master, my heart shall be Thy throne.
My life I give, henceforth to live, O Christ, for Thee alone.

God longs that we give ourselves fully and completely to continue the work of Jesus in this world in and through the Holy Spirit.

Depending on God and not on ourselves

Biography: George Mueller. Mueller was a highly effective evangelist and philanthropist in nineteenth-century England. He is credited not only with founding a number of orphanages but also with being an amazing example of trusting in God. He never asked anyone, except God, for anything, and yet the orphans always had what they needed. Mueller once said, “Faith does not operate in the realm of the possible. There is no glory for God in that which is humanly possible. Faith begins where man’s power ends.”2

The stories of God’s provision in Mueller’s life and ministry are amazing. Many times Mueller received unsolicited food donations only hours before they were needed to feed the children, further strengthening his faith in God. For example, on one well-documented occasion, they gave thanks for breakfast when all the children were sitting at the table, even though there was nothing to eat in the house. As they finished praying, the local baker knocked on the door with sufficient fresh bread to feed everyone, and the milkman gave them plenty of fresh milk because his cart had broken down in front of the orphanage. Imagine how these experiences impacted their faith. Choose to depend on God and not on yourself.

The blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church.

Church History: Church history has taught many lessons, not the least of which is the truth that persecution causes the church to grow. This is seen clearly in the book of Acts as the early church grew rapidly in the face of persecution. Why do churches grow in times of persecution? There probably are many answers, but one truth is that persecution separates the true follower of Jesus from the one whose faith is not genuine. Faith and courage in the face of death communicate the authenticity of the faith of those who are martyred. Are you prepared to stand firm for Jesus regardless of the price you might be asked to pay? Consider reading from John Foxe’s Book of Martyrs or from Duane Arnold’s Prayers of the Martyrs.

Teaching the Text by Grant R. Osborne, Baker Publishing Group, 2016

Dictionary

Direct Matches

Banquet

A banquet is a joyful celebration, usually involving wine, abundant food, music, and dancing. Banquets celebrated special occasions such as the forging of a relationship (Gen. 26:26 30), the coronation of a king (1 Chron. 12:28–40), the completion of the temple (2 Chron. 7:8), victory over one’s enemies (Gen. 14:18–19; Ps. 23:5), weddings (Gen. 29:22; John 2:1–11; Rev. 19:9), birthdays of royals (Mark 6:21), and the reunion of estranged relatives (Luke 15:23–24). Banquets also symbolized one’s status, since they were by invitation only. One’s seating arrangement corresponded to one’s social status in the group, since there were “higher” and “lower” positions (Luke 14:8–9). During the meal, people reclined on bedlike seats.

Jesus uses the banquet as a metaphor for the presence of the kingdom (cf. Matt. 9:14–17). He tells a parable of a king who has planned a wedding banquet for his son. Those who were invited have refused to attend (i.e., the Jewish leaders), so the king commands his servants to go out into the streets and gather as many people as they can find, both good and bad (Matt. 22:1–10).

Jesus also uses the imagery of a banquet to describe the final future manifestation of the kingdom. He exhorts his disciples to be prepared for the unexpected return of the bridegroom, lest they be excluded from the wedding banquet (Matt. 25:1–13). At the Last Supper, he commands the disciples to continue the practice of sharing bread and wine after his departure, to remember his atoning death and to anticipate his future coming (Matt. 26:26–29). This future banquet will celebrate Christ’s final union with his bride, the church (Rev. 19:6–9).

Eli

The chief priest of Israel at the tabernacle at Shiloh toward the end of the period of judges (1 Sam. 1:1 4:22). He is described as both physically and spiritually flabby. He is not evil, just spiritually undiscerning. Also, he fails to discipline his two sons, Hophni and Phinehas, who are wicked. He ends badly when his sons, who are leading the army against the Philistines, are defeated and killed. When he gets the news, Eli falls off a log and breaks his neck. Even so, his descendants continue as priests until the time of David. At that time, though, the prophetic announcement comes to fulfillment, and the priesthood passes from his descendant Abiathar and goes to Zadok (1 Kings 2:27, 35).

Elijah

A prophet raised up by God during the reign of Ahab of Israel (ninth century BC) in order to counter fast-rising idolatry fueled by the king and his foreign-born wife, Jezebel.

False worship at this time focused on Baal, a major Canaanite deity who was the god of fertility, having power over dew, rain, lightning, and thunder. Thus, as people turned to Baal for these life-giving forces, God shut up the heavens so there would be no rain in Israel (1 Kings 17:1). God also at this time sent Elijah the Tishbite to confront the king.

Through the performance of miraculous acts, Elijah demonstrated that God was with him. The first such act was multiplying the food supplies of a widow who provided him with food. Even more dramatically, he prayed for the woman’s son when the child died, and the dead boy began to breathe again (1 Kings 17:17 24).

Elijah’s most dramatic moment came when he confronted Ahab and his many Baal prophets on Mount Carmel (1 Kings 18). Yahweh fought Baal on the latter’s terms. The object was whether Yahweh or Baal could throw fire from heaven to light the altar fire. Baal was purportedly a specialist at throwing fire (lightning), and his prophets went first. However, because Baal did not really exist, they failed. When Yahweh’s turn came, Elijah increased the stakes by pouring water on the wood. Yahweh, the one true God, threw fire from heaven, which burned the sacrifice, wood, stones, and dirt, and even dried up the water. Soon thereafter, God opened up the skies so that it rained again. Even so, Ahab and then his son Ahaziah (2 Kings 1) continued to worship Baal.

Elijah was a devoted servant of Yahweh. Before Elijah passed from this life, God introduced him to his successor, Elisha. When the end came, he did not die but rather was caught up to heaven (2 Kings 2:1–18)—only the second person reported to leave this life without dying (cf. Enoch in Gen. 5:21–24).

Toward the end of the OT period, the prophet Malachi announced the coming day of the Lord (Mal. 4:5–6). As a precursor to that day, God would send the prophet Elijah as a forerunner. Some people thought that Jesus was Elijah (Matt. 16:14; Mark 6:15; 8:28; Luke 9:8, 19), but Jesus is the one who ushers in the kingdom of God. John the Baptist was his forerunner, and so it was he who is rightly associated with Elijah (Matt. 11:13–14). Indeed, his wilderness lifestyle and ministry echoed those of Elijah. At the Mount of Transfiguration, Elijah appeared to Jesus along with Moses; these two wilderness figures represented the prophets and the law (Matt. 17:1–13; Mark 9:2–13; Luke 9:28–36).

Galilee

The northern region of Israel. Determining the region’s precise boundaries is difficult, but in Jesus’ time it appears to have encompassed an area of about forty-five miles north to south and twenty-five miles east to west, with the Jordan River and the Sea of Galilee forming the eastern border. Josephus divides the region into Upper and Lower Galilee. Upper Galilee contains elevations of up to about four thousand feet and is composed mostly of rugged mountains, while Lower Galilee reaches a maximum height of about two thousand feet and is characterized by numerous fertile valleys. Lower Galilee was the site of most of Jesus’ ministry.

Galilee appears several times in the OT (e.g., Josh. 20:7; 1 Kings 9:11; 1 Chron. 6:76). It was part of the land given to the twelve tribes (Josh. 19). Since Galilee was distant from Jerusalem, which played the most prominent part in Jewish history, much of its history is not mentioned in the OT. Many of the references that do occur are military references, such as Joshua’s defeat of the kings at the waters of Merom (Josh. 11:1 9) and the Assyrian removal of the northern kingdom of Israel (Isa. 9:1). However, its great beauty, particularly of mountains such as Carmel, Hermon, and Lebanon, was the source of numerous images and metaphors in the poetic and prophetic literature (e.g., Ps. 133:3; Isa. 33:9; 35:2; Jer. 46:18).

Galilee figures more prominently in the NT. Jesus came from Nazareth in Galilee and conducted much of his early ministry there. Luke specifically identifies Galilee as the place where Jesus’ ministry began before spreading to Judea (Luke 23:5; Acts 10:37). Galilee is also portrayed as the place where Jesus will reunite with his disciples following the resurrection (Mark 16:7) and where he gives them the Great Commission (Matt. 28:16–20).

Herod

Several kings of the Jews, related by birth, had the name “Herod.” The Herods formed a royal dynasty that flourished during the time of Christ and the early church. The founder of the dynasty was Antipater, who was appointed by Caesar in 47 BC as procurator of Judea. The Herods, being partly Edomite (descended from Esau) as well as loyal servants of Rome, were never fully accepted by their Jewish subjects. The family history was characterized by lust, intrigue, and bloodshed. They opposed the Christian faith, sometimes violently, being responsible for the attempted murder of Jesus (Matt. 2:16), the beheading of John the Baptist (Matt. 14:1 12), and the execution of the apostle James (Acts 12:2).

(1) Herod I (Herod the Great), son of Antipater, known as King Herod (Matt. 2:1; Luke 1:5). He ruled Palestine in the years 37–4 BC with Roman consent. A skillful politician, he managed to retain the favor of Rome by deftly switching allegiances when necessary. A capable ruler in some respects, he engaged in extensive building works. His finest project was the beautification of the temple, which he hoped would win Jewish favor. The rabbis would later say, “Whoever has not seen Herod’s building has not seen anything beautiful.”

His rule, however, was marred by paranoia, suspicion, and cruel jealousy. He had some of his wives and sons killed for suspected plotting. In Matthew’s Gospel he is visited by wise men looking for “one who has been born king of the Jews.” Subsequently, he massacred the male infants of Bethlehem, trying to rid himself of this new, royal challenger (Matt. 2:1–11). Upon his death, his kingdom was divided among three of his sons, Herod Antipas, Herod Archelaus, and Herod Philip.

(2) Herod Antipas, son of Herod the Great, also known simply as Herod or as Herod the tetrarch (Matt. 14:1; Luke 3:19). He was given jurisdiction over Galilee and Perea, which he ruled from 4 BC to AD 39 (Luke 3:1). For this reason, when Pilate heard that Jesus came from Galilee, he sent him to Antipas for questioning (Luke 23:6–12).

He is infamous for his role in the death of John the Baptist, which later haunted him (Matt. 14:1–12; Mark 6:14–29). Jesus referred to him as “that fox,” alluding to his predatory destructiveness for having killed John the Baptist, who criticized him for taking his half brother’s wife, Herodias, in marriage. He also sought to kill Jesus (Luke 13:31–32). Jesus warned the disciples of the yeast of Herod (Mark 8:15). Yeast was a metaphor sometimes used to describe how evil spreads and corrupts the whole person, perhaps a reference to Herod’s lust for Herodias and his murderous opposition to God’s word and Son. (See also Antipas.)

(3) Herod Archelaus, ethnarch of Judea, Samaria, and Idumea (4 BC–AD 6) and son of Herod the Great (Matt. 2:22). (See also Archelaus.)

(4) Herod Philip, son of Herod the Great and Cleopatra of Jerusalem; he was tetrarch of Iturea and Traconitis in the years 4 BC–AD 34 (Luke 3:1). He rebuilt Paneas and named it “Caesarea Philippi” after the emperor and himself (Matt. 16:13; Mark 8:27). Apparently, he married his niece Salome III, the daughter of Herodias and his half brother Herod son of Mariamne II.

(5) Herod (Philip), son of Herod the Great and Mariamne II; he was married to Herodias, who left him for his half brother Antipas (Matt. 14:3; Mark 6:17; Luke 3:19). Though sharing a common name, this is a different son of Herod the Great than the Herod Philip of Luke 3:1.

(6) Herod Agrippa I, grandson of Herod the Great, also called “King Herod” in Scripture (Acts 12:1). At the height of his power (r. AD 37–44), he ruled an area coextensive with that of his grandfather. He persecuted the early church, killing James the brother of John. Encouraged by the Jews, he imprisoned Peter, intending to put him on trial, until an angel of God miraculously intervened to free him. He died prematurely in Caesarea when struck down for not giving glory to God (Acts 12:20–25).

(7) Herod Agrippa II (reigned in Chalcis AD 48–52, in Iturea AD 52–c. 93), the son of Herod Agrippa I. Prompted by the governor Festus, he gave audience to the apostle Paul to make his defense. He rejected Paul’s attempt to persuade him of the truth of the Christian faith (Acts 25:13–27; 26).

Herodias

The unscrupulous wife of Herod Antipas who instigated the beheading of John the Baptist (Matt. 14:1 12; Mark 6:14–29). Herodias deserted her first husband, Herod Philip, son of Herod the Great and Mariamne II, to marry his half brother Herod Antipas (Matt. 14:3; Mark 6:17; Luke 3:19). When John the Baptist publicly denounced the legality of the marriage (cf. Lev. 18:16; 20:21), Antipas imprisoned him and Herodias sought revenge. Opportunity came through her daughter, Salome, whose dancing so pleased Antipas that he foolishly swore an oath promising anything she wanted.

Holy

Holiness is an attribute of God and of all that is fit for association with him. God alone is intrinsically holy (Rev. 15:4). God the Father is holy (John 17:11), as is the Son (Acts 3:14), while “Holy” is the characteristic designation of God’s Spirit (Ps. 51:11; Matt. 1:18). God’s name is holy (Luke 1:49), as are his arm (Ps. 98:1), ways (Ps. 77:13), and words (Ps. 105:42).

With reference to God himself, holiness may indicate something like his uniqueness, and it is associated with attributes such as his glory (Isa. 6:3), righteousness (Isa. 5:16), and jealousy—that is, his proper concern for his reputation (Josh. 24:19).

God’s dwelling place is in heaven (Ps. 20:6), and “holy” functions in some contexts as a virtual equivalent for heavenly (11:4). God’s throne is holy (47:8), and the angels who surround it are “holy ones” (89:5; cf. Mark 8:38).

A corollary of God’s holiness is that he must be treated as holy (Lev. 22:32)—that is, honored (Lev. 10:3), worshiped (Ps. 96:9), and feared (Isa. 8:13).

While “holy” is sometimes said to mean “set apart,” this does not appear to be its core meaning, though it is an associated notion (Lev. 20:26; Heb. 7:26). Holiness, as applied to people and things, is a relational concept. They are (explicitly or implicitly) holy “to the Lord” (Exod. 28:36), never “from” something.

The symbolic representation of God’s heavenly palace, the tabernacle (Exod. 40:9), and later the temple (1 Chron. 29:3), and everything associated with them, are holy and the means whereby God’s people in the OT may symbolically be brought near to God. For God to share his presence with anything or anyone else, these too must be holy (Lev. 11:44 45; Heb. 12:14).

The OT system of worship involved the distinction between unclean and clean, and between common and holy, and the means of effecting a transition to a state of cleanness or holiness (Lev. 10:10). People, places, and items may be made holy by a process of consecration or sanctification, whether simply by God’s purifying presence (Exod. 3:5) or by ritual acts (Exod. 19:10; 29:36).

God’s faithful people are described as holy (Exod. 19:6; 1 Pet. 2:9). In the OT, this is true of the whole people of God at one level, and of particular individuals at another. Thus, kings (Ps. 16:10), prophets (2 Kings 4:9), and in particular priests (Lev. 21:7) are declared to be holy. While the OT witnesses to some tension between the collective holiness of Israel and the particular holiness of its designated leaders (Num. 16:3), the latter were intended to act as models and facilitators of Israel’s holiness.

John

A common name in first-century Judaism. The Greek name Iōannēs comes from the Hebrew name “Yohanan.” (1) The Baptist or Baptizer, he was the son of the priest Zechariah and Elizabeth. (See John the Baptist.) (2) The son of Zebedee, he was an apostle originally belonging to the inner circle of the twelve main disciples of Jesus. (See John the Apostle.) (3) John Mark, a cousin of Barnabas (Col. 4:10) and the son of Mary (Acts 12:12). (See Mark, John.) (4) The elder. Both 2 John and 3 John claim authorship by “the elder” (2 John 1; 3 John 1). Traditionally, all three Johannine Letters, the Gospel of John, and sometimes the Revelation of John have been attributed to John the apostle. However, modern scholarship often attributes 2 John and 3 John, and sometimes 1 John, to “the elder”—John the elder. (5) The seer, the author of the book of Revelation (see 1:1, 4, 9; 22:8). Some scholars ascribe the authorship of Revelation to John the apostle, in line with the view of the church father Irenaeus. Other scholars ascribe the writing of Revelation to a certain John the elder. The book of Revelation does not further identify the author. However, the author is among the prophets, a seer, and his name is “John”—hence, John the seer.

John the Baptist

A Jewish prophet at the time of Jesus, he was the son of priestly parents (Zechariah and Elizabeth), executed by Herod Antipas, and identified as “John” (a common Jewish name), often with the title “the Baptist” or “the Baptizer,” the latter possibly being the older title.

John the Baptist unwaveringly maintained that he was sent to introduce the Son (or Chosen One) of God, who would baptize with the Holy Spirit (John 1:33 34; cf. Matt. 3:11–12 pars.). This one was not named, but the Baptist was told how he would know him: “The man on whom you see the Spirit come down and remain is the one” (John 1:33). Thus, the Baptist could claim, “I myself did not know him” (John 1:31), more likely meaning that the Baptist did not know Jesus was the one until the Spirit descended on him (1:32). It is less likely that John meant that he had not met his cousin previously (Luke 1:39–45). Jesus accepts (and validates) the Baptist’s proclamation both at the beginning of his ministry (Mark 1:9) and again later (Luke 16:16; John 5:35; 10:41).

After his imprisonment, the Baptist seems less certain of his earlier identification of Jesus as the coming one (Matt. 11:2–3). It should also be noted that John had not disbanded his disciples. After his death, some continued to preach his baptism of repentance as far away as in Ephesus (Acts 18:24–26; 19:1–7). Similarly, Jesus’ last description of the Baptist is ambiguous. It is guarded but still complimentary (John 5:32–36; 10:41) and even lofty: “Among those born of women there has not arisen anyone greater than John the Baptist”; however, Jesus’ next statement could be interpreted to mean that the Baptist was not yet part of the coming kingdom: “Yet whoever is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he” (Matt. 11:11). Like everyone else, John was confused by Jesus’ preaching ministry. Jesus was not acting like the Messiah they were expecting (Luke 7:18–20). The Gospels offer no final verdict on the Baptist.

King

A kingdom signifies the reality and extent of a king’s dominion or rule (Gen. 10:10; 20:9; Num. 32:33; 2 Kings 20:13; Esther 1:22). Some kingdoms were relatively small; others were concerted attempts to gain the whole world.

A kingdom presupposes monarchy, rule by an individual, human authority. Although kings only have as much authority as their armies and the general populace allow, they nevertheless exercise an almost absolute power, which invites either profound humility or hubris. Royal arrogance, unfortunately, is the primary motif characterizing kings in the Bible (e.g., Dan. 3).

God originally intended Israel to be governed as a theocracy, ruled by the one, true, living God (but see Gen. 17:6; Deut. 17:14 20). Israel was to be a “kingdom of priests” (Exod. 19:6), but the people demanded a king (1 Sam. 8:1–22). However, even when God granted their request, God remained King over the king and even retained ownership of the land (Lev. 25:23, 42, 55). The Israelite king was nothing more than God’s viceroy, with delegated authority. With few exceptions, most of the kings of Israel and Judah were corrupted by authority and wealth and forgot God (1 Sam. 13:13–14; 15:28; Matt. 14:6–11). But God made a covenant with David, so that one of his descendants would become a coregent in a restored theocracy, the kingdom of God (2 Sam. 7:1–29; Pss. 89:3; 132:11). In contrast to David’s more immediate descendants, this coming king would return to Jerusalem humble and mounted on a donkey (Zech. 9:9; cf. Isa. 62:11). The Gospels present Jesus Christ as this king (Matt. 21:1–9 pars.). Those who are likewise humble will inherit the land with him (Matt. 5:5).

