Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Mark 6:17
For Herod himself had sent forth and laid hold upon John, and bound him in prison for Herodias’ sake, his brother Philip’s wife: for he had married her.
17. For Herod ] St Mark now proceeds more fully than the first Evangelist to relate the circumstances of the murder of the Baptist.
for Herodias’ sake ] During one of his journeys to Rome, Herod Antipas had fallen in with Herodias the wife of his brother Herod Philip, a son of Herod the Great and Mariamne, who was living there as a private person. Herodias was not only the sister-in-law, but the niece of Antipas, and already had a daughter who was grown up. Herod himself had long been married to the daughter of Aretas, Emr of Arabia Petra, but this did not prevent him from courting an adulterous alliance with Herodias, and she consented to become his wife, on condition that the daughter of the Arabian prince was divorced. But the latter, suspecting her husband’s guilty passion, did not wait to be divorced, and indignantly fled to the castle of Machrus, and thence to her father’s rocky fortress at Petra, who forthwith assembled an army to avenge her wrongs, and defeated Herod in a decisive battle (Jos. Ant. Mar 6:1).
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Mar 6:17
For Herodias sake.
Evil effects of vice
The pleasures which chiefly affect or rather bewitch the body, and by so doing become the pest and poison of the nobler and intellectual part of man, are those false and fallacious pleasures of lust and intemperance. Nothing does or can darken the mind or conscience of man more. Could Herod have ever thought himself obliged by the religion of an oath to murder the Baptist, had not his lust and his Herodias imprisoned and murdered his conscience first? It seems his besotted conscience, having broken through the seventh commandment, the sixth stood too near it to be safe long. So that it was his lust obstinately continued in which thus darkened and deluded his conscience; and the same will no doubt darken, delude, and in the end extinguish the conscience of any man breathing, who shall surrender himself up to it. (Dr. South.)
The reciprocal revenge of wrong
There is another point that should be brought out-the power which one nature has upon another, and the reciprocal revenge of wrong. When Herod ensnared his brothers wife, when he tempted her into adulterous abandonment of her husband and into unlawful intercourse with him, he was the aggressor and she was the partner; but when they were living in unholy concord she became the avenger, and her influence upon him led him into this infamous crime and this damnable cruelty. He destroyed her virtue, and she destroyed his manhood; and from that time to this how many have been destroyed by those who should have been their protectors, and who should have inspired in them purity and gentleness and forgivingness! Oh, what chance was there for sweet and wholesome water to come out of such fountains! But they rotted together and spoiled each other. How many times, if we could look into the secrets of the household, should we see the same work going on: a bad man lowering the tone of the woman that came to him pure and simple minded, destroying her aspiration, familiarizing her with vulgarity, urging all his influence and power to take away from her the fear of evil and wrong, and rather rejoicing as every barrier is broken down to bring her to his level! And how many men have been despoiled by hard, selfish, and ambitious wives, the man being simple-minded, and, on the whole, having right notions, and the woman perpetually employing the subtle arts of influence, persuasion, and fascination, and all of them in the direction of selfishness, and oftentimes in the direction of corruption and malignant crime! (H. W. Beecher.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
17. For Herod himself had sentforth, and laid hold upon John, and bound him in prisonin thecastle of Machrus, near the southern extremity of Herod’sdominions, and adjoining the Dead Sea [JOSEPHUS,Antiquities, 18.5,2].
for Herodias’ sakeShewas the granddaughter of Herod the Great.
his brother Philip’s wifeandtherefore the niece of both brothers. This Philip, however, was notthe tetrarch of that name mentioned in Lu3:1 (see on Lu 3:1), but onewhose distinctive name was “Herod Philip,” another son ofHerod the Greatwho was disinherited by his father. Herod Antipas’own wife was the daughter of Aretas, king of Arabia; but he prevailedon Herodias, his half-brother Philip’s wife, to forsake her husbandand live with him, on condition, says JOSEPHUS[Antiquities, 18.5,1], that he should put away his own wife.This involved him afterwards in war with Aretas, who totally defeatedhim and destroyed his army, from the effects of which he was neverable to recover himself.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
For Herod himself had sent forth,…. Some of his guard, a detachment of soldiers,
and laid hold upon John; who seized upon him, and took him up:
and bound him in prison; in the castle of Machaerus:
for Herodias’ sake, his brother Philip’s wife, for he had married her; whilst his brother was living, and who had had children by her; [See comments on Mt 14:3].
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
For Herod himself ( H). Mark now proceeds to give the narrative of the death of John the Baptist some while before these nervous fears of Herod. But this post eventum narrative is very little out of the chronological order. The news of John’s death at Machaerus may even have come at the close of the Galilean tour. “The tidings of the murder of the Baptist seem to have brought the recent circuit to an end” (Swete). The disciples of John “went and told Jesus. Now when Jesus heard it, he withdrew from thence in a boat” (Mt 14:12f.). See on Mt 14:3-12 for the discussion about Herod Antipas and John and Herodias.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
1) “For Herod himself had sent forth and laid hold upon John,” (autos gar ho Herodes aposteilas ekratesen ton loannen) “For Herod had himself mandated or commissioned that John be seized,” as also recounted, Mat 14:3-5.
2) “And bound him in prison for Herodias’ sake,” (kai edesen auton en phulake dia Herodiada) “And had bound him in prison because of Herodias,” in response to the wish of Herodias, where he was detained till his murder by Herod.
