Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Matthew 14:1

At that time Herod the tetrarch heard of the fame of Jesus,

1. At that time ] During the missionary journey of the Twelve. See Mark loc. cit.

Herod ] Herod Antipas, tetrarch of Galilee and Pera. He was a son of Herod the Great, and Malthak, a Samaritan, who was also the mother of Archelaus and Olympias. He was thus of Gentile origin, and his early associations were Gentile, for he was brought up at Rome with his brother Archelaus. He married first a daughter of Aretas, king of Arabia, and afterwards, while his first wife was still living, he married Herodias, wife of his half-brother Philip, who was living in a private station, and must not be confused with Philip the tetrarch of Iturea. Cruel, scheming, irresolute, and wicked, he was a type of the worst of tyrants. He intrigued to have the title of tetrarch changed for the higher title of king; very much as Charles the Bold, of Burgundy, endeavoured to change his dukedom into a kingdom. In pursuance of this scheme Antipas went to Rome “to receive for himself a kingdom and return” (Luk 19:12). He was however foiled in this attempt by the arts of his nephew Agrippa, and was eventually banished to Lyons, being accused of confederacy with Sejanus, and of an intention to revolt. Herodias was his worst enemy: she advised the two most fatal errors of his reign: the execution of John Baptist, which brought him into enmity with the Jews, and the attempt to gain the royal title, the result of which was his fall and banishment. But there is a touch of nobility in the determination she took to share her husband’s exile as she had shared his days of prosperity. For Herod’s designs against our Lord, see Luk 13:31; and for the part which he took in the Passion, see Luk 23:6-12.

the tetrarch ] Literally, the ruler of a fourth part or district into which a province was divided; afterwards the name was extended to denote generally a petty king, the ruler of a provincial district. Deiotarus, whose cause Cicero supported, was tetrarch of Galatia. He is called king by Appian, just as Herod Antipas is called king, Mat 14:9, and Mar 6:14.

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

Ch. Mat 14:1-12. Herod the Tetrarch puts to death John the Baptist

Mar 6:14-29, where the further conjectures as to the personality of Jesus are given, “Elias, a [or the ] prophet, or as one of the prophets,” and the whole account is narrated in the vivid dramatic manner of St Mark. St Luke relates the cause of the imprisonment, Mar 3:19-20; the conjectures as to Jesus, Mat 9:7-9.

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

Herod the tetrarch – See also Mar 6:14-16; Luk 9:7-9. This was a son of Herod the Great. Herod the Great died probably in the first year after the birth of Christ, and left his kingdom to his three sons, of whom this Herod Antipas was one. He ruled over Galilee and Perea. See the notes at Mat 2:15. The title tetrarch literally denotes one who rules over a fourth part of any country. It came, however, to signify the governor or ruler of any province subject to the Roman emperor – Robinson, Lexicon.

Heard of the fame of Jesus – Jesus had been a considerable time engaged in the work of the ministry, and it may seem remarkable that he had not before heard of him. Herod might, however, have been absent on some expedition to a remote part of the country. It is to be remembered, also, that he was a man of much dissoluteness of morals, and that he paid little attention to the affairs of the people. He might have heard of Jesus before, but it had not arrested his attention. He did not think it a matter worthy of much regard.

Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible

Mat 14:1-11

Herod the tetratch heard of the fame of Jesus.

A Court preacher

Herod is favourable to John, how could he be more unfortunate than to strike in the face the king who protects him? Is not the confidence of Herod an indication of the providence of God, not to be cast aside? This is what Court preachers of almost all epochs say to themselves. Moses was taught at the Court of Pharaoh, but said to the King, Let the people of God go. John says to Herod, It is not lawful.

I. His fidelity. He might have taken another means of fulfilling his mission, completely saving his life. He might have aroused the people against the King, and have made himself a popular hero. That is the protestation which God demands, not noisy indignation, but that humble and firm testimony in the presence of evil. But you suffer for your frankness; but who has found the secret of loving truly without suffering. False love always seeks itself; it will not alienate a heart to save it. True love, which seeks the good of others, and not its own interest, consents to be forgotten, sacrificed.

II. The recompense of this fidelity. Life for us so easy and for the old saints so terrible; we are tempted to accuse God of inexplicable severity. John dead! are you sure? Ask the authors of the crime. Herod sees him haunting him everywhere. Dead!-one cannot die when one has served God. To-day John speaks to us, his example has cheered our souls. Dead! no, in the cause which he has served nothing is useless, and if the most obscure devotion does not lose its recompense, what will be the recompense of a martyrdom such as his? Dead! but is that dying, to go to rejoin those who were witnesses of God on earth. Let me die the death of the righteous, etc. (E. Bersier, D. D.)

The Church built and enlarged by humble but heroic fidelity to truth

It is from similar devotedness that the Church has been able to arise and enlarge. When you see glittering in the air some massive cathedral, which remains standing as a testimony to the faith of past generations, think, then, of the blocks buried in the depths of the ground. None look to see them, but without those layers the edifice would fall at the first gust of a storm. Well, if to-day there is in the world a Christian Church, if there is a refuge accessible to all the sorrows of earth, an asylum where the soul escapes for ever from the oppressions of this world, a spiritual home where faith, hope, and love abide for ever; if we ourselves have been able to find there a place; it is certain that at its base there are acts of devotion without number, obscure deaths, unknown sufferings, silent sacrifices, which none can count. (E. Bersier, D. D)

Compromising Court preachers

Who knows now but that the favour of the monarch is a providential arrangement by God, for the furtherance of His Truth? Will you go, and by an early and unseasonable speech overthrow the designs of God: Yes, my brethren, this is that which Court preachers of almost all epochs say to themselves. This is that which was said at the Court of Constantine, and thus it was that that emperor was deified who murdered his own son. Alas! this is that which was said in the sixteenth century, at the Court of Henry VIII., while that monarch stained the English Reformation with his disgraceful profligacy. This is that which was said at the Court of Philip of Hesse, and it was thus that Luther, in a day of weakness, covered, with a cowardly compromise, the profligacies of that prince. This is that which was said at the Court of Louis XIV., and it was thus that Bossuet, so implacable upon this point against Luther himself, had scarcely a courageous word, in presence of scandals far more crying still. This is how Massillon reassured himself at the Regents Court. This is how, upon the free soil of America, in the face of negro slavery and of all the infamy which accompanied it, some thousands of ministers of the gospel remained a long time silent, or only spoke so peaceably that a clap of thunder might have come to startle their sleeping consciences. Ah! deplorable allurement of the favour of the world! That is why dishonoured Religion has had some Te Deum for every fortunate action of power, some absolutions for all scandals, and why to-day it is miserably compromised in all the complications of human politics, when, alone, and without other support than its very truth, it would have, perhaps, brought over the world to Jesus Christ. (E. Bersier, D. D.)

Conscience and the moral law

Herod had a motive which shut our all reason and argument. It was his guilty conscience told him this was John the Baptist. The use I make of this passage is to set before you such considerations as naturally arise from it, and are proper for the direction and government of ourselves.

I. Observe the great force and efficacy of conscience. The fears which surround the guilty are so many undoubted proofs and records of the Judges authority.

II. This moral law is promulgated to every rational creature: the work of the Law is written in the heart. The rebukes of conscience will sooner or later restore the true sense to the Law, which was darkened by the shades of false reason serving the inclinations of a corrupted heart.

III. What care the wise author of our being has taken, not only to manifest himself and his laws to us, but likewise to secure our obedience, and thereby our eternal happiness and welfare. (T. Sherlock, D.D.)

The rewards and punishment of religion are in the present as well as in the future

It is thought a great disadvantage to religion that it has only such distant hopes and fears to support it; and it is true that the great objects of our hopes and fears are placed on the ether side of the grave, whilst the temptations to sin meet us in every turn and are almost constantly present with us. But then to balance this it must be considered that though the punishments and rewards of religion are at such a distance, yet the hopes and fears are always present, and influence the happiness of our lives here, as much, and often much more, than any other good or evil which can befall us. The peace of mind which flows from doing right, the fear, anxiety, the torments which attend the guilty, will inevitably determine the condition of men to happiness or misery in our life. (T. Sherlock, D.D.)

The terrors of conscience

The state of the wicked is a very restless one. The wildness and inconsistency of Herods imagination.

