John the Baptist Is Murdered

(Matthew 14:1–12)

From Exegetical Commentary on Matthew, AMG Publishers, 2006.

[1] “Herod” was actually the name given to a family of rulers in Palestine who reigned just prior to Jesus’ birth until shortly after His ascension.

The Herods were descended from Antipater, an Idumean (a tribe that had descended from Esau—the Edomites). Idoumaía (2401), derived from the Hebrew Edōm, extended from the Dead Sea southward to the Gulf of Aqaba and from the Valley of Arabah eastward to the desert of Arabia—about 125 miles long and 30 miles wide. The descendants of Esau lived in this area, ordinarily harboring hostility toward the Jews. David fought against them (2 Sam. 8:14), but they were not entirely subdued until John Hyrcanus, a priest and Maccabean king, conquered them around 125 bc. During the Babylonian captivity, they took possession of the southern parts of Palestine as far as Hebron so that the later name of Idumea came to include this region also (see Ezek. 36:5).

At the age of fifteen, Herod, surnamed “The Great” (See Matt. 2; Luke 1), was honored by Julius Caesar with an appointment to manage the province of Galilee. About 41 bc, he was given the title “tetrarch” with administrative responsibilities over a fourth part of the region.

Opposition forces caused Herod to flee to Rome where he was declared king of Judea. After gathering an army together, he recovered Jerusalem and extirpated the Maccabean family in 37 bc. Following the battle of Actium, he joined the party of Octavius who confirmed his appointment. He then rebuilt the temple of Jerusalem, constructed and enlarged many cities (especially Caesarea), and erected theaters and gymnasiums.

He was notoriously jealous and cruel, at one time putting to death his wife Mariamne and her two sons, Alexander and Aristobulus. He died in ad 2 at seventy years of age, after a reign of about forty years.

Toward the close of his life, Herod commanded the massacre of infants in Bethlehem (Matt. 2:16) in a vicious attempt to kill the Jewish Messiah. At his death, the Roman emperor Caesar Augustus passed half of the kingdom (Idumea, Judea, and Samaria) to Herod’s son Archelaus along with the title of ethnarch. The remaining half was split between two other sons, Herod Antipas and Philip. Antipas ruled Galilee and Perea, and Philip ruled Batanea, Trachonitis, and Auranitis (Luke 3:1), later called Caesarea Philippi, north of Galilee. Herod Antipas, we read here, “heard of the fame of Jesus.”

[2] But he mistakenly thought that John the Baptist, whom he had killed, had been raised from the dead. The text implies that Antipas preferred the Pharisaic affirmation of the resurrection to the Sadducean denial of a resurrection and he believed John the Baptist to be worthy of such an honor.

But before we credit Herod with any of this, we should remember that he probably sided with the majority party (the Pharisees) and John the Baptist strictly for political reasons. Luke comments that he was actually “perplexed” (diēpórei, the imperfect of diaporéō [1280], to severely doubt, hesitate; Luke 9:7) over the differing theories of Jesus’ identity, some saying He was a resurrected John, others, a revived Elijah or a prophet (Luke 9:7-8).

[3] According to Josephus (Antiquities, xviii:112), Herod Antipas imprisoned John at the request of Herodias his wife and beheaded him in a fortress established in Machaerus (east of the Dead Sea), a town not mentioned in either Testament. Archaeological excavations in Israel show that Essenes occupied this area.

Matthew says Herod, “having captured (kratēsas, the aorist participle of kratéō [2902], to arrest) John, bound him and placed him in prison for (diá [1223], for the reason, because of) Herodias’ sake, his brother Philip’s wife” (a.t.).

When followed by a noun in the accusative case, diá refers to the active reason something is done. Herod imprisoned John for Herodias’ sake. In fact, elsewhere we read that apart from the perspective of the mob, “Herod feared John, knowing that he was a just and holy man, and observed him; and when he heard him, he did many things, and heard him gladly” (Mark 6:20; a.t.).

[4] Nevertheless, John repeatedly accused Herod Antipas and Herodias of adultery, a fact given by the imperfect tense of légō ([3004], to speak meaningfully). Élege is best translated, “He was saying” to Herod, meaning, “He was accusing.”

And John accused Herod Antipas in no uncertain terms: “It is [absolutely] not lawful (éxestin [1832], from ek [1537], out of from within, and eimí [1510], to be; i.e., ‘morally right’) for thee to have her.” John did not mince words or hold back on “all the counsel of God” (Acts 20:27), in spite of the danger to his life.

[5] Only John’s popularity with the people who considered him a prophet saved him at that time. Matthew informs us that Herod was “willing (thélōn, the present participle of thélō [2309], desiring) to put [him] to death (apokteínai, the aorist infinitive of apokteínō [615], to kill; the aorist infinitive stressing the idea of once for all), [but] he feared the multitude because they considered him as a prophet” (a.t.).