3) ”His brother Philip’s wife: for he had married her.” (ten gunaika Philippou tou adelphou hoti auten egamesen) “Who was the wife of Philip, the brother of Herod, because he had married her,” Mat 14:6-11.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
(17) For Herod himself had sent forth.See Notes on Mat. 14:3-12.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
‘For Herod himself had sent out and laid hold on John and bound him in prison, for the sake of Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife, for he had married her. For John said to Herod “It is not lawful for you to have your brother’s wife.” And Herodias set herself against him and desired to kill him, but she could not, for Herod feared John knowing that he was a righteous and holy man, and kept him safe. And when he heard him he was greatly perplexed, and he heard him gladly.’
This summary of the situation reveals Herod’s initial reluctance to act against John, only doing so because of his strong-minded wife’s insistence and John’s accusations. But even then he had refused to allow him to be killed. John had enjoyed Herod’s special protection, for Herod had respected and feared him as a true man of God and would bring him into his presence to hear what he had to say. He did not want such blood on his hands. We have here an interesting picture of a divided Herod. On the one hand he was a tyrant, but on the other he had a kind of recognition that he should be taking God into account. Thus when it came to religious matters he vacillated between one position and the other. There is an interesting parallel here with the story of Ahab and Jezebel, where another weak king was controlled by his wife.
‘He was greatly perplexed’ (some manuscripts have ‘did many things’) probably included the fact that he was in two minds about what he should do about Herodias. A man’s struggle with himself against the attractions of a desirable woman is the cause of many a man’s perplexity. The flesh struggles with the conscience, and neither will cease its demands, often making the man behave strangely and act seemingly out of character.
‘Had bound him in prison.’ Josephus tells us that this was at Machaerus near the Dead Sea, a bleak place where there was both palace and prison. Mark does not tell us anything about the place where the events occurred.
‘Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife.’ Names in the Herod family were of great complexity not helped by the fact that Herod and Philip were both family names and given freely. ‘Herodias’ was the granddaughter of Herod the Great, being the daughter of his son Aristobulus. Thus she was niece to Herod Antipas. ‘His ‘brother Philip’ was not Philip the Tetrarch who later married Salome. Rather he was another Herod Philip who lived as a private citizen at Rome, and who was a son of Herod the Great by a second Mariamne, and thus also Herodias’ uncle.
Marriage to Herodias was not only attractive because she was clearly a desirable woman, inheriting the beauty of her grandmother Mariamne, but also because she was of royal descent as part Hasmonean and thus more acceptable to the people than Antipas himself who had no recognised Jewish blood in him. But if this was part of his reason for marrying her it failed, partly due to John the Baptiser’s strictures, for they hated him even more.
‘It is not lawful for you to have your brother’s wife.’ Marriage to a brother’s wife while the brother was still alive was forbidden (Lev 18:16; Lev 20:21). This condemnation and Herodias’ resulting hatred, added to John the Baptiser’s strong support among the people. And they hated Herod Antipas all the more for this behaviour, thus making for a possible uprising. These were the reasons for John’s imprisonment.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Herod reproved by John:
v. 17. For Herod himself had sent forth and laid hold upon John, and bound him in prison for Herodias’ sake, his brother Philip’s wife.
v. 18. For John had said unto Herod, It is not lawful for thee to have thy brother’s wife.
v. 19. Therefore Herodias had a quarrel against him, and would have killed him; but she could not,
v. 20. for Herod feared John, knowing that he was a just man and an holy, and observed him; and when he heard him, he did many things, and heard him gladly. Some personal facts concerning Herod and his family are here told. Throughout the passage the name king is applied to him by courtesy only; for Herod was merely tetrarch of Galilee and Perea. He had resided for some time at Machaerus, a strong fortress of the Jews east of the Dead Sea. But he built Tiberius, on the Sea of Galilee, as his capital, fitting it out with all the luxury that he could devise. He had been married to the daughter of King Aretas of Arabia, but had rejected her for the sake of Herodias, then the wife of Philip, Herod’s half-brother, not the ethnarch. His philosophy of life might be summed up in the sentence: Let us eat, drink, and be merry, for tomorrow we shall be dead. The saddest incident in his life is that of which the evangelist here gives an account. John the Baptist, with the fearlessness which should characterize every preacher of repentance, had severely reprimanded him for his adulterous union with Herodias, telling him that it was not right, that it was not the proper thing, that it could not be permitted according to the Law of God that he continue in this anti-Scriptural union. “It so came to pass that Herod the king was living in open, well-known offense. For he had the wife of his brother Philip, who was still living, with him as his lawful wife. This was to John a disagreeable business, since he through his preaching was supposed to rebuke all offense and turn the people from it; for that was his calling. Therefore he does what a pious preacher should do, is not concerned about the fact that Herod is a great king, but just as he rebuked other people for their sins and admonished them to abstain from them, thus he rebukes and admonishes Herod also, and says that it is not right for him to have his brother’s wife. This displeased Herod very much; and the harlot still more, for she was troubled lest the sermon concerning her bring fruit. For this reason she lay in wait for John and would have liked to kill him, but she could not. Herod also would gladly have done it, but he was afraid, since he saw what testimony and praise John had with everybody. For that reason, since John would not desist from his rebuking and admonishing, he caused him to be arrested and put him in prison, in order that he could no longer call out so openly. ” Incidentally, Herod, as is the case with many a weak. character, felt the influence of the mightier and morally greater mind. Herodias had no scruples of any kind; she was determined, she frankly sought to kill John. But feeble, vacillating Herod was between two fires, the people, on the one hand, esteeming John as a prophet, and Herodias, on the other hand, demanding his death. In the meantime Herod, in more than one instance, gave heed to the words of John, and many a word which he heard from the mouth of this fearless exhorter caused him to hesitate and think twice before committing: further lawlessness. Thus matters came to a deadlock, while John was kept in prison at Machaerus.