I. The reproaches of conscience unavoidable, proved from

(1) Scripture;

(2) Reason;

(3) Experience. Tales of ghosts and spectres accounted for upon this principle.

II. To account for the difficulties that attend the proof of this proposition, it is to be observed-

1. That our judgments often mislead us when they are formed only upon the outside and surface of mens actions.

2. That the reprehensions of conscience are not a continued, but intermitting, disease.

3. The few instances of wicked men that go out of the world without feeling the stings of conscience, to be ascribed either to ill principles early and deeply imbibed, or to an obstinacy of temper, or to a natural and acquired stupidity. These only prove that there are monsters in the moral, as well as in the natural world, but make nothing against the settled laws of either applications. Even for pleasures sake we ought to abstain from all criminal pleasures. It is the best way to secure peace to ourselves by having it always in our consciences. Let those chiefly listen to this reprover who are otherwise set in great measure above reproof. (F. Atterbury.)

Wounds of conscience

Whatever doth violence to the plain dictates of our reason concerning virtue and vice, duty and sin, will as certainly discompose and afflict our thoughts as a wound will raise a smart in the flesh that receives it. (F. Atterbury.)

Herod, a man governed by fear

I. He is an example of how cowardice, superstition, and cruelty naturally go together.

1. Fear of his bad wife leads him to imprison John.

2. Fear of the multitude stays him from killing him.

3. Fear of his oath and fear of ridicule drive him to carry out a vow which it was wicked to make, and tenfold more wicked to keep.

4. Fear of a bad conscience makes him tremble lest Jesus should prove to be John risen from the dead to trouble him.

II. Only when Jesus is brought bound before him, and is surrounded by his men of war, does the coward gain courage to mock him. (J. P. Norris.)

Conscience a preacher

I. There can be no dispute that he is lawfully in office.

II. He has been long in office.

III. This preacher never lacks clearness of discrimination.

IV. Boldness is another characteristic of this preacher.

V. Awakening.

VI. Preaches everywhere.

VII. And as for effectiveness, wizen has this preacher been surpassed?

VIII. Benevolent.

IX. Will never stop preaching.

1. All other preaching can be effective only as it harmonizes with that of this preacher.

2. Shall the everlasting ministrations of this preacher be to us a blessing or a curse? (H. B. Hooker, D. D.)

Herod; or, the power of conscience

I. Conscience will not be silenced by wealth or earthly surroundings.

II. A guilty conscience is troubled with not only real, but imaginary, troubles.

III. A guilty conscience will torment a sinner in spite of his avowed scepticism. (T. Kelly.)

Conscience-fears

A man will give himself up to the gallows twenty years after the treacherous stroke. Nero was haunted by the ghost of his mother, whom he had put to death. Caligula suffered from want of sleep-he was haunted by the faces of his murdered victims. We can still see the corridors recently excavated on the Palatine Hill. We can walk under the vaulted passages where his assassins met him. Often weary with lying awake, writes Suetonius, sometimes he sat up in bed, at others walked in the longest porticos about the house, looking out for the approach of day. You may see the very spot where his assassins waited for him round the corner. Domitian had those long wails cased with clear agate. The mark of the slabs may still be seen. The agate reflected as in a glass any figure that might be concealed round an angle, so that a surprise was impossible. It is said that Theodoric, after ordering the decapitation of Lysimachus, was haunted in the middle of his feasts by the spectre of a gory head upon a charger. And how often must a nobler head than that of Lysimachus have haunted a more ignoble prince than Theodoric as he sat at meat and muttered shudderingly aside, It is John whom I beheaded! (H. R. Haweis.)

Conscience in defiance of sceptical decrial

Herod was a Sadducee; he appears to have been the avowed patron and protector of that sect which believed neither in the existence of spirit, whether angels, men, or devils. Yet see how the conscience of Herod crushes his creed to pieces; though he believed not in the resurrection of the dead, yet he feared that John had risen from the dead; though he despised the idea of hell as a fable, and as a bugbear, he felt within him all the horrors of Gehenna, the gnawings of a worm that dieth not, the scorchings of a fire that is not quenched. Men may try to believe that there is no existence beyond the grave; they may write upon the sepulchre, Death is an eternal sleep; these flimsy pretences burst through them like a river rushing through a mound of sand, or a roaring lion through a spiders web. (Dr. Thomas.)

Head in a charger

History tells of similar instances of barbarity. Mark Antony caused the heads of these whom he had proscribed to be brought to him while he was at table, and entertained himself by looking at them. Ciceros head being one of those brought, he ordered it to be placed on the very tribune whence Cicero had spoken against him. Agrippina, the mother of Nero, sent an officer to kill Lollia Paulina, her rival for the throne. When her head was brought, she examined it with her hands, till she discovered some mark by which the lady had been distinguished.

Troubled conscience

Though Herod thought good to set a face on it to strangers, unto whom it was not safe to bewray his fear; yet to his domestics he freely discovered his thoughts; This is John Baptist. The troubled conscience will many a time open that to familiars, which it hides from the eyes of others. Shame and fear meet together in guiltiness. (Bishop Hall.)

Need of ministerial faithfulness

There was a foolish law among the Lacedaemonians, that none should tell his neighbour any ill news which had befallen him, but every one should be left to find it out for themselves. There are many who would be glad if there was a law that could tie up ministers months from scaring them with their sins; most are more offended with the talk of hell than troubled for that sinful state that should bring them thither. But when shall ministers have a fitter time to tell sinners of their dangers, if not now, for the time cometh when no more offers of love can be done for them. (H. Smith.)

Bold in reproof

A minister without boldness is like a smooth file a knife without an edge, a sentinel that is afraid to let off his gun. If men will be bold in sin, ministers must be bold to reprove. (Gurnall.)

Conscience a tormentor

A wicked man needs no other tormentor, especially for the sins of blood, than his own heart. Revel, O Herod, and feast and frolic; and please thyself with dances, and triumphs, and pastimes: thy sin shall be as some Fury, that shall invisibly follow thee, and scourge thy guilty heart with secret lashes, and upon all occasions shall begin thy hell within thee. (Bishop Hall.)

Herod a hypocrite

Is there a worldly-minded man, that lives in some known sin, yet makes much of the preacher, frequents the church, talks godly, looks demurely, carries fair? Trust him not; he will prove, after his pious fits, like some testy horse, which goes on some paces readily and eagerly, but anon either stands still, or falls to flinging and plunging, and never leaves till he have cast his rider. (Bishop Hall.)

Influence of Balls

I was employing a very respectable woman a few days to do some work for me, and one evening she said to me, You must please to let me off earlier to-night, maam; Im going to the bail. To the ball, I exclaimed in amazement, to the ball! Yes, she said: I am at all the balls. I could not understand her; for, never going to such places myself, I am somewhat ignorant of what goes on. So she added, I am keeper of the china and am tea-maker; so I am obliged to be there; and I shall not get to bed before six oclock to-morrow morning. Oh maam! she burst out, its a dreadful life! I have seen young ladies, when they first came to this town, looking so bright, their cheeks so rosy, their eyes so dancing with joy; and before the winter was over I have not known them, they looked so old and pale and haggard and miserable. (S. S. Teachers Journal.)

Dancing

Dancing in itself, as it is a set, regular harmonious motion of the body, cannot be unlawful, more than walking or running. Circumstances may make it sinful. The wanton gesticulations of a virgin, in a wild assembly of gallants warmed with wine, could be no other than riggidh and unmaidenly. (Bishop Hall.)

Known by our pleasures

There cannot be a better glass, wherein to discern the face of our hearts, than our pleasures; such as they are, such are we; whether vain or holy. (Bishop Hall.)

Blundering wickedness

I. Herod in his first act moves too late. Herod imprisoned John, intending a crushing blow against the good cause; but it was ineffectual. He was powerless to hinder Johns work. That work was done, and not to be undone. His influence was already abroad in the air. His words were pricking the hearts of thousands. Herod could not arrest this, any more than he could lock up the atmosphere within prison bars.

II. Even if Herod could have stopped the revolution he had seized the wrong man. John had passed over the leadership to his chief. The Messiah was spreading His truth in the villages, to the northward, out of reach.

III. In bringing John to his castle to confront his royal authority, he only gives the fearless prophet A chance to come to close quarters with him. The ruler furnished a great opportunity to Gods prophet and he took it.

