But when Pilate heard Galilee mentioned, he asked if the man was a Galilean. When he found out that he was in Herod’s jurisdiction, he sent him to Herod, who was also in Jerusalem during those days.
Now when Herod saw Jesus, he was exceedingly glad, for he had wanted to see him for a long time, because he had heard many things about him. He hoped to see some miracle done by him. He questioned him with many words, but he gave no answers. The chief priests and the scribes stood, vehemently accusing him. Herod with his soldiers humiliated him and mocked him. Dressing him in luxurious clothing, they sent him back to Pilate. Herod and Pilate became friends with each other that very day, for before that they were enemies with each other.
Geneva Bible translators 1599 · Public Domain On vv6, 7, 11, 12 Christ is a laughingstock to princes, but to their…
Christ is a laughingstock to princes, but to their great smart.
Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain.
John Trapp 1656 · Public Domain On vv6–12 6 When Pilate heard of Galilee, he asked whether…
6 When Pilate heard of Galilee, he asked whether the man were a Galilaean.
Ver. 6. He asked] As desirous to rid his hands of him.
John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
John Gill 1763 · Public Domain On vv6–12 When Pilate heard of Galilee,.... "The name of Galilee",…
When Pilate heard of Galilee,.... "The name of Galilee", as the Syriac and Persic versions read when that was mentioned,
he asked; the Ethiopic version says, the "Galilaeans"; some of which might be present, being come to the feast of the passover, and were very proper persons to inquire of:
Read full note →
whether the man were a Galilean; so Jesus was reputed to be: for though he was born at Bethlehem of Judah, he was brought up at Nazareth in Galilee, where he spent the greater part of his private life, and his public ministry was chiefly exercised in those parts; hence the Jews thought, that he came out of Galilee, and was a Galilean, Joh 7:41 and so he used to be called by Julian the apostate; and it seems, that the answer returned to Pilate was, that he was a Galilean; and so the Persic version adds, and they said, yes; for it follows,
John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
John Wesley 1765 · Public Domain On vv7, 8, 9, 11 He sent him to Herod - As his proper…
He sent him to Herod - As his proper judge.
John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.
Adam Clarke 1810 · Public Domain On vv7, 10, 11, 12 Verse 7. Herod's jurisdiction] The city of Nazareth, in…
Verse 7. Herod's jurisdiction] The city of Nazareth, in which Christ had continued till he was thirty years of age, and that of Capernaum, in which he principally resided the last years of his life, were both in Lower Galilee, of which Herod Antipas was tetrarch. Pilate was probably glad of this opportunity to pay a little respect to Herod, whom it is likely he had irritated, and with whom he now wished to be friends. See Lu 23:12.
Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Joseph Benson 1811 · Public Domain On v10 Luk 23:10-12. And the chief priests and scribes —…
Luk 23:10-12. And the chief priests and scribes — Whose malice had brought them to attend him thither; stood — In the presence of the king; and vehemently accursed him — Doubtless as an enemy to Cesar, and guilty of seditious practices, crimes which they had laid to his charge before Pilate. Observe, reader, it is no new thing for good men and good ministers, who are real and useful friends to the civil government, to be falsely accused as factious and seditious, and enemies to the government. Herod, with his men of war — Namely, those of his soldiers who now attended him as his life-guard; set him at naught — Treated him in a very contemptuous manner, as a despicable person beneath their notice; and who no way answered the account they had heard of him, as he neither said nor did any thing to gratify their curiosity. And arrayed him in a gorgeous robe — Herod, finding himself disappointed in his expectation of seeing Jesus work miracles, ordered him to be clothed with a robe, in colour like those which kings used to wear, and permitted his attendants to insult him. Thus Herod, who had been acquainted with John the Baptist, and had more knowledge of Christ too, and of religion, than Pilate had, was more abusive to Christ than Pilate was: for knowledge without grace does but make men more ingeniously wicked. Our Lord’s being dressed in this manner by Herod’s order, shows, that here also the priests had accused him of having assumed the titles and honours belonging to the Messiah; for the affront put upon him was plainly in derision of that pretension. The other head of accusation, his having attempted to raise a sedition in Galilee, on account of the tribute, they durst not touch upon, because Herod could not fail to know the gross falsehood of it. Herod’s usage of our Lord was exceedingly insolent, but, perhaps, the remorse of conscience, which he had felt on account of the murder of John the Baptist, might render him cautious how he joined in any attempt on the life of Jesus, which we do not find that he ever did. The expression, εσθητα λαμπραν, which we render, a gorgeous robe, is translated in the Vulgate, veste alba, a white garment, and by Erasmus, Castalio, Beza, and in the Zurich translation, veste splendida, a shining garment. “Though the Greek word may be rendered either way,” says Dr. Campbell, “I prefer the latter, as denoting that quality of the garment which was the most remarkable; for this epithet was most properly given to those vestments, wherein both qualities, white and shining, were united. Such white and splendid robes were worn in the East by sovereigns.” And he sent him again to Pilate — Without further injury, thereby intimating, that he left him to do what he pleased with his prisoner, but that, for his own part, he apprehended his pretensions to royalty worthy of derision rather than serious resentment. And the same day Herod and Pilate were made friends together — Whatever Pilate’s real intentions were, in sending Jesus to Herod to be examined by him, his doing this was so well taken by the latter; and Herod’s sending him back to the Roman governor was, on the other hand, such a public instance of regard to him, that this mutual obligation, with the messages that passed between them on this occasion, brought them to a better understanding one of another, than there had been of late between them. For before they were at enmity between themselves — The cause of this enmity can only be conjectured: perhaps it might be the slaughter which Pilate had made of some of the Galileans, who had come up to offer sacrifices at Jerusalem, spoken of Luk 13:1; or, perhaps, Pilate had encroached upon Herod’s jurisdiction, by giving judgment in causes which concerned his subjects: and therefore Herod, looking upon the sending of Jesus to him to be judged, because he was a Galilean, as a reparation for former offences, was forthwith reconciled to Pilate. Observe, reader, how those who quarrelled with one another, could yet unite against Christ, as Gebal, and Ammon, and Amalek, though divided among themselves, were confederate against the Israel of God, Psa 83:7.
Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Albert Barnes 1834 · Public Domain On vv6, 7, 10, 11, 12 Whether he were a Galilean - He asked this…
Whether he were a Galilean - He asked this because, if he was, he properly belonged to Herod’s jurisdiction, who reigned over Galilee.
Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary 1859 · Public Domain On vv7, 11 He sent him away to Herod. Pilate, in this…
He sent him away to Herod. Pilate, in this instance, not only extricated himself from the importunities of the Jewish priests, (ver. 5) but moreover obeyed the Roman law in that particular, which forbade any one to be condemned by a governor to whom he was not the subject. (Theophylactus)
George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset & David Brown 1871 · Public Domain On vv8–11 some miracle--Fine sport thou expectedst, as the Philistines with…
some miracle--Fine sport thou expectedst, as the Philistines with Samson (Jdg 16:25), O coarse, crafty, cruel tyrant! But thou hast been baulked before (see on Luk 13:31-33), and shalt be again.
Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
Daniel D. Whedon 1874 · Public Domain On vv6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 § 136.—JESUS SENT TO HEROD, vv. AND RETURNED BY…
§ 136.—JESUS SENT TO HEROD, vv. AND RETURNED BY HEROD TO PILATE, Luk_23:6-12.
7. Herod’s jurisdiction—The authority of Herod Antipas extended over Galilee and Peraea.
Read full note →
At Jerusalem—Doubtless to keep the Passover. For a full account of Herod Antipas see our notes on Mat_14:1-11, and on Luk_13:31-32.
Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges 1878 · Public Domain On vv7–12 7. he sent him to Herod] The word used…
7. he sent him to Herod] The word used is technical—anepempsen, the Lat. remisit—and means the remission of a question to a higher court (Act_25:1; comp. Phm_1:11; Jos. B. f. II. 20, § 5). St Luke alone preserves this interesting incident. He seems to have had special in ormation about Herod’s court. Pilate’s object may have been (1) to get rid of the responsibility—or at least to divide it—by ascertaining Herod’s opinion; (2) to do a cheap act of courtesy which might soothe the irritation which Herod, as well as the Jews, felt against him. Vespasian paid a similar compliment to Agrippa. Jos. B. J. iii. 10, § 10.
who himself also was at Jerusalem] “also,” i.e. as well as Pilate. Herod lived at Tiberias, and Pilate at Caesarea. During the immense assemblages of the Jewish feasts the two rulers had come to Jerusalem, Pilate to maintain order, Herod to gain popularity among his subjects by a decent semblance of conformity to the national religion. At Jerusalem Herod occupied the old palace of the Asmonaean princes (Jos. B. J. ii. 16; Antt. xx. 8, § 11).
Read full note →
at that time] Rather, in those days (of the Feast).
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers 1878 · Public Domain On vv6–12 (6) When Pilate heard of Galilee.—The incident that follows…
(6) When Pilate heard of Galilee.—The incident that follows is peculiar to St. Luke, and may have been obtained by him from Manaen or other persons connected with the Herodian household with whom he appears to have come in contact. (See Introduction.) It is obvious that Pilate catches at the word in the hope of shifting on another the responsibility of con demning One whom he believed to be innocent and had learnt to respect, while yet he had not the courage to acquit Him.
A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Pulpit Commentary 1880 · Public Domain On vv6, 8, 11, 12 Vers. 6, 7. When Pilate heard of Galilee, he…
Vers. 6, 7. When Pilate heard of Galilee, he asked whether the Man were a Galilaean. And as soon as he knew that he belonged unto Herod"s jurisdiction, he sent him to Herod, who himself also was at Jerusalem at that time . Now, Pilate dreaded lest these Jews should make his clemency towards the Prisoner a ground of accusation against him at Rome. Pilate had enemies in the capital. His once powerful patron Sejanus had just fallen. His own past, too, he was well aware, would not bear examination; so, moved by his cowardly fears, he refrained from releasing Jesus in accordance with what his heart told him was just and right; and yet he could not bring himself to condemn One to whom he was drawn by an unknown feeling of reverence and respect. But hearing that Jesus was accused among other things of stirring up sedition in Galilee, he thought he would shift the responsibility of acquitting or condemning, on to the shoulders of Herod, in whose jurisdiction Galilee lay. Herod was in Jerusalem just then, because of the Passover Feast. His usual residence was Capernaum.
The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Biblical Illustrator 1887 · Public Domain On v8 When Herod saw Jesus, he was exceeding glad
Luk_23:8-12
When Herod saw Jesus, he was exceeding glad
Read full note →
Divine reserve; or, Christianity in relation to our mental moods
I.
THAT ALL SUBJECTS REVEAL THEMSELVES ACCORDING TO THE MENTAL MOOD IN WHICH THEY ARE EXAMINED. That which is looked for, is found or thought to be found. The same person or principle examined through the respective media of sympathy and antipathy, will reveal aspects the most different. It is of vital importance to remember this fact in all our investigations of creeds, or balancings of contradictory evidence, so that we may escape both the traductions of prejudice and the blindings of partiality. The non-recognition of this truth has induced the grossest misrepresentations of social life, of individual belief, and of denominational doctrine.