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
Mar 6:17-29 . See on Mat 14:3-12 . Mark narrates more circumstantially [98] and with more peculiar originality; see especially Mar 6:20 , the contents of which, indeed, are held by Baur to rest on a deduction from Mat 14:9 .
] is a commentary upon the of Mar 6:16 . Herod himself , namely, etc.
] in a prison , without the article. At Mar 6:28 , on the other hand, with the article. Comp. 1Ma 9:53 ; Thuc. iii. 34; Plut. Mor. p. 162 B; Plat. Leg. ix. 864 E: .
Mar 6:19-20 . The is here, in variation from Matthew, denied in the case of Herod. It is not merely an apparent variation (Ebrard, p. 384; Lange), but a real one, wherein Mark’s narrative betrays a later shape of the tradition (in opposition to Schneckenburger, erst. kan. Ev. p. 86 f.); while with Matthew Josephus also, Antt. xviii. 5. 2, attributes to Herod the intention of putting to death. Comp. Strauss, I. p. 396 f. As to ( she gave close heed to him ), see on Luk 11:53 .
] he feared him; he was afraid that this holy man, if he suffered him to be put to death, would bring misfortune upon him. From this fear arose also the utterance contained in Mar 6:14 ; Mar 6:16 : “Herodem non timuit Johannes,” Bengel.
] not; magni eum faciebat (Erasmus, Grotius, Fritzsche, de Wette), which the word does not mean, but he guarded him (Mat 9:17 ; Luk 5:38 ; Tob 3:15 ; 2Ma 12:42 ; Polyb. iv. 60. 10; Herodian, ii. 1.11), i.e. he did not abandon him, but took care that no harm happened to him: “ custodiebat eum,” Vulg. Comp. Jansen, Hammond, Bengel, who pertinently adds by way of explanation: “contra Herodiadem;” and also Bleek. According to Ewald, it is: “ he gave heed to him .” Comp. Sir 4:20 ; Sir 27:12 . But this thought is contained already in what precedes and in what follows. The compound strengthens the idea of the simple verb, designating its action as entire and undivided.
] when he had heard him. Observe afterwards the emphasis of (and gladly he heard him).
] namely, which he had heard from John. Very characteristic is the reading: . , which has the strongest internal probability of being genuine, although only attested by B L , Copt. [99]
We may add that all the imperfects apply to the time of the imprisonment , and are not to be taken as pluperfects (Grotius, Bolten). The took place when Herod was actually present (as was now the case; see on Mat 14:10 f.) in Machaerus; it is possible also that he had him sent for now and then to his seat at Tiberias. But in any case the expressions of Mark point to a longer period of imprisonment than Wieseler, p. 297, assumes.
Mar 6:21 . ] , in reference to time, means nothing else than at the right time , hence: a rightly-timed, fitting, appropriate day (Beza, Grotius, Jansen, Fritzsche, de Wette, Ewald, Bleek, and many others). Comp. Heb 4:16 ; Psa 104:27 ; 2Ma 14:29 ; Soph. O. C. 32; Herodian, i. 4. 7, i. 9. 15, v. 8. 16; and see Plat. Def. p. 413 C. Mark makes use of this predicate, having before his mind the purpose of Herodias , Mar 6:19 , which hitherto had not been able to find any fitting point of time for its execution on account of the tetrarch’s relation to John. [100] Grotius well says: “opportuna insidiatrici, quae vino, amore et adulatorum conspiratione facile sperabat impelli posse nutantem mariti animum.” Others (Hammond, “Wolf, Paulus, Kuinoel) have explained it contrary to linguistic usage as: dies festivus ( ). At the most, according to a later use of (Phrynich. p. 125; comp. below, Mar 6:31 ), might mean: a day, on which one has convenient time, i.e. a leisure day (comp. , to be at leisure, Polyb. v. 26. 10, al. , , leisure), which, however, in the connection would be inappropriate, and very different from the idea of a dies festivus .
On , magnates , a word in current use from the Macedonian period, see Kypke, I. p. 167; Sturz, Dial. Mac. p. 182; Lobeck, ad Phryn. p. 197.
. ] The first two were the chief men of the civil and military service of the tetrarch . Moreover, the principal men of Galilee , people who were not in his service (“status provinciales,” Bengel), were called in.
Mar 6:22 . . ] of Herodias herself . The king was to be captivated with all the greater certainty by Herodias’ own daughter ; another dancer would not have made the same impression upon him.
Mar 6:23 . . . . ] in accordance with Est 5:3 . See in general, Kster, Erlut. p. 194. It is thus that the unprincipled man, carried away by feeling, promises. The contracted form of the genitive belongs to the later manner of writing. Lobeck, ad Phryn. p. 347. The article was not requisite. Heindorf, ad Phaed. p. 176.
Mar 6:25 . Observe the pertness of the wanton damsel. As to (Mar 10:35 : I will that thou shouldst , etc.), see on Luk 6:31 .
Mar 6:26 . ] on account of what was observed at Mar 6:20 .
. . .] emphatically put first, as the determining motive.
] eam repmdiare . Examples of , referred to persons (comp. Heliod. vii. 26: ), may be seen in Kypke, I. p. 167 f. The use of the word in general belongs to the later Greek. Frequent in Polybius.
Mar 6:27 . ] a watcher, i.e. one of his body-guard . On them also devolved the execution of capital punishment (Seneca, de ira , i. 16, benef. iii. 25, al .; Wetstein in loc. ) The Latin word (not spiculator , from their being armed with the spiculum , as Beza and many others hold) is also adopted into the Hebrew . See Lightfoot and Schoettgen, also Buxtorf, Lex. Talm. p. 1533. The spelling (Lachm. Tisch.) has decisive attestation.