IV. incontinent depravity reels through revelry to blood-guiltiness. Poor and comfortless is evils triumph. (W. V. Kelley.)

The dead prophet yet alive

The prophets voice is not silenced by the executioners hand, but sounds on in the guilty, haunted soul. John troubles Herod more now than when he was alive. The prisoner does not stay down in the dungeon any more, but rooms with Herod, sits spectral at the Tetrarchs feasts, makes festival doleful as funeral, wakes him in the night, and keeps saying unpleasant things on the inner side of his ear-drum. (W. V. Kelley.)

Martyrdom of John Baptist

Learn from this-

I. That if we faithfully do our duty, we must be prepared to suffer for it. John would have received many marks of favour and acts of kindness from Herod, if only he would have kept silence on one subject; because he dared not be silent, he met with prison and death. So with us. If we are really in earnest in serving God, Satan will be sure to stir up some opposition against us. These hindrances are the tests of our faithfulness.

II. That Gods grace is always sufficient. The Baptists life and death were lonely; but, though separated from Jesus in the body, he was nearer to Him in spirit than the multitude which thronged Him. It is blessed to be constantly in Gods house, to live in an atmosphere of Divine consolation; but it is even more blessed to be content if, through no fault of our own, we are deprived of this: nothing can take away from us the satisfaction of reposing our soul simply upon the will of God.

III. That death may be viewed not with horror but with joy. Herodias sought to wreak cruel vengeance on John; she did but release him from a weary imprisonment, and open the door to his eternal bliss. If only we are ready for death can death come too soon? It is the door of release from storm and cloud, sorrow and sin. (S. W. Skeffington, M. A.)

Contrast

(1) the fearlessness of the witness to the truth, with the fickleness of the truckler to public opinion;

(2) the true consistency which adheres unswervingly to the truth and does not shrink from bearing testimony at all hazards and against all transgressors, with that false consistency which holds to a sinful promise rather than own itself to be in the wrong;

(3) the external fortunes in this world of the friends and the enemies of the truth; its enemies feasting in pomp, and carrying out unchecked their own wicked will, while its friends lie solitary in a dungeon or are cruelly murdered;

(4) their spiritual and eternal condition the witness-bearer passing from prison to rest and peace, the blasphemer going on from one enormity to another, and finally going down to his own place. (Vernon W. Hutting, B. A.)

Herods marriage with Herodias

The marriage was unlawful for three reasons.

1. The former husband of Herodias, Philip, was still living. This is expressly asserted by Josephus.

2. The former wife of Antipas was still living, and had fled to her father, Aretas, on hearing of his intention to marry Herodias.

3. Antipas and Herodias were already related to one another within the forbidden degrees of consanguinity.

Dislike of faithful rebuke

Lais broke her looking-glass because it showed the wrinkles on her face. Man; men are angry with those who tell them their faults, when they should be angry with the faults that are told them.

A charger

A somewhat capacious platter, often made of silver, which was charged or loaded with meat at banquets. The sight of the Baptists head would be a feast to Herodias and her daughter. (J. Morison)

Monarchs subject to law

How different a part did John act from that of the judges of Persia in the times of Cambyses. That madman of a monarch wished to marry his sister; and he demanded of the judges whether there were any Persian law that would sanction such a marriage. They pusillanimously answered that they could find no such law but they found another-that the monarch of Persia was at liberty to do whatsoever he pleased. (J. Morison.)

Reproving the rich

It is not uncommon for men to reprove the poor and the humble in society for their offences, but it is a rare virtue to charge crime, with unflinching fidelity, upon the higher classes. The poor are lectured on all hands, and the most contemptible clap-traps are adopted to catch their ear. But where are the Johns to lecture the rich and the royal, the Herods? (D. Thomas, D. D.)

Fidelity often provokes

Faithful rebukes, if they do not profit, usually provoke. (M. Henry.)

Faithful prelates

So Latimer presented for a new-years gift to King Henry VIII., a New Testament, with a napkin, having this posy about it. Whoremongers and adulterers God will judge. Archbishop Grindal lost Queen Elizabeths favour, and was confined, for favouring prophecies etc., as it was pretended; but in truth, for condemning an unlawful marriage of Julio, an Italian physician, with another mans wife. (John Trapp.)

Herods birthday

A mere plot. A great feast must be prepared, the states invited, the damsel must dance, the king swear, the Baptist thereupon he beheaded, that the queen may be gratified. And this tragedy was new acted at Paris. A.D. 1572, when the French massacre was committed under pretence of a wedding royal. (John Trapp.)

Like mother, like daughter

Neither good bird nor good egg. Such another hussy as this was dame Alice Pierce, a concubine to our Edward III. For when, as at a parliament in the fiftieth year of that kings reign, it was petitioned that the Duke of Lancaster, the Lord Latimer, chamberlain, and this dame Alice might be removed from court, and the petition was vehemently urged by Sir Peter la Mare; this knight afterwards, at the suit of that impudent woman, was committed to perpetual imprisonment at Nottingham. And another such history we have of one Diana Valentina mistress to Henry II., King of France whom she had so subdued that he gave her all the confiscations of goods made in the kingdom for cause of heresy. Whereupon many were burned in France for religion, as they said, but indeed to maintain the pride and satisfy the covetousness of that lewd woman. (John Trapp.)

Herods oath

Were his oaths an absolute bar upon retraction? No doubt the original promise was the original sin. He should not have made such an unconditional promise. He made it in the spirit of a braggart and a despot. His oaths were hatched in wickedness. But though thus hatched, was he not bound, when they were once in existence, to adhere to them? There was something good in adhering to them-something of respect and reverence for the Divine Being, who is either explicitly or implicitly appealed to in all oaths. But there was also something appallingly bad. There was adherence to what was utterly unlawful and wicked. He had no business to peril such lives as that of John on the freak and pleasure of Salome, or on the hate of Herodias, or on any rash words of his own. It was criminal to put any lives in such peril. If his oath had merely perilled valuable goods and chattles, then, though he had sworn to his own hurt, it would have been his duty not to change. But no oath whatsoever, and no bond whatsoever within the limits of possibility, could constitute an obligation to commit a crime. Illegitimate oaths are immoral, and should be repented of, not fulfilled. (J. Morison, D. D.)

Herods sorrow at death of the Baptist

As Andronicus, the Greek Emperor, that deep dissembler, would weep over those whom he had for no cause, caused to be executed, as if he had been the most sorrowful man alive; so this cunning murderer craftily hides his malice, and seeming sad in the face is glad at heart to be rid of the importunate Baptist, that he may sin uncontrolled. (John Trapp.)

The last struggle of conscience

In that moment there must have come before his mind his past reverence for the prophet, the joy which had for a time accompanied the strivings of a better life, possibly the counsels of his foster-brother, Manaen. Had there been only the personal influence of Herodias, these might have prevailed against it; but, like most weak men, Herod feared to be thought weak. It was not so much his regard for the oath which he had taken (that, had it been taken in secret, he might have got over), but his shrinking from the taunt, or whispered jest, or contemptuous gesture, of the assembled guests, if they should see him draw back from his plighted word. A false regard for public opinion, for what people will say or think of us in our own narrow circle, was in this, as in so many other instances, an incentive to guilt, instead of a restraint. (Dean Plumptre.)

Salomes death retributive

A tradition or legend relates that Salomes death was retributive in its outward form. She fell upon the ice, and in the fall her head was severed from the body. (Dean Plumptre.)

Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell

CHAPTER XIV.

Herod, having heard the fame of Christ, supposes him to be John

the Baptist, risen from the dead, 1, 2.

A circumstantial account of the beheading of John the Baptist,

3-12.

Five thousand men, besides women and children, fed with five

loaves and two fishes, 13-21.

The disciples take ship, and Jesus stays behind, and goes

privately into a mountain to pray, 22, 23.

A violent storm arises, by which the lives of the disciples are

endangered, 24.

In their extremity, Jesus appears to them, walking upon the

water, 25-27.

Peter, at the command of his Master, leaves the ship, and walks

on the water to meet Christ, 28-31.

They both enter the ship, and the storm ceases, 32, 33.

They come into the land of Gennesaret, and he heals many

diseased people, 34-36.

NOTES ON CHAP. XIV.