Oaths

The obligations of relationships within ancient societies and between social groups were frequently reinforced by means of oaths, and the practice of oath making (by both God and people) is witnessed to in the pages of the Bible. The name of God was frequently invoked (Judg. 8:19; 2 Kings 2:2), but oaths were not to be made using the names of foreign deities (Ps. 16:4). For this reason, when an oath was broken, God’s name was profaned (Lev. 19:12). To take an oath was to ask God to witness what was promised, and it invited him to act as avenger if the promise was broken (Gen. 31:50; 1 Sam. 12:3). This made oath taking a religious act, and so oaths often were made at sanctuaries and under the supervision of cultic officials (Num. 5:11 31; Judg. 11:11; Hos. 4:15).

In the Bible, God is portrayed as binding himself by oaths, most notably his sworn promises to Abraham (Gen. 22:16–18; 50:24). This fact is used by the author of Hebrews in an argument designed to assure readers that God meant what he said when he made promises to his people (Heb. 6:13–18). The coming of Jesus fulfilled the terms of that oath (Luke 1:73). So too the Davidic covenant was supported by a divine oath (Pss. 89:35, 49; 110:4; 132:11), and this was fulfilled by the enthronement of Christ at his resurrection and ascension (Acts 2:30–33).

Jesus’ teaching on oaths (Matt. 5:33–37) does not necessarily contradict OT legislation (cf. Lev. 19:12; Num. 30:2; Deut. 23:21–23) but rather brings out the true heart of God behind the legislation. Oaths are unnecessary, Jesus said, for those who habitually tell the truth. An emphatic yes or no is all that is needed. The teaching of James 5:12 reflects what is found in Jesus’ teaching on this subject. This may not outlaw all oath taking, and certainly the apostle Paul did not understand there to be a blanket prohibition of oaths, for in his letters he is on record as making oaths (Gal. 1:20; Phil. 1:8).

Philip

(1) The tetrarch of Iturea and Traconitis, regions northeast of Palestine, at the time when John the Baptist’s public ministry began (Luke 3:1). (2) One of Jesus’ twelve apostles (Matt. 10:3; Mark 3:18; Luke 6:14; John 1:43). Philip, like Andrew and Peter, was from Bethsaida (John 1:44). It was Philip who introduced Nathanael to Jesus (John 1:45 48). John’s Gospel mentions Philip three times subsequent to chapter 1 (6:5–7; 12:20–22; 14:6–10), in the last instance recording Philip’s shortsighted request for Jesus to show the Father to the apostles. (3) One of seven men selected by the Jerusalem church to care for the distribution of food to its widows (Acts 6:1–6). This man, also known as Philip the evangelist (21:8), shared the message of Jesus Christ in a city of Samaria, performing great miracles (8:5–13). Philip later explained the good news of Jesus to an Ethiopian eunuch whom he encountered (8:26–38). After Philip baptized the eunuch, “the Spirit of the Lord suddenly took Philip away” (8:39). Philip then preached in several towns, finally arriving at Caesarea, where he settled (8:40). Years later, Paul stayed in Caesarea with Philip and his four prophesying daughters (21:8–9).

Prison

In comparing modern society to that of biblical times, it is important to acknowledge what is distinctive about prisons in many modern societies. Prisons serve multiple functions, including imposing incarceration as punishment for crimes committed, segregating dangerous criminals from the larger population, deterring crime by imposing a negative incentive, and rehabilitating offenders so that they can eventually return to society. In many cases where modern law imposes incarceration as the penalty for crime, ancient and biblical law imposed economic penalties (such as fines), corporal punishment (beatings), and capital punishment (death). In addition, many of the biblical references to prisons and prisoners involve what in modern society would be considered political rather than criminal incarceration.

The story of Joseph prominently features an Egyptian prison. Joseph was falsely put in prison for the crime of molesting his master’s wife (Gen. 39:19 20), while his companions were imprisoned for the otherwise unspecified crime of causing offense to the king (40:1). As this story illustrates, the sentences were not of a predetermined duration, and release depended on the goodwill of the king (Gen. 40:13), a situation in which Paul also found himself hundreds of years later during Roman times (Acts 24:27). When Joseph imprisoned his brothers, it was on a presumption of guilt for the crime of espionage (Gen. 42:16). In Roman times, in contrast, certain prisoners had a right to be put on trial eventually, if not quickly (Acts 25:27; see also 16:37). Imprisonment could also be imposed for failure to pay a debt (Matt. 18:30). Joseph kept Simeon in prison as a guarantee that his brothers would fulfill a prior agreement (Gen. 42:19, 24). In addition to specialized dungeons, prisoners could also be confined in houses (Jer. 37:15; Acts 28:16) and pits (Zech. 9:11).

In both Testaments, release from prison is a symbol of God’s salvation. The theme is prominent in the psalms, as in Ps. 146:7: “The Lord sets prisoners free” (see also Pss. 68:6; 107:10; 142:7). In Acts 12:7 Peter is freed from prison by a divinely sent messenger. Paul wrote a number of letters from prison and identified himself as a prisoner of Christ (Eph. 3:1; Col. 4:10; 2 Tim. 1:8; Philem. 1). Some texts refer in mythological terms to a prison that confines spirits or Satan (1 Pet. 3:19; Rev. 20:7).

Prophets

A prophet is a messenger of God, a person to whom God entrusts his message to an individual or to a nation. Indeed, the last book in the OT is named “Malachi,” which means “my messenger.” Isaiah heard God ask, “Whom shall I send?” and he cried out, “Send me!” (Isa. 6:8). A good template for understanding the phenomenon is Moses and Aaron. Moses was to tell Aaron what to say, and Aaron would say it. “Then the Lord said to Moses, ‘See, I have made you like God to Pharaoh, and your brother Aaron will be your prophet’” (Exod. 7:1).

In the NT period there were a number of prophets. John the Baptist could point to Jesus and proclaim him to be the Lamb of God, who takes away the sins of the world (John 1:29). Agabus the prophet predicted a famine and, later, Paul’s arrest (Acts 11:28; 21:10 11).

Paul lists “gifts of the Spirit” (1 Cor. 12:4–11), including prophecy and various phenomena reminiscent of the OT prophets’ ecstatic state. Paul warns the Corinthians not to overdo this sort of thing and so to be mature (1 Cor. 14:19–20). Near the end of his life, in one of his last letters, he speaks of prophecy as normative in the church, particularly in establishing an authoritative body of elders to rule and especially to preach the gospel (1 Tim. 1:18; 4:14). Peter draws a connection between the ministry of the OT prophets and the proclamation of the gospel of Jesus Christ (1 Pet. 1:10–12). Evangelism seems to be the normative mode for prophecy today: forthtelling by calling people to turn from their sins to Jesus, and foretelling by speaking of his return and the final judgment.

Thus, all Christians hold the office of prophet, even if they never participate in the ecstatic state experienced by the Corinthians. The greatness of a prophet is in how clearly the prophet points to Jesus. John the Baptist was the greatest of the OT prophets by that measure, but any Christian on this side of the cross and resurrection can proclaim the gospel even more clearly. Thus, the prophetic ministry of any Christian is greater than John’s (Matt. 11:11).

Five prophetesses are mentioned in the OT: Miriam (Exod. 15:20), Deborah (Judg. 4–5), Huldah (2 Kings 22:14–20; 2 Chron. 34:22–28), Isaiah’s wife (Isa. 8:3), and Noadiah (Neh. 6:14).

Similarly in the NT, Peter recognizes God’s promise through Joel being fulfilled in the gift of prophetic speech to women as well as men at Pentecost (Acts 2:18); and Paul, acknowledging that women prophesy publicly in the congregation, is concerned only with the manner of their doing so (1 Cor. 11:5). The prophetess Anna proclaims the baby Jesus as the Messiah (Luke 2:36–38), Luke reports that the four unmarried daughters of Philip the evangelist also prophesy (Acts 21:8–9). The only false prophetess in the NT is the apocalyptic figure of Jezebel in Rev. 2:20.

Word

“Word” is used in the Bible to refer to the speech of God in oral, written, or incarnate form. In each of these uses, God desires to make himself known to his people. The communication of God is always personal and relational, whether he speaks to call things into existence (Gen. 1) or to address an individual directly (Gen. 2:16 17; Exod. 3:14). The prophets and the apostles received the word of God (Deut. 18:14–22; John 16:13), some of which was proclaimed but not recorded. The greatest revelation in this regard is the person of Jesus Christ, who is called the “Word” of God (John 1:1, 14).

The psalmist declared God’s word to be an eternal object of hope and trust that gives light and direction (Ps. 119), and Jesus declared the word to be truth (John 17:17). The word is particularized and intimately connected with God himself by means of the key phrases “your word,” “the word of God,” “the word of the Lord,” “word about Christ,” and “the word of Christ” (Rom. 10:17; Col. 3:16). Our understanding of the word is informed by a variety of terms and contexts in the canon of Scripture, a collection of which is found in Ps. 119.

The theme of the word in Ps. 119 is continued and clarified in the NT, accentuating the intimate connection between the word of God and God himself. The “Word” of God is the eternal Lord Jesus Christ (John 1:1; 1 John 1:1–4), who took on flesh and blood so that we might see the glory of the eternal God. The sovereign glory of Christ as the Word of God is depicted in the vision of John in Rev. 19:13. As the Word of God, Jesus Christ ultimately gives us our lives (John 1:4; 6:33; 10:10), sustains our lives (John 5:24; 6:51, 54; 8:51), and ultimately renders a just judgment regarding our lives (John 5:30; 8:16, 26; 9:39; cf. Matt. 25:31–33; Heb. 4:12).

Works

The Bible has much to say about works, and an understanding of the topic is important because works play a role in most religions. In the most generic sense, “works” refers to the products or activities of human moral agents in the context of religious discussion. God’s works are frequently mentioned in Scripture, and they are always good. His works include creation (Gen. 2:2 3; Isa. 40:28; 42:5), sustenance of the earth (Ps. 104; Heb. 1:3), and redemption (Exod. 6:6; Ps. 111:9; Rom. 8:23). Human works, therefore, should be in alignment with God’s works, though obviously of a different sort. Works in the Bible usually reflect a moral polarity: good or evil, righteous or unrighteous, just or unjust. The context of the passage often determines the moral character of the works (e.g., Isa. 3:10–11; 2 Cor. 11:15).

Important questions follow from the existence of works and their moral quality. Do good works merit God’s favor or please him? Can good works save at the time of God’s judgment? When people asked Jesus, “What must we do to do the works God requires?” he answered, “The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent” (John 6:28–29). Without faith it is impossible to please God (Heb. 11:6). The people from the OT commended in Heb. 11 did their works in the precondition of faith. Explicitly in the NT and often implicitly in the OT, faith is the condition for truly good works. God elects out of his mercy, not out of human works (Rom. 9:12, 16; Titus 3:5; cf. Rom. 11:2). Works not done in faith, even if considered “good” by human standards, are not commendable to God, since all humankind is under sin (Rom. 3:9) and no person is righteous or does good (Rom. 3:10–18; cf. Isa. 64:6). Works cannot save; salvation is a gift to be received by faith (Eph. 2:8–9; 2 Tim. 1:9; cf. Rom. 4:2–6). Even works of the Mosaic law are not salvific (Rom. 3:20, 27–28; Gal. 2:16; 3:2; 5:4). Good works follow from faith (2 Cor. 9:8; Eph. 2:10; 1 Thess. 1:3; James 2:18, 22; cf. Acts 26:20). The works of those who have faith will be judged, but this judgment appears to be related to rewards, not salvation (Matt. 16:27; Rom. 2:6; 2 Cor. 5:10; cf. Rom. 14:10; 1 Cor. 3:13–15).

Direct Matches

Banquet

A banquet is a joyful celebration, usually involving wine, abundant food, music, and dancing. Banquets celebrated special occasions such as the forging of a relationship (Gen. 26:26–30), the coronation of a king (1 Chron. 12:28–40), the completion of the temple (2 Chron. 7:8), victory over one’s enemies (Gen. 14:18–19; Ps. 23:5), weddings (Gen. 29:22; John 2:1–11; Rev. 19:9), birthdays of royals (Mark 6:21), and the reunion of estranged relatives (Luke 15:23–24). Banquets also symbolized one’s status, since they were by invitation only. One’s seating arrangement corresponded to one’s social status in the group, since there were “higher” and “lower” positions (Luke 14:8–9). During the meal, people reclined on bedlike seats.

In the OT, the image of a banquet anticipates a future occasion when God will remove the reproach of his people (Isa. 25:6). It also becomes a metaphor for special access to God, who protects, blesses, and honors his people (Ps. 23:5).

The plot of the book of Esther revolves around banquets. The book opens with two big banquets held by Ahasuerus (Esther 1) that conclude with the removal of Vashti as queen, soon replaced by Esther. Esther invites the king and Haman to a banquet in order to expose the insidious plot of the latter (Esther 7). The book culminates with a great banquet that is the prototype for an annual banquet celebrating the Jews’ victory over their enemies, Purim (9:2–32).

Brothers

Brotherhood and Israelite Identity

Ancient Israelite society was fundamentally organized along the lines of kinship and family. As a result, relations among brothers figure prominently in the biblical construction of Israelite identity, which is conceptualized through a series of fraternal relationships, often rife with conflict: Isaac and Ishmael; Jacob and Esau; and the twelve sons of Jacob, among whom the relationship between Joseph and his brothers is pivotal in the history of Israel. Long after the lifetimes of the patriarchs, the Israelites continued to understand the structure of their society and the relationships between its constituent tribes as a complex of fraternal relationships. The patriarchal stories of Genesis were a mirror of later social and political realities. If the sibling rivalries of antiquity explained competition between later social groups, the memory of the brotherhood of those groups also provided a basis for solidarity both within Israel (“You may not put a foreigner over you, who is not your brother” [Deut. 17:15 ESV]) and with near neighbors (“You shall not abhor an Edomite, for he is your brother” [Deut. 23:7 ESV]). Similarly, the fraternal relationship between Moses and Aaron endured in later Israelite society as a model for synthesizing distinct strands of the religion into a coherent whole.

For later Israelite readers of the Bible, the brotherly relationships of Genesis and Exodus were not simply stories about dead ancestors; rather, they provided a compelling account of the organization of Israelite society as they knew it (see Zech. 11:14) and of the relationship between Israel and its neighbors, several of which were descended from the brothers of the Israelite patriarchs (see Ps. 83:6; Amos 1:11; Obad. 10; Mal. 1:2–4). Even though Hiram and Solomon did not trace their relationship back to a common ancestor, they extended the language of the brother alliance to their own (1 Kings 9:12–13).

Biblical literature cultivates a predilection for the underdog, elevating a long series of younger, disadvantaged brothers: the heroes of Israel included Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Gideon (Judg. 6:15), and David (1 Sam. 16:11).

The brother’s wife represented a special case. Sexual relations with a brother’s wife were strictly forbidden (Lev. 18:16; 20:21; see also Mark 6:18), but under certain circumstances one was compelled to marry a brother’s widow (Deut. 25:5–9; see variations of this practice in Gen. 38:8; Ruth 4:5–6). This custom underlay a question that Jesus was asked concerning seven brothers, each of whom died, repeatedly widowing the same woman (Matt. 22:24; Mark 6:17; Luke 14:26).

Brothers in the New Testament

Among Jesus’ twelve disciples were several pairs of brothers, including Peter and Andrew (Mark 1:16 pars.) and James and John the sons of Zebedee (Mark 1:19). Jesus himself had brothers (Mark 3:31–35; John 7:3–5; Acts 1:14), including James, Joseph, Simon, and Judas (Mark 6:3; see also Gal. 1:19).

In addition to the story of seven brothers mentioned above, several of Jesus’ teachings drew illustrations from the relationship of brothers, including the stories of the prodigal son (Luke 15:11–32) and of the rich man and Lazarus (see Luke 16:28). Jesus singled out the belittling of a brother as a particularly heinous sin (Matt. 5:22). In the Sermon on the Mount and elsewhere, “brother” stands not only for a literal brother but also more generally for one’s fellow human.

In light of the OT conception of Israel as a nation of brothers (see Deut. 17:15 and the discussion above), it is not surprising that Jesus and the NT authors adopted the language of brotherhood to describe the Christian community. The “brotherhood of believers” (1 Pet. 2:17 NIV 1984) derives from the common brotherhood of Christians with Christ himself. Brotherhood with Christ depends not on physical descent but on a shared commitment to obedience to God (Matt. 12:50; 23:8), and this loyalty is deeper than that of the literal family, such that it can turn “brother against brother” (Mark 13:12).

The predominant form of address in the NT Epistles is “brothers,” and in Acts the Christians are most commonly designated as “the brothers.” Paul also refers to fellow Jews, including non-Christians, as his “brothers” (Acts 22:1; Rom. 9:3 ESV). See also Brotherly Love.

Dance

Rhythmic movement of the body, usually to music. In the Bible, dancing usually has some form of religious significance. For God’s people in the OT, dancing was a joyous experience associated with celebration and worship. The various words used to describe dancing are descriptive: leaping, skipping, twisting, and whirling. Throughout Scripture, dancing is used as a symbol of rejoicing and as an antithesis to mourning (Ps. 30:11; Eccles. 3:4; Lam. 5:15). The sacred dances of the Hebrews expressed praise (Pss. 149:3; 150:4) and joy (Exod. 15:20; Judg. 11:34; 1 Sam. 18:6–7; 21:11; 29:5; Ps. 30:11; Eccles. 3:4; Lam. 5:15). In ancient Jewish culture men and women danced in separate groups (Ps. 68:25; Jer. 31:13). Dance performers usually were groups of women, with one leading, on occasions of national celebration, such as after the crossing of the Red Sea (Exod. 15:20), after military victories (1 Sam. 18:6), and at religious festivals (Judg. 21:19–21). This may reveal the peculiarity of David’s conduct in dancing with all his might as the ark of the Lord was brought to Jerusalem (2 Sam. 6:14; 1 Chron. 13:1–14; 15:1–29). Although dancing was reserved for occasions of religious worship and festivity, God speaks of a time of the ultimate restoration of his people from despair, when he promises that all Israel will rejoice in dancing (Jer. 31:4, 13).

Pagan worship also included dancing. The prophets of Baal, in their attempt to implore their god to appear, performed a kind of limping dance around Elijah’s altar on Mount Carmel (1 Kings 18:26). Elsewhere, Aaron and the Israelites danced before the golden calf at the foot of Mount Sinai (Exod. 32:6, 18–19).

Dancing is also associated with pagan celebrations, as when Herodias’s daughter danced before Herod Antipas and his dinner guests at Herod’s birthday celebration. The result was the beheading of John the Baptist. In the manner of Greek entertainment, the dance of this young daughter, who perhaps was only twelve to fourteen years old (Matt. 14:6; Mark 6:22), probably was a sensual art form, a type of dance unheard of in Israel.