[98] Mentioning even the name of Philip . Josephus, Antt. xviii. 5. 4, names him by the family name Herodes , which does not necessitate the supposition of a confusion as to the name on the part of Mark (Ewald, Gesch. Chr. p. 51). Only we may not understand Philip the tetrarch , but a half-brother of his, bearing a similar name. See on Mat 14:3 .
[99] Comp. Buttmann in the Stud. u. Krit. 1860, p. 349. It is to be explained: he was perplexed about many things ; what he heard from John was so heart-searching and so closely touched him. On as equivalent to , see Krger on Thuc. v. 40. 3; Heindorf, ad Plat. Crat. p. 409 D.
[100] The appropriateness of the day is then stated in detail by . . . Hence I do not deem it fitting to write, with Lachmann (comp. his Prolegom. p. xliii.), , .
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
17 For Herod himself had sent forth and laid hold upon John, and bound him in prison for Herodias’ sake, his brother Philip’s wife: for he had married her.
Ver. 17. See Trapp on “ Mat 14:2 “ See Trapp on “ Mat 14:3 “
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Mar 6:17-29 . Story of Herod and the Baptist (Mat 14:3-12 ). Herod’s endorsement of the theory that Jesus is John redivivus gives a convenient opportunity for reporting here post eventum the Baptist’s fate. The report is given in aorists which need not be translated as pluperfects (as in A. V [45] and R. V [46] ).
[45] Authorised Version.
[46] Revised Version.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
Mar 6:17 . ., for the same Herod, who made the speech just reported, etc. : some have supposed that the mistake is here made of taking Herodias for the wife of Philip the tetrarch, who in reality was husband of her daughter Salome (so Holtz. in H. C.). Herodias had previously been the wife of a rich man in Jerusalem, step-brother of Herod Antipas, referred to by Josephus (Ant. J., xviii., 5, 4) by the name of Herod, the family name. He may, of course, have borne another name, such as Philip. Even if there be a slip it is a matter of small moment compared to the moral interest of the gruesome story.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
Mark
THE MARTYRDOM OF JOHN
Mar 6:17 – Mar 6:28
This Herod was a son of the grim old tiger who slew the infants of Bethlehem. He was a true cub of a bad litter, with his father’s ferocity, but without his force. He was sensual, cruel, cunning, and infirm of purpose. Rome allowed him to play at being a king, but kept him well in hand. No doubt his anomalous position as a subject prince helped to make him the bad man he was. Herodias, the Jezebel to this Ahab, was his brother’s wife, and niece to both her husband and Herod. Elijah was not far off; John’s daring outspokenness, of course, made the indignant woman his implacable enemy.
I. This story gives an example of the waking of conscience.
Note the unusual order of the sentence in Mar 6:16 : ‘John whom I beheaded, he is,’ etc. The terrified king blurts out the name of his dread first, then tremblingly takes the guilt of the deed to himself, and last speaks the terrifying thought that he is risen. A man who has a sin in his memory can never be sure that its ghost will not suddenly start up. Trivial incidents will rouse the sleeping conscience. Some nothing, a chance word, a scent, a sound, the look on a face, the glow of an evening sky, may bring all the foul past up again. A puff of wind clears away the mist of oblivion, and the old sin starts into vividness as if done yesterday. You touch a secret spring, and there yawns in the floor a gap leading down to a dungeon.
Conscience thus wakened is free from all illusions as to guilt. ‘ I beheaded.’ There are no excuses now about Herodias’ urgency, or Salome’s beauty, or the rash oath, or the need of keeping it, before his guests. The deed stands clear of all these, as his own act. It is ever so. When conscience speaks, sophistications about temptations or companions, or necessity, or the more learned excuses which philosophers make about environment and heredity as weakening responsibility and diminishing guilt, shrivel to nothing. The present operations of conscience distinctly predict future still more complete remembrance of, and sense of responsibility for, long past sins. There will be a resurrection of men’s evil deeds, as well as of their bodies, and each of them will shake its gory locks at its author, and say, ‘Thou didst it.’
There is no proof that Herod was a Sadducee, disbelieving in a resurrection; but, whether he was or not, the terrors of conscience made short work of the difficulties in the way of his supposition. He was right in believing that evil deeds are gifted with an awful immortality, and will certainly rise again to shake their doer’s soul with terrors.
II. The narrative harks back to tell the story of John’s martyrdom.
Mark’s analysis of the play of contending feeling in the weak king is barely intelligible in the Authorised Version, but is clearly shown in the Revised Version. He ‘feared John,’-the jailer afraid of his prisoner,-’knowing that he was a righteous man and an holy.’ Goodness is awful. The worst men know it when they see it, and pay it the homage of dread, if not of love. ‘And kept him safe’ not ob – but pre -served him; that is, from Herodias’ revenge. ‘And when he heard him, he was much perplexed.’ The reading thus translated differs from that in the Authorised Version by two letters only, and obviously is preferable. Herod was a weak-willed man, drawn by two stronger natures pulling in opposite directions.
So he alternated between lust and purity, between the foul kisses of the temptress at his side and the warnings of the prophet in his dungeon. But in all his vacillation he could not help listening to John, but ‘heard him gladly,’ and mind and conscience approved the nobler voice. Thus he staggered along, with religion enough to spoil some of his sinful delights, but not enough to make him give them up.
Such a state of partial conviction is not unusual. Many of us know quite well that, if we would drop some habit, which may not be very grave, we should be less encumbered in some effort which it is our interest or duty to make; but the conviction has not gone deeper than the understanding. Like a shot which has only got half way through the armoured skin of a man-of-war, it has done no execution, nor reached the engine-room where the power that drives the life is. In more important matters such imperfect convictions are widespread. The majority of slaves to vice know perfectly well that they should give it up. And in regard to the salvation which is in Christ, there are multitudes who know in their inmost consciousness that they ought to be Christians.