Verse 1. Herod the tetrarch] This was Herod Antipas, the son of Herod the Great. See Clarke on Mt 2:1, where an account is given of the Herod family. The word tetrarch properly signifies a person who rules over the fourth part of a country; but it is taken in a more general sense by the Jewish writers, meaning sometimes a governor simply, or a king; see Mt 14:9. The estates of Herod the Great were not, at his death, divided into four tetrarchies, but only into three: one was given by the Emperor Augustus to Archelaus; the second to Herod Antipas, the person in the text; and the third to Philip: all three, sons of Herod the Great.

Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible

This and the following history is related by Mark more largely, Mar 6:14-30; by Luke more shortly, Luk 9:7-9. We heard before, that the Romans, under whom the Jews now were, had altered the government of the Jews from a kingdom to a tetrarchy, or government of four. Luke telleth us who were the tetrarchs, Luk 3:1. Herod (as we read there) was the tetrarch of Galilee. He had before this time put John Baptist to death, upon what occasion, and in what manner, we shall hear by and by. He heareth of the fame of Jesus. Luke saith he heard of all that was done by him, and was perplexed; that some said John the Baptist was risen from the dead; others, that Elias had appeared; others, that one of the old prophets was risen again. But Herod said, John have I beheaded: but who is this, of whom I hear such things? And he desired to see him. Mark saith, Mar 6:14, that king Herod heard of him; (for his name was spread abroad): and he said, That John the Baptist was risen from the dead, and therefore mighty works do show forth themselves in him. Others said, That it is Elias. And others said, That it is a prophet, or as one of the prophets. But when Herod heard thereof, he said, It is John, whom I beheaded: he is risen from the dead. So as it seems though others had various opinions, yet Herod was fixed in this, that this man was John the Baptist risen again from the dead. Though Luke reports him as speaking more doubtfully, (as he might do to the people), yet Matthew and Mark speak him affirming of it more confidently (probably to his courtiers and confidants). There was an opinion amongst the heathens, that the souls of men and women, when they died, went into other bodies. Some think that Herod was infected with that, and that this is the meaning of his suspicion that John was risen from the dead; that his soul, which he had forced from his body, was gone into another body, so as it might be revenged on him. Or else he thought that John was indeed raised from the dead, (which yet by search might quickly have been known), and therefore mighty works showed themselves in him.

Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole

1. At that time Herod thetetrarchHerod Antipas, one of the three sons of Herod theGreat, and own brother of Archelaus (Mt2:22), who ruled as ethnarch over Galilee and Perea.

heard of the fame ofJesus“for His name was spread abroad” (Mr6:14).

Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible

At that time Herod the tetrarch,…. Not Herod the Great, in whose reign Christ was born, and who slew the infants of Bethlehem, but his son; this was, as the Jewish chronologer c rightly observes,

“Herod Antipater, whom they call , “the tetrarch”; the son of Herod the First, and brother of Archelaus, and the third king of the family of Herod.”

And though he is here called a “tetrarch”, he is in Mr 6:14 called a king: the reason of his being styled a “tetrarch” was this; his father Herod divided his large kingdom into four parts, and bequeathed them to his sons, which was confirmed by the Roman senate: Archelaus reigned in Judea in his stead; upon whose decease, that part was put under the care of a Roman governor; who, when John the Baptist began to preach, was Pontius Pilate; this same Herod here spoken of, being “tetrarch” of Galilee, which was the part assigned him; and his brother Philip “tetrarch” of Ituraea, and of the region of Trachonitis; and Lysanias, “tetrarch” of Abilene, Lu 3:1 the word “tetrarch”: signifying one that has the “fourth” part of government: and in Munster’s Hebrew Gospel, he is called “one of the four princes”; and in the Arabic version, “a prince of the fourth part”; and in the Persic, a “governor of the fourth part of the kingdom”. The “time” referred to, was after the death of John the Baptist; and when Christ had been for a good while, and in many places, preaching and working miracles; the particular instant which respect is had unto, is the sending forth of the twelve disciples to preach and work miracles; and which might serve the more to spread the fame of Christ, and which reached the court of Herod; who, it is said here,

heard of the fame of Jesus: what a wonderful preacher he was, and what mighty things were done by him.

c David Ganz. Tzemach David, par. 1. fol. 25. 2. and so in Juchasin, fol. 142. 2.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

The Death of John the Baptist.

      1 At that time Herod the tetrarch heard of the fame of Jesus,   2 And said unto his servants, This is John the Baptist; he is risen from the dead; and therefore mighty works do show forth themselves in him.   3 For Herod had laid hold on John, and bound him, and put him in prison for Herodias’ sake, his brother Philip’s wife.   4 For John said unto him, It is not lawful for thee to have her.   5 And when he would have put him to death, he feared the multitude, because they counted him as a prophet.   6 But when Herod’s birthday was kept, the daughter of Herodias danced before them, and pleased Herod.   7 Whereupon he promised with an oath to give her whatsoever she would ask.   8 And she, being before instructed of her mother, said, Give me here John Baptist’s head in a charger.   9 And the king was sorry: nevertheless for the oath’s sake, and them which sat with him at meat, he commanded it to be given her.   10 And he sent, and beheaded John in the prison.   11 And his head was brought in a charger, and given to the damsel: and she brought it to her mother.   12 And his disciples came, and took up the body, and buried it, and went and told Jesus.

      We have here the story of John’s martyrdom. Observe,

      I. The occasion of relating this story here, Mat 14:1; Mat 14:2. Here is,

      1. The account brought to Herod of the miracles which Christ wrought. Herod the tetrarch or chief governor of Galilee heard of the fame of Jesus. At that time, when his countrymen slighted him, upon the account of his meanness and obscurity, he began to be famous at court. Note, God will honour those that are despised for his sake. And the gospel, like the sea, gets in one place what it loses in another. Christ had now been preaching and working miracles above two years; yet, it should seem, Herod had not heard of him till now, and now only heard the fame of him. Note, It is the unhappiness of the great ones of the world, that they are most out of the way of hearing the best things (1 Cor. ii. 8). Which none of the princes of this world knew, 1 Cor. i. 26. Christ’s disciples were now sent abroad to preach, and to work miracles in his name, and this spread the fame of him more than ever; which was an indication of the spreading of the gospel by their means after his ascension.

      2. The construction he puts upon this (v. 2); He said to his servants that told him of the fame of Jesus, as sure as we are here, this is John the Baptist; he is risen from the dead. Either the leaven of Herod was not Sadducism, for the Sadducees say, There is no resurrection (Acts xxiii. 8); or else Herod’s guilty conscience (as is usual with atheists) did at this time get the mastery of his opinion, and now he concludes, whether there be a general resurrection or no, that John Baptist is certainly risen, and therefore mighty works do show forth themselves in him. John, while he lived, did no miracle (John x. 41); but Herod concludes, that, being risen from the dead, he is clothed with a greater power than he had while he was living. And he very well calls the miracles he supposed him to work, not his mighty works, but mighty works showing forth themselves in him. Observe here concerning Herod,

      (1.) How he was disappointed in what he intended by beheading John. He thought if he could get that troublesome fellow out of the way, he might go on in his sins, undisturbed and uncontrolled; yet no sooner is that effected, than he hears of Jesus and his disciples preaching the same pure doctrine that John preached; and, which is more, even the disciples confirming it by miracles in their Master’s name. Note, Ministers may be silenced, and imprisoned, and banished, and slain, but the word of God cannot be run down. The prophets live not for ever, but the word takes hold,Zec 1:5; Zec 1:6. See 2 Tim. ii. 9. Sometimes God raises up many faithful ministers out of the ashes of one. This hope there is of God’s trees, though they be cut down, Job xiv. 7-9.

      (2.) How he was filled with causeless fears, merely from the guilt of his own conscience. Thus blood cries, not only from the earth on which it was shed, but from the heart of him that shed it, and makes him Magor-missabib–A terror round about, a terror to himself. A guilty conscience suggests every thing that is frightful, and, like a whirlpool, gathers all to itself that comes near it. Thus the wicked flee when none pursue (Prov. xxviii. 1); are in great fear, where no fear is, Ps. xiv. 5. Herod, by a little enquiry, might have found out that this Jesus was in being long before John Baptist’s death, and therefore could not be Johannes redivivus–John restored to life; and so he might have undeceived himself; but God justly left him to this infatuation.