II. THAT THE DIVINE BEING DISCRIMINATES OUR MENTAL MOODS. Apparently, Herod was in a pleasing state of mind. Superficial observers would have been delighted with his animated and cordial bearing. What could be more gratifying to Christ than that Herod was exceeding glad to see Him? There was no royal hauteur, no cold rebuff, no vengeful triumph. Why, then, that awful silence? Could Herod have done more to conciliate the favour of his renowned prisoner? Was it not an act of incomparable condescension for Herod to wear a smile in the presence of a reputed blasphemer and seditionist? For Christs significant reserve there must be some peculiar but satisfactory reason. It was not fear of the judge, for He was the judges Creator and Sovereign; it was not contempt, for He entertains a just regard for all the creatures of His hand; it was not constitutional sullenness, for none could be more open and engaging than He; it was not consciousness of guilt, for His most rancorous foes failed in their attempts at crimination. Why, then, did Christ thus treat a man who was exceeding glad to see Him? The only satisfactory answer which we can suggest is that Herods gladness did not arise from a proper cause; or, in other words, was no true index to his mental mood. Christ looked deeper than the smile which lighted Herods countenance, or the mere blandishment of his manner; He discriminated the mood of mind, and acted accordingly.
III. THAT CERTAIN MENTAL MOODS DEPRIVE MEN OF THE RICHEST BLESSINGS OF CHRISTIANITY. Why that solemn silence on the part of Christ? Because of Herods mental mood. The judge wished his curiosity gratified, he had heard of the great wonder-worker, and longed to behold His feats of skill, or His displays of power. Christ knew the treatment proper for the oblique-minded judge, and acted accordingly: He would not work miracles to gratify a king; He would smile on a child, or dry the tear of misery, but He would not court the applause or solicit the patronage of royalty. To whom, then, will the Lord Jesus deign to reveal Himself in tender speech or loving vision? Is there any intellect on whose conflicts with scepticism He will bestow His attention? Is there any heart on whose strugglings with sin He will lift up the light of His countenance? Since He was silent before Herod, will He be communicative to any of His creatures? He shall answer for Himself, To this man will I look. Suppose the Divine speaker had paused here, what inquisitiveness and suspense would have been occasioned! To this man; to which man, blessed Lord, wilt Thou look? to the man who has slain kings, and wandered to the throne of power through the blood of the warrior and the tears of the widow? to the man who has enrolled his name among the proudest of conquerors? to the man who boasts attachment to the cold exactitudes of a heartless theology? to the man arrayed in purple, and enshrined in the splendour of a palace? is this the man to whom Thou wilt look? Nay! Tis a grander spectacle which attracts the Divine eye--to the man that is poor, and of a contrite spirit, and that trembleth at My word (Isa_66:2).Here, then, we have two conditions of Divine communion, viz., contrition and reverence: apart from these there can be no spiritual fellowship. In Herod these conditions were not found; hence Christ was dumb i So with us: if we would truly worship God we must fulfil the conditions herein demanded. To be more distinct on this part of the subject, I may enumerate a few classes of hearers, whose mental moods deprive them of spiritual enjoyment:
1. Men of violent personal antipathies. Such persons confound the minister with his message; so that if any whim has been assaulted, or any favourite dogma contravened, they forthwith resort to misinterpretation, they turn every appeal into a personality, and that which was intended as a blessing they pervert into a curse! God will not commune with them: they fulfil not the conditions of fellowship--they are neither contrite nor reverent--and Christ answers them nothing!
2. Men of large speculative curiosity. Herod belonged to this class. They wish to pry into the secrets of the Infinite: not content with the ample disclosures which the Divine Being has graciously granted, they would penetrate into the deepest recesses of His nature, and scale the loftiest altitudes of His universe. They conceive a philosophic dislike for the common-place truths of Christianity; and regard with patronising pity the minister who lingers on the melancholy hill of Calvary. Such men would understand all mystery: they would break the silence of the stars, or detain the whirlwind in converse: they would summon angels from their high abode and extort the secrets of heaven, they would even dare to cross-examine the Deity Himself on the propriety of His moral government! God will answer them nothing.
3. Men who accept rationalism as their highest guide. They reject all that reason cannot comprehend. Their own intellect must see through every subject, otherwise they consider it as worthy only of repudiation. They read the New Testament as they would read a work on mathematics, or a treatise on physical science, expecting demonstration of every point. Such men leave the Bible with dissatisfaction. Christ treats them with silence: their flippant questions elicit no response: their feeble reason plunges in hopeless confusion--Infinitude refuses to be grasped in a human span, and Eternity disdains to crowd into one little intellect its stupendous and magnificent treasures.
4. Men who delight in moral darkness. Such men have no objection to theological discussion; they may even delight in an exhibition of their controversial powers, and, at the same time, hate the moral nature and spiritual requirements of the gospel. So long as attention is confined to an analysis of abstract doctrines they listen with interest, but the moment the gospel tears away the veil from their moral condition--reveals their depravity--upbraids their ingratitude--smites their pride--and shakes their soul with the assurance of judgment and eternity, they sink back into sullenness, they take refuge in infidelity, or they curse and blaspheme! Your Herods care not for moral betterance; they wish their fancies gratified--they desire their questions answered, but they persist in following thedevices of their imagination, and imprisoning themselves in the bond-house of bestial passion. The text suggests--
IV. THAT MEN SO DEPRIVED RESORT TO OPPOSITION. And Herod with his men of war set Him at naught, and mocked Him, and arrayed Him in a gorgeous robe, and sent Him again to Pilate. This is a striking illustration of the manner in which the truth has been treated in all ages. Men have approached the Bible with foregone conclusions, and because those conclusions have not been verified they have revolted, and assumed an antagonistic attitude. Ample illustration of the proposition might be adduced from the history of infidelity, bigotry, and persecution: but instead of lingering on this department of the subject we hasten to indicate the practical bearing of the thesis on the matter more immediately in hand. As an assembly of men responsible in some degree for the dissemination of Christian truth, it is important to understand how we can best fulfil our mission. In prosecuting this inquiry let me remind you of three things:
1. That the Bible is Gods appointed representative. What Christ was to Herod, the Scriptures are to us, viz., the embodiment of Divine truth and love. The very fact of our having the Bible, involves a tremendous responsibility.