Such a condition is one liable to unrest and frequent inner conflict. Truly, he is ‘much perplexed’ whose conscience pulls him one way, and his inclinations another. There is no more miserable condition than that of the man whose will is cleft in twain, and who has a continual battle raging within. Conscience may be bound and thrust down into a dungeon, like John, and lust and pride may be carousing overhead, but their mirth is hollow, and every now and then the stern voice comes up through the gratings, and the noisy revelry is hushed, while it speaks doom.
Such a state of inner strife comes often from unwillingness to give up one special evil. If Herod could have plucked up resolve to pack Herodias about her business, other things might have come right. Many of us are ruined by being unwilling to let some dear delight go. ‘If thine eye causeth thee to stumble, pluck it out.’
We do not make up for such cowardly shrinking from doing right by pleasure in the divine word which we are not obeying. Herod no doubt thought that his delight in listening to John went some way to atone for his refusal to get rid of Herodias. Some of us think ourselves good Christians because we assent to truth, and even like to hear it, provided the speaker suit our tastes. Glad hearing only aggravates the guilt of not doing. It is useless to admire John if you keep Herodias.
III. The end of the story gives an example of the final powerlessness of such half-convictions.
This was what all the convictions of John’s righteousness had come to. So had ended the half yielding to his brave rebukes and the ineffectual aspirations after cleaner living. That chaos of lust and blood teaches that partial reformation is apt to end in a deeper plunge into fouler mire. If a man is false to his feeblest conviction, he makes himself a worse man all through. A partial thaw is generally followed by keener frost than before. A soul half melted and cooled again is harder to melt than before. An abortive slave-rising rivets the chains.
The incident teaches that simple weakness may come to be the parent of great sin. In a world like this, where there are always more voices soliciting to wrong than to right, to be weak is in the long run to be wicked. Fatal facility of disposition ruins hundreds of unthinking men. Nothing is more needful than that young people should learn to say ‘No,’ and should cultivate a wholesome obstinacy which is afraid of nothing but of sinning against God.
If we look onwards to this Herod’s last appearance in Scripture, we get further lessons. He desired to see Jesus that he might see a miracle done to amuse him, like a conjuring trick. Convictions and terrors had faded from his frivolous soul. He has forgotten that he once thought Jesus to be John come again. He sees Christ, and sees nothing in Him; and Christ says nothing to Herod, because He knew it would be useless.
It is an awful thing to put one’s self beyond the hearing of that voice, which ‘all that are in the graves shall hear.’ The most effectual stopping for our ears is neglect of what we know to be His will. If we will not listen to Him, we shall gradually lose the power of hearing Him, and then He will lock His lips, and answer nothing. We dare not say that Jesus is dumb to any man while life lasts, but we dare not refrain from saying that that condition of utter insensibility to His voice may be indefinitely approached by us, and that neglected convictions bring us terribly far on the way towards it.
Fuente: Expositions Of Holy Scripture by Alexander MacLaren
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Mar 6:17-29
17For Herod himself had sent and had John arrested and bound in prison on account of Herodias, the wife of his brother Philip, because he had married her. 18For John had been saying to Herod, “It is not lawful for you to have your brother’s wife.” 19Herodias had a grudge against him and wanted to put him to death and could not do so; 20for Herod was afraid of John, knowing that he was a righteous and holy man, and he kept him safe. And when he heard him, he was very perplexed; but he used to enjoy listening to him. 21A strategic day came when Herod on his birthday gave a banquet for his lords and military commanders and the leading men of Galilee; 22and when the daughter of Herodias herself came in and danced, she pleased Herod and his dinner guests; and the king said to the girl, “Ask me for whatever you want and I will give it to you.” 23And he swore to her, “Whatever you ask of me, I will give it to you; up to half of my kingdom.” 24And she went out and said to her mother, “What shall I ask for?” And she said, “The head of John the Baptist.” 25Immediately she came in a hurry to the king and asked, saying, “I want you to give me at once the head of John the Baptist on a platter.” 26And although the king was very sorry, yet because of his oaths and because of his dinner guests, he was unwilling to refuse her. 27Immediately the king sent an executioner and commanded him to bring back his head. And he went and had him beheaded in the prison, 28and brought his head on a platter, and gave it to the girl; and the girl gave it to her mother. 29When his disciples heard about this, they came and took away his body and laid it in a tomb.
Mar 6:17-29 This is out of chronological sequence. It was inserted to explain Mar 6:14.
Mar 6:17 “Herodias” She had been the wife of Philip, the brother of Herod Antipas (cf. Mat 14:3). They had lived in Rome. She was also Antipas’ niece through Aristobulus. Antipas had wooed her away from Philip and married her.
According to Josephus (i.e., Antiquities of the Jews 18.5.4), Herodias was married to Herod the Great’s son, Herod (whose mother was Marianne, the high priest’s daughter). He also says Herodias’ daughter, Salome, later married Philip. It is possible that Herod was known as Herod Philip.
Mar 6:18 This relationship violated Lev 18:16; Lev 20:21.
Mar 6:19 “Herodias had a grudge against him” This is imperfect tense. She must have brought the subject up again and again to Herod Antipas. Herod kept (imperfect tense) him safe from her (Mar 6:20).
Mar 6:20 “Herod was afraid of John” This fear was because John was a holy man. Mat 14:4 says he feared John’s popularity with the people. Herod was a fearful person. He feared John, Herodias, and his gueststoo bad he did not fear God!
Mar 6:21 There are three groups of guests: (1) civil authorities; (2) military authorities; and (3) local wealthy and influential leaders.