      (3.) How, notwithstanding this, he was hardened in his wickedness; for though he was convinced that John was a prophet, and one owned of God, yet he does not express the least remorse or sorrow for his sin in putting him to death. The devils believe and tremble, but they never believe and repent. Note, There may be the terror of strong convictions, where there is not the truth of a saving conversion.

      II. The story itself of the imprisonment and martyrdom of John. These extraordinary sufferings of him who was the first preacher of the gospel, plainly show that bonds and afflictions will abide the professors of it. As the first Old-Testament saint, so the first New-Testament minister, died a martyr. And if Christ’s forerunner was thus treated, let not his followers expect to be caressed by the world. Observe here,

      1. John’s faithfulness in reproving Herod, Mat 14:3; Mat 14:4. Herod was one of John’s hearers (Mark vi. 20), and therefore John might be the more bold with him. Note, Ministers, who are reprovers by office, are especially obliged to reprove those that are under their charge, and not to suffer sin upon them; they have the fairest opportunity of dealing with them, and with them may expect the most favourable acceptance.

      The particular sin he reproved him for was, marrying his brother Philip’s wife, not his widow (that had not been so criminal), but his wife. Philip was now living, and Herod inveigled his wife from him, and kept here for his own. Here was a complication of wickedness, adultery, incest, besides the wrong done to Philip, who had had a child by this woman; and it was an aggravation of the wrong, that he was his brother, his half-brother, by the father, but not by the mother. See Ps. l. 20. For this sin John reproved him; not by tacit and oblique allusions, but in plain terms, It is not lawful for thee to have her. He charges it upon him as a sin; not, It is not honourable, or, It is not safe, but, It is not lawful; the sinfulness of sin, as it is the transgression of the law, is the worst thing in it. This was Herod’s own iniquity, his beloved sin, and therefore John Baptist tells him of this particularly. Note, (1.) That which by the law of God is unlawful to other people, is by the same law unlawful to princes and the greatest of men. They who rule over men must not forget that they are themselves but men, and subject to God. “It is not lawful for thee, any more than for the meanest subject thou hast, to debauch another man’s wife.” There is no prerogative, no, not for the greatest and most arbitrary kings, to break the laws of God. (2.) If princes and great men break the law of God, it is very fit they should be told of it by proper persons, and in a proper manner. As they are not above the commands of God’s word, so they are not above the reproofs of his ministers. It is not fit indeed, to say to a king, Thou art Belial (Job xxxiv. 18), any more than to call a brother Raca, or, Thou fool: it is not fit, while they keep within the sphere of their own authority, to arraign them. But it is fit that, by those whose office it is, they should be told what is unlawful, and told with application, Thou art the man; for it follows there (v. 19), that God (whose agents and ambassadors faithful ministers are) accepteth not the persons of princes, nor regardeth the rich more than the poor.

      2. The imprisonment of John for his faithfulness, v. 3. Herod laid hold on John when he was going on to preach and baptize, put an end to his work, bound him, and put him in prison; partly to gratify his own revenge, and partly to please Herodias, who of the two seemed to be most incensed against him; it was for her sake that he did it. Note, (1.) Faithful reproofs, if they do not profit, usually provoke; if they do not do good, they are resented as affronts, and they that will not bow to the reproof, will fly in the face of the reprover and hate him, as Ahab hated Micaiah, 1 Kings xxii. 8. See Pro 9:8; Pro 15:10; Pro 15:12. Veritas odium parit–Truth produces hatred. (2.) It is no new thing for God’s ministers to suffer ill for doing well. Troubles abide those most that are most diligent and faithful in doing their duty, Acts xx. 20. Perhaps some of John’s friends would blame him as indiscreet in reproving Herod, and tell him he had better be silent than provoke Herod, whose character he knew very well, thus to deprive him of his liberty; but away with that discretion that would hinder men from doing their duty as magistrates, ministers, or Christian friends; I believe John’s own heart did not reproach him for it, but this testimony of his conscience for him made his bonds easy, that he suffered for well-doing, and not as a busy-body in other men’s matters, 1 Pet. iv. 15.

      3. The restraint that Herod lay under from further venting of his rage against John, v. 5.

      (1.) He would have put him to death. Perhaps that was not intended at first when he imprisoned him, but his revenge by degrees boiled up to that height. Note, The way of sin, especially the sin of persecution, is down-hill; and when once a respect to Christ’s ministers is cast off and broken through in one instance, that is at length done, which the man would sooner have thought himself a dog than to have been guilty of, 2 Kings viii. 13.

      (2.) That which hindered him was his fear of the multitude, because they counted John as a prophet. It was not because he feared God (if the fear of God had been before his eyes he would not have imprisoned him), nor because he feared John, though formerly he had had a reverence for him (his lusts had overcome that), but because he feared the people; he was afraid for himself, his own safety, and the safety of his government, his abuse of which he knew had already rendered him odious to the people, whose resentments being so far heated already would be apt, upon such a provocation as the putting of a prophet to death, to break out into a flame. Note, [1.] Tyrants have their fears. Those who are, and affect to be, the terror of the mighty, are many times the greatest terror of all to themselves; and when they are most ambitious to be feared by the people, are most afraid of them. [2.] Wicked men are restrained from the most wicked practices, merely by their secular interest, and not by any regard to God. A concern for their ease, credit, wealth, and safety, being their reigning principle, as it keeps them from many duties, so it keeps them from many sins, which otherwise they would not be restrained from; and this is one means by which sinners are kept from being overmuch wicked, Eccl. vii. 17. The danger of sin that appears to sense, or to fancy only, influences men more than that which appears to faith. Herod feared that the putting of John to death might raise a mutiny among the people, which it did not; but he never feared it might raise a mutiny in his own conscience, which it did, v. 2. Men fear being hanged for that which they do not fear being damned for.

      4. The contrivance of bringing John to his death. Long he lay in prison; and, against the liberty of the subject (which, blessed be God, is secured to us of this nation by law), might neither be tried nor bailed. It is computed that he lay a year and a half a close prisoner, which was about as much time as he had spent in his public ministry, from his first entrance into it. Now here we have an account of his release, not by any other discharge than death, the period of all a good man’s troubles, that brings the prisoners to rest together, so that they hear not the voice of the oppressor, Job iii. 18.

      Herodias laid the plot; her implacable revenge thirsted after John’s blood, and would be satisfied with nothing less. Cross the carnal appetites, and they turn into the most barbarous passions; it was a woman, a whore, and the mother of harlots, that was drunk with the blood of the saints,Rev 17:5; Rev 17:6. Herodias contrived how to bring about the murder of John so artificially as to save Herod’s credit, and so to pacify the people. A sorry excuse is better than none. But I am apt to think, that if the truth were known, Herod was himself in the plot; and with all his pretences of surprise and sorrow, was privy to the contrivance, and knew before what would be asked. And his pretending his oath, and respect to his guests, was all but sham and grimace. But if he were trepanned into it ere he was aware, yet because it was the thing he might have prevented, and would not, he is justly found guilty of the whole contrivance. Though Jezebel bring Naboth to his end, yet if Ahab take possession, he hath killed. So, though Herodias contrive the beheading of John, yet if Herod consent to it, and take pleasure in it, he is not only an accessary, but a principal murderer. Well, the scene being laid behind the curtain, let us see how it was acted upon the stage, and in what method. Here we have,

      (1.) The humouring of Herod by the damsel’s dancing upon a birth-day. It seems, Herod’s birth-day was kept with some solemnity; in honour of the day, there must needs be, as usual, a ball at court; and, to grace the solemnity, the daughter of Herodias danced before them; who being the queen’s daughter, it was more than she ordinarily condescended to do. Note, Times of carnal mirth and jollity are convenient times for carrying on bad designs against God’s people. When the king was made sick with bottles of wine, he stretched out his hand with scorners (Hos. vii. 5), for it is part of the sport of a fool to do mischief, Prov. x. 23. The Philistines, when their heart was merry, called for Samson to abuse him. The Parisian massacre was at a wedding. This young lady’s dancing pleased Herod. We are not told who danced with her, but none pleased Herod like her dancing. Note, A vain and graceless heart is apt to be greatly in love with the lusts of the flesh and of the eye, and when it is so, it is entering into further temptation; for by that Satan gets and keeps possession. See Prov. xxiii. 31-33. Herod was now in a mirthful mood, and nothing was more agreeable to him than that which fed his vanity.