Dance is not limited to the pious, and it was found to be an integral part of everyday events of antiquity. Children danced (Job 21:11; Matt. 11:16–17; Luke 7:32), as did the young women at the vineyards, some while playing their hand drums (Judg. 21:21; Jer. 31:4, 13). The Shulammite’s dance (Song 6:13) was as beautiful as two dance troupes. Dancing is associated with family celebrations, as in the story of the prodigal son. When the prodigal son returned home, his exuberant father cried out, “For this son of mine was dead and is alive again; he was lost and is found,” and so “they began to celebrate.” The older brother heard music and dancing, which commemorated the homecoming of the prodigal son (Luke 15:24–25).

Danced

Dancing

Elijah

(1) A true prophet raised up by God during the reign of Ahab of Israel (ninth century BC) in order to counter fast-rising idolatry fueled by the king and his foreign-born wife, Jezebel.

Elijah lived in the wilderness, perhaps to escape the vengeance of the royal couple and to avoid being tainted by the perversities of the state of Israel. He had a distinctive appearance: very hairy and dressed in a loincloth (2 Kings 1:8).

Elijah continued to confront the wicked idolatry of these kings. God used him to pronounce judgment against Ahab and Jezebel, as well as the dynasty, after the royal pair unjustly had Naboth the Jezreelite executed simply so they could possess his field (1 Kings 21).

(2) A descendant of Benjamin and ancestor of Saul (1 Chron. 8:27). (3) A descendant of Harim, who married a foreign woman during the time of Ezra (Ezra 10:21). (4) A descendant of Elam, who married a foreign woman during the time of Ezra (Ezra 10:26).

Executioner

One assigned to administer the sentence of capital punishment. The only executioner noted as such in the Bible is the agent of King Herod who beheaded John the Baptist in prison (Mark 6:27). In ancient Israel, the law stated that certain crimes, such as idolatry or murder, were punishable by death. The executioner might be the kinsman of the murdered (Num. 35:19), assigned men (Ezek. 9:1), or witnesses to the crime along with the townspeople (Lev. 20:2; Deut. 17:7; 21:21). A despotic king would have a designated executioner (Dan. 2:14, 24; Mark 6:27).

Guest

One who receives hospitality at another’s home or table. Hospitality was a matter of honor in ancient times. It was shameful to mistreat a guest (Judg. 19:23). A guest received special portions at the table (1 Sam. 9:22–24; Esther 1:3), although the guest of a Levitical priest was not allowed to eat the sacred offering (Lev. 22:10). Job’s misfortunes alienated him from his guests (Job 19:15), but the guests of the metaphorical Woman Folly fared worse (Prov. 9:18).

Guests abound in Jesus’ parables about banquets and weddings (Matt. 22:10–11; Mark 2:19; Luke 14:16; 19:7). Jesus himself was often a guest (Luke 7:49; 14:7; 22:11; John 2:10). King Herod’s misguided concern for his dinner guests caused the death of John the Baptist (Matt. 14:9; Mark 6:22, 26).

Herod

Several kings of the Jews, related by birth, had the name “Herod.” The Herods formed a royal dynasty that flourished during the time of Christ and the early church. The founder of the dynasty was Antipater, who was appointed by Caesar in 47 BC as procurator of Judea. The Herods, being partly Edomite (descended from Esau) as well as loyal servants of Rome, were never fully accepted by their Jewish subjects. The family history was characterized by lust, intrigue, and bloodshed. They opposed the Christian faith, sometimes violently, being responsible for the attempted murder of Jesus (Matt. 2:16), the beheading of John the Baptist (Matt. 14:1–12), and the execution of the apostle James (Acts 12:2).

(1) Herod I (Herod the Great), son of Antipater, known as King Herod (Matt. 2:1; Luke 1:5). He ruled Palestine in the years 37–4 BC with Roman consent. A skillful politician, he managed to retain the favor of Rome by deftly switching allegiances when necessary. A capable ruler in some respects, he engaged in extensive building works. His finest project was the beautification of the temple, which he hoped would win Jewish favor. The rabbis would later say, “Whoever has not seen Herod’s building has not seen anything beautiful.”

(2) Herod Antipas, son of Herod the Great, also known simply as Herod or as Herod the tetrarch (Matt. 14:1; Luke 3:19). He was given jurisdiction over Galilee and Perea, which he ruled from 4 BC to AD 39 (Luke 3:1). For this reason, when Pilate heard that Jesus came from Galilee, he sent him to Antipas for questioning (Luke 23:6–12).

(3) Herod Archelaus, ethnarch of Judea, Samaria, and Idumea (4 BC–AD 6) and son of Herod the Great (Matt. 2:22). (See also Archelaus.)

(4) Herod Philip, son of Herod the Great and Cleopatra of Jerusalem; he was tetrarch of Iturea and Traconitis in the years 4 BC–AD 34 (Luke 3:1). He rebuilt Paneas and named it “Caesarea Philippi” after the emperor and himself (Matt. 16:13; Mark 8:27). Apparently, he married his niece Salome III, the daughter of Herodias and his half brother Herod son of Mariamne II.

(5) Herod (Philip), son of Herod the Great and Mariamne II, he was married to Herodias, who left him for his half brother Antipas (Matt. 14:3; Mark 6:17; Luke 3:19). Though sharing a common name, this is a different son of Herod the Great than the Herod Philip of Luke 3:1.

(6) Herod Agrippa I, grandson of Herod the Great, also called “King Herod” in Scripture (Acts 12:1). At the height of his power (r. AD 37–44), he ruled an area coextensive with that of his grandfather. He persecuted the early church, killing James the brother of John. Encouraged by the Jews, he imprisoned Peter, intending to put him on trial, until an angel of God miraculously intervened to free him. He died prematurely in Caesarea when struck down for not giving glory to God (Acts 12:20–25).

(7) Herod Agrippa II (reigned in Chalcis AD 48–52, in Iturea AD 52–c. 93), the son of Herod Agrippa I. Prompted by the governor Festus, he gave audience to the apostle Paul to make his defense. He rejected Paul’s attempt to persuade him of the truth of the Christian faith (Acts 25:13–27; 26).

Herod Philip

Several kings of the Jews, related by birth, had the name “Herod.” The Herods formed a royal dynasty that flourished during the time of Christ and the early church. The founder of the dynasty was Antipater, who was appointed by Caesar in 47 BC as procurator of Judea. The Herods, being partly Edomite (descended from Esau) as well as loyal servants of Rome, were never fully accepted by their Jewish subjects. The family history was characterized by lust, intrigue, and bloodshed. They opposed the Christian faith, sometimes violently, being responsible for the attempted murder of Jesus (Matt. 2:16), the beheading of John the Baptist (Matt. 14:1–12), and the execution of the apostle James (Acts 12:2).

(3) Herod Archelaus, ethnarch of Judea, Samaria, and Idumea (4 BC–AD 6) and son of Herod the Great (Matt. 2:22). (See also Archelaus.)

Herodias

The unscrupulous wife of Herod Antipas who instigated the beheading of John the Baptist (Matt. 14:1–12; Mark 6:14–29). Herodias deserted her first husband, Herod Philip, son of Herod the Great and Mariamne II, to marry his half brother Herod Antipas (Matt. 14:3; Mark 6:17; Luke 3:19). When John the Baptist publicly denounced the legality of the marriage (cf. Lev. 18:16; 20:21), Antipas imprisoned him and Herodias sought revenge. Opportunity came through her daughter, Salome, whose dancing so pleased Antipas that he foolishly swore an oath promising anything she wanted.

Platter

A large plate for serving food. The head of John the Baptist was placed on a platter and presented to the daughter of Herod’s wife Herodias (Mark 6:25, 28). Jesus compared the Pharisees to a dirty platter (Luke 11:39 [NIV: “dish”]).

Prison

Imprisonment of Criminals

The story of Joseph prominently features an Egyptian prison. Joseph was falsely put in prison for the crime of molesting his master’s wife (Gen. 39:19–20), while his companions were imprisoned for the otherwise unspecified crime of causing offense to the king (40:1). As this story illustrates, the sentences were not of a predetermined duration, and release depended on the goodwill of the king (Gen. 40:13), a situation in which Paul also found himself hundreds of years later during Roman times (Acts 24:27). When Joseph imprisoned his brothers, it was on a presumption of guilt for the crime of espionage (Gen. 42:16). In Roman times, in contrast, certain prisoners had a right to be put on trial eventually, if not quickly (Acts 25:27; see also 16:37). Imprisonment could also be imposed for failure to pay a debt (Matt. 18:30). Joseph kept Simeon in prison as a guarantee that his brothers would fulfill a prior agreement (Gen. 42:19, 24). In addition to specialized dungeons, prisoners could also be confined in houses (Jer. 37:15; Acts 28:16) and pits (Zech. 9:11).

Political Imprisonment

In a number of biblical stories individuals are imprisoned for what we would today describe as political or ideological reasons. Samson was imprisoned by the Philistines in retaliation for the havoc that he had wreaked in their land and probably to prevent further incidents (Judg. 16:21). While in prison, Samson was enslaved. Several Israelite and Judean kings were imprisoned by their Mesopotamian overlords for offenses ranging from failure to pay taxes to revolt, including Hoshea (2 Kings 17:4), Jehoiachin (2 Kings 25:27–29), Manasseh (2 Chron. 33:11), and Zedekiah (Jer. 52:11). In some cases, the imprisonment of such elites was brutal and involved torture (2 Chron. 33:11; Jer. 52:11), though Jehoiachin was later released from prison and allowed to live out his captivity in some comfort (2 Kings 25:27–29).

In the NT, individuals were also imprisoned for such crimes. Barabbas was imprisoned by the Roman government of Judea for participating in an insurrection (Mark 15:7). Saul of Tarsus imprisoned a number of Christians, apparently without what we would today recognize as any criminal offense (Acts 8:3). Peter was imprisoned by Herod for political gain (Acts 12:4). Paul and Silas were imprisoned for disturbing the peace of Philippi (Acts 16:23).

Imprisonment of Prophets

A special case of political incarceration is the imprisonment of prophets. From the point of view of the biblical writers, prophets were imprisoned for speaking the truth to a powerful person who did not want to hear it. From the point of view of those in power, imprisoning dissenters was an important way of suppressing opinions that could undermine the regime. In some cases, the imprisonment of dissenters or troublemakers was a prelude to execution (John the Baptist and Jesus). The practice of imprisonment instead of immediate execution may reflect the ambivalent attitude of rulers toward controversial prophets: they could not be allowed to move about freely in society, but they had some status or right as prophet that prevented their execution. In some cases, prophets managed to confront a king without being punished, suggesting that there was a certain level of tolerance for them even when they were not supportive of royal power, a tolerance that might have contributed to the use of imprisonment instead of execution.

Ahab imprisoned Micaiah son of Imlah after he delivered an unfavorable oracle (1 Kings 22:27). Similarly, Asa imprisoned Hanani the seer (2 Chron. 16:10). These kings may have hoped that such treatment would coerce better news in the future. Jeremiah (Jer. 37:15) and John the Baptist (Mark 6:17) were also imprisoned for delivering unwelcome messages to those in power.

Theological Significance

Prisoner

Imprisonment of Criminals

Political Imprisonment

Imprisonment of Prophets

Theological Significance

Secondary Matches

The following suggestions occured because Mark 6:14-29 is mentioned in the definition.

Adultery

One of the sins forbidden in the Ten Commandments (Exod. 20:14; Deut. 5:18). Narrowly interpreted, the prohibition forbids extramarital relations with a married woman (Lev. 20:10), but it is applied more broadly in Lev. 20 and Deut. 22–24 to cover a variety of sexual offenses.

The prophets invoked the commandment in condemning God’s wayward people (Hos. 4:2; Jer. 7:9). They also used it as a metaphor for spiritual unfaithfulness to the God of the covenant (Hos. 3–4; Ezek. 16:30–34), as does Revelation for succumbing to false teaching (Rev. 2:22).

Jesus brought out the original force of the commandment, saying that a lustful look amounted to adultery (Matt. 5:27–30). He listed this commandment in Mark 10:19 (and pars.) when talking to the rich young ruler. Paul and James also made clear that the prohibition was still in force (Rom. 2:22; 13:9; James 2:11). Jesus taught that adultery springs from the unregenerate heart (Matt. 15:19 pars.), and for Paul adultery was one of “the acts of the flesh” (Gal. 5:19).

The OT penalty for adultery was stoning (Deut. 22:22–24), though it is not clear how rigorously this was enforced. Jesus forgave the woman “caught in adultery” (John 8:3–11) and told her not to repeat her sin. His leniency may have been motivated in part by the hypocrisy of her accusers, who had let the guilty man go free.

The exception clause in Jesus’ teaching that forbids divorce and remarriage (“except for sexual immorality,” which includes adultery) is found in Matt. 5:32; 19:9. Matthew only spells out what is implicit in Mark 10:11–12; Luke 16:18. Jesus stated that if a man divorces his wife so as to marry another woman (more attractive to him for some reason), this is nothing but legalized adultery. The notorious example of Herod’s marriage to Herodias may be part of the background to this teaching (Mark 6:17).

Agrippa

Several kings of the Jews, related by birth, had the name “Herod.” The Herods formed a royal dynasty that flourished during the time of Christ and the early church. The founder of the dynasty was Antipater, who was appointed by Caesar in 47 BC as procurator of Judea. The Herods, being partly Edomite (descended from Esau) as well as loyal servants of Rome, were never fully accepted by their Jewish subjects. The family history was characterized by lust, intrigue, and bloodshed. They opposed the Christian faith, sometimes violently, being responsible for the attempted murder of Jesus (Matt. 2:16), the beheading of John the Baptist (Matt. 14:1–12), and the execution of the apostle James (Acts 12:2).

(3) Herod Archelaus, ethnarch of Judea, Samaria, and Idumea (4 BC–AD 6) and son of Herod the Great (Matt. 2:22). (See also Archelaus.)

Aretas

The name of several Arabian kings. Paul mentions Aretas, king of Arabia Petraea and father-in-law of Herod Antipas, who divorced his daughter to marry Herodias, his brother’s wife (see Mark 6:17 pars.). This led to war and the subsequent destruction of Antipas’s army, which the people blamed on his murder of John the Baptist (Josephus, Ant. 8.116). Following the death of Emperor Tiberius (AD 37), Aretas apparently had gained control of Damascus, where Paul, being pursued by the king’s ethnarch, escaped in a basket through a window in the wall (Acts 9:25; 2 Cor. 11:32–33).

Capital Punishment

The government-sanctioned killing of a perpetrator of a serious offense. The biblical portrayal of capital punishment involves the concept as a God-ordained institution related to the value of humanity and the necessary recompense for the corruption or murder of that ideal (Gen. 9:6).

Methods of capital punishment. The methods of capital punishment listed in the Scriptures are several. The most common method was stoning (Lev. 24:16; Num. 15:32–36; Deut. 13:1–10; 17:2–5), and this required that the primary witnesses for the prosecution be the first to take up stones against the accused. The burning of a person was rare, but it was commanded for certain sexual crimes (Lev. 20:14). In the story of Judah and Tamar, before learning the true nature of her pregnancy, Judah ordered his daughter-in-law to be burned to death outside the city (Gen. 38:24). On occasion, the method of punishment involved being run through by a weapon: Phinehas impaled an Israelite and his Midianite lover with a spear in order to soothe the wrath of God and stop a plague (Num. 25:7–8); Canaanites under the kherem (divine command of total destruction) were to be put to the sword (Deut. 13:15), and God commanded that anyone who touched Mount Sinai be shot through with arrows (Exod. 19:13). Beheading seems to have been practiced for crimes against royalty, though there are no mandates concerning it (2 Sam. 16:9; 2 Kings 6:31–32). Other forms of capital punishment included impalement or placement upon a wooden stake (Ezra 6:11; Esther 2:23). Although some understand this to be a form of hanging, archaeological evidence and understandings of the cultures of the time suggest that impalement is more likely. Finally, the Romans took the punishment of crucifixion that they had learned from Carthage and applied it with vigor to those guilty of insurrection (Luke 23:13–33).

Offenses leading to capital punishment. With respect to Israel, the list of offenses deemed worthy of capital punishment primarily focused upon human interrelations, though a few crimes listed did involve the breaking of covenant stipulations involving one’s direct relationship with God. From this latter group, crimes such as witchcraft and divination (Exod. 22:18; Lev. 20:27; Deut. 18:20), profaning the Sabbath (Exod. 31:14–17), idolatry (Lev. 20:1–5), and blasphemy (Lev. 24:14–16; Matt. 26:65–66) were included. In these laws one sees the expression of God’s wrath and jealousy for his position in the lives of those who claim to be his. Mandates demanding death in response to some sort of corruption of the human ideal included acts such as costing another person his or her life, sexual aberrations, and familial relationships. Anyone who committed murder (Exod. 21:12), put another’s life at risk by giving false testimony in a trial (Deut. 19:16–21), or enslaved a person wrongfully (Exod. 21:16) could be considered to have cost someone’s life. Sexual aberrations regarded as worthy of death included sexual acts of bestiality, incest, and homosexuality (Exod. 22:19; Lev. 20:11–17), rape (Deut. 22:23–27), adultery (Lev. 20:10–12), and sexual relations outside of marriage (Lev. 21:9; Deut. 22:20–24). The final group of familial relationships primarily applies to the crass rebellion of children against their parents (Deut. 21:18–21).

At times, the righteous faced capital punishment for their beliefs. For example, at the hands of government faithful saints of God were sawn in two (Heb. 11:37 [a Jewish tradition may indicate that the prophet Isaiah died in such a manner]), stoned (Acts 7:58–59), and beheaded (Mark 6:27; Acts 12:2). At other times, attempts were made to inflict such punishment, but God intervened. In these examples, the punishments that God prevented include consumption by lions (Dan. 6), burning in a fiery furnace (Dan. 3), being thrown over a cliff (Luke 4:29–30), and stoning (Acts 14:19).

Capital punishment today. Several opinions persist regarding the appropriateness of continuing the practice of capital punishment in the modern era. For some, passages expressing a command concerning such types of punishment are either descriptive of what was going on or fall under the principle of a culture that no longer exists, so their laws are no longer relevant. Indeed, few today would enforce capital punishment for the same crimes that Israel punished with death. For these individuals, the question then becomes whether Scripture, which required capital punishment at the time it was written, permits capital punishment today. Those who are consistent will admit that if there is no mandate to require it, it must also be admitted that there is no mandate preventing its use as well.

On the other side are those who argue that while one cannot directly apply the laws of the OT to today’s situation, the principle expressed, particularly as it pertains to value of humanity, demands the continuation of capital punishment at least in response to heinous crimes that cost an individual his or her life, either literally as with murder, or more figuratively (but just as real) as with rape. For these people, it is significant that the requirements of capital punishment for murder precede the giving of the law (Gen. 9:6). Since the status of humanity in the eyes of God has not altered, neither has his prescribed method of dealing with those crimes been lifted; here the principle requires the practice (Rom. 13:4).

The answers are not easy, but they are important. The biblical text itself regularly balances the expected payment for sins worthy of the death penalty with expressions of grace (Gen. 4:15; Josh. 6:22–23). Furthermore, one must account for the perfect knowledge of God and his execution of his fully justified wrath in contrast to the imperfect knowledge of humanity and the inequalities that sometimes find expression in modern court settings. Finding the balance between holding a biblical worldview that appropriately seeks justice and one regulated by grace is difficult enough in terms of interpersonal relationships; when it is moved to the greater scope of society as a whole, the questions are even more significant and even more difficult to answer. See also Crimes and Punishments.