2. That the Bible must be approached in a sympathetic spirit.
3. That we are responsible for our manner of reproducing the Bible. (J. Parker, D. D.)
Imitating the silence of Christ
There lived in a village near Burnley a girl who was persecuted in her own home because she was a Christian. She struggled on bravely, seeking strength from God, and rejoicing that she was a partaker of Christs sufferings. The struggle was too much for her, but He willed it so; and at length her sufferings were ended. When they came to take off the clothes from her poor dead body, they found a piece of paper sewn inside her dress, and on it was written, He opened not His mouth. (W. Baxendale.)
Remarkable reticence
Moltke, the great strategist, is a man of lowly habits and few words. He has been described as a man who can hold his tongue in seven languages! (H. O. Mackay.)
Herod Antipas: religious curiosity
Most of us will admit that this is an age of much curiosity about religion. The phrase would seem to include three things. First, curiosity about religion as an interesting phase of human thought. Then, curiosity about religion as exhibited in the picturesque and commanding personages who have founded new faiths. But yet again there may be curiosity about religion as a possible manifestation of the extra-natural or supernatural. Revivalism and spiritualism make the flesh creep not altogether unpleasingly. August and ancient ceremonials haunt the imagination with their weird magnificence. The verses which I have read bring before us the very type of irreligious or non-religious curiosity about religion, and of the punishment which awaits it.
I. In the passage itself let us note, in the first place, THE DEALINGS OF HEROD ANTIPAS WITH JESUS.
1. Herod did not take any active part in the greatest tragedy of time.
2. It will be necessary for our purpose to consider, secondly, Herods position in the religious world of his day. That he was a Sadducee would seem to be certain from profane history, and from a comparison of St. Matthew with St. Mark.
3. The character of Herod Antipas may be thought too black to contain even a warning for any of us. He was but a promising pupil in the school of which Tiberius was a master; a meaner trickster, a punier liar, a feebler murderer. He was the fox, as our Lord called him, not the wolf. Yet in one respect he was not so unlike some of us. A mist of superstition hung over the unclean pool of lust and hatred which he had made his soul. He was alternately repelled and attracted by Christ. That he was not incapable of religious curiosity the text sufficiently witnesses. Some in our day might exclaim that it was perhaps unfortunate that an opportunity was lost of gratifying the curiosity of a person so interesting--as if Christ was Incarnate to amuse dilettanti. But He who knows all men and what is in man knew better. The blood-stained hands are held out half caressingly. The voice which commanded the head of John Baptist to be given to the daughter of Herodias pours forth its flood of superficial questions. He will not waste one miracle or one word. As they of old loved to teach, the silent Jesus, working no sign, is a prophecy and a sign to us. He answered him nothing.
II. The whole incident thus becomes full of lessons to us. A thoughtful, meditative reader stops in awe. If we feel the awfulness of that silence, we shall, I think, recognize the truth of that which I am about to say. There is, no doubt, a sort of curiosity about religion which is the necessary result of quickened intellectual, nay, of quickened spiritual life. But the smiting of the people of Beth-shemesh is net recorded for nothing. Free inquiry is one thing, free-and-easy inquiry is another. If we play with God, it is at our own risk. The question is--what do you believe? We stand fronting eternity, not with the many propositions which we affect to believe or think we believe, but with the few which we do believe. Can we make an act of faith in God? We see Him standing mute before the curiosity of Herod Antipas, and we say, Save us, oh save us, from that silence! (Bishop Win. Alexander.)
I. HEROD BEFORE JESUS.
Our Lord before Herod
1. See idle curiosity at its best.
2. Idle curiosity disappointed.
(1) Our Lord came not into this world to be a performer.
(2) Herod had already silenced the Voice; no wonder he could not now hear the Word.
(3) Herod might have heard Christ hundreds of times before if he had chosen to do so.
(4) Christ had good reason for refusing to speak to Herod this time, because He would not have it supposed that He yielded to the pomp and dignity of men.
3. Idle curiosity curdles into derision.
II. JESUS IN THE PRESENCE OF HEROD. Although no blows are recorded, I greatly question whether our Divine Master suffered anywhere more than He did in the palace of tiered.
1. Fully in earnest for the salvation of souls, and in the midst of His grievers passion, He is looked upon as a mountebank and a mere performer, who is expected to work a miracle for the amusement of an impious court.
2. Then to think of our Lords being questioned by such a fop as Herod!
3. Then the ribaldry of the whole thing!
4. It was no small pain to our Lord to be silent.
5. Think of the contempt that was poured upon Him. (C. H. Spurgeon.)
The silence of Jesus
I. PREJUDICE, WHATEVER BE ITS SOURCE, GETS NOTHING OUT OF THE SCRIPTURES. If you bring a full pitcher to a spring, you can get nothing from that spring.
II. HABITUAL INDULGENCE IN SIN WILL PREVENT US FROM GETTING ANY ANSWER TO OUR INQUIRIES FROM SCRIPTURE. When you want an answer from the telephone, you not only put your ear to the instrument, but you also say to those about you, Hush! I want to hear. If you would hear Christ you must say Hush to the murmuring of sin.
III. THE INFLUENCE OF SCEPTICISM MAKES THE SCRIPTURES SILENT. (W. M. Taylor, D. D.)
The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
William B. Godbey 1900 · Public Domain On v6 Luk 23:6-12. “Pilate, hearing of Galilee, asked if He…
JESUS BEFORE HEROD
Luk 23:6-12. “Pilate, hearing of Galilee, asked if He is a Galilean man. And learning that He is from Herod’s jurisdiction, he sent Him up to Herod, he also being in Jerusalem in those days.” As Jesus had been; reared in Galilee, He was known everywhere as a citizen of that country, which belonged to the kingdom of Herod, who made it a rule to be in Jerusalem during the great convocations, having also a judgment-hall there for the convenience of business which might be encumbered on him during the festivals. Already has Pilate seen that terrible trouble is brewing in the case, as, he finds the Man utterly innocent, and yet the chief priests, followed by the howling mob, clamor for His blood and are determined on His execution. Consequently Pilate is delighted with the prospect of getting rid of the case, which is already becoming truly formidable.