      (2.) The rash and foolish promise which Herod made to this wanton girl, to give her whatsoever she would ask: and this promise confirmed with an oath, v. 7. It was a very extravagant obligation which Herod here entered into, and no way becoming a prudent man that is afraid of being snared in the words of his mouth (Prov. vi. 2), much less a good man that fears an oath, Eccl. ix. 2. To put this blank into her hand, and enable her to draw upon him at pleasure, was too great a recompense for such a sorry piece of merit; and, I am apt to think, Herod would not have been guilty of such an absurdity, if he had not been instructed of Herodias, as well as the damsel. Note, Promissory oaths are ensnaring things, and, when made rashly, are the products of inward corruption, and the occasion of many temptations. Therefore, swear not so at all, lest thou have occasion to say, It was an error, Eccl. v. 6.

      (3.) The bloody demand the young lady made of John the Baptist’s head, v. 8. She was before instructed of her mother. Note, The case of those children is very sad, whose parents are their counsellors to do wickedly, as Ahaziah’s (2 Chron. xxii. 3); who instruct them and encourage them in sin, and set them bad examples; for the corrupt nature will sooner be quickened by bad instructions than restrained and mortified by good ones. Children ought not to obey their parents against the Lord, but if they command them to sin, must say, as Levi did to father and mother, they have not seen them.

      Herod having given her her commission, and Herodias her instructions, she requires John the Baptist’s head in a charger. Perhaps Herodias feared lest Herod should grow weary of her (as lust useth to nauseate and be cloyed), and then would make John Baptist’s reproof a pretence to dismiss her; to prevent which she contrives to harden Herod in it by engaging him in the murder of John. John must be beheaded then; that is the death by which he must glorify God; and because it was his who died first after the beginning of the gospel, though the martyrs died various kinds of deaths, and not so easy and honourable as this, yet this is put for all the rest, Rev. xx. 4, where we read of the souls of those that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus. Yet this is not enough, the thing must be humoured too, and not only a revenge, but a fancy must be gratified; it must be given her here in a charger, served up in blood, as a dish of meat at the feast, or sauce to all the other dishes; it is reserved for the third course, to come up with the rarities. He must have no trial, no public hearing, no forms of law or justice must add solemnity to his death; but he is tried, condemned, and executed, in a breath. It was well for him he was so mortified to the world that death could be no surprise to him, though ever so sudden. It must be given her, and she will reckon it a recompence for her dancing, and desire no more.

      (4.) Herod’s grant of this demand (v. 9); The king was sorry, at least took on him to be so, but, for the oath’s sake, he commanded it to be given her. Here is,

      [1.] A pretended concern for John. The king was sorry. Note, Many a man sins with regret, that never has any true regret for his sin; is sorry to sin, yet is utterly a stranger to godly sorrow; sins with reluctancy, and yet goes on to sin. Dr. Hammond suggests, that one reason of Herod’s sorrow was, because it was his birth-day festival, and it would be an ill omen to shed blood on that day, which, as other days of joy, used to be graced with acts of clemency; Natalem colimus, tacete lites–We are celebrating the birth-day, let there be no contentions.

      [2.] Here is a pretended conscience of his oath, with a specious show of honour and honesty; he must needs do something, for the oath’s sake. Note, It is a great mistake to think that a wicked oath will justify a wicked action. It was implied so necessarily, that it needed not be expressed, that he would do any thing for her that was lawful and honest; and when she demanded what was otherwise, he ought to have declared, and he might have done it honourably, that the oath was null and void, and the obligation of it ceased. No man can lay himself under an obligation to sin, because God has already so strongly obliged every man against sin.

      [3.] Here is a real baseness in compliance with wicked companions. Herod yielded, not so much for the sake of the oath, but because it was public, and in compliment to them that sat at meat with him; he granted the demand that he might not seem, before them, to have broken his engagement. Note, A point of honour goes much further with many than a point of conscience. Those who sat at meat with him, probably, were as well pleased with the damsel’s dancing as he, and therefore would have her by all means to be gratified in a frolic, and perhaps were as willing as she to see John the Baptist’s head off. However, none of them had the honesty to interpose, as they ought to have done, for the preventing of it, as Jehoiakim’s princes did, Jer. xxxvi. 25. If some of the common people had been here, they would have rescued this Jonathan, as 1 Sam. xiv. 45.

      [4.] Here is a real malice to John at the bottom of this concession, or else he might have found out evasions enough to have got clear of his promise. Note, Though a wicked mind never wants an excuse, yet the truth of the matter is, that every man is tempted when he is drawn aside of his own lust, and enticed, Jam. i. 14. Perhaps Herod presently reflecting upon the extravagance of his promise, on which she might ground a demand of some vast sum of money, which he loved a great deal better than John the Baptist, was glad to get clear of it so easily; and therefore immediately issues out a warrant for the beheading of John the Baptist, it should seem not in writing, but only by word of mouth; so little account is made of that precious life; he commanded it to be given her.

      (5.) The execution of John, pursuant to this grant (v. 10); He sent and beheaded John in the prison. It is probable the prison was very near, at the gate of the palace; and thither an officer was sent to cut off the head of this great man. He must be beheaded with expedition, to gratify Herodias, who was in a longing condition till it was done. It was done in the night, for it was at supper-time, after supper, it is likely. It was done in the prison, not at the usual place of execution, for fear of an uproar. A great deal of innocent blood, of martyr’s blood, has thus been huddled up in corners, which, when God comes to make inquisition for blood, the earth shall disclose, and shall no more cover, Isa 26:21; Psa 9:12.

      Thus was that voice silenced, that burning and shining light extinguished; thus did that prophet, that Elias, of the new Testament, fall a sacrifice to the resentments of an imperious, whorish woman. Thus did he, who was great in the sight of the Lord, die as a fool dieth, his hands were bound, and his feet put into fetters; and as a man falleth before wicked men, so he fell, a true martyr to all intents and purposes: dying, though not for the professions of his faith, yet for the performance of his duty. However, though his work was soon done, it was done and his testimony finished, for till then none of God’s witnesses are slain. And God brought this good out of it, that hereby his disciples, who while he lived, though in prison, kept close to him, now after his death heartily closed with Jesus Christ.

      5. The disposal of the poor remains of this blessed saint and martyr. The head and body being separated,

      (1.) The damsel brought the head in triumph to her mother, as a trophy of the victories of her malice and revenge, v. 11. Jerome ad Rufin, relates, that when Herodias had John the Baptist’s head brought her, she gave herself the barbarous diversion of pricking the tongue with a needle, as Fulvia did Tully’s. Note, Bloody minds are pleased with bloody sights, which those of tender spirits shrink and tremble at. Sometimes the insatiable rage of bloody persecutors has fallen upon the dead bodies of the saints, and made sport with them, Ps. lxxix. 2. When the witnesses are slain, they that dwell on the earth rejoice over them, and make merry,Rev 11:10; Psa 14:4; Psa 14:5.

      (2.) The disciples buried the body, and brought the news in tears to our Lord Jesus. The disciples of John had fasted often whole their master was in prison, their bridegroom was taken away from them, and they prayed earnestly for his deliverance, as the church did for Peter’s, Acts xii. 5. They had free access to him in prison, which was a comfort to them, but they wished to see him at liberty, that he might preach to others; but now on a sudden all their hopes are dashed. Disciples weep and lament, when the world rejoices. Let us see what they did.

      [1.] They buried the body. Note, There is a respect owing to the servants of Christ, not only while they live, but in their bodies and memories when they are dead. Concerning the first two New-Testament martyrs, it is particularly taken notice of, that they were decently buried, John the Baptist by his disciples, and Stephen by devout men (Acts viii. 2); yet there was no enshrining of their bones or other relics, a piece of superstition which sprung up long after, when the enemy had sowed tares. That over-doing, in respect to the bodies of the saints, is undoing; though they are not to be vilified, yet they are not to be deified.