Crime

Unlike modern systems of jurisprudence, the Bible does not draw distinctions between criminal, civil, family, and religious law, either in its terminology or in its presentation of legal material. In the Bible, acts of deviance that are defined as criminal in virtually all societies are discussed alongside violations of a culturally specific, religious nature. For instance, the Ten Commandments prohibit murder and dishonoring parents (Exod. 20:12–13), as well as commanding Sabbath observance (Exod. 20:8–11). Any attempt to extract a system of criminal law from biblical materials must account for the fact that every culture defines deviance differently, with respect not only to specific acts but also to categories of deviance.

When viewed from the standpoint of the Bible’s organization of legal material, the terminology used, and the sanctions applied, there is substantial overlap in the Bible between “crime” and what modern societies define as noncriminal deviance. For present purposes, we might define “crime” broadly as including any act of social deviance that merits the application of a sanction by society at large (as opposed to the ad hoc fiats of rulers, as in Gen. 26:11) and that can be prohibited in a generally applied rule (even accounting for differences between free citizens and slaves, as in Exod. 21:18–21). As we will see, the Bible requires punishments, often severe, for a broad spectrum of offenses.

Capital Crimes

The Pentateuch mandates the death penalty for a wide variety of crimes. Often the mode of execution is unspecified. Where a particular mode is prescribed, the death penalty most often consisted of stoning (as in Num. 15:35) and less frequently of burning (Lev. 20:14) or shooting with arrows (Exod. 19:13).

Crimes incurring the death penalty include killing or murder (Exod. 21:12–14; Lev. 24:17; Num. 35:16), though the crime is aggravated or lessened depending on the intention behind it (Exod. 21:13–14) and whether a weapon is involved (Num. 35:16); attacking parents (Exod. 21:15); kidnapping and slave trading (Exod. 21:16; Deut. 24:7); cursing parents (Exod 21:17; Lev. 20:9); negligence resulting in death (Exod. 21:29); bestiality (Exod. 22:19; Lev. 20:15–16); breach of the Sabbath (Exod. 31:14–15; Num. 15:35); child sacrifice (Lev. 20:2); adultery (Lev. 20:10; Deut. 22:22); incest (Lev. 20:11–12); homosexuality (Lev. 20:13); marrying a woman and her mother (Lev. 20:14); witchcraft (Exod. 22:18; Lev. 20:27); blasphemy (Exod. 24:16); unauthorized approach to the tabernacle (Num. 1:51); idolatry (Num. 25:5); false prophecy and divination (Deut. 13:5); presumptuous prophecy (Deut. 18:20); enticing others to idolatry (Deut. 13:6–10); false testimony in a capital case (Deut. 19:19); and contempt for authorities (Deut. 17:2; Josh. 1:18).

When the body of an executed criminal was displayed by hanging, it had to be removed by nightfall (Deut. 21:22). The death penalty was not to be applied vicariously to family members of criminals (Deut. 24:16). In OT texts, execution was to be carried out by the victims (Deut. 13:9), families of victims (the “avenger of blood” of Num. 35:19), or witnesses to the crime.

The NT mentions an official or professional executioner (Mark 6:27). Paul declares that the authorities rightly derive the power of the sword from God (Rom. 13:4).

Punishments for Noncapital Crimes

Corporal punishment. Beating as a criminal punishment is rare in the OT (Jer. 20:2; 37:15). Most OT references to beating occur in the context of the household, as a punishment for slaves or children. Deuteronomy 25:3 limits the number of strokes in a flogging to forty (see 2 Cor. 11:24). Flogging was commonly applied as a criminal punishment in Roman times, and it was a common mode of discipline within the Roman military (Acts 16:22; 2 Cor. 11:25; 1 Pet. 2:20).

Restitution. Crimes against property were punished by compelling the offender to make restitution by repaying, often in an amount that exceeded the actual damages, including in cases of theft or negligence (Exod. 21:33; 22:3–15); killing an animal (Lev. 24:18, 21); having sexual relations with a virgin not pledged to be married (Exod. 22:16); injuring a pregnant woman (Exod. 21:22); harming a slave (Exod. 21:26–27). Financial restitution could not be made for murder (Num. 35:31).

Retribution. The notion of the lex talionis, the law of retribution, is stated in Exod. 21:23–24: “life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot” (cf. Lev. 24:19–20; Deut. 19:21; Matt. 5:38). This formula appears in other ancient legal traditions. The idea of bodily mutilation may strike modern readers as barbaric, but such laws may actually have been relatively enlightened by ancient standards, as they imposed a proportional limit on retribution.

Incarceration. In modern societies, incarceration and probation account for the vast majority of the punishments resulting from criminal offenses. In the OT, incarceration is rarely mentioned apart from the imprisonment of war captives (e.g., Judg. 16:21) and political dissidents. Jeremiah was imprisoned several times for his criticism of the regime (Jer. 32:2; 37:15). Throughout the Bible, prisoners often are guarded by soldiers rather than by professional jailers.

Paul imprisoned Christians prior to his conversion (Acts 8:3), and he himself was imprisoned or placed under arrest several times (e.g., Acts 16:23; 20:23; 24:27; Rom. 16:7). John the Baptist was imprisoned after he criticized Herod (Mark 6:17). Again, in both cases, incarceration was used to silence and segregate someone whose free movement in society threatened political stability rather than to punish a common criminal. In Matt. 5:25–26 Jesus refers to imprisonment for an unspecified reason, though the threat that “you will not get out until you have paid the last penny” suggests that incarceration was a substitute for an unpaid fine or monetary penalty. This recalls Exod. 22:3, which mandates that a thief who could not make financial restitution for theft must be sold (as a slave).

Banishment and cities of refuge. A number of OT passages refer to the “cutting off” of a person from the community. It is not clear whether this language refers to exile or the death penalty; several of the crimes thus punished are known to be capital crimes in other texts.

The law of Num. 35:6–34 establishes six “cities of refuge” among the towns allotted to the Levites. To these cities an unintentional killer could flee from the “avenger of blood,” a relative of the victim, until such time as the case could be adjudicated by the whole community. A killer who was found to have acted unintentionally and without malice could remain in the city of refuge, safe from retribution, until the death of the high priest, at which time the killer was free to return home with impunity.

Trials and Judgments

In biblical times Israel did not have an independent judiciary. Judgments in criminal cases were rendered by local elders (Josh. 20:4), communities (Num. 35:24), monarchs, or other rulers and officials. The judges of the book of Judges were primarily military rulers, though they may have also adjudicated cases as a function of their military and political power (Judg. 4:5). Cases were decided on the basis of eyewitness testimony (Num. 35:30) and, in the case of capital crimes, on the basis of multiple witnesses (Deut. 17:6). In some cases, the Bible provides detailed statutory criteria for making such judgments, as in the discussion in Num. 35:16–28 of the difference between murder and unintentional killing. In some cases, where the determination of guilt or innocence would have been impossible, as in the case of suspected adultery, a verdict could be attained through divination (Num. 5:11–31). As already noted, the judgment of some cases could be affected by the slave status of those involved (Exod. 20:20–21; see also 22:8–9).

The trial and execution of Naboth, though ultimately a subversion of justice of the highest order, offers an insight into the operation of justice in Israel in the monarchic period (1 Kings 21:1–16). Naboth was accused on a trumped-up charge of blasphemy, a capital crime (Exod. 24:16). He was tried by the notables of his city, and on the testimony of two (false) witnesses (Deut. 17:6), he was then stoned to death.

From the standpoint of OT law, the trial and execution of Jesus were complicated by the context of concurrent systems of Jewish and Roman law and government. Like Naboth, Jesus was accused by false witnesses (Matt. 26:60–61). Ultimately, the Sanhedrin determined that because Jesus had blasphemed in its presence by identifying himself as the Messiah and the Son of God, further witness testimony was unnecessary in order to achieve the desired result, the death penalty (Matt. 26:65–66; John 19:7). Ultimately, the Sanhedrin had to involve the Roman governor because it lacked the authority to execute a criminal (John 18:31). By the time Jesus was taken before Pilate, the charge had been changed from a religious one to a political one: Jesus claimed to be the king of the Jews, thus subverting Roman authority (Matt. 26:11–12). Eventually, Pilate tortured and executed Jesus not because he saw merit in the charges but rather to avoid a riot (Matt. 27:24; John 19:4, 12). Luke reports that Jesus also had a trial before Herod Antipas, the ruler to whom Jesus was subject as a Galilean (23:7). Thus, the trial of Jesus in some ways reflects both Jewish and Roman law, but it also involves some purely pragmatic (and legally and morally questionable) actions on the part of both the Sanhedrin and Pilate.

Crime and Punishment

Capital Crimes

The NT mentions an official or professional executioner (Mark 6:27). Paul declares that the authorities rightly derive the power of the sword from God (Rom. 13:4).

Punishments for Noncapital Crimes

Trials and Judgments

Criminal

Capital Crimes

The NT mentions an official or professional executioner (Mark 6:27). Paul declares that the authorities rightly derive the power of the sword from God (Rom. 13:4).

Punishments for Noncapital Crimes

Trials and Judgments

Imprisoned

Imprisonment of Criminals

Political Imprisonment

Imprisonment of Prophets

Theological Significance

Instruments

The Bible often refers to songs, music, musical sounds and instruments, and dancing. We can infer several details about the instruments from their descriptions in the Bible as well as from archaeological finds and other ancient texts. NT references to music are scant; the OT material may be supplemented by ancient Near Eastern resources from Egypt, Canaan/Israel, Ugarit, and Mesopotamia.

Music

Style. In all likelihood, Israel’s music sounded much like that of its neighbors. This conjecture is particularly strengthened by findings from Ugarit, a city on the Syrian coast across from Cyprus. These findings, roughly from the time of the judges, mention some of the same musical instruments found in the Bible, some of which have been uncovered by archaeologists. The style of the poetry is very similar to the Song of Deborah (Judg. 5). Lyrically, some of the descriptions and titles used by the Canaanites for Baal are applied by Israel to Yahweh, to assert that he is the true God who has these attributes. Given these similarities in text, poetic style, and instrumentation, it is most probable that Israel’s music sounded much like that of its neighbors. Still, there is some evidence for regional styles. The direction to play psalms “according to gittith” (superscription to Pss. 8; 81; 84) may refer to the style of Gath, and similar regional interpretations are proposed for other directions in the psalms.

Lyrics. The lyric side of Israel’s songs exhibits rhythm and deliberate structure. The most obvious planned structure is the alphabetic acrostic, where the poet or songwriter composes one or more verses to begin with successive letters of the Hebrew alphabet. But the psalms exhibit many other structures involving symmetries and balance, such as equal halves, centered lines, symmetrical patterns of stanza length, and other features. The lines themselves usually demonstrate balance among their parts, having similar numbers of beats or accented syllables. Several lament poems exhibit a particular pattern known as qinah meter, which presumably also fits a musical template.

Performance. The performance of the psalms was, on at least some occasions, accompanied by multiple instruments and performed in a choir to achieve the volume necessary for community gatherings, which had no amplification equipment. It is generally assumed, though not known, that all choir members sang melody rather than in parts. They may well have integrated solo performances and musical interludes. From the poetry of the psalms, we observe different speaking voices. That is, in some instances, we hear the voice of the king, or of the people generally, or an official who addresses the audience, or a priestly or prophetic speaking voice, even the words of God himself. This is very suggestive that public performance may have brought different singers to the foreground at different times. There are also poems that employ a repeated refrain, suggesting an antiphonal performance, and others in which the priests or people in Jerusalem take up parts different from those of the arriving worshipers. While the exact execution of these songs is speculative, these elements suggest a certain amount of pageantry, at least for community settings. David is responsible for setting up Israel’s musical orders for the temple, with professional musicians with rotating responsibilities (1 Chron. 16; 25).

Instruments

Strings. The most frequently mentioned instrument is the kinnor, a lyre, also often referred to as a harp. The sound box of the harp is at the base, from which a straight or curved neck rises at a sharp angle so that the strings going from the box to the neck are of different length. The lyre has two uprights and a crosspiece on top, from which the strings of similar length stretch down to the sound box. The kinnor-lyre had eight to ten strings (based on Akkadian and Ugaritic findings and Jewish descriptions) and could be played with a pick or by hand. David’s “harp” was such a lyre. The “harp” mentioned in the NT (1 Cor. 14:7; Rev. 5:8; 14:2; 15:2) probably was also a lyre. Another OT lyre, or perhaps a harp, the nebel, complemented the kinnor-lyre. Jewish tradition about the strings implies that it produced a lower sound. The nebel-lyre is most often mentioned with other instruments, though occasionally alone. Another stringed instrument mentioned three times, the ’asor, may have been a harp or a lyre with ten strings (Pss. 33:2; 92:3; 144:9). In Pss. 45:8; 150:4 there is mention of “the strings,” which may refer to more than just the stringed instruments specifically mentioned in the Bible. The ancient world also had lutes, an instrument with a long, straight neck, fretted like a guitar or ukulele, proceeding from a small sound box.

Percussion. Timbrels, cymbals, and castanets or rattles are percussion instruments mentioned in the Bible. The timbrel, also known from Egypt and Ugarit, was a hand drum, like a tambourine but without metal jingles. The timbrel accompanies dancing and may have been used by the dancers (Exod. 15:20; Judg. 11:34; 1 Sam. 18:6). Cymbals may have been paired or individual, but it is not certain whether these latter were suspended cymbals or finger cymbals, being four to six inches in diameter. In 2 Sam. 6:5 there is mention of another percussion instrument, mena’an’im (the root of this word means “to shake”), perhaps “sistrums” (NIV) or “castanets” (NASB) (although the KJV renders it as “cornets”). Egyptian sistrums were small, forked, metal instruments with three sliding crossbars that had hooked ends. Archaeologists have also found rattles made of pottery, with ceramic balls inside. Castanets were small hand-clappers joined with a string. Israel likely had all of these, though it is hard to know which is referred to in 2 Sam. 6:5. The cymbal is mentioned once in the NT (1 Cor. 13:1), though not as musically pleasing in that context.

Woodwinds and horns. The OT attests to both an animal horn, most frequently called a shopar, and a metal trumpet, the khatsotserah (Num. 10:2–10). The NT refers to a horn with a word used to translate both OT terms (salpinx). The ancient world had both flutes and shawms. Shawms have a bell-like flare at the end, while the shaft of a flute is straight to the end. What is likely a double-reed shawm is frequently translated “flute” (1 Sam. 10:5; 1 Kings 1:40; Isa. 5:12; 30:29; Jer. 48:36 [NIV: “pipes”]). It is unclear whether the instrument mentioned in Gen. 4:21; Ps. 150:4 commonly translated as “flute” is a woodwind or a stringed instrument. The NT also mentions a flute or reed instrument (Matt. 11:17; 9:23; 1 Cor. 14:7; Rev. 18:22) that could be played for dancing or mourning.

Simplicity and complexity. Instruments such as horns, trumpets, and some percussion instruments were not used only for making music. The blowing of the ram’s horn or the trumpet might be used to sound the alarm, convene an assembly, or in preparation for an announcement. Aaron was to wear metal bells on the hem of his robe when entering the holy place (Exod. 28:33–35). Some of the percussion instruments may have been used to augment dance and keep rhythm more than to make music for singing. The strings were the primary instruments to accompany singing, though they were not necessarily accompanied by song.

A few Assyrian texts treat the tuning and playing of music with technical notations. From their string designations and tuning directions we can infer that their scales utilized seven notes as in the modern octave (seven notes plus one repeating). The notes for tuning stringed instruments suggest that the tunings produced different scales. Musical theory, then, was not completely absent. Many of the pictorial representations of musicians from Egypt and Mesopotamia include multiple instruments being played together (cf. Nebuchadnezzar’s instructions in Dan. 3:5, 7, 10, 15 and David’s celebration in 2 Sam. 6:5). These are not simply multiple kinds of noisemakers, although community gatherings would require volume. Rather, they exhibit a sense of understanding which instruments complemented each other well. While the singing of the ancient Near East no doubt included chanting, singing with multiple instruments suggests something more melodious than mere chanting interspersed with the strumming of a lute. This music could be styled to fit different moods, to soothe, to celebrate, to mourn, to worship. It is reasonable to suggest that the music accompanying the psalms reflected the wide range of emotions mentioned in the text.

Dancing

The dancing mentioned in the Bible is usually celebratory and positive and is combined with singing or the playing of musical instruments. Such dancing may occur at any happy occasion but is mentioned most often in connection with victory or worship (e.g., Exod. 15:20; Judg. 11:34; 1 Sam. 18:6). The women of Shiloh “join in the dancing” (Judg. 21:21) at an annual festival, which implies some manner of folk dancing. The dancing of Herodias’s daughter probably was erotic (Matt. 14:6; Mark 6:22), and the dancing of the Israelites around the golden calf probably was laden with sensuality as well (Exod. 32:19).

Jail

Imprisonment of Criminals

Political Imprisonment

Imprisonment of Prophets

Theological Significance

Jailer

Imprisonment of Criminals

Political Imprisonment

Imprisonment of Prophets

Theological Significance

Lute

Music

Instruments

Dancing

Lyre

Music

Instruments

Dancing

Meals

A banquet is a joyful celebration, usually involving wine, abundant food, music, and dancing. Banquets celebrated special occasions such as the forging of a relationship (Gen. 26:26–30), the coronation of a king (1 Chron. 12:28–40), the completion of the temple (2 Chron. 7:8), victory over one’s enemies (Gen. 14:18–19; Ps. 23:5), weddings (Gen. 29:22; John 2:1–11; Rev. 19:9), birthdays of royals (Mark 6:21), and the reunion of estranged relatives (Luke 15:23–24). Banquets also symbolized one’s status, since they were by invitation only. One’s seating arrangement corresponded to one’s social status in the group, since there were “higher” and “lower” positions (Luke 14:8–9). During the meal, people reclined on bedlike seats.

Music

Music

Instruments

Dancing

Perea

The Greek name for the region east of the Jordan River and Samaria, south of the Decapolis (modern Jordan). In the NT it is referred to as peran tou Iordanou (“beyond the Jordan” or “the region across the Jordan”) (Matt. 4:25; 19:1; Mark 3:8; 10:1). Galilean Jews often detoured through Perea when traveling to Judea in order to avoid Samaria (John 4:3–4, 9). It was part of the kingdom of Herod the Great, apportioned to his son Herod Antipas, who also ruled Galilee as a client king of the Roman Empire in Jesus’ time. Herod’s fortress in Machaerus (southern Perea) is the probable location of John the Baptist’s imprisonment and beheading (Mark 6:17–28). Jesus traveled through Perea (Matt. 19–20) to arrive in Jerusalem for his Passion Week.

Persecute

The words “persecute” and “persecution” refer to the act of pursuing and wrongly afflicting someone. The terms occur mostly in the NT, where typically they refer to persecution of Jesus’ followers. Their persecution takes varying forms, such as false legal accusations, imprisonment, or execution.