Read full note →
“And Herod, seeing Jesus, rejoiced exceedingly; for he was a long time wishing to see Him, because he was hearing of many things concerning Him, and he hoped to see some miracle wrought by Him. And he asked Him in many words, and He responded to him nothing. The chief priests and scribes stood by, accusing Him vehemently.” Though they just lied on Him by wholesale and by false accusation did their utmost to induce Herod to sign His death-warrant, Jesus answered not a word, treating Herod and his clamorous accusers with profound silence. Will you not do likewise? Though people tell a thousand lies on you, keep your mouth shut, thus following the example of your Lord, who, when reviled, reviled not again. When under strong temptation, and especially false accusation, you see, reticence is the true policy. Let your enemies do all the talking, and they will break down and get ashamed before you are aware.
“And Herod having treated Him with contempt, and mocked Him, along with his soldiers, putting on Him a scarlet robe, sent Him back to Pilate.” As high treason against Caesar was the climax of all their vociferous accusations, Herod regarded Him as a visionary enthusiast, deluded with the idea that He was King of the Jews, which he thought as utterly preposterous, since He was alone, not only without an army to defend Him, but apparently friendless and homeless; therefore he concluded to humor the joke by investing Him with an old royal robe, and sending Him back to Pilate in the habit and attitude of a King, saying to him, “O yes, I have recognized His royal dignity, and now clothe Him in a purple robe, and send Him back to you.”
“And they both, Pilate and Herod, became friends with each other that same day; for they were formerly accustomed to be in hostility either to other.” O how frequently do we see this historic item verified, the belligerent sects laying down their cudgels, becoming friendly, and uniting against the holiness people!
William B. Godbey, Commentary on the New Testament (1896–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Alexander MacLaren 1905 · Public Domain On vv9–10
Luke
‘THE RULERS TAKE COUNSEL TOGETHER’
Read full note →
A SOUL’S TRAGEDY
Luk 23:9.
Four Herods play their parts in the New Testament story. The first of them is the grim old tiger who slew the infants at Bethlehem, and soon after died. This Herod is the second-a cub of the litter, with his father’s ferocity and lust, but without his force. The third is the Herod of the earlier part of the Acts of the Apostles, a grandson of the old man, who dipped his hands in the blood of one Apostle, and would fain have slain another. And the last is Herod Agrippa, a son of the third, who is only remembered because he once came across Paul’s path, and thought it such a good jest that anything should be supposed capable of making a Christian out of him.
There is a singular family likeness in the whole of them, and a very ugly likeness it is. This one was sensual, cruel, cunning, infirm of purpose, capricious like a child or a savage. Roman policy amused him with letting him play at being a ruler, but kept him well in hand. And I suppose he was made a worse man by the difficulties of his position as a subject-prince.
Now I wish to put together the various incidents in this man’s life recorded in the Gospels, and try to gather some lessons from them for you.
I. First, I take him as an example of half-and-half convictions, and of the inner discord that comes from these.
I do not need to remind you of the shameful story of his repudiation of his own wife, and of his disgusting alliance with the wife of his half-brother, who was herself his niece. She was the stronger spirit, a Biblical Lady Macbeth, the Jezebel to this Ahab; and, to complete the parallel, Elijah was not far away. John the Baptist’s outspoken remonstrances of course made an implacable enemy of Herodias, who did all she could to compass his death, but was unable to manage that, though she secured his imprisonment. The reason for her inability is given by the Evangelist Mark, in words which are very inadequately rendered by our Authorised Version, but may be found more correctly translated in the Revised Version. It is there said that King ‘Herod feared John’-the gaoler afraid of his prisoner!-’knowing that he was a just man and a holy’-goodness is awful. The worst men know it, and it extorts respect. ‘And kept him safe’-from Herodias, that is. ‘And when he heard him he was perplexed’-drawn this way and that way by these two magnets, alternately veering to lust and to purity, hesitating between the kisses of the beautiful temptress at his side and the words of the prophet. And yet, with strange inconsistency, in all his vacillations ‘he heard him gladly’; for his better part approved the nobler voice. And so he staggered on, having religion enough to spoil some of his sinful delights, but not enough to shake them off.
That is a picture for which in its essence many a man and woman among us might have sat. For I suppose that there is nothing more common than these half-and-half convictions which, like inefficient bullets, get part way through the armoured shell of a ship, and there stick harmless. Many of us have the clearest convictions in our understandings, which have never penetrated to that innermost chamber of all, where the will sits sovereign. It is so about little things, it is so about great ones. Nothing is more common than that a man shall know perfectly well that some possibly trivial habit stands in the way of something that it is his interest or his duty to pursue; but the knowledge lies inoperative in the outermost part of him. It is so in regard to graver things. The majority of the slaves of any vice whatsoever know perfectly well that they ought to give it up, and yet nothing comes of the conviction.
‘He was much perplexed.’ What a picture that is of the state of unrest and conflict into which such half-and-half impressions of duty cast a man. Such a one is like a vessel with its head now East, now West, because there is some weak or ignorant steersman at the helm. I know nothing more sure to produce inward unrest and disturbance and desolation than that a man’s knowledge of duty should be clear, and his obedience to that knowledge partial. If we have John down in the dungeon, if conscience is not allowed to be master, there may be feasting and revelry going on above, but the stern voice will come up through the grating now and then, and that will spoil all the laughter. ‘When he heard him, he was much perplexed.’