      [2.] They went and told Jesus; not so much that he might shift for his own safety (no doubt he heard it from others, the country rang of it), as they might receive comfort from him, and be taken in among his disciples. Note, First, When any thing ails us at any time, it is our duty and privilege to make Christ acquainted with it. It will be a relief to our burthened spirits to unbosom ourselves to a friend we may be free with. Such a relation dead or unkind, such a comfort lost or embittered, go and tell Jesus who knows already, but will know from us, the trouble of our souls in adversity. Secondly, We must take heed, lest our religion and the profession of it die with our ministers; when John was dead, they did not return every man to his own, but resolved to abide by it still. When the shepherds are smitten, the sheep need not be scattered while they have the great Shepherd of the sheep to go to, who is still the same, Heb 13:8; Heb 13:20. The removal of ministers should bring us nearer to Christ, into a more immediate communion with him. Thirdly, Comforts otherwise highly valuable, are sometimes therefore taken from us, because they come between us and Christ, and are apt to carry away that love and esteem which are due to him only: John had long since directed his disciples to Christ, and turned them over to him, but they could not leave their old master while he lived; therefore he is removed that they may go to Jesus, whom they had sometimes emulated and envied for John’s sake. It is better to be drawn to Christ by want and loss, than not to come to him at all. If our masters be taken from our head, this is our comfort, we have a Master in heaven, who himself is our Head.

      Josephus mentions this story of the death of John the Baptist (Antiq. 18. 116-119), and adds, that a fatal destruction of Herod’s army in his war with Aretas, king of Petrea (whose daughter was Herod’s wife, whom he put away to make room for Herodias), was generally considered by the Jews to be a just judgment upon him, for putting John the Baptist to death. Herod having, at the instigation of Herodias, disobliged the emperor, was deprived of his government, and they were both banished to Lyons in France; which, says Josephus, was his just punishment for hearkening to her solicitations. And, lastly, it is storied of this daughter of Herodias, that going over the ice in winter, the ice broke, and she slipt in up to her neck, which was cut through by the sharpness of the ice. God requiring her head (says Dr. Whitby) for that of the Baptist; which, if true, was a remarkable providence.

Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary

Herod the tetrarch (H ). Herod Antipas ruler of Galilee and Perea, one-fourth of the dominion of Herod the Great.

The report concerning Jesus ( ). See on 4:24. Cognate accusative, heard the hearing (rumour), objective genitive. It is rather surprising that he had not heard of Jesus before.

Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament

Tetrarch. A ruler of a fourth part. Archelaus had obtained two – fourths of his father ‘s dominions, and Antipas (this Herod) and Philip each one – fourth.

The fame [] . Better as Rev., report. Lit., hearing.

Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament

HEROD’S ACCUSING CONSCIENCE, MURDER OF JOHN THE BAPTIST V. 1-14

1) “At that time Herod the tetrarch,” (en ekeino to kairo) At or in that time period or season,” (ekousen Herodes ho tetraaches) “Herod who was the tetrarch heard,” Herod Antipas, son of Herod the Great, Luk 23:6-12.

2) “Heard of the fame of Jesus,” (ten akoen lesou) “The report of Jesus,” or of the fame that was circulating concerning Jesus, Luk 9:7. His fame had now reached the Royal Palace. Herod ruled Galilee and Perea, one fourth of his father’s dominion, as a tetrarch-governor, consequently called king, Mat 14:9.

Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary

The reason why the Evangelists relate this occurrence is, to inform us that the name of Christ was universally celebrated, and, therefore, the Jews could not be excused on the plea of ignorance. Many might otherwise have been perplexed by this question, “How came it that, while Christ dwelt on the earth, Judea remained in a profound sleep, as if he had withdrawn into some corner, and had displayed to none his divine power?” The Evangelists accordingly state, that the report concerning him was everywhere spread abroad, and penetrated even into the court of Herod.

Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary

HEROD AND HIS FOOLISH PROMISE

Mat 14:1-13.

Compare Mar 6:14-29 and Luk 9:7-9.

THIS man, Herod, of whom I shall speak this evening, is a man who attracts to himself a morbid interest. He is an improvement upon his father, Herod the Great, in that he was not as bloody and conscienceless, but still the greater characteristics of his life were his sins.

Perhaps the most marked incidents of his life, were his shameful relations with Herodias, wife of his half-brother, Herod Philip (Mat 14:1-3); his part in having John the Baptist beheaded; and his connivance at the crucifixion of Christ.

A sermon would be easy from either and each of these circumstances, but I propose, this evening, to speak to none of them, save as the first relates itself to the promises made to the daughter of Herodias.

It would also be interesting to speak of Herods faith, for he was a Sadducee, or a Liberalist, and believed in no angel, spirit or resurrection, so he said, but like most liberalists, when the time of fear was on; when the miracles of Jesus Christ were making a mighty stir throughout his kingdom, he got alarmed and expressed his conviction that Christ was John the Baptist risen from the dead. Mat 14:1-2:

At that time Herod the tetrarch heard of the fame of Jesus, and said unto his servants, This is John the Baptist; he is risen from the dead; and therefore mighty works do shew forth themselves in him.

So in times past, as at the present, such theology was seen to be a poor life-preserver, and was cast aside for something more Scriptural when the ship was threatened.

But still more important than a mans creed is his conduct, and I invite your attention this evening to Herods behavior under the condition of our text,

But when Herods birthday was kept, the daughter of Herodias danced before them, and pleased Herod; whereupon he promised with an oath to give her whatsoever she would ask. And she, being before instructed of her mother, said, Give me here John Baptists head in a charger. And the king was sorry: nevertheless for the oaths sake, and them which sat with him at meat, he commanded it to be given her. And he sent, and beheaded John in the prison. And his head was brought in a charger, and given to the damsel: and she brought it to her mother. And his disciples came, and took up the body, and buried it, and went and told Jesus (Mat 14:6-12).

From this we learn

THE PROMISES OF PASSION ARE PERILOUS.

It was one of Herods rash moments, when to the daughter of Herodias he said, Ask of me whatsoever thou wilt, and I will give it thee. In the midst of his nobles and flatterers, he was filled with pride. In the midst of his festivities, he was inflamed with wine; and as this lascivious woman danced before him, there was an appeal to baser passions, the poorest possible preparation for promise-making. Let us beware of making promises under the impetus of personal pride.

The besetting sin of so many lives is self-esteem. We hold ourselves in such honor that we are constantly watching for ways and means to bring our fellows to believe that we are some great ones, that we are people of power, folks who keep their word, semi-gods who can speak what they will and have it come to pass. And there are not a few who would conserve this dignity at any possible expense. The heaviest load that small men have to bear is their dignity. There are so many things that they would like to do and cant, because of their dignity. Doubtless that word dignity was a good one originally, but it does the devil many turns at the present time. There is so much of the needful work of this worldthe work that would set things right, that is beneath the dignity of men, that it seems a pity that we cannot drown our dignity in the sea and be done with it.

Many years ago, when the late Dr. A. C. Dixon, began to speak in the streets of Baltimore, there were certain fastidious folks in his first Baltimore church who felt that it was unbecoming their pastor to get on a dry-goods box, and address the curious street-crowd; and so they got one of their most important representatives to approach the preacher and mildly suggest to him that his conduct seemed a little questionable. When he asked Why? his member replied, We hardly think it is as dignified as one in your position ought to be. To this Dr. Dixon answered, Well, that may be right, but I am trying to walk by the Word, and I will study the Scriptures to see what they have to say on ministerial dignity . A few days later he met this officious friend, and he said, Oh, Brother Blank, I wanted to say that I have looked up that matter of dignity, and the principal thing that I can find in the Bible touching the subject is in Ecc 10:6; Folly is set in great dignity

For his oaths sake. Herod had to keep this promise when once he had made it, in his pride; and, as we have seen, he made it while inflamed with wine. Poor condition for promise-making. The drunken man is never quite responsible for his words, and the drinking man is never-as-clear-eyed and levelheaded as one ought to be to make important promises.

The contracts in intemperance have wrecked many a house as certainly as they have destroyed a soul. People who put the wine glass into their festal hours do well to recall that record of history.

It is said that a single glass of wine changed the history of France for a quarter of a century. Louis Phillipe had a son, Duke of Orleans, and heir to the throne. On a festive occasion, he drank one glass too many, in consequence of which he was unable to manage the horses, and they dashed him to his death. As a result, his property was confiscated and his family exiled, and the whole history of France sadly effected.

You men who are going to drive business bargains, or stand in social circles, or propose marriage and domestic relations, remember that you are unfitted for any one of these when inflamed with wine, and if the higher call of the souls interest is to be considered, no man, under the influence of liquor, can make the promise that every man ought to make before God.