Persecution throughout the Bible. Within the NT, the English words “persecute” and “persecution” are, with few exceptions, translations of the Greek verb diōkō or the related noun diōgmos. However, diōkō can also mean simply “to pursue, follow after,” such as when the object of pursuit is righteousness or peace (Rom. 9:30; 1 Tim. 6:11; 2 Tim. 2:22; 1 Pet. 3:11). The term is used in this same sense in the LXX (Gen. 14:15; Deut. 16:20; 19:6; 2 Sam. 22:38). The Greek words were translated into English as “persecute” or “persecution” when the translators thought that the context also showed wrongful affliction. The corresponding Hebrew word radap shares this meaning.

In this sense of wrongful affliction, persecution occurs throughout the Bible. The Egyptian army pursues the people of Israel to the Red Sea (Exod. 14:8; Neh. 9:11). On two occasions, the people want to stone the prophet Moses to death (Exod. 17:3–4; Num. 14:10). Saul hunts David (1 Sam. 23:25; 24:14; 26:18). Saul wrongly slays the Gibeonites out of a sense of patriotism (1 Sam. 21:1–2). Jezebel kills God’s prophets (1 Kings 18:13). The prophet Uriah is slain (Jer. 26:23), and the prophet Jeremiah is incarcerated (Jer. 38:6–9). Isaiah, Ezekiel, and other prophets are strongly opposed, suggesting persecution (2 Chron. 36:16; Isa. 1:2–6; Ezek. 2:3–4; 3:7–9; Acts 7:52). Daniel is cast to the lions (Dan. 6:16). A king’s decree allows execution of all Jews for holding the laws of God above the king’s commands, indicating pagan religious hostility (Esther 3). Pagan hostility is shown by the later deaths of many Jews in the religious persecution described in 1 Maccabees and in the first-century uprisings in Egypt described by the Jewish philosopher Philo of Alexandria.

Persecution in the New Testament. In the NT, persecution begins with the imprisonment and beheading of John the Baptist (Mark 6:16–18; Josephus, Ant. 18.116–19). Jesus is accused by the religious authorities and eventually is tried and executed by Pilate. The religious authorities later flog Jesus’ apostles for teaching about him (Acts 5:40). The disciple Stephen is soon accused by false witnesses, tried, and executed by stoning (7:59–60). At this time, Saul (Paul) of Tarsus drags men and women from the Jerusalem church off to prison by authority from the chief priests. Saul has them beaten, and at their execution he casts votes against them (8:3; 22:4, 5, 19; 26:10). After this, Herod executes Jesus’ disciple James (12:2). Saul (Paul) converts, and then he suffers threats, beatings, stoning, and prison (Acts 13:50; 14:5, 19; 16:22–35; 24:27; 2 Cor. 11:23–25). Disciples in Macedonia and Achaia suffer; some Hebrew-speaking disciples suffer imprisonment and property seizure; and some disciples in Asia Minor die as martyrs (2 Cor. 1:6; 1 Thess. 1:6–7; Heb. 10:34; Rev. 2:8–13). Pagan persecution of Christians continued for nearly three centuries, sometimes far more severely, according to records compiled by Eusebius (Hist. eccl. 2.25; 3.17–19, 32–33; 4.8, 13, 15; 5.1–2; 6.1, 4, 41–42; 8.2–3, 7–13). Persecution was sporadic, often beginning with slander or legal accusations. It occurred in many regions, with leaders especially suffering. Records of persecution survived haphazardly.

Jesus says that we are to love and do good to our enemies and pray for our persecutors (Matt. 5:44; Luke 6:27). While being crucified, Jesus accordingly prays, “Father, forgive them” (Luke 23:34; cf. Acts 7:60). Preparing for arrest, Jesus warns his disciples to pray to avoid temptation, and he himself prays (Matt. 26:41). Both Jesus and Paul say that believers will be persecuted (Matt. 24:9; 1 Thess. 3:4; 2 Tim. 3:12), but God gives strength in persecution (Acts 14:22; 2 Cor. 12:10).

Persecution

Pipe

Music

Instruments

Dancing

Punish

Capital Crimes

The NT mentions an official or professional executioner (Mark 6:27). Paul declares that the authorities rightly derive the power of the sword from God (Rom. 13:4).

Punishments for Noncapital Crimes

Trials and Judgments

Punishment

Capital Crimes

The NT mentions an official or professional executioner (Mark 6:27). Paul declares that the authorities rightly derive the power of the sword from God (Rom. 13:4).

Punishments for Noncapital Crimes

Trials and Judgments

Salome

Mark lists Salome among the women who observed Jesus’ crucifixion (Mark 15:40), who followed and cared for Jesus in Galilee (15:41), and who attempted to anoint Jesus’ body (16:1). Matthew 27:56 may speak of her as “the mother of Zebedee’s sons,” who asked Jesus to honor her sons (Matt. 20:20–21). Although of doubtful accuracy, several extrabiblical sources relate Salome to Mary, Joseph, or Zachariah. Additionally, Josephus identifies the daughter of Herodias (Matt. 14:6–11; Mark 6:22–28) by this name.

Theft

Capital Crimes

The NT mentions an official or professional executioner (Mark 6:27). Paul declares that the authorities rightly derive the power of the sword from God (Rom. 13:4).

Punishments for Noncapital Crimes

Trials and Judgments

Thief

Capital Crimes

The NT mentions an official or professional executioner (Mark 6:27). Paul declares that the authorities rightly derive the power of the sword from God (Rom. 13:4).

Punishments for Noncapital Crimes

Trials and Judgments

Tribune

A high-ranking Roman military officer. Translated “commander” in the NIV, the Greek word chiliarchos designates an officer (Lat. tribunus) in charge of a cohort, which ideally consisted of six hundred soldiers, including over a hundred cavalry (Mark 6:21; John 18:12; Acts 21:31–33, 37; 22:24, 26–29; 23:10, 15, 17–19, 22; 24:22; 25:23; Rev. 6:15; 19:18). A legion consisted of ten cohorts and typically had four to six tribunes. At the arrest of Jesus (John 18:12), it is likely that only a small detachment from a cohort was present.

Showing 1 to 50 of235 results

1. Bonhoeffer, A Man of Conscience

Illustration

Max A. Forsythe

Working at the higher political levels of resistance to the Nazi wickedness in the late thirties, the German pastor, Dietrich Bonhoeffer encouraged the military authorities who made up the Kreslau Circle. Early on, he was arrested and held in prison, like many other Christians who openly condemned and opposed Herr Hitler. Like many men of conscience, he did not survive World War Two. In fact, there is a report that when Americans were fighting there way into the prison where Bonhoeffer was held, the Nazi guards hurriedly moved through the prison with a "must not survive" list and shot him and others down in cold blood right in their cells.

His crime? To use a modern phrase, Bonhoeffer was considered politically incorrect! Why? Like many Christians he told the truth and was willing to abide by the consequences of condemning the dangers and madness of Hitler and his occultic Black Shirted Strassen Soldaten. While history does record the fact that the first admittees to the Nazi concentration camps were by and large Christian, by the end of the war - their immediate numbers were overwhelmed by those Jews who had neither the finances nor opportunities to escape the growing persecution in the mid forties. People of faith, to use another contemporary term were harassed, harangued and eventually destroyed because the pagan power of the Nazi state must be built up at any social cost, thus any who did not support the state were deigned enemies of the that state! So it always has been and will be in the worldly history of mankind. Where ever absolutism raises its ugly head and demands the respect if not acceptance of any and every moral error or theological heresy.

In our text for today we read about such political subtleties and even learn anew the old worldly proverb, "Hell has no fury like a woman scorned."

2. A Christian Understanding of Worth

Illustration

Eric Ritz

When we attempt to live a life worthy of the Gospel it is because our understanding of "worth" is far different from the world's. John the Baptist was not beheaded because he went along with the status quo. John gave his life because of his commitment to truth as he understood it, much like Dietrich Bonhoeffer and his struggles with Nazism and Hitler. Being a pastor in the German Lutheran Church, Bonhoeffer was forced to choose between his loyalty to God or to an insane ruler. He was executed in 1945 for the opposition he voiced to the satanic rule of Hitler.

As G.K. Chesterton so concisely wrote: "It is not that Christianity has been tried and found wanting, but tried and found difficult." Life has many roads to travel. However, we choose the road on which the shadow of the cross falls. It always leads to freedom and to victory when the final lap of the race is run. Some 2000 years later, we speak of the reigns of the Herods and Caesars with pity and disdain, but the names of John the Baptist and Jesus Christ live on as those for whom life was lived with devotion and courage.

3. No Going Back

Illustration

Staff

When Julius Caesar landed on the shores of Britain with his Roman legions, he took a bold and decisive step to ensure the success of his military venture. Ordering his men to march to the edge of the Cliffs of Dover, he commanded them to look down at the water below. To their amazement, they saw every ship in which they had crossed the channel engulfed in flames. Caesar had deliberately cut off any possibility of retreat. Now that his soldiers were unable to return to the continent, there was nothing left for them to do but to advance and conquer! And that is exactly what they did.

Note: This may not be historically accurate. If Caesar burnt his boats (and it looks like he may have) it might have been to keep them from falling into the enemies hands, and the ship burning might have been in Alexandria not Britain. So, this story might best be introduced as a legend.

4. Jesus Doesn't Know Him Like We Do

Illustration

A woman and her grandmother a very forgiving and religious soul were sitting on their porch discussing a member of the family. "He's just no good," the young woman said. "He's completely untrustworthy, not to mention lazy." "Yes, he's bad," the grandmother said as she rocked back and forth in her rocker, "but Jesus loves him." "I'm not so sure of that," the younger woman persisted. "Oh, yes," assured the elderly lady. "Jesus loves him." She rocked and thought for a few more minutes and then added, "Of course, Jesus doesn't know him like we do."

5. We Cannot Not Be Sinners

Illustration

Scott Hoezee

Most people are loathe to admit that they are just generally bent toward the bad, inclined to do it wrong. So when the Christian tradition declares to any and all, "You are a sinner," most people these days reply, "What did I do?" If sin exists at all, it is merely episodic, an occasional (and inexplicable) "lapse" from our better nature, which is at bottom "pretty good."

How foreign is the notion articulated by theologian Emil Brunner. Brunner once noted that we can, in principle, avoid any particular sin. And we often do. Few if any people give in to every dark impulse. The average person, whether or not he is particularly religious, resists many temptations that come his way on the average day. He does not slip the Snickers bar into his coat instead of paying for it, does not exceed the speed limit, does not shove the person ahead of him in line for the subway, does not grab and grope at the co-worker in the attractive dress.

In principle the sinner can, and often does, avoid any particular sin, Brunner noted. But what we cannot do is avoid every sin. We cannot not be sinners. We cannot claim that we have never done it wrong. We cannot promise that we will never do another wrong thing, speak another cross word, or think another angry thought in the future. Even if the alcoholic promises never to take another drink or the adulterer vows never again to wake up in the wrong bed and even if they keep those promises what they cannot promise is that in addition to staying sober or chaste they will also remain just overall sinless.

Evil is everywhere and often comes in the most banal, ordinary of trappings. Mark 6 reminds us of this, too. No less than John the Baptist ended up being killed not because of the machinations of world-class evil or the titanic doings of horrifying figures of towering, marrow-chilling stature. No, John was killed because somebody said something silly in a boozy moment of untoward sexual bravado. It's not quite the end we imagined for God's chosen servant John!

6. If It Meant Losing Our Heads

Illustration

Scott Hoezee

Nestled into the midst of this sordid tale is the curious line in verse 20 that Herod liked to listen to John. What do we make of that? Did he like to listen to John in the way a man might enjoy watching a trained monkey or the antics of a pet dog? Was John the Baptist a kind of court jester for Herod—someone whose wild-eyed, red-faced, veins-popping-out-of-his-neck preaching helped to pass the hours on lazy palace afternoons? Or did he like to listen to John because something about John's bracing honesty and impassioned words about the kingdom of God were getting through to Herod? It's hard to say, though the former may have some weight in that we know that John had confronted this King Herod (see the Textual Points for more information on Herod Antipas) over his very public affair with his sister-in-law. That sufficiently angered Herod to have John jailed but the message surely never penetrated Herod's thick skull (nor his hidebound heart). He may have liked to listen to John but he didn't take much to heart. So maybe John was a kind of court jester.

If so, maybe this is one of the earliest examples of why preaching always makes us "fools for Christ." To those whose hearts are not touched by the Holy Spirit, even the best preaching (and John's was some of the best the world has ever known) looks like a sideshow, a freak show, the weirdest thing in the world. Preachers today don't have quite the respect and social cache they once enjoyed, but most people don't burst into paroxysms of laughter and giggles when you tell them, "I'm a preacher." What we sometimes forget, however, is that at the heart of what we do as preachers (or what anyone does who witnesses to the gospel) is something that, to the mind of the wider world, is silly.

Maybe sometimes we preachers try to hard to be liked, to be respected on a par with doctors and lawyers and other white-collar professionals. And maybe that's the wrong goal—for preachers, for all gospel witnesses. If preaching meant maybe losing our heads—literally—would we still do it?

7. Historical Background

Illustration

Scott Hozee

Only the back-story here provides a glimmer of something positive to say about how it all came about. According to a very helpful article by Craig Keener in The Lectionary Commentary (Eerdmans, 2001), John the Baptist was probably the only figure who had the courage (and the holy pluck) to stand up to Herod Antipas. This is not the Herod who was around when Jesus was born nor is this the Book of Acts Herod who later persecuted the church and killed, among others, James. But what this middle Herod shared in common with those other two was a real nasty streak of immorality, self-aggrandizement, and corruption.

He had been married originally to a Nabataean princess whom he later dumped in favor of marrying his brother's wife, Herodias. You know the old saying, the heart wants what it wants, and Herod's heart wanted Herodias. So even though it made him guilty of multiple sins (adultery and incest among them) and even though it angered the king of the Nabataeans (to whom Herod's first wife fled in humiliation after Herod took up with his sister-in-law Herodias)—and even though this later led to a military conflict with the Nabataeans in which Herod was roundly defeated and embarrassed—nevertheless Herod married Herodias, and no one save John the Baptist had the moral fortitude to point out how wrong it was.

Had John just stuck to baptisms and some harsh pronouncements about the Pharisees and such, he would have been OK. But John landed in prison because he had the temerity to question the morality of Herod the Tetrarch (he never was actually designated a king and when he petitioned Rome for the title, Caesar Gaius Caligula banished Herod and Herodias to Gaul for the rest of their lives). As has too often been the case in history, the powers that be are content to regard religion as a kind of hobby that seems to satisfy certain needs people have. And so long as it stays in the realm of "hobby," religion and the people who practice it are left alone. But when the religious start to stray out of that designated realm, that's when things get ugly fast.

8. The Presence of Doubt

Illustration

David Heller

You are familiar with David Heller's delightful little book, Dear God: Children's Letters to God. There are some wonderfully witty observations. For example,

Dear God, What do you think about all those movies made about you around Easter time? I think they're kind of corny, myself. Your buddy, Charles (age 9)

Dear God, What do you do with families that don't have much faith? There's a family on the next block like that. I don't want to get them in trouble, so I can't say who. See you in church. Alexis (age 10)

Dear God, Want to hear a joke? What is red, very long, and you hear it right before you go to sleep? Give up? A sermon. Your friend, Frank (age 11)

Then there is this one from a youngster who sees all the misery in the world and wonders: "Dear God, I have doubts about you sometimes. Sometimes I really believe. Like when I was four and I hurt my arm and you healed it up fast. But my question is, if you could do this why don't you stop all the bad in the world? Like war. Like diseases. Like famine. Like drugs. And there are problems in other people's neighborhoods, too. I'll try to believe more. Ian (age 10)"

Is there any of young Ian in you? If you are honest, probably. Undoubtedly, there was some Ian in John the Baptist.

9. Not All Conflict Is Healthy

Illustration

Eric Ritz

There is a silly story about a man who walks into a bar and says, "Bartender, give me two shots."

The bartender asks, "You want them both now or one at a time?"

The guy says, "Oh, I want them both now. One's for me and one's for this little guy here," and he pulls a 3-inch-high man out of his pocket.

The bartender asks, "He can drink?"

"Oh, sure," says the man, "He can drink."

So the bartender pours the shots and sure enough, the little guy drinks it all up. "That's amazing" says the bartender. "What else can he do, can he walk?"

The man flicks a quarter down to the end of the bar and says, "Hey, Jake. Go get that." The little guy runs down to the end of the bar and picks up the quarter. Then he runs back down and gives it to the man.

The bartender is in total shock. "That's amazing" he says, "what else can he do? Does he talk?"

The man says "Sure he talks. Hey, Jake, tell him about that time we were hunting in Africa and YOU CALLED THAT WITCH DOCTOR AN IDIOT!"

Not all conflict is healthy or desirable. But some conflict is unavoidable. "Be careful," said Jesus, "when all men speak well of you."

10. Brave Soldiers

Illustration

Craig Brian Larson

Tim Bowden, in his book One Crowded Hour, tells about an incident that happened during the confrontation between Malaysia and Indonesia in 1964

A group of Gurkhas from Nepal were asked if they would be willing to jump from transport planes into combat against the Indonesians if the need arose. The Gurkhas had the right to turn down the request because they had never been trained as paratroopers. Bowden quotes an account of the story:

"Now the Gurkhas usually agreed to anything, but on this occasion they provisionally rejected the plan. But the next day one of their NCOs sought out the British officer who made the request and said they had discussed the matter further and would be prepared to jump under certain conditions.

"What are they?" asked the British Officer.

"The Gurkhas told him they would jump if the land was marshy or reasonably soft with no rocky outcrops, because they were inexperienced in falling. The British officer considered this, and said that the dropping areas would almost certainly be over jungle, and there would not be rocky outcrops, so that seemed all right. Was there anything else?

"Yes, said the Gurkhas. They wanted the plane to fly as slowly as possible and no more than one hundred feet high. The British officer pointed out the planes always did fly as slowly as possible when dropping troops, but to jump from 100 feet was impossible, because the parachutes would not open in time from that height.

"Oh," said the Gurkhas, "that's all right, then. We'll jump with parachutes anywhere. You didn't mention parachutes before!"

Any church could use such Gurkha-like commitment and courage.

A SHORTER VERSION

In his book One Crowded Hour, Tim Bowden describes an incident in Borneo in 1964. Nepalese fighters known as Gurkhas were asked if they would be willing to jump from airplanes into combat against the Indonesians. The Gurkhas didn't clearly understand what was involved, but they bravely said they would do it, asking only that the plane fly slowly over a swampy area and no higher than 100 feet. When they were told that the parachutes would not have time to open at that height, the Gurkhas replied, "Oh, you didn't mention parachutes before!"

11. Do You Serve the Real King?

Illustration

Bill Hayes

If you play the game of chess, you are familiar with the pieces on the board – from the lowly pawn to the all–important king.

If one of your pawns gets "captured" – it's not that big a deal. But if your king gets captured – the game is over. Pawns have little power – are usually used to set up other pieces or sacrificed to help clear the way for the other, more important pieces – like the rook, knight, bishop, or queen. Kings, however, while their movement is somewhat limited when compared to the other pieces – are the one piece you want to protect at all cost.

That's the way it is in life, also – isn't it?

People will strive to be a king – but nobody wants to be a pawn. The truth, however, is that even kings can end up being pawns (like Herod Antipas did in today's Gospel account) – and we have to be careful that we live our lives following and serving the real King – God – instead of being someone else's pawn.