The reason for these imperfect convictions is generally found, as Herod shows us, in the unwillingness to get rid of something which has fastened its claws around us, and which we love too well, although we know it is a serpent, to shake off. If Herod had once been man enough to screw himself up, and say to Herodias, ‘Now you pack, and go about your business!’ everything else would have come right in time. But he could not make up his mind to sacrifice the honeyed poison, and so everything went wrong in time. My friend, how many of us are prevented from following out our clearest convictions because they demand a sacrifice? ‘If thine eye cause thee to stumble, pluck it out, and cast it from thee. It is better for thee.’
And then, further, note that these irresolute convictions and shirking of plain duty are not atoned for by, though they are often accompanied with, a strange acquiescence in, and approval of, God’s truth. Herod fancied, inconsistently enough, that he was making some kind of compensation for disobedience to the message, by liking to listen to the messenger. And there are a great many of us, all whose Christianity consists in giving ear to the words which we never think of obeying. I wonder how many of you there are who fancy that you have no more concern with this sermon of mine than approving or disapproving of it, as the case may be; and how many of us there are who, all our lives long, have substituted criticism of the Gospel as ministered by us poor preachers-be it approving or disapproving criticism-for obedience to the Christ and acceptance of His salvation.
II. We see in Herod an example of the utter powerlessness of such partial convictions and reformation.
I am not going to tell over again the ghastly story of John’s death, which no other words than the Evangelist’s can tell half so powerfully. I need only remind you of the degradation of the poor child Salome to the position of a dancing girl, the half-tipsy generosity of the excited monarch, the grim request from lips so young and still reddened by the excitement of the dance, Herod’s unavailing sorrow, his fantastic sense of honour which scrupled to break a wicked promise, but did not scruple to kill a righteous man, and the ghastly picture of the girl carrying a bleeding head-such a gift!-to her mother.
But out of that jumble of lust and blood I desire to gather one lesson. There you have-in an extreme form, it is true-a tremendous illustration of what half-and-half convictions may come to. Whether or no we ever get anything like as far on the road as this man did matters very little. The process which brought him there is the thing that I seek to point to. It was because he had so long tampered with the voice of his conscience that it was lulled into silence at that last critical moment. And this is always the case, that if a man is false to the feeblest conviction that he has in regard to the smallest duty, he is a worse man all over ever after. We cannot neglect any conviction of what we ought to do, without lowering the whole tone of our characters and laying ourselves open to assaults of evil from which we would once have turned shuddering and disgusted. A partial thaw is generally followed by intenser frost. An abortive insurrection is sure to issue in a more grinding tyranny. A soul half melted and then cooled off is less easy to melt than it was before. And so, dear brethren, remember this, that if you do not swiftly and fully carry out in life and conduct whatsoever you know you ought to be or do, you cannot set a limit to what, some time or other, if a strong and sudden temptation is sprung upon you, you may become. ‘Is thy servant a dog that he should do this thing?’ Yes! But he did it. No mortal reaches the extreme of evil all at once, says the wise old proverb; and the path by which a man is let down into depths that he never thought it was possible that he should traverse is by the continual neglect of the small admonitions of conscience. Neglected convictions mean, sooner or later, an outburst of evil.
John’s murder may illustrate another thing too-viz. how simple, facile weakness of character may be the parent of all enormities. Herod did not want to kill John. He very much wanted to keep him alive. But he was not man enough to put his foot down, and say, ‘There! I have said it; and there is to be no more talk about slaying this prophet of God.’ So the continual drop, drop, drop, of Herodias’ suggestions and wishes wore a hole, in the loose-textured stone at last; and he did the thing that he hated to do and had long fought against. Why? Because he was a poor weak creature.
The lesson from this is one that I would urge upon all you young people especially, that in a world like this, where there are so many more voices soliciting us to evil than inviting us to good, to be weak is, in the long run, to be wicked. So do you cultivate the wholesome habit of saying ‘No,’ and do not be afraid of anything but of hurting your conscience and sinning against God.
III. Once more, we have in Herod an example of the awakening of conscience.
When Jesus began to be talked about beyond the narrow limits of the shores of the Sea of Galilee, and especially when He began to organise the Apostolate, and His name was spread abroad, some rumours reached even the court, and there were divergent opinions about Him. One man said, It is Elias; and another said, It is a prophet, ‘and Herod said, It is John, whom I beheaded. He has risen from the dead, and therefore mighty works do show forth themselves in him.’
Ah, brethren! when a man has, away back in the chambers of his memory, some wrong thing, be it great or be it little, he is at the mercy of any chance or accident to have it revived in all its vividness. It is an awful thing to walk this world with a whole magazine of combustibles in our memories, on which any spark may fall and light lurid and sulphurous flames. A chance thing may do it, a scent, a look upon a face, a sound, or any trifle may bring all at once before the wrongdoer that ancient evil. And no lapse of time makes it less dreadful when it is unveiled. The chance thrust of a boat-hook that gets tangled in the grey hairs of a corpse, brings it up grim to the surface. Press a button, by accident, upon a wall in some old castle, and a door flies open that leads away down into black depths. You and I have depths of that sort in our hearts. Then there are no more illusions about whose fault the deed was. When Herod killed John, he said, ‘Oh! It is not I! It is Herodias. It is Salome. It is my oath. It is the respect I bear to the people who heard me swear. I must do it, but I am not responsible.’ But when, in ‘the sessions of silent thought,’ the deed came back to him, Salome and Herodias, the oath, and the company were all out of sight, and he said, ‘I! I did it.’
That is what we all shall have to do some day, in this world possibly, in the next certainly. Men sophisticate themselves with talk about palliations, and excuses, and temptations, and companions and the like. And philosophers sophisticate themselves nowadays with a great many learned explanations, which tend to show that a man is not to blame for the wrong things he does. But all that rubbish gets burned up when conscience wakes, and the doer says, ‘Whom I beheaded.’