“when he heard him” Herod either called for John or went to his cell at Machaerus (i.e., on the eastern side of the Dead Sea, cf. Josephus’ Antiquities 18.5.2).
“he was very perplexed; but he used to enjoy listening to him” This shows the paradox of a man drawn to the truth, yet rejecting the light (cf. Joh 3:19-21).
Herodias waited until just the right momenta public gathering, a drunken party, a lustful dance, and an outrageous promiseto force Herod’s hand to do her bidding.
Mar 6:22 “the daughter of Herodias” She was called Salome by Josephus, the daughter of Philip.
“danced” It was not common for woman of her social status to dance at this type of gathering. These sensual dances were usually done by prostitutes or professional dancers.
“‘Ask me for whatever you want and I will give it to you'” Herod said this in the presence of his administrative officials and could not take it back (cf. Mar 6:21; Mar 6:26).
Mar 6:23 “he swore to her” He used God’s name to assure his believability.
Mar 6:24 This verse confirms her mother’s ulterior motives and plot (cf. Mar 6:28 b).
Mar 6:26 Herod’s need to impress his friends and family overshadowed his fear (perilupos, which implies exceeding sorrow, cf. Mat 26:38; Mar 14:34).
Mar 6:27 “executioner” This is a Latin term for his special bodyguards. It originally referred to a spy, but came to be used of an executioner (i.e., Seneca). Mark has more Latin terms and phrases than any other Gospel. It was probably written specifically to Romans.
“in the prison” In Antiquities 18.5.2 Josephus tells us it was Herod’s fort named Machaerus, which was near the Dead Sea in Moab.
Mar 6:29 John the Baptist was obviously in the will of God. Yet his ministry only lasted about eighteen months. Although the actual cause of his death was the scheming of an evil woman, God is in control of history for His purposes. This verse also reflects the Jewish concern for a proper burial.
Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley
prison = the prison.
for . . . sake = on account of. Greek. dia. App-104.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
am 4032, ad 28
Herod: Mat 4:12, Mat 11:2, Mat 14:3-12, Luk 3:19, Luk 3:20
Philip’s: Luk 3:1
Reciprocal: Lev 18:16 – General 1Ki 21:25 – whom Jezebel 1Ki 22:27 – Put this fellow Pro 14:16 – the fool Joh 3:24 – General Gal 2:6 – it maketh
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
7
The persecution began with the imprisonment of John which was spite work, caused by Herodias whom he had unlawfully married, she being the wife of his brother.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Mar 6:17-19. See on Mat 14:3-4.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Mar 6:17-26. For Herod had laid hold on John, &c. See the note on Mat 14:3-7. Herodias had a quarrel against him This princess was the granddaughter of Herod the Great, by his son Aristobulus, and had formerly been married to her uncle Philip, the son of her grandfather, by Mariamne, and brother to Herod the tetrarch. Some time after that marriage this Herod, happening in his way to Rome to lodge at his brothers house, fell passionately in love with Herodias, and on his return made offers to her; which she accepted, deserting her husband, who was only a private person, that she might share with the tetrarch in the honours of a crown. On the other hand, he, to make way for her, divorced his wife, the daughter of Aretas, king of Arabia. Wherefore both parties being guilty of incest as well as adultery, they were reproved by the Baptist, with a courage highly becoming the messenger of God. For though he had experienced the advantage of the tetrarchs friendship, he was not afraid to displease him when his duty required it. This freedom Herod resented to such a degree, that he laid his monitor in irons. But if Herods resentment of the liberty which John took with him was great, that of Herodias was much greater. The crime she was guilty of being odious, she could not bear to have it named, and far less reproved. She was, therefore, enraged to the highest pitch, and nothing less than the Baptists head would satisfy her: and ever since he had offended her, she had been plotting against his life, but had not yet been able to get her purpose accomplished. For Herod feared John Great and powerful as the king was, he stood in awe of John, though in low life, and for a while durst not attempt any thing against him; knowing that he was a just man and holy Such force has virtue sometimes upon the minds of the highest offenders! And observed him Or rather, preserved, or protected him, (as , it seems, should rather be rendered) namely, against all the malice and contrivances of Herodias. And when he heard him Probably sending for him occasionally; he did many things Recommended by him; and heard him gladly Delusive pleasure, while he continued in the practice of known sin! Thus it often happens that they who do not truly fear God and turn to him, will go certain lengths in obedience to his commandments, provided something be remitted to them by way of indulgence. But when they are more straitly pressed, throwing off the yoke, they not only become obstinate but furious, which shows us, that no man has any reason to be satisfied with his conduct because he obeys many of the divine laws, unless he has learned to subject himself to God in every respect, and without exception. When a convenient day was come Convenient for her purpose; that Herod made a supper for his lords, high captains, and chief estates Greek, , the tribunes (or commanders of one thousand men each) and principal men of Galilee: that is, to the great men of the court, the army, and the province. When the daughter of Herodias came in and danced See notes on Mat 14:6-12. For his oaths sake, and for their sakes which sat with him, he would not reject her Herods honour was like the conscience of the chief priests, Mat 27:6. To shed innocent blood wounded neither the one nor the other!