Do you serve the real King - God - or are you someone else's pawn?

12. Commitment

Illustration

Donald Deffner

J. Upton Dickson, who brands himself as a Christian humorist, joked after writing a pamphlet called “Cower Power,” that he was thinking about founding a society called D.O.O.R.M.A.T.S. It is an acronym for “Dependent Order of Really Meek and Timid Souls.” Their logo would be a yellow caution light. And their motto would be “The meek shall inherit the earth…if that’s okay with everybody.” Of course, Upton quipped, the society didn’t last very long when someone objected!

13. Public-pressure

Illustration

Dan Erickson

One of my favorite stories is The Emperor's New Clothes. It is the tale about an Emperor who was swindled by a supposed tailor. The man claims to sew a new, special suit for the Emperor. It is special because only those who are wise will see the clothes, while those who are foolish will find them invisible. Not wanting to be labeled a fool, the Emperor pretends he can see the suit, pretends to put it on, and then proceeds to walk around the castle in his underwear. Not wanting to be considered fools, all his advisors and servants pretend to be able to see the clothes as well and comment on how beautiful they are. As the Emperor leads a parade through the city, his loyal subjects "ah" and "oh" over clothing they cannot see. Everyone is lying, because they are afraid to tell the truth. If they admit they see the Emperor in his underwear, they will certainly be ridiculed by all their neighbors. But, finally, one young boy exposes the deception. He blurts out that the Emperor is not wearing any clothes and his words encourage others to speak the truth as well.

14. How Life's Pressures Affect Good Judgment - Sermon Starter

Illustration

Brett Blair

In the opera Faust, there is a fight to the finish between Satan and the young man Valentine. During the course of the fight, Satan breaks Valentine's sword and he stands poised to slay him. But the young boy takes the two pieces of his sword and fashions them into a cross. Confronted with this symbol of faith, Satan becomes immobilized and Valentine is saved.

It is an interesting concept: A dramatic demonstration of faith. Unfortunately such resolution of faith does not always save you. In fact, it might be your deathbed. It was John's. Take a look at the story with me. John has been arrested by King Herod. And why? Because John kept reminding Herod that even the king is not above the law. He said, "It is not lawful for you to have your brother's wife."

So this was the king's egregious sin. He had stolen his brother's wife, Herodias. Now, it would be understandable if this were where the story ended. The king didn't like a desert preacher calling him a sinner so he had him beheaded. Simple enough. But life is not always simple. There is usually more to a story than meets the eye. And in this case we learn that Herod actually liked to listen to John, thought he was a holy man, and protected him. Perhaps, in Herod's mind, putting him under lock and key was a way of removing him from harms way.

So if the king was offended by John's outbursts, it was not enough to warrant death. The king feared the prophet and dared not harm him. But life has a funny way of pressuring us to do things we would not normally do. This is a story about a man who caved due to social pressures. Let me ask you: How do life's pressures affect your judgment? What can we learn form this deplorable moment in the life of this king, this moment when the king caved? We learn that...

1. Puzzling problems require conscientious decisions
2. Promises made in haste create great waste
3. Pressures in life can affect good judgment

15. Public Pressure

Illustration

Brett Blair

Lloyd J. Ogilve, in his book Life without Limits, tells the story of a pastor who in the space of one week heard the following comments from various people:

A woman said, "I'm under tremendous pressure from my son these days. I can't seem to satisfy him, however hard I work. He really puts me under pressure."

A young man said, "My parents have fantastic goals for me to take over the family business. It's not what I want to do, but their pressure is unbearable."

A college woman said, "I'm being pressured by my boyfriend to live with him before we are married. You know...sort of try it out...to see if we are right for each other."

A husband said, "My wife is never satisfied. Whatever I do, however much I make, it's never enough. Life with her is like living in a pressure cooker with the lid fastened down and the heat on high."

A secretary said, pointing to her phone, "That little black thing is driving me silly. At the other end of the line are people who make impossible demands and think they are the only people alive."

A middle-aged wife said, "My husband thinks my faith is silly. When I feel his resistance to Christ, I wonder if I'm wrong and confused. As a result, I've developed two lives; one with him and one when I'm with my Christian friends."

An elderly woman said, "My sister thinks she has all the answers about the faith and tries to convince me of her point of view. I feel pressured to become her brand of Christian, but I keep thinking if it means being like her, I don't want it at all. When she calls, I just put the phone on my shoulder and let her rant on while I do other things. A half-hour later, she's still on the line blasting away, but I still feel pressure."

A young pastor at a clergy conference said, "I hardly know who I am any more. There are so many points of view in my congregation, I can't please them all. Everyone wants to capture me for his camp and get me to shape the church around his convictions. The pressure makes me want to leave the ministry."

All of these persons have one thing in common. They are being pressured by other people. We all, at one time or another, experience people-pressure. The question is how will it effect our judgment? That is the question Herod faced. After making an oath to a pretty young girl that she could have up to half of his kingdom, she surprised him and asked for the head of the Baptist. Mark 6:26 indicates that the King was thrown into distress, he knew it was wrong, but because of his oath and his dinner guests, he did not want to refuse her. He sent the executioner and on a platter was delivered the head of a holy man.

16. An Admirer of Jesus

Illustration

Brett Blair

There were two brothers in Georgia during the 1950's. One decided that in opposition to the dominant culture of the day, he was going to participate in the formation of a desegregated community. The other worked as an attorney for a prominent law firm. Both were Christians and attended church regularly. As the community formed and social pressure forced the community into court proceedings, the one brother asked his attorney brother to help them with the legal work. The brother refused, saying that he could lose his job. He pressured his brother to help with a reminder that he was a Christian. The lawyer responded, "I will follow Jesus to his cross, but it is his cross. I have no need to be crucified." To this his brother replied, "Then you are an admirer of Jesus, but not his disciple."

King Herod is like this attorney. He greatly admired this prophet from God, John the Baptist, but not enough to become his disciple, not enough to risk his own honor and prestige to protect him.

Another similarity occurs in the first part of our text. The people had heard about Jesus. They knew of his great work. They heard about his powerful teaching. They admired him, but they came to the wrong conclusions about him. These people knew about Jesus, but they did not follow him.

17. DANCER

Illustration

Stephen Stewart

Judges 21:23 - "And the Benjamites did so, and took their wives according to their number, from the dancers whom they carried off; then they went and returned to their inheritance, and rebuilt the towns, and dwelt in them."

Psalm 87:7 - "Singers and dancers alike will say, ‘All my springs are in you.’ "

Dancing has formed a part of religious rites and has been associated with war and hunting, with marriage, birth, and other occasions, since the recorded history of man. It grew out of three basic human reactions: 1. the desire to imitate the movements of beasts, birds, even the sun and moon; 2. the desire to express emotions by gestures; 3. gregarious impulses.

Throughout past ages dancing has been associated with worship. Closely related to religious praises was the sacramental dance in which worshipers sought to express through bodily movements praise or penitence, worship or prayer. Out of the primitive dances the esthetic dance of civilized ancient nations slowly developed. In these the primary concern of the dancers was to reveal grace, speed, and rhythm, often to appeal to the carnal nature of both participants and spectators. Vashti refused to expose herself because of this (Esther 1:12).

The Hebrews developed their own type of dancing, associated with worship. Basically, it was like modern religious shouting by individuals, or processions of exuberant groups. Three things characterized it: 1. sexes never intermingled in it, except where pagan influences had crept in; 2. usually dancing was done by women, with one leading, as in the case of Miriam; 3. dancing usually took place out of doors.

Hebrew contains six verbs to describe the actions of dance:

1. sahok - usually translated as sporting or playing and conveys the expression of joy in dancing.
2. rakod - original meaning was "to leap like a lamb"
3. karkar - suggests a round dance and may refer to turning on the heel in one sport
4. hol - to writhe or to turn
5. pesah - refers to a limping dance
6. hag - means "holiday," possibly from the word hug meaning "circle" or "dancing in a circle"

For ages, dancing has been accompanied by clapping of the hands, and percussion and other noise-making instruments seem to be native to it. In some cases, antiphonal singing accompanied the dancing. The Romans introduced the Greek dance to Palestine. At first the Primitive Christian churches allowed the dance, but it soon caused degeneracy, and was forbidden.

Today we have dancers of just about every tradition, and many churches are using the dance as re-interpretations of the biblical message. Also, considering the athletic nature of many of the dances, it is not at all off base to say that the modern gymnast can also be considered as a counterpart of the ancient dancer. Certainly the fluidity of movement and the grace inherent in gymnastics would allow this.

18. A John the Baptist Christmas Card

Illustration

Darrick Acre

I love receiving Christmas cards. I especially like Christmas cards with good Christian artwork on the cover. The lion with the lamb; the three wise men and the message, "Wise Men Still Seek Him;" the Madonna and child; or the star piercing the darkness over stable and manger; all are beautiful depictions of the Christmas story. Again, I am positive that as a group we have all perused thousands of Christmas cards like these. Yet I do not recall ever receiving one with John the Baptist preaching in the desert. Do you? I can picture it in my mind: a card front marred by the dead, barren wilderness of Judea out by the Jordan River, with this animated, prophetic figure as the focal point. But I have never read one that even closely resembles such a scene. Have you?

John the Baptist is totally inappropriate for the way we celebrate Christmas. Christmas is about the birth of Jesus as Matthew and Luke report that holy night many years ago. Mary, Joseph, angels, manger, shepherds, wise men; a child is born unto us. Glory to God in the highest! That is what Christmas is all about. Jesus is the reason for the season. So we honor sweet, little Jesus boy, get warm fuzzies, and hug our family members. What does John the Baptist have do with Christmas?

For Mark, everything. Instead of Bethlehem and choirs of angels, he begins the story of Jesus' coming with a prophet blaring and baptizing in the wilderness of Judea. In so doing, he adds a new figure to the good news about the incarnation and coming of the Christ. It is John the Baptist. Throughout the centuries the church has recognized Mark's unique contribution through its observance of Advent in preparation for the celebration of Christmas.

19. PROPHET

Illustration

Stephen Stewart

Hebrews 11:32 - "And what more shall I say? For time would fail me to tell of Gideon, Barak, Samson, Jephtah, of David and Samuel and the prophets -"

"Prophet" is the Greek word used in the Greek Old Testament to translate a Hebrew word whose meaning is obscure; the Greek meant a person who spoke or interpreted oracles, and therefore was not speaking his own thoughts, but those of a god. Although the word in essence means "forth-telling," not "fore-telling," still part of the Greek word means "before," and since they considered prophecies and prophetic utterances to deal with future events and foreknowledge, it was not difficult for them to take the next step and consider that the prophetic message was a predictive one. They also felt that a prophet must necessarily speak while in an ecstatic state, so that the god might speak through him. It was this idea of the prophet as giving ecstatic predictions that has colored and misinterpreted our understanding through the centuries.

While it is true, as stated above, that the meaning of the Hebrew word is obscure, the most generally accepted scholarly opinion is that it merely meant "to announce;" but this announcement was on divine order, and so, finally, the prophet was one "who utters a God-given message." This could be, and often was, a prediction of future events, usually a warning of doom if conditions were not improved, but it did not have to be such a message. Whatever it involved, it came directly from God, and it is for this that we remember the prophets - as spokesmen for God.

In this way, we can see that the prophet differs from the priest. While both were communicators, they were on opposite sides of the fence, so to speak - the priest carried the words and petitions of the people to God, while the prophet carried God’s messages to the people.

We have a wide range of individuals in the ranks of the prophets - from the early ecstatics to the sophiscated such as Isaiah; from those who acted out their prophecies to those who were almost fantastically visionary; from those who were specifically ethical to those who were seemingly objective. All of which tells us that God never goes by any man’s rules - he chooses the best and most effective medium at any one time. And certainly the disparity of the prophets is proof of that.

Prophecy, as such, had long disappeared by New Testament times, although we find the use of the term in connection with New Testament men (and women, too). But in the New Testament, it refers to preachers and evangelists; they were Christian teachers to whom the Spirit, at times, made special direct communication and who interpreted God’s will to man.

Today, of course, the pastor or preacher or minister of a congregation fulfills the role of the prophet. In fact, this is one of the specific elements within the call to preach.

20. Living in the Past

Illustration

William B. Kincaid, III

On the television show M*A*S*H, Dr. Charles Emerson Winchester III made it clear what separated him from everybody else. "I'm a Winchester," he was heard to say more than once. For him, it was his family name that made him superior to everyone else. Other people carry other burdens. One woman received her education at Harvard and found a way to work Harvard into every conversation. Congregations fall victim to the same problem. Churches become satisfied with their pasts to the point that they do not make the changes necessary to live in the present with the same degree of faithfulness shown in prior years. It's one thing to be proud of certain things, but it is possible to lean too heavily on a good past and live too scantily in the precious present.

That's what John the Baptist was dealing with in this lesson. In scripture's continuing assault on the religious people of the day, John the Baptist was completely unimpressed with the very thing that the Jewish people had built their lives upon. They were the "children of Abraham." That was their birthright and, they felt, it would never be taken from them.

Then comes John the Baptist. He tells them that just because they are children of Abraham doesn't mean that the requirements have been eased or that they can slack off. We hate to hear John the Baptist say that because we know how it translates to our situation. We can hear him now. "Just because you are members of the church, just because you give your weekly offerings, just because your great-grandparents were in this church, just because you are an officer, just because you are the minister, doesn't mean it is time to relax and take it easy and give in to this temptation of thinking this matter of being Christian is under control." In other words, don't presume your past has taken care of your present.

21. The King Is Coming

Illustration

Steve Weaver

Can you imagine complete silence? It's hard to in our culture today in which televisions, radios, etc. are constantly blaring. But in this morning's text a silence of 400 years is broken. Don't misunderstand, not everyone was silent during this period. Women and men were talking.. Boys and girls were talking. But there was no prophet speaking the Word of the LORD. No one was truthfully saying, "Thus says the LORD…"

In reality two silences are broken in this morning's text. For one, the 400 year period without a Word from God and for another, a gap of approximately 30 years in the life of Jesus. Matthew skips directly from his birth and infancy narrative to an event that occurs approximately 30 years later: the ministry of John the Baptist. Both of these silences are broken by the sound of a voice.

The voice which breaks the silence is the voice of John the Baptist, who may rightly be called the last of the Old Testament Prophets. He is functioning as a Herald by announcing the coming of the King. In the ancient world, a herald was one who went ahead of a king's chariot to prepare the road. He would command a crew which would smooth out the usually rough roads of that day by filling potholes and removing boulders. The herald would also go before the king shouting, "Make way, the King is coming!" One commentator noted that such "efforts to make a road level and smooth were restricted to times when royalty was on its way" (Robert Mounce, Matthew NIBC, 23).

This was the function of John the Baptist.

22. All Sorts of Ways to Murder a Person

Illustration

Maxie Dunnam

Indifference -- is anything more painful and destructive?

In his book The Surrender and the Singing, Ray Ashford wrote, “I once watched a man murder a beautiful and intelligent woman. It wasn’t, mind you, a crime of passion in which he took her life with a knife or gun in a single explosive moment of blinding rage. It was, rather, a crime absolutely devoid of passion, a murder within the law and over a long period of time, four-and-a-half decades. It was murder by indifference and neglect.”

What a stinging word -- murder by indifference and neglect. Have you seen it? I have. And I have been guilty of it -- not murder, but the smashing of a dream, the choking of an idea, the crushing of enthusiasm, the putting down of a person that made them less than alive and whole -- by my inattention, my failure to listen, by unwillingness to give time, my neglect of caring enough to affirm and encourage. What about you? Are you guilty of neglect and indifference?

23. SEER

Illustration

Stephen Stewart

1 Samuel 9:9 - "Formerly in Israel, when a man went to inquire of God, he said, ‘Come let us go to the seer’; for he who is now called a prophet was formerly called a seer."

It is presumed (especially when reading our text), that the office of the seer antedated the office of prophet in Israel, although the functions of each were the same. Our text is probably a gloss on the original text, added at a later date by someone who realized that Samuel was not a member of a roving band of ecstatics, such as the early prophets (see PROPHET), but that he was a solitary man in close communication with God, who spoke the messages of God.

The office of the prophet, as we generally think of it, did not clearly emerge until the tenth century B.C. at the earliest, but it is obvious that there were, at all times, men who were tuned in on God’s wave length, if we may say so, and who were commissioned to present God’s messages to the people. It is quite possible that the office of seer was lifted from the Canaanites, and then made into a distinctively Israelite profession through a process of refinement.

We do have specific instances of the non-Hebrew seer, who was actually a messenger of Yahweh, the God of the Hebrews. For example, in Numbers 22 to 24, we have the story of Balaam, a seer who was employed by the king of Moab at the time of the Israelites’ wanderings, but who actually became a spokesman for God.

However, there is one thing that we must remember - the earlier the time with which we are dealing, the more primitive the concepts, so it should be no surprise to us that the seers were often dabblers in fortune-telling and became involved with the baser forms of divination, such as wizardry, necromancy, and such practices which has been expressly forbidden. But there is a mysterious fascination about things, and the temptation was great. So we find that there were degenerate seers also in Israel.

I suppose that if we wish to make a more specific differentiation between seer and prophet, we might be justified in saying that the seer made his powers his profession and livelihood, and his functioning was habitually passive: he waited to be consulted. The great prophets, on the other hand, were men of all walks of life who were literally "plucked out of their ways of life" by God, and were driven to deliver God’s messages to his people.

Today I don’t suppose we have a profession or calling that parallels that of the seer, although we might not be too far off base if we compare him to the modern-day fortune-teller, who makes his living off the credibility of others, and who, in more cases than not, will predict what he knows the client wants to hear, rather than jeopardize that living.

24. Pointing to Christ

Illustration

King Duncan

The highly esteemed theologian Karl Barth had a painting of the crucifixion on the wall of his study that was painted by the artist Matthias Grunewald. In the painting there is an image of John the Baptist. The artist portrayed John the Baptist pointing his finger to the cross of Jesus in the center of the painting. It's said that when Barth would talk with a visitor about his work, he would direct them to John the Baptist in the painting, and he would say, “I want to be that finger." Barth wanted to point people to Christ.

25. Preparing the Way, Preparing Our Hearts

Illustration

Scott Hoezee

All four gospels talk about John the Baptist and his fiery message of repentance. Two of the four gospels do not mention Jesus' birth at all. But Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John all recognized that no gospel would be complete without John the Baptist. A gospel may skip Christmas but it may not skip John. Why? Because as Zechariah knew already when John was just eight days old, John was going to be the necessary advance man to get the world ready to receive Jesus. If Jesus was the one who would plant the mustard seed of the kingdom into the soil of this world, then John was to be the one who did the hard work of plowing the soil to get ready for that planting. John would be the one who would sink down his plow blade into human hearts that were the spiritual equivalent of a parched field whose dirt had long ago hardened into something resembling concrete.

If Jesus was God's divine Visitor to this world, then John was the one who was sent to prepare the way. Because God knew and John the Baptist knew: how the visit of God's Son would be received would very much depend on people's situation. If they were eager to hear the good news that God's tender mercies were available to forgive their sins, then they'd be glad to hear just that message from the lips of Jesus. But if people didn't think they had a problem with sin, then the visit of God's Son would be merely annoying and a waste of their time. John worked overtime to ensure that no one had that reaction.