Brethren, unless we take refuge in the great sacrifice for the sins of the world which Jesus Christ has made, we shall, possibly in this life, and certainly hereafter, be surrounded by a company of our own evil deeds risen from the dead, and every one of them will shake its gory locks at us, and say, ‘Thou didst it.’
IV. The last lesson that I gather from this man’s life is the final insensibility which these half-and-half convictions tend to produce.
Jesus Christ was sent by Pilate to Herod as a kind of peace-offering. The two had been squabbling about some question of jurisdiction; and so, partly to escape from the embarrassment of having to deal with this enigmatical Prisoner, and partly out of a piece of politic politeness, Pilate sends Jesus to Herod, because He was in his jurisdiction. Think of the Lord of men and angels being handed about from one to the other of these two scoundrels, as a piece of politeness!
When Christ stands before Herod, note that all its former convictions, partial or entire, and all its terrors superficial or deep, have faded clean away from this frivolous soul. All that he feels now is a childish delight in having this well-known Man before him, and a hope that, for his delectation, Jesus will work a miracle; much as he might expect a conjurer to do one of his tricks! That is what killing John came to-an incapacity to see anything in Jesus.
‘And he asked Him many questions, and Jesus answered him nothing.’ He locked His lips. Why? He was doing what He Himself enjoined: ‘Give not that which is holy to the dogs. Cast not your pearls before swine.’ He said nothing, because He knew it was useless to say anything. So the Incarnate Word, whose very nature and property it is to speak, was silent before the frivolous curiosity of the man that had been false to his deepest convictions.
It is a parable, brother, of what is being repeated over and over again amongst us. I dare not say that Jesus Christ is ever absolutely dumb to any man on this side of the grave; but I dare not refrain from saying that this condition of insensibility to His words is one that we may indefinitely approach, and that the surest way to approach it and to reach it is to fight down, or to neglect, the convictions that lead up to Him. John was the forerunner of Christ, and if Herod had listened to John, to him John would have said: ‘Behold the Lamb of God!’ To you I say it, and beseech you to take that Lamb of God as the Sacrifice for your sins, for the Healer and Cleanser of your memories and your consciences, for the Helper who will enable you joyfully to make all sacrifices to duty, and to carry into effect every conviction which His own merciful hand writes upon your hearts. And oh, dear friends, many of you strangers to me, to whom my voice seldom comes, let me plead with you not to be content with ‘hearing’ any of us ‘gladly,’ but to do what our words point to, and to follow Christ the Saviour. If you hear the Gospel, however imperfectly, as you are hearing it proclaimed now, and if you neglect it as-must I say?-you are doing now, you will bring another film over your eyes which may grow thick enough to shut out all the light; you will wind another fold about your hearts which may prove impenetrable to the sword of the Spirit; you will put another plug in your ears which may make them deaf to the music of Christ’s voice. Do what you know you ought to do, yield yourselves to Jesus Christ. And do it now, whilst impressions are being made, lest, if you let them sleep, they may never return. Felix trembled when Paul reasoned; but he waved away the messenger and the message, and though he sent for Paul often, and communed with him, he never trembled any more.
‘There is a tide in the affairs of men
Which, taken at the flood,’
would lead us into the haven of rest in Christ; and, if allowed to pass, may leave us, stranded and shipwrecked, among the rocks.
Alexander MacLaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture (1904–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
J. W. McGarvey 1914 · Public Domain On v6 J. W. McGarvey's The Fourfold Gospel [CXXX. Second Stage…
J. W. McGarvey's The Fourfold Gospel [CXXX. Second Stage of Roman Trial].
CXXX. SECOND STAGE OF THE ROMAN TRIAL. JESUS BEFORE HEROD ANTIPAS. (Jerusalem. Early Friday morning.) cLUKE XXIII. 6-12.
Read full note →
c6 But when Pilate heard it [when he heard that Jesus had begun his operations in Galilee], he asked whether the man were a Galilaean. 7 And when he knew that he was of Herod's jurisdiction [Herod was tetrarch of Galilee-- Luk_3:1], he sent him unto Herod, who himself also ["also" includes both Pilate and Herod, neither of whom lived at Jerusalem] was at Jerusalem in these days. ["These days" refers to the passover season. Pilate had come up from his residence at Cæsarea to keep order during the passover, and Herod had come from Tiberias to keep in favor with the Jews by showing his respect to their festival. Hearing that Jesus was a citizen of Herod's province, Pilate saw an opportunity to do two things: first, by sending Jesus to Herod he would either shift or divide the grave responsibility in which he was placed; second, he would show a courtesy to Herod which might help to remove Herod's enmity toward him, a courtesy which perhaps might be the reverse of the discourtesy which likely caused the enmity-- Luke xiii. 1.] 8 Now when Herod saw Jesus, he was exceeding glad: for he was of a long time desirous to see him, because he had heard concerning him; and he hoped to see some miracle done by him. [As to Herod's previous knowledge of Christ, see Luke ix. 7-9.] 9 And he questioned him in many words; but he answered him nothing. 10 And the chief priests and the scribes stood, vehemently accusing him. [The rulers felt that their case had well-nigh failed before Pilate, so they became the more urgent in the presence of Herod, since Herod had less reason to fear them than Pilate. In the midst of this, Jesus stood silent, answering [709] neither question nor accusation. Herod, as sated ruler, adulterer, and murderer, wished Jesus to turn juggler for his amusement; but the Son of God had nothing but silence for such a creature. The only contemptuous word which Jesus is recorded to have spoken had reference to this ruler-- Luke xiii. 31, 32.] 11 And Herod with his soldiers set him at nought, and mocked him, and arraying him in gorgeous apparel sent him back to Pilate. [Herod took vengeance upon the silence of Christ by treating him with abusive contempt. But finding nothing in Jesus worthy of condemnation, he returned him to Pilate.] 12 And Herod and Pilate became friends with each other that very day: for before they were at enmity between themselves. [Thus Pilate gained but half his desire: Herod was now his friend, but the case of Jesus was still on his hands.]