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
ARREST & IMPRISONMENT OF JOHN THE BAPTIST
Mat 14:3-5; Mar 6:17-20; Luk 3:19-21. Mark: For Herod himself, having sent, arrested John, and bound him in prison, on account of Herodias, the wife of his brother Philip, because he married her. For John said to Herod, It is not lawful for thee to have the wife of thy brother. And Herodias hated him, and wished to kill him; and was not able. For Herod revered John, knowing him to be a righteous and holy man; and he continued to hold him in prison, and hearing him, continued to do many things, and he was hearing him delightfully. Matthew: And wishing to kill him, he feared the multitude, because they had him as a prophet. Luke: And Herod the tetrarch, being convicted by him concerning Herodias, the wife of Philip, his brother, and concerning all those wicked things which Herod did, added also this to all, he also shut up John in prison. We see from the concurrent histories of this dark tragedy, as given by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, that John the Baptist extended no royal courtesy whatever to the king and queen; but, looking them in the face, thus boldly and fearlessly exposed them in the presence of all the people, pronouncing his withering condemnation against their unlawful matrimony, Herodias, being the legal wife of his brother Philip not the Philip who was at that time tetrarch of Iturea and Trachonitis (Luk 3:1), but of another Philip, who was his half-brother. Here we see a notable case of an honest preacher going into prison and to the executioners block, losing all his liberties, and even his life, rather than withhold a solitary item of the truth. If the preachers nowadays were to expose and condemn all of the unlawful marriages in their congregations, thousands of them would lose their pastoral heads, especially in the wealthy city churches. O how the present age needs preachers having the backbone of John the Baptist! This illustrates the absolute necessity of entire sanctification on the part of the clergy, as nothing but this grace can qualify the preacher to tell the truth under all circumstances, regardless of his reputation, financial interest, and his ecclesiastical head. In this whole transaction, Herod shows up a better spirit than Herodias. You see plainly from Mark that Herod imprisoned John, and kept him in prison nearly two years, to keep Herodias from killing him. If he had not been protected by those impregnable prison-walls, and kept night and day under lock and key, the queen would have hired an assassin to go and murder him. Machaerus, a city and strong fortification, which our dragoman pointed out to us, on the east bank of the Dead Sea, where Herod also had a palace and spent a portion of his time, was the place of Johns imprisonment. During these twenty months, which wound up with his decapitation through the stratagem of Herodias, Herod frequently heard John preach. Mark says: Knowing him to be a righteous and holy man. We become righteous in regeneration, and holy in sanctification. Hence you see that King Herod, an intelligent, unconverted Church-member, had gumption enough to believe in the two works of grace i.e., regeneration and sanctification and see them both in John the Baptist. Mark here informs us that Johns preaching had a powerful effect on Herod, who, like multiplied thousands of unsaved Church-members, wanted to be good. And hearing him, he continued to do many things, and he continued to hear him delightfully. All this took place during those twenty months of his imprisonment at Machaerus, where Herod had a palace, and spent much of his time, meanwhile holding John in prison to keep his haughty wife from having him killed, she, of course, being too mad at him to ever hear him any more, though her royal husband heard him very frequently, ever and anon, and was delighted with the wonderful truth so ably and faithfully dispensed by his prisoner. He continued to do many things; i.e., he was very religious, and obeyed John in many things, being literally carried away by the red-hot truth which he preached; yet he never made the final surrender and got saved; finally permitting his diabolical wife to constrain him to imbue his hands in the innocent blood of the preacher under whose ministry he had been delighted these two years, shed many a tear, and made many a holy vow.
Fuente: William Godbey’s Commentary on the New Testament
Verse 17
We learn, from the secular histories of those times, that this was Herod Antipas, the son of the old king. He had enticed away from his brother Philip, who was then living in poverty and obscurity, his wife Herodias, who was the daughter of another brother, and of course the niece of both her husbands. The name of the daughter who danced was Salome; a common Hebrew name at that time.
Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament
17 For Herod himself had sent forth and laid hold upon John, and bound him in prison for Herodias’ sake, his brother Philip’s wife: for he had married her. 18 For John had said unto Herod, It is not lawful for thee to have thy brother’s wife. 19 Therefore Herodias had a quarrel against him, and would have killed him; but she could not: 20 For Herod feared John, knowing that he was a just man and an holy, and observed him; and when he heard him, he did many things, and heard him gladly. 21 And when a convenient day was come, that Herod on his birthday made a supper to his lords, high captains, and chief estates of Galilee; 22 And when the daughter of the said Herodias came in, and danced, and pleased Herod and them that sat with him, the king said unto the damsel, Ask of me whatsoever thou wilt, and I will give it thee. 23 And he sware unto her, Whatsoever thou shalt ask of me, I will give it thee, unto the half of my kingdom. 24 And she went forth, and said unto her mother, What shall I ask? And she said, The head of John the Baptist. 25 And she came in straightway with haste unto the king, and asked,saying, I will that thou give me by and by in a charger the head of John the Baptist. 26 And the king was exceeding sorry; yet for his oath’s sake, and for their sakes which sat with him, he would not reject her. 27 And immediately the king sent an executioner, and commanded his head to be brought: and he went and beheaded him in the prison, 28 And brought his head in a charger, and gave it to the damsel: and the damsel gave it to her mother. 29 And when his disciples heard of it, they came and took up his corpse, and laid it in a tomb.
I would like to point out a few items for application sake. First in verse 20 we gain insight into Herod’s feelings toward John the Baptist. 20 “For Herod feared John, knowing that he was a just man and an holy, and observed him; and when he heard him, he did many things, and heard him gladly.”
It doesn’t seem that Herod was a believer, though he could have been, but we see a lost man’s respect for a Godly man. Two items. Know that ungodly people respect godly men on some plain. Second know that this should be true today however I see little respect for godly men today. Some possible reasons for today’s disrespect might be:
a. There is nothing in the life of the believer to respect. They live like the lost, they talk like the lost, they act like the lost, they watch the same trashy television/movies as the lost and they are for all practical purposes the same as the lost except that they call themselves Christian.