26. Accountable to God

Illustration

Maxie Dunnam

Winston Churchill was once asked what his most awesome thought was. One would think that he would respond in terms of world politics, or at least British politics. But he said that his most awesome thought was that someday he would have to account to God for his life.

It might take a question like that, and someone to call us to deep reflection about our life, to cause us to think beyond our involvements today: beyond that challenge that we face, beyond the fun that we’re having, beyond the money that we’re making. It may not be a popular thought or even a thought that we’ve ever considered, but all of life says it’s going to be so. Someday we’re going to have to account to God for who we are and what we’ve done.

That’s not something to be fearful of, but something to challenge us.

27. All the Flies Are Doing It

Illustration

Charles Swindoll

Once a spider built a beautiful web in an old house. He kept it clean and shiny so that flies would patronize it. The minute he got a "customer," he would clean up on him, so the other flies would not get suspicious. Then one day this fairly intelligent fly came buzzing by the clean spider web. Old man spider called out, "Come in and sit." But the fairly intelligent fly said, "No, sir. I don't see other flies in your house, and I am not going in alone!"

But presently he saw on the floor below a large crowd of flies dancing around on a piece of brown paper. He was delighted! He was not afraid if lots of flies were doing it. So he came in for a landing. Just before he landed, a bee zoomed by, saying, "Don't land there, stupid! That's flypaper!" But the fairly intelligent fly shouted back, "Don't be silly. Those flies are dancing. There's a big crowd there. Everybody's doing it. That many flies can't be wrong!"

Well, you know what happened. He died on the spot. Some of us want to be with the crowd so badly that we end up in a mess. What does it profit a fly (or a person) if he escapes the web only to end up in the glue?

28. Tongues: A Gift from God

Illustration

Merrill F. Unger

There are two aspects in the manifestation of tongues: first, the sign of tongues in Acts 2, 10, 19 (and probably in Ch 8); second, the gift of tongues in the early apostolic church. The gift under the second aspect evidently was not permanent (1 Cor 13:9-13), nor given to every believer. It required the concomitant gift of interpretation (1 Cor 12:10; 14:1-40). This sign gift with interpretation was meant to instruct the church before the completed NT Scriptures were given. Under the first aspect tongues were a means by which the Holy Spirit witnessed to Israel on the day of Pentecost (2:4-13). They were a sign of the truth that Jesus was the Messiah and an indication of the new age of the Spirit. The Jews were again challenged by the Samaritans' receiving the Holy Spirit (Acts 8:14-17), and, although this is not specifically mentioned, they may have been given the evidence that the despised Samaritans had actually received the same gift as the Jews, by the sign of their supernatural utterances (cf. 11:17).

This is the use of tongues in the introduction of the gift of the Holy Spirit to Gentiles (Acts 10:44-47). Nothing could have been more convincing to skeptical, unbelieving Peter and his Jewish colleagues than the fact that Cornelius and the other Gentiles spoke in supernatural languages just as the Jews at Pentecost.

The disciples of John the Baptist who received the Holy Spirit and spoke in languages they had never learned (Acts 19:6-10) were a similar witness to the strong Jewish community at Ephesus. For the disciples of John the Baptist, whom the Jews generally accepted as a God-sent prophet, to be blessed by the Holy Spirit after being baptized in the name of the rejected Messiah, was of the deepest significance. 'But some of them [the Jews] became obstinate; they refused to believe' as Isaiah (Isa 28:11-12) had predicted (1 Cor 14:22).

29. A Great Prophet Has Arisen Among Us

Illustration

Richard A. Jensen

"Shunem: Site of the Prophet Elisha's Resurrection Miracle." If they had had road signs in the days of old this might have been the sign that welcomed you to Shunem. All the people of Shunem and all the people in the cities around Shunem surely knew of Elisha's miraculous feat. This was an area known for its prophets!

Elisha's prophetic forerunner, Elijah, was the first prophet to raise a young man to life. It happened in Zarephath (1 Kings 17:8-24). Perhaps it is not surprising that Elisha also raised a young man to life. We are told, after all, that Elisha inherited a double share of Elijah's spirit!

In a story told in 2 Kings 4 we hear that Elijah came to Shunem one day and had a bite to eat at the home of a wealthy woman. Since there were no fast food restaurants in Elisha's day, he stopped quite often at the house of the Shunammite woman to get something to eat. The woman sensed that Elisha was a holy one of God. So she persuaded her husband to fix up a permanent guest room for Elisha. She invited Elisha to stop and stay with them whenever he passed through Shunem. And he did. Free room and board is a pretty good deal, after all!

Now Elisha was an honorable man. He thought he should really give this woman some kind of gift. He told his servant Gehazi to ask the Shunammite woman what gift he might give to her. Gehazi went. He discovered that the woman was quite content with what she had. She asked for nothing. "But there must be something we can give this woman," Elisha insisted to Gehazi. Then Gehazi had a wonderful idea. "This woman has no child and her husband is old," he said to Elisha. Elisha got the point. He announced to the woman of Shunem that, "At this season, when the time comes round, you shall embrace a son" (2 Kings 4:16). And it came to pass just as Elisha had promised. One day years later, the son of the woman of Shunem went out among the reapers to be with his father. Suddenly he began to complain bitterly. "Oh, my head, my head!" he shrieked.

"Carry the lad to his mother," the father ordered. The reapers did so. The boy lay on his mother's lap until noon, and then he died. The Shunammite woman carried her son straightway to Elisha's guest room and laid him on Elisha's very own bed. She then set out to Mt. Carmel determined to find Elisha. When she found the prophet she fell before him and took hold of his feet. "Did I ask my Lord for a son?" she pleaded. "Did I not say, 'Do not mislead me'?" (2 Kings 4:28).

Elisha got the point. He returned to Shunem, went to his room where the dead boy lay, shut the door and began to pray. Elisha then stretched himself upon the boy and breathed his breath into him. Soon the child sneezed seven times and then opened his eyes. "Take your son," Elisha said to the woman of Shunem.

"Shunem: Site of the Prophet Elisha's Resurrection Miracle." Thus a sign at the city gate might have read. The city of Nain was just a stone's throw down the road from Shunem. The citizens of Nain undoubtedly basked in Shunem's glory. They, too, believed themselves to live in a land where prophets do miracles."

30. Who Do You Say I Am? - Sermon Starter

Illustration

Brett Blair

Jesus and his disciples ventured into the District of Caesarea Philippi, an area about 25 miles northeast of the Sea of Galilee. The region had tremendous religious implications. The place was littered with the temples of the Syrian gods. Here also was the elaborate marble temple that had been erected by Herod the Great, father of the then ruling Herod Antipas. Here also was the influence of the Greek gods. Here also the worship of Caesar as a God himself. You might say that the world religions were on display in this town. It was with this scene in the background that Jesus chose to ask the most crucial questions of his ministry.

He looked at his disciples and in a moment of reflection said: "Who do men say that I am?" The disciples begin sharing with Jesus what they have heard from the people who have been following Jesus: Some say that you are Elijah; others say John the Baptist, still others Jeremiah or one of the prophets. It's always been this way, Jesus as seen by the masses is seen in so many different ways.

You can speak of Jesus as prophet, holy man, teacher, or spiritual leader, and few will object. But speak of Him as Son of God, divine, of the same nature as the Father, and people will line up to express their disapproval.

A billion Muslims will say: "Prophet, yes. God, no!" Jews scattered around the world will say: "Teacher, yes. Messiah, no!" Liberal Protestants and religionists of various stripes will say: "Exemplary man, yes. Divine, no!" Who do people say he is? Who do you say he is? And what are we called to do? Let's take a look at the answers to these three question:

1. Who do men say that I am?
2. Who do you say that I am?
3. What is the church called to do?

31. An Introduction to John the Baptist

Illustration

Thomas Long

As the door to a new era swings open, John the Baptist is the ideal hinge. He is dressed like the old age, but he points to the new. His preaching style is vintage Old Israel; his message paves the way for New Israel. He appears to have wandered out of some retirement home for old prophets, but he announces the arrival of one who is even greater than the prophets. He baptizes with the water of the ancient Jordan River; he promises the coming of one who will baptize with the Holy Spirit and fire. Everything is about to change. The old is passing away; the new presses in. The long, lost night of hopelessness is coming to an end, and John the Baptist is the rooster who awakens the sleeping world with dawn's excited cry.

32. Suffering for Independence

Illustration

Brett Blair

Fifty-six men signed the Declaration of Independence. Their conviction resulted in untold sufferings for themselves and their families. Of the 56 men, five were captured by the British and tortured before they died. Twelve had their homes ransacked and burned. Two lost their sons in the Revolutionary Army. Another had two sons captured. Nine of the fifty-six fought and died from wounds or hardships of the war. Carter Braxton of Virginia, a wealthy planter and trader, saw his ships sunk by the British navy. He sold his home and properties to pay his debts and died in poverty.

At the battle of Yorktown, the British General Cornwallis had taken over Thomas Nelson's home for his headquarters. Nelson quietly ordered General George Washington to open fire on the Nelson home. The home was destroyed and Nelson died bankrupt. John Hart was driven from his wife's bedside as she was dying. Their thirteen children fled for their lives. His fields and mill were destroyed. For over a year, he lived in forests and caves, returning home only to find his wife dead and his children vanished. A few weeks later, he died from exhaustion.

Such were the sacrifices of the founding fathers. There are no movements that have shaped the world where sacrifice was not called upon. And of course in the church we have all our grace predicated on a sacrifice and it didn't stop at the cross. Jesus told his disciples that they too would need to take up the cross. And that's what they did:

Matthew suffered martyrdom by being slain with a sword at a distant city of Ethiopia.
Mark expired at Alexandria, after being cruelly dragged through the streets of that city.
Luke was hanged upon an olive tree in the classic land of Greece.
John was put in a cauldron of boiling oil, but escaped death in a miraculous manner, and was afterward banished to Patmos.
Peter was crucified at Rome with his head downward.
James, the Greater, was beheaded at Jerusalem.
James, the Less, was thrown from a lofty pinnacle of the temple, and then beaten to death with a fuller's club.
Bartholomew was flayed alive.
Andrew was bound to a cross, whence he preached to his persecutors until he died.
Thomas was run through the body with a lance at Coromandel in the East Indies.
Jude was shot to death with arrows.
Matthais was first stoned and then beheaded.
Barnabas of the Gentiles was stoned to death at Salonica.
Paul, after various tortures and persecutions, was at length beheaded at Rome by the Emperor Nero.

33. Preparation

Illustration

Brett Blair

Many years ago as the world watched the beginning game of the World Series in San Francisco there was suddenly an interruption of the opening interview. The screen blinked and went blank. When the program resumed: A Special News Bulletin. The San Francisco metropolitan area had experienced a serious earthquake. We all watched the live pictures as the huge fire in the Marina area burned. A remote camera crew was there and we saw the firemen fighting the fires. The scene I remember the most, however, was a group of people standing around just looking at the destruction and looking at the fire.

All of a sudden a cop came up to the crowd and yelled out to them: What are you people doing just standing there. You must get prepared immediately. Go home and fill your bathtubs up with water. Be prepared to live without city services for 72 hours. The sun will set in another hour and your time is running out. Go and get prepared.

A long, long time ago a man came on the scene by the name of John the Baptist. John's message was not told in soft monotones, but rather there was an urgent screaming in his voice. "Why are you not getting ready?" he yelled to the Hebrews. Why are you just standing there. Don't you see that your time is running out on you. You need to be preparing the way. Making the path straight. Go and get ready.

That message may sound very strange to our modern ears, but the simple truth is that is Jesus were standing here in the flesh this morning and we asked him to give a list of the preachers who were most instrumental upon him, he would have listed the name of John the Baptist. There is just simply no question about that. There was no single human being who was more influential upon the life and career of Jesus than John.

34. The Wayward Bus

Illustration

Brett Blair

In John Steinbeck's story "The Wayward Bus" a dilapidated old bus takes a cross country shortcut on its journey to Los Angeles, and gets stuck in the mud. While the drivers go for assistance, the passengers take refuge in a cave. It is acurious company of people and it is obvious that the author is attempting to get across the point that these people are lost spiritually as well as literally. As they enter into this cave, the author calls the reader's attention to the fact that as they enter they must pass a word that has been scrawled with paint over the entrance. The word is repent. Although Steinbeck calls that to the reader's attention it is interesting that none of the passengers pay any attention to it whatsoever.

All too often this is our story. Yet, John the Baptist calls upon us to take our sinning seriously. Why? Because God does? Repentance is not just changing our minds, or feeling sorry for something that we have done, or even making bold resolves that we will never participate in certain conduct again. Instead, repentance means to turn around and go in another direction. What John the Baptist wanted his audience to hear was: Turn your life toward this one called Messiah. This is not negative or down-faced. Rather, it breaks the chains of oppression and death that hold us back.

35. You Must Get Past John

Illustration

Richard A. Wing

William Willimon, who was Chaplain at Duke University years ago, said that John the Baptist reminds us of boundaries we must respect and gates we must pass through. At Duke, Willimon reminds the students, "If you are going to graduate, you must first get past the English Department. If you are going to practice law, you must pass the bar. If you want to get to medical school you must survive Organic Chemistry." Likewise, "If you want to get to the joy of Bethlehem in the presence of Jesus, you must get past John the Baptist in the desert." The word from John is "repent," which means"about-face" or turning 180 degrees.

36. The Passing of the Apostles

Illustration

Staff

Tradition holds that the Apostles died in the following manner:

Matthew suffered martyrdom by being slain with a sword at a distant city of Ethiopia.
Mark expired at Alexandria, after being cruelly dragged through the streets of that city.
Luke was hanged upon an olive tree in the classic land of Greece.
John was put in a cauldron of boiling oil, but escaped death in a miraculous manner, and was afterward banished to Patmos.
Peter was crucified at Rome with his head downward.
James, the Greater, was beheaded at Jerusalem.
James, the Less, was thrown from a lofty pinnacle of the temple, and then beaten to death with a fuller's club.
Bartholomew was flayed alive.
Andrew was bound to a cross, whence he preached to his persecutors until he died.
Thomas was run through the body with a lance at Coromandel in the East Indies.
Jude was shot to death with arrows.
Matthais was first stoned and then beheaded.
Barnabas of the Gentiles was stoned to death at Salonica.
Paul, after various tortures and persecutions, was at length beheaded at Rome by the Emperor Nero.

37. Good Actions

Illustration

King Duncan

Baron de Rothschild was one of the richest men who ever lived. Legend has it that the Baron once posed before an artist as a beggar. While the artist, Ary Scheffer, was painting him, the financier sat before him in rags and tatters holding a tin cup. A friend of the artist entered, and the baron was so well disguised that he was not recognized. Thinking he was really a beggar, the visitor dropped a coin into the cup.

Ten years later, the man who gave the coin to Rothschild received a letter containing a bank order for 10,000 francs and the following message: "You one day gave a coin to Baron de Rothschild in the studio of Ary Scheffer. He has invested it and today sends you the capital which you entrusted to him, together with the compounded interest. A good action always brings good fortune. Signed, Baron de Rothschild." A simple act of kindness was bountifully rewarded.

Now hear the words of our Lord: "He who receives you receives Me, and he who receives Me receives Him who sent Me. He who receives a prophet in the name of a prophet shall receive a prophet's reward; and he who receives a righteous man in the name of a righteous man shall receive a righteous man's reward. And whoever in the name of a disciple gives to one of these little ones even a cup of cold water to drink, truly I say to you he shall not lose his reward." Even a cup of cold, says the Master, water given to one of his little ones will be rewarded.

Note: This does appear to be more legend than fact. We are unable to find the actual painting described in the story nor evidence of the story itself.

38. In the Wrong Place?

Illustration

King Duncan

Many years ago a pastor was invited to preach at a nearby country church he had never been to before. As he set out he was uncertain which road to take since most rural roads are not clearly marked and the directions he had been given left something to be desired. He stopped to ask directions along the way. The person he asked tried, but mistakenly steered him down the wrong road.

The morning was pleasant and although the road seemed a little longer than the pastor had expected, he cheerfully continued on his way. Finally he arrived at a little white church just as the Sunday School lesson was concluding. The pastor entered the church and greeted some of the people as he made his way to the pulpit. That morning he delivered a strong and inspiring sermon. People in the congregation weren't quite sure what to think, but they listened attentively. When the worship service concluded, the pastor descended from the pulpit, shook hands with the good people and headed toward home.

Meanwhile, there was another small church a few miles away. It was filled with people waiting and wondering what could possibly have happened to the pastor who was scheduled to preach for them. Our hero never suspected that he had preached at the wrong church that morning.

There are times in our lives when we have to admit that things seem out of place. Somehow things just don't seem to fit. Advent is one of those times. Everywhere we go we see signs of the Christmas season - festive decorations, brightly colored lights, carols playing loudly at the mall, Christmas specials on television reminding us of the jolly nature of the holiday. Yet, when we arrive at church on this, the Second Sunday of Advent, we are greeted by an unlikely figure, John the Baptist. Something just doesn't seem right. It seems that we are in the wrong place. Or at the very least John the Baptist has picked the wrong Sunday to be our guest speaker.

39. Sacrifice for Discipleship

Illustration

King Duncan

Millions of Christians have been inspired by the life and death of Dietrich Bonhoeffer, a German pastor and theologian who was killed during World War II.

Bonhoeffer was as outspoken concerning the sins of Adolf Hitler as John the Baptist was about the sins of Herod. Friends in the United States and England, knowing the probable consequences of opposing Hitler, arranged for Bonhoeffer to leave Germany. After a few months, however, Bonhoeffer knew he must return to his homeland. There he preached ever more strongly against what was happening to his people. Needless to say, he aroused great opposition. Soon he was forced to go underground. Later he was imprisoned. There he was executed.

Out of his struggles he wrote a monumental work, The Cost of Discipleship. It stands as an eternal judgment of those who want Christ but do not want to bear a cross. John the Baptist understood the cost of discipleship. He knew what it was to sacrifice everything in answer to God's call.

40. We Are Not Tenacious

Illustration

Around 1870 New York City had one of the most hotly contested mayor's races in its history. The incumbent was Mayor John Tweed, Boss Tweed he was called. He was running for reelection. The Boss Tweed machine represented politics at its very worst. The entire administration was corrupt to the core. A number of dedicated people decided that they were fed up with this kind of politics and the good people of the city took on the Boss Tweed element. At first they seemed to make headway. But as the campaign drug on they began to feel the pressures of machine politics. Many of these good people began to drop out. When the election was held and the results counted, to many people's disappointment, they discovered that Boss Tweed had been reelected. The next day the New York Times ran an editorial and analyzed what had happened. It said: The good people quit being good before the bad people quit being bad"

Isn't that so often our dilemma. We are not tenacious. We throw up our hands in disgust. In our witnessing if we don't have instant affirmation then we throw in the towel. The same thing is true with prayer.

41. Is It Well with Your Family? - Sermon Starter

Illustration

Brett Blair

I must candidly confess that when I was in seminary the 16th chapter of Paul's letter to the Romans didn't do much for me. It struck me as being boring nothing more than a long presentation of people's names, most of whom I could not pronounce; I usually skimmed over that part so I could get to what I considered to be the real Gospel. Over the years I have greatly changed my attitude about this particular chapter and I have discovered that there is much more to it than I had first imagined. For example, it is interesting to note that of the twenty-six people who Paul singles out for his personal greeting, six were women. Now that strikes me as being rather interesting, since Paul has frequently gotten a bum rap for being a male chauvinist. I think it also shows us the tremendous influence that women had in the early church. In the male oriented first century Palestine, it is telling that Paul could not describe the church without mentioning the significant role of women.