[6] The adversative “but” (dé [1161]) here implies that a ripe time for Herod to act had arrived. He had wanted to strike at John for a long time, but he needed an occasion and some special circumstances to offset the multitude’s bias. The day and circumstances came together. On his birthday, Herodias’ daughter danced and “pleased (ēresen, the aorist tense of aréskō [700], to fit, please, incline the heart of) Herod.”

[7] Did Herod anticipate or even plan this whole scenario? By binding himself publicly to a carte blanche, he could shift the blame for John’s death to the girl. Certainly, the multitude would be sympathetic toward a king who kept his word. From her request, we know that Herodias wanted John dead, but Herod, also, wanted John dead (v. 5).

[8] And so, prompted by her unscrupulous mother Herodias, the daughter requested, “Give me here (hōde [5602]) John the Baptist’s head on a platter” (a.t.). The “here” implies “now” or “at this time,” and could be taken as intending to head off any further consideration of the matter. Any king, otherwise, would be demeaned by the presumption of “here and now,” but Herod was trapped by his own words and perhaps considered the whole affair as a “now or never” opportunity.

Another shocking referent is the “platter,” something that food and drink are ordinarily served on, yet an apt lead-in to a specific judgment of God: “For they have shed the blood of saints and prophets, and thou hast given them blood to drink; for they are worthy” (Rev. 16:6). That God would give such murderers the blood of the slain to satisfy their thirst is not a very pleasant picture but one that fits the crime. If they wanted the blood of the innocent so desperately, let them drink it!

What happened to childlike innocence and ethical parenting? Is the head of a man on a dinner platter a common request from a young girl? Whose idea was this? Mark says she asked her mother, Herodias, “What shall I ask [for]?” (Mark 6:24). Then we read here, “being before instructed (probibastheísa, the aorist passive participle of probibázō [4264], to persuade or confirm in advance) of her mother.” What kind of depraved advice to a child is this? And what generation of vipers accepts it? As Jesus said elsewhere, it would be better for such people to be collared with a millstone and cast into the sea before they cause some little one to sin (Matt. 18:6).

[9] “And the king was sorry (elupēthē, the aorist passive of the intransitive verb lupéō or lupéomai [3076], to be grieved).” Matthew reports this as fact—not pretense. But how can this be predicated to the same person who was “would have put [John] to death” (v. 5)?

Certainly, Herod’s mind and will were divided over the matter. Intermittently, he believed John to be a “just man and and holy,” and he “heard him gladly” (Mark 6:20). But he more consistently succumbed to the will of his illicit lover. Defiling even her own daughter (v. 8), Herodias was evidently a master of persuasion.

Herod’s grief, therefore, is not inconsistent with his desire to put John to death. It just shows that while co-existing with some grain of righteousness and truth, sin (lust), apart from the grace of God and stimulated by an evil agent (Herodias), overcomes a person (Luke 11:22; 2 Pet. 2:19-20). The apostle Paul says that there are two kinds of grief (lúpē), one “of the world” that works death and the other “of God” that works repentance (2 Cor. 7:10). But Herod did not repent; evil overcame him, inside and out.

Perhaps, like Judas, when Herod saw the ultimate fruit of his sin, he was sorry, as many people are when they finally see how far astray their sin has led them. But this is not a sorrow that produces salvation.

The adversative dé ([1161], but), translated “nevertheless” in the King James Version, introduces Herod’s higher will, so to speak. His ultimate decision was to conform to the minimal integrity expected of a king—keeping a solemn promise. Diá (1223), “on account of [the oath],” views the promise as a cause and conformity as an effect.

In addition to the oath, a second constraint on Herod’s freedom to act existed: “And them which sat with (sunanakeiménous, the present participle of sunanákeimai [4873] from sún [4862], together; and anákeimai [345], to recline, sit down at the table; thus, to sit together with) him.” The oath was public; the request was public; there was no way Herod could privately deny the request. The presence of even a single subject, not to mention a house full of guests, constricted his ability to renegotiate terms.

So “he commanded (ekéleusen [2753]) it to be given (dothēnai, the aorist passive infinitive of dídōmi [1325], to give) her.” The oath and the presence of guests combined to motivate Herod to command this deplorable act.

[10] “And he [Herod] sent, and beheaded (apekephálisen, the aorist tense of apokephalízō [607], to sever the head off the body) John in the prison,” possibly the firstfruits of those “beheaded for the witness of Jesus” (Rev. 20:4).

[11] Per the original request, John’s head was first given to the young girl, who in turn gave it to her mother. Some birthday gift this was!

[12] John’s disciples took his body and buried it, possibly including his head, and then “went and told Jesus.”

Dr. Spiros Zodhiates (1922-2009) served as president of AMG International in Chattanooga, Tenn. for over 30 years, was the founding editor of Pulpit Helps Magazine, and authored dozens of exegetical books.