This observation on the part of the world then is blanket applied to all Christians no matter what their life might be like.
b. The American lost person is much more depraved than the lost of Christ’s time. Probably not since Herod beheaded John because of a pretty woman – at least we are not to that level as yet in America – yet.
c. Know that the lost watch the believer, and that they keep those thoughts to themselves for their own consideration. My father was in the hospital a lot toward the end of his life. My pastor never went to see my father – uhh officially, yet every time he was in the hospital he happened into my father’s room. Over time this had a profound effect on my Father. He mentioned once in a passing way that he thought the pastor was an awfully nice man. My father gave few compliments so I took that as being a great compliment for the pastor.
The pastor never was pushy, just tried to be a friend. I truly believe that his plowing in my father’s life was the reason that on his deathbed he finally spoke to me of spiritual things in an open way.
Being a good Christian has its moments and we need to live as if every moment were one of those that make a change in someone’s life.
d. Know that you can have a relationship with a lost person, even in power, if you keep your stand where it ought to be and speak truth even when it would be easier not to speak. John pointed out Herod’s sin, not that he probably needed to, but to have access to Herod and not pointout sin would have been remiss on John’s part.
e. Truth affects different folks in different ways. Herod did not seem to be bothered by John’s truth, yet his wife wanted to kill John over it. This might indicate that Herod knew it was truth and was trying to ignore it, but his wife wanted revenge for having to listen to the truth.
So today some will listen and others will attempt to cause you trouble.
f. Note the commitment to keeping his word on the part of Herod. Beheading a man who was just is not something that would be easy, yet Herod followed through to keep his name clean – willing to murder for his name’s sake.
I am glad that we do not have men in power in America that would kill to keep their name clear of slander, but it would be very nice to see men in power even worry about what their name is like to the world or even to the voters. It seems they will do anything and everything to be in power and stay there.
When I was a teenager the local policeman (there was one on duty at a time) caught me speeding. He met me at the judge’s office and I was correctly fined. All through the process I was kicking myself for my stupidity, not for my own name, but for my father’s name. He had always held his name as important to him, indeed that was about all he had in life. I knew my name was going to be in the paper and I knew he would be embarrassed knowing that his son was a lawbreaker.
At that time in mid-Nebraska a speeder was not held with high regard, indeed it was a sign of poor parenting if your children found themselves in trouble. Oh for the days when there were some standards to life among the lost – among the believers. Today there is no standard since with humanism you do what you feel is right for you, thus there is no standard that exists. It is fairly clear how long a society will last with that ethic.
It was reported this week that Christian youth are heavily involved in Wicca a “religion” that teaches that there are no rules – humanism mixed with Devil worship might be the source. Wicca is a mother earth belief that has no rules to life, nothing is right or wrong. Naturally young Christians like this because they have not been taught truth in the church nor seemingly at home or anywhere else.
One should wonder at the control that this woman had over Herod. His wife certainly was not in subjection to her husband. Yes, she is an ungodly woman and she has little to do with a Christian woman, but she certainly is a bad example of how to be a wife. Christian wives ought to take a long look at this conniving woman and vow never to be anything like Herodious.
I fear many Christian wives are doing similar things on a much less dangerous plain. They know what they want and they move and shake in the background to get their way when they know their husband would not approve if she had been up front with him. Wives your place under the authority of your husband is God’s placement, God’s will and God’s desire for you. Be at peace with your husband and do not put undo pressure upon him. Up front talk/requests are muchbetter than behind the scenes twisting and moving.
On the other hand men, take a serious look at Herod and the undue pressure he allowed his wife to place upon him. Not only did she plot against him, but she used his own sexual lust to do it. You must be master of yourself first and then your wife. Do not allow your desire to cloud your judgment. You are the head of your house so be sure to act like it by example of controlling yourself first then your family.
Now just one more thought before we move on. You are Herodious sitting in your palace minding your own business and someone walks in with a head in a charger. Now, what does etiquette require of you at that moment in time? Just how do you do your queenly thing when looking at the head of someone else severed from his body? What do you say? Thank you seems rather cold. “Oh I’m sorry, I didn’t mean it.” Would be a lie since you requested it. Just how did Herodious react. Might there have been remorse somewhere along the line? Might there have been sick feelings? What a cold cold woman she must have been – gentlemen be thankful for the wife of your youth!
Fuente: Mr. D’s Notes on Selected New Testament Books by Stanley Derickson
The death of Jesus’ forerunner 6:17-29 (cf. Matthew 14:4-12)
Mar 6:17-29 are a flashback in which Mark explained how John had died. This is the only story in Mark’s Gospel that does not concern Jesus directly. [Note: Taylor, p. 310.] Why did Mark include it? Perhaps he did so because John’s death prefigured Jesus’ violent end. Mark devoted 14 verses to John’s death but only three to his ministry. He really gave two passion narratives, Jesus and John’s. [Note: Lane, p. 215.]
Mark showed particular interest in what "King" Herod Agrippa, and especially Herodias, did to John. [Note: For discussions of the differences between Mark and Josephus’ accounts of John’s death, see Cranfield, pp. 208-9; Taylor, pp. 310-11; or Lane, pp. 215-16.] The main reason Mark included this pericope will emerge later (Mar 9:13).
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
Herod Philip I was really Herod Antipas’ half-brother. [Note: See ibid., p. 218, for a diagram of the Herodian family tree.] It was unlawful for Herod to marry Herodias because their marriage was incestuous since Philip was still alive (cf. Lev 18:16; Lev 20:21). Antipas had converted to Judaism, so he had placed himself under Mosaic Law. [Note: Hiebert, p. 149.]
"We behold in John an illustrious example of that moral courage, which all pious teachers ought to possess, not to hesitate to incur the wrath of the great and powerful, as often as it may be found necessary: for he, with whom there is acceptance of persons, does not honestly serve God." [Note: Calvin, 2:222.]
"Not even the royal house was exempt from the call to radical repentance." [Note: Lane, p. 219.]