Verse 13 of chapter 16 is particularly interesting and it is one that scholars have struggled with over the centuries. Paul writes: "Give my greetings to Rufus, chosen in the Lord, and his mother and mine." Now this statement could be taken two ways. It could mean that Paul had two distinct women in mind--the mother of Rufus and his own personal mother. Or, he could be saying: "I salute Rufus and his mother, who is like a mother to me." If that is what he meant, and most Biblical scholars agree that that is indeed what he meant, then it raises some interesting speculation. When and where did Paul meet Rufus' mother? Did she nurse him through some serious illness?

Did she receive him into her home for an extended stay during his missionary journeys? How did this woman and Paul form such a close bond that he refers to her fondly as being like his mother? Mark tells us that Simon of Cyrene, the man who carried Jesus cross, had two sons: Alexander and Rufus. Was this the same Rufus to whom Paul was speaking? If that is true, his mother would be Simon of Syrene's wife. No one knows for sure who this remarkable woman was who served as a mother figure for the great Paul. But it really makes no difference, because what he writes makes an excellent springboard for a Mother's Day sermon.

Some people ridicule Mother's Day as a lot of sentimental drivel. They say that it is nothing more than the creation of the greeting card companies and the florists. And, to be perfectly candid, there are many ministers who shun this day because, they say, it is not a religious holiday. Furthermore, they preach from the lectionary, which has an assigned scriptural reading each week, and therefore mother's day is left out.

Well, of course, we must admit that there is sentiment to this day, but what is wrong with that? Seems to me that a little bit of sentiment is healthy. True enough, there are some women in the Bible, such as Jezebel and the vindictive Herodias, who had John the Baptist beheaded, who tarnish the institution of motherhood. There are women today who abandon, abuse, and corrupt their children and who create a poor model, but I like to think that these are the exceptions. Most mothers do the right thing and deserve recognition. So this morning I would like to join Paul and salute all of the mothers who are with us.

1. First, mothers should be saluted for their tenacious love.
2. Secondly, mothers should be saluted for the tremendous impact they have.
3. Third, mothers should be saluted because where they are, that is where home is.

42. Who Is Jesus?

Illustration

John R. Brokhoff

Now, more than ever, we need to face the question, "Who is the real Jesus?" Is the Christ of faith the Jesus of history? What is the truth about Jesus? What can we believe? We turn to the Apostles' Creed which has given the church's answer for 2,000 years.

Different Positions

It is not strange that the most popular question of our time is, "Who is Jesus?" Was this question not answered in Matthew 16:16 when Peter said to Jesus at Caesarea Philippi: "You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God"? In Jesus' day, too, there were different opinions about Jesus. When on a retreat with his disciples, he asked them what people were saying about him. The public was divided: Jesus was considered to be John the Baptist, Elijah, Jeremiah, or one of the prophets. What more of an answer do we need than the answer of Peter? Jesus accepted his answer as the truth, for he said, "Blessed are you, Simon, son of Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father in heaven" (Matthew 16:17). Yet, after twenty centuries, we do not believe what Peter said about the identity of Jesus. According to a Gallup poll, 42 percent of Americans agreed with the statement: "Jesus is the Son of God." A recent report from Germany indicated that only one out of every four believe in Jesus Christ. Throughout Christian history down to the present, there are different views of Jesus. Now let us look at some of them.

1. The All-Human Jesus

Human

According to this position, Jesus is 100 percent human. It was held as early as the first centuries of Christianity by the Ebionites. They denied that Jesus was divine. He was only a teacher, prophet, miracle-man, and one with an outstanding character. But he was not divine, the Son of God. Today this view is held by many, including atheists, agnostics, Unitarians, Jews, Moslems, and other non-Christian religions.

2. The All-Divine Jesus

Divine

Opposite the Ebionites, Docetists held that Jesus was entirely divine. He was not at all human. This view was originally taught by Eutychus, a monk in a monastery near Constantinople. In the fourth century, Appolonarius, bishop of Laodicea, popularized the teaching. It was known as Docetism, from the Latin word docere meaning "to seem." It just seemed that Jesus was human. It was based on the idea that the physical and material were inherently evil. The human body therefore was sinful. Jesus therefore was not human, for God could not be identified with sin. Docetists held that Jesus' human nature was swallowed up by the divine. This denied the Incarnation, the biblical teaching that "the Word became flesh."

3. The Half And Half Jesus

Human/Divine

Nestorians took the view that Jesus was half human and half divine. It was taught by Nestorius, bishop of Constantinople, in the fifth century. To this day it is a very popular understanding of Jesus. When we see Jesus hungry, thirsty, and tired, we say it was because he was human. When he struggles in prayer and on the cross cries out, "My God, why ...?" we see the human Jesus. On the other hand, Jesus is God when he walks on water, feeds 5,000, raises the dead, heals lepers, and rises from the grave. The problem with this view is that we have a divided Jesus -- two persons in one body.

4. The Adopted Jesus

Divine

Human

This is known as adoptionism. According to this position, Jesus came into the world as a human. Because of his moral excellence, his perfect obedience to God, his wisdom, his compassion for people, and his willing sacrifice of himself on the cross, the Father adopted him as his son at his baptism. This adoption was confirmed by the resurrection and the ascension. Jesus then became a deified man.

5. The Both And Jesus

Human & Divine

The above different positions concerning Jesus caused great concern, for the gospel was at stake. If Jesus were only human, then he was just a martyr on the cross and not the Lamb that took away the sin of the world. If he were only human, the resurrection was a fairy tale. His promises of forgiveness and eternal life were meaningless. His claims to know God and to be one with God would then be the words of a religious fanatic who was deluded into thinking he was the Son of God.

On the other hand, if Jesus were only divine and not human, humanity would be the loser. Because he was human, he became one of us. As a human, he fulfilled the law for us. Through his humanity we could see the nature of God. Above all, he became sin for us so that sin, through him, could go out of the world. As a human Jesus knows our human condition. Like all of us he was tempted and he showed that by the power of God we can overcome temptation to sin.

Consequently, the church had to take a stand on the question of Jesus. Is he only human, only divine, or half and half? In 451 A.D. the church held a council at Chalcedon to decide the issue. The church decided that it was not a matter of Jesus being fully God or fully human, or half and half, but it was a matter of both, both fully human and fully divine. To this day the church holds to this truth stated at Chalcedon:

We confess one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, perfect in manhood, truly God and truly man, or a rational soul and a body, of one substance with the Father with respect to the Godhead, and of one substance with us in respect of the manhood, like us in everything but sin ...

This is to say that Jesus is fully God and fully man. These two natures are blended into one integrated personality. He is not a split personality, nor does he suffer from schizophrenia. It is like a blender in your kitchen. Suppose you put apples, peaches, and pears in it and pushed the "on" button for a minute. Now what do you have -- apples, peaches, and pears? Yes, you do, but can you tell which is which? They have become one fruit, one substance. Also, it is like homogenized milk. When the raw milk comes from the farm, a dairy runs it through a homogenizer. As the milk runs through the machine, pistons compact the milk so that the cream and skim milk are made one. As a result you cannot take cream off the milk. In the same way, the human and divine natures of Jesus are compacted into one integrated person.

This means that the Father and the Son are one. When Jesus prays, God also prays. When the human Jesus suffers and dies on a cross, God is in Jesus enduring the cross. "God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself" (2 Corinthians 5:19). When the human Jesus speaks, it is also God who speaks. When Jesus weeps, God weeps. This truth makes us realize the seriousness of the cross. It was not only a human on the cross, but God was there in Jesus. Good Friday is the day God died in Jesus. Indeed, the murderers did not know what they were doing; they did not know they were killing God! As the spiritual says, "Sometimes it causes me to tremble, tremble, tremble."

43. Gospel Counterfeits

Illustration

Michael P. Green

The following messages can be heard form the pulpits throughout the United Stets every morning.

Noah’s message from the steps going up to the Ark was not, “Something good is going to happen to you!”
Amos was not confronted by the high priest of Israel for proclaiming, “Confession is possession!”
Jeremiah was not put into the pit for preaching, “I’m O.K., you’re O.K.!”
Daniel was not put into the lion’s den for telling people, “Possibility thinking will move mountains!”
John the Baptist was not forced to preach in the wilderness and eventually beheaded because he preached, “Smile, God loves you!”
The two prophets of the tribulation will not be killed for preaching, “God is in his heaven and all is right with the world!”

But what, in actuality, was the message of all these men of God? A simple single word: “Repent!”

44. The Arrival of Hope

Illustration

Joel D. Kline

Alan Paton's novel, Cry, the Beloved Country, is the story of a black South African pastor, Stephen Kumalo, who travels from his small village of Ntodsheni to the city of Johannesburg, to find his son Jonathan. Jonathan had gone to the city to find employment, but while there had gotten involved with the wrong crowd, and when Pastor Kumalo finds his son, Jonathan is in jail for killing a white lawyer named Arthur Jarvis. In an intriguing turn of events, we learn that Arthur had been a leading advocate for the rights of black Africans and had just finished writing a book about the need for justice in that hate-torn nation.

In his grief the pastor goes to the father of Arthur Jarvis, to apologize for his son's crime. The elder Jarvis little agreed with his son's passion for working against the evils of apartheid. But in the aftermath of Arthur's death, the father struggles to make sense of the changes in his son's perspective that had set him on such a markedly different course in life. As a result, the father reads and rereads his son's manuscript. And that seems to explain what enabled the elder Jarvis not to berate or reject Pastor Kumalo, but instead to receive him kindly. In the days and weeks that follow, the elder Jarvis continues to embrace a new perspective, eventually promising to erect a new church building for the congregation Pastor Kumalo serves. Further, the elder Jarvis offers to build a dam for the village of Ntodsheni, so that the people might have year-round access to fresh water.

The very rumor of what is to be done sends a shock wave of hope throughout the village. There will now be water for irrigation. The people will be able to raise cattle. And because there will be abundant food and milk for their families, the young people of the village will no longer have to drift off to the cities to find work. There will be laughter and singing and dancing once again. Nothing had yet happened, and yet the village is transformed, as if the changes have already occurred. Writes Alan Paton, "Although nothing has come yet, something is here already."

The Gospel writers portray John the Baptist as one who raised the hopes of the ancient people of Israel, pointing the way to the coming of the Messiah, the One so much greater than John that the Baptist feels unworthy even to untie his sandals. As the Baptist begins his ministry, nothing has yet happened; and yet, in their anticipation of more yet to come, the people begin to respond as if the long-awaited Messiah were already present.

45. Leading the Way

Illustration

Richard Gribble

The twentieth century provided numerous examples of prophets who have blazed paths for others to follow. In India, Mahatma Gandhi, through a method of nonviolent resistance, led his people to throw off British Imperialism and bring freedom to the sub-continent and its peoples. In the 1960s, using similar tactics, Martin Luther King, Jr., spoke of the dream he had of a nation where people would not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. In the late 1970s, Archbishop Oscar Romero in El Salvador heard the cry of the poor in his land and acted to bring hope and justice to a society dominated by wealth and power. Nelson Mandela and Bishop Desmond Tutu in South Africa provided the light to lead their nation out of the dark night of apartheid to a new light of freedom for all. Our history is replete with examples of contemporary prophets, but are we listening to their collective voice and finding the path they have blazed?

John the Baptist pointed the way to Jesus, serving as a prophet for the people of his day. Let us, in whatever capacity God has provided in our lives, do likewise. Let us be prophets who blaze a path to the Lord, both at Christmas and for eternal life.

46. Never Give Up!

Illustration

Brett Blair

In the middle of WWII on October 29, 1941 Winston Churchill delivered a short address at the Harrow School. England had been through some of its darkest days. But Churchill was equal to the task. He said to the students:

"You cannot tell from appearances how things will go. Sometimes imagination makes things out far worse than they are; yet without imagination not much can be done. Those people who are imaginative see many more dangers than perhaps exist; certainly many more than will happen; but then they must also pray to be given that extra courage to carry this far-reaching imagination. But for everyone, surely, what we have gone through in this period - I am addressing myself to the School - surely from this period of ten months this is the lesson: never give in, never give in, never, never, never, never-in nothing, great or small, large or petty - never give in except to convictions of honor and good sense. Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy. We stood all alone a year ago, and to many countries it seemed that our account was closed, we were finished. All this tradition of ours, our songs, our School history, this part of the history of this country, were gone and finished and liquidated.

[Churchill continues:] Very different is the mood today. Britain, other nations thought, had drawn a sponge across her slate. But instead our country stood in the gap. There was no flinching and no thought of giving in; and by what seemed almost a miracle to those outside these Islands, though we ourselves never doubted it, we now find ourselves in a position where I say that we can be sure that we have only to persevere to conquer."

The church at times forgets that this is also God's message. God has promised never to give up on us. Old Testament and New Testaments together, are a record of how God never, never, never, gave up.

Adam and Eve disobeyed the very First Rule. But God never gave up.
Abraham wandered, and Sarah laughed. But God never gave up.
Moses hid and shook with fear. But God never gave up.
Saul went insane. But God never gave up.
David plotted against Uriah. But God never gave up.
Ahaz sold out to Assyria. But God never gave up.
Israel fell into pieces. But God never gave up.
The Jewish people became exiles. But God never gave up.
John the Baptist was beheaded. But God never gave up.
Peter denied he even knew him. But God never gave up.
The disciples all ran away. But God never gave up.

God never, never, never gave up and he has not given up today!

47. Touch

Illustration

The Memminger Institute in Topeka, Kansas once had a fascinating experiment. They identified a group of crib babies who did not cry. Let me explain. It seems that babies cry because they instinctively know that this is the way to get attention. Crying is their way of calling out. These babies, however, had been in abusive situations. Their parents let hem cry for hours on end and never responded. Do you know what happened? The babies eventually quit crying. It is almost as if they had learned that it was not worth trying.

So the Memminger Institute came in for an experiment. They got some people from retirement and from nursing homes, and every day these people held these babies and rocked them. The object was to get these babies to start crying again. And you know, it worked. Physical touch had made the difference.

As important as physical touch is there is another kind of touch that is even more important. It is spiritual touch. And I would contend that when a people are denied spiritual touch a very similar thing happens. They stop trying to do and be good. Their lives fall in disrepair and violence, anger, lying, robbery, adultery, abuse and murder creep in.

48. Returning God's Call

Illustration

Leonard Sweet

This week's text challenges individuals and your church community to examine how they respond to the persistent voice of God in their lives.

From Presbyterian author and editor John C. Purdy comes the title and story that inspired this week's sermon ideas. Purdy recalls that in The Blue Mountains of China (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1970), Canadian Mennonite/English Professor/author Rudy Wiebe tells the story of a Mennonite farmer named Sam Reimer. One night Sam hears a voice saying to him, "Samuel, Samuel ... I am the God of your fathers, the Lord your God. Go and proclaim peace in Vietnam." In perplexity, Sam goes to his pastor, who tells him to listen for the voice a second time. The next night the call comes again, but Sam cannot get anyone to believe that he has truly heard God's voice. His pastor won't believe it; neither will his wife or his fellow Mennonites. The Canadian government won't give him a visa to Vietnam; the inter-Mennonite Church Service Society won't help him. Sam's reaction to these rebuffs is to give up hope and die. On his deathbed he says to his wife, "When I heard the voice, I should of gone. Left a note and gone. When you know like that, are chosen, you shouldn't wait, talk. Go." (Returning God's Call [Louisville, Ky: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1989], 10).

Sam Reimer heard the same call that came to Samuel the prophet. But Sam Reimer's call never materialized into a prophetic mission because the community of faith surrounding him failed to support him. If old Eli, despite his shortsightedness and personal failures, had not counseled the young Samuel on recognizing and responding to God's call, how could the fledgling prophet have learned to open his mind and heart to receive God's words?

C.S. Lewis said there are two kinds of people in the world: those who respond to God saying, "Thy will be done" and those to whom God says, "All right, then, have it your way." It might also be said that there are two kinds of people who return God's call: those who say to God "Thy will be done" and those who respond to God by saying "All right, then, have it your way." As you return God's call this week, may you so stand in the stream of God's consciousness, that the waters of God's love and the waves of God's will may carry you in the directions the Spirit would have you go - toward the people God would have you meet and minister unto.

49. Understanding Grace

Illustration

Maxie Dunnam

A fifteen-year-old girl went to a youth conference in Oklahoma. She was short and a bit overweight. She was not too attractive, and she had been crippled from birth. When a dance was held one night at the conference, she simply put her crutches by a chair nearby, sat down in another chair and spent the evening watching the others dance. All the time smiling, but who knows the pain that was going on inside.

My friend, Norman Neaves, who tells the story says, "The music was the kind that peals the skin off your face and overloads the auditory nerve, and the floor was full of teenagers moving with the rhythm." Then a very special thing happened. In the middle of the dance program that evening, a slow number was played by the band, and a tall 16-year-old boy went over to this girl, held out his hand and said to her, "Please, would you dance with me?" She looked up with unbelieving surprise, and with a smile quivering on her face, she said, "Yes." Together they began dancing. The young man held her tightly, and she held on to him tightly, lest she stumble and fall. It was a beautiful sight to behold.

"Later that evening, one of the leaders went to the young man and told him how special he thought it was for him to do this, and how much he admired him. And he said, "As the two of you were dancing, I noticed that she whispered something in your ear. Do you mind if I ask what it was?"

And the teenager said, "You're not going to believe this, but she said that this was the first time that anyone had ever asked her to dance in her whole life." (Norman Neaves, quoted by Donald Shelby, "Eureka".

That's a picture of grace. All grace.

Can you imagine how that young woman felt? Unattractive, crippled, never having been asked to dance. And then came Prince Charming and it happened. Can you imagine how she felt? If so, then you are beginning to understand grace.

50. Mary Magdalene: An Adulteress?

Illustration

David J. McBriar

I don't know if you realize it or not, but lately there's a great preoccupation with Jesus' relationship with women. The Da Vinci Code has sold 80 million copies. It's a fast paced thriller that claims Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene, and the church knew about this, the novel claims, but suppressed it. And let me ask you, as an aside, whenever you hear the name “Mary Magdalene," what comes to your mind? The woman accused of adultery? The woman history says was a prostitute? If it does, then you've been taken in.

In the year 591, in a sermon, Pope Gregory the Great, identified Mary Magdalene with the adulteress woman. And in 1969, the Vatican said he was wrong. The Vatican moves slowly. 1,378 years is a long time. There's no relationship in the New Testament between the woman taken in adultery and Mary Magdalene. Mel Gibson erroneously identifies her with the adulterous woman in his famous film, The Passion. It's clear that Jesus had a fondness for women. Luke, far more than any of the other gospel writers, points that out. Women were the first evangelizers, the first to tell the good news of Jesus' resurrection to his disciples. Martha and Mary, Lazarus' sisters were always considered to be his confidants. Their home was a place he could go for refreshment and peace. And it is this "Samaritan" woman who is a bit troubled but nevertheless brings many people, a whole village, to believe in Jesus.

Showing 1 to 50 of 235 results