[FFG 709-710]
J. W. McGarvey (with Philip Y. Pendleton), Commentaries on the New Testament (The Fourfold Gospel, 1914; Acts; and the epistles) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
C. I. Scofield 1917 · Public Domain On v7 See margin ref., (See Scofield "Mat 14:1"). Also Luk…
Herod
See margin ref., (See Scofield "Mat 14:1"). Also Luk 23:8; Luk 23:11; Luk 23:12; Luk 23:15; Luk 3:1
The Scofield Reference Bible (1917 edition), notes by C. I. Scofield — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Paul E. Kretzmann 1924 · Public Domain On v6 Jesus before Herod:
Jesus before Herod:
v. 6. When Pilate heard of Galilee, he asked whether the Man were a Galilean.
Read full note →
v. 7. And as soon as he knew that He belonged unto Herod’s jurisdiction, he sent Him to Herod, who himself also was at Jerusalem at that time.
v. 8. And when Herod saw Jesus, he was exceeding glad; for he was desirous to see Him of a long season because he had heard many things of Him; and he hoped to have seen some miracle done by Him.
v. 9. Then he questioned with Him in many words; but He answered him nothing
v. 10. And the chief priests and scribes stood and vehemently accused Him.
v. 11. And Herod with his men of war set Him at naught, and mocked Him, and arrayed Him in a gorgeous robe, and sent Him again to Pilate.
v. 12. And the same day Pilate and Herod were made friends together; for before they were at enmity between themselves.
As soon as Pilate heard the word Galilee, he became intensely interested. Calm, judicious reasoning had told him from the start that Jesus was innocent, but his weak, vacillating nature feared an uprising of the Jews, which might have become a serious matter with the city full of pilgrims. Here was a chance to get rid of the entire unpleasant matter. At once he inquired and received the information that Jesus belonged to the jurisdiction of Herod Antipas, the tetrarch of Galilee. Without a moment’s delay, the governor of Judea, to whose court the case had been brought and by whom it should be decided, sent the prisoner to Herod, who had also come up for the feast and resided in the fine palace of the Herodian family in the western part of the city. That was cowardice on the part of Pilate, combined with legal quibbling. He tried to evade the issue, to escape a disagreeable situation. He had not been so careful of jurisdiction when he had caused the Galileans to be killed in the Temple, Luk 13:1. If anyone holds an office, he should perform the work of that office, even though it occasionally be disagreeable. And, above all, everyone should be honest and true in his work. Herod was highly pleased when Jesus was brought before him. He had heard many things concerning Him even in Galilee, Luk 9:7-9, and had been anxious to see Him for a long time. He now had the opportunity without a special effort on his part. Here was a new amusement to keep him occupied, to provide an agreeable change in the monotony of life, for the prisoner might be able to delight him and his courtiers with some clever tricks or even perform a miracle for his special benefit. As soon as Jesus. was brought into his palace, therefore, he plied Him with questions of many kinds. But he. was sadly disappointed, for Jesus did not answer him with so much as a word. Herod had had opportunity enough to hear the truth, out of the mouth of that fearless witness, John the Baptist, but he had hardened his heart against the truth and had killed the preacher of righteousness. And even now it was not the desire for the preaching of salvation that was actuating him, but mere curiosity. That is a terrible punishment of God when He no longer addresses Himself to a person in His Gospel, but ignores him entirely. The chief priests and scribes, fearing that their case might take an unfavorable turn in their absence, had followed the soldiers with the prisoner to the palace of Herod and there renewed their vehement charges. But Herod paid no attention to their crying. His hope of amusement had been spoiled by the unwillingness of the prisoner to respond. He and the soldiers of his body-guard, therefore, treated Him with every sign of contempt, mocked Him, had Him clothed in a costly or shining robe, "probably a cast-off royal mantle of his own," and then sent Him back to Pilate. His action indicated that he considered Jesus a helpless, irresponsible fool, a mock king, a man to be laughed at, not to be feared or punished. Pilate and Herod had before this, probably due to the governor’s cruel action, been on bad terms; there had been enmity between them. But now the disagreement was forgotten. Herod had had his sport, such as it was, but would not try the case, which he referred back to Pilate as the proper judge. Jesus was the plaything of unprincipled men. There is really no difference in kind, whether: the children of the world accuse Christ and the disciples of Christ as rebels and perverters of morals or despise them as innocuous fools. And where enmity toward Christ is concerned, former enemies become the best of friends.
Paul E. Kretzmann, Popular Commentary of the Bible (1921–1924) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
unfoldingWord translationNotes 2017 · CC BY-SA 4.0 On vv6, 8, 11 heard this
heard this
"heard that Jesus began to teach in Galilee"
Read full note →
he asked whether the man was a Galilean
Pilate wanted to know from which area Jesus came because he wanted to have a lower-ranking government official judge Jesus. If Jesus were from Galilee, Pilate could have Herod judge Jesus because Herod had authority over Galilee.
the man
This refers to Jesus.
he discovered
"Pilate found out"
he was under Herod's authority
The passage does not state the implied fact that Herod was the ruler of Galilee. AT: "Jesus was under the authority of Herod because Herod ruled over Galilee" (See: Assumed Knowledge and Implicit Information)
he sent
"Pilate sent"
who himself
This refers to Herod.
in those days
"at that time"
translationWords
Pilate
Galilee
Herod Antipas
authority
Jerusalem
unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.
Tyndale Open Study Notes 2022 · CC BY-SA 4.0 On vv6, 8, 9, 12 23:6-7 Realizing that Jesus was a Galilean and thus…
23:6-7 Realizing that Jesus was a Galilean and thus under the jurisdiction of Herod Antipas, Pilate saw an opportunity to get out of this sticky situation without condemning an innocent man or angering the religious leaders.
Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.