And then this promise, as we have said, was stimulated by baser passions still. The scant dress of this dancing maid, in this festal hour, stirred the lust of the man whose illegal relations with her mother was sufficient proof of his immoral character. And if there is ever a time when the tongue should be still, and not a word spoken, lest by our speech we should sting ourselves and strike venom into the veins of others, it is under such circumstances. I believe with Quarles when he says, Oh, lust, thou infernal fire whose fuel is gluttony, whose flame is pride, whose sparkles are wanton words, whose smoke is infamy, whose ashes are uncleanness, whose end is hell!

Be careful what promises you make under that Satanic stimulant, for there is a second lesson suggested in this text.

SORROW NEVER CAN SAVE FROM SIN.

As a boy, I used to believe that our sorrow saved us from sin, and I almost wish it did, for if so, the world might be redeemed. Surely, there is enough sorrow in it.

As Dr. Talmage says, The earth is covered with a deluge of sorrow. The very first utterance when we come into the world is a cry; without any teaching we learn to weep. What has so wrinkled that mans face? What has so prematurely whitened his hair? What calls out that sigh? What starts that tear? Trouble! Trouble! I find it in the cellar of poverty, and far up among the heights; for this also has gone up over the tops of the mountains. No escape from it. You go into the store and it meets you at your counting desk; you go into the street and it passes you on the corner; you go into the house and it welcomes you at the door. Tears of poverty, tears of persecution, tears of bereavement, a deluge of tears gathered together from all the earth. They could float an ark larger than Noahs, and yet they do not save you.

Sorrow does not undo the sinful act. Mat 14:9-10.

And the king was sorry: nevertheless for the oaths sake, and them which sat with him at meat, he commanded it to be given her. And he sent, and beheaded John in the prison.

Charles the 9th of France, who murdered the Hugenots, went mad in consequence of his deed, and used to rave in his remorse, If I only had spared the infants, there might be some forgiveness of my sins. If I only had! But his remorse could not bring to life again the murdered ones.

Sorrow does not stop the effects of sin. When John Newton was a youth, he engaged aboard a trading vessel, and shipped to the South Seas, and later to Africa, and was shortly the most accomplished sinner of his age. On the same vessel was a young Englishman with whom Newton chummed, and had shortly corrupted and led into a dissolute life. When Newton was converted, he sought out this young man, and strove to lead him to Christ, but he laughed in his face and said, You taught me my infidelity; how dare you come to me now and talk of God. Few men ever had a more successful ministry than John Newton, but it was claimed by those who knew him that he seldom smiled, and his intimate friends believed that all his days were spent in bitter sorrow over the circumstance of having corrupted a man, and starting him on the road to Hell.

Not long since, a gentleman who supposed himself to be converted, asked me if I believed that he was saved, and when I said, I thought so, he replied, How can I be saved, when there are so many in the world still walking in sinful ways, whom I tempted to take their first sinful steps? I want you to remember, young men, when you are leading your companions into vice, that though you may one day keep your purpose to reform, you have put into an evil way others who will perish, and whose fate will forever seem like Gods frown.

Sorrow does not atone for sin. I used to suppose if I could only weep enough, mercy would come in consequence of my penitence. The older brethren used to sing,

Weeping will not save me;Though my face were bathed in tears;That would not allay my fears;Could not wash the sins of years,Weeping will not save me,

and I wondered at it; but I have come to understand it. Sorrow can never atone for sin.

Dr. Gordon tells of one of our missionaries who relates the terrible suffering of a heathen whom he had found. This heathen had for many years lived with his body immersed in water; he had hung on hooks piercing through his flesha horrid record of studied penalties inflicted upon the body. He was trying to make peace with God through his own wounds. But, beloved, I come to tell you tonight that that is not the way; and Jesus Christ set forth another, as He stood before that little group of disciples. He said, Peace be unto you, and then He showed them the wounds in His body by which He had purchased that peace.

No longer, said Gordon, are we to make peace with God, since the Scriptures declare that He has made peace. By His Cross, the Gospel which we preach now to the world is not make peace, but take peace I wish we could see that truth tonight for it is the only escape from our sins.

Dr. Torrey went to a woman who had requested prayers for her daughter, and said, Is she here? and she was pointed out. At the close of the service, he spoke to the young woman, and said, Do you not want to accept Christ as your Saviour tonight? She stamped her foot in anger and replied, My mother should have known better than to speak to you. She knows that that only makes me worse. But Torrey called her aside and said, Wont you read this Scripture? and opening to Isaiah, he pointed out the words,

He was wounded for our transgressions; He was bruised for our iniquities, the chastisement of our peace is upon Him and with His stripes we are healed. All we like sheep have gone astray. We have turned every one to his own way, and the Lord hath laid on Him the iniquity of us all.

And the Spirit of God sent the truth into that girls heart and that night she surrendered herself to the Lord. It is not sorrow, I repeat, that can save us from our sins, but rather the wounds of the Son of God.

LET US SET ASIDE SATAN-INSPIRED PROMISES.

It is bad to make a bad promise, but it is better to break a bad promise than to keep it.

You young people at your courting still, let me advise you to be careful in your engagements. Broken engagements mean much sorrow, but a mistaken wedding means still more. And you young men, in dealing with your friends, be careful what promises you make. I was present, a few days since, when two young men agreed together to go out in the darkness of that night to do the very devils work; infinitely better to break that promise than to keep it.

In Chicago, a young girl of 16 came to me in great trouble, and told me of a promise she had made to meet one whose intentions were evidently evil, and said, What shall I do? I dislike to break my word? And I said, Your word wont be worth much to you when all else is gone. If we make pledges which the devil has inspired, we ought to dash them in pieces before his face.

I often think of Miriam, in Hawthornes Marble Fawn. You remember that one engagement, one mis-step, made her miserable, though she sought many times to be separated from him to whom she had made her pledge. It was in vain! Hawthorne concludes one of his chapters by saying, But the stream of Miriams trouble kept its way through this flood of human life, and neither mingled with it nor was turned aside. With a sad kind of feminine ingenuity, she found a way to kneel before her tyrant undetected, though in full sight of all the people, still beseeching him for freedom, and in vain.

It is wisdom, then, when one has made a promise, inspired of Satan, to break it before the hour of keeping it comes on. For while a purpose can be set aside, an overt act is eternal.

To set such pledges aside may mean salvation. I recall that before I was converted, when listening to preaching, I was often convicted both of my sin and of my need of a Saviour; but without exception, Satan would bring to my memory some promise or engagement for the future that was out of keeping with a profession of faith. And so, month after month, and year after year, he delayed my decision, until he had well-nigh destroyed my soul.

I dont care what the promise is; with whom it is made; how much it seems to involve. Decide tonight to set that Satanic promise aside, and let Gods Son come to save.

There is a story told of a minister who met a working man one morning, and said, What a beautiful day. How grateful we ought to be to God for all His mercies. The laborer replied, I dont know much about that. Why, said the minister, I suppose you always pray to God for your wife, and family, for your children, dont you? No, said the laborer, I do not. Do you ever pray? No, was the mans reply. Then, I will give you half a crown if you will promise me you never will pray as long as you live. The workman smiled and said, I will take your offer. A half crown will get me a good deal of beer. The money was paid and the preacher went his way, thinking that would bring him face to face with how little he cares for his soul.

The workman said to himself, This is a queer thing I have doneto take money and promise never to pray as long as I live. It worried him, and when at the noon-hour he met his wife, he told her of it, and she replied, Well, John, you may depend upon it, it was the devil, and you have sold your soul for half a crown. This drove him well-nigh to distraction and he could not rid himself of the thought, that, for a pittance, he had parted with every spiritual help; and so he began to attend church seeking some way of escape. One night he was in a crowd. This same preacher who had given him a half crown, came into it, and stood forth to preach, and his text was, What shall it profit a man, if he gain the whole world and lose his own soul? And as he went on, his remarks were, I bought a mans soul for Satan, and paid him half a crown for it. The poor fellow could stand it no longer, and rushing up, he flung the money at the ministers feet, and said, Take it back! Take it back! But, said the minister, didnt you agree to it? Yes, answered the man, I did, but it was a bad promise, and I break it. A half crown and never pray? I would give the world to be permitted to pray now. The preacher said, Then pray, for God is still merciful and a contract with Satan ought not to stand! That night the man who had sold himself for so little, abrogated the contract and accepted Christ.

There are people here that are selling themselves for small prices. Men and women who will lose their souls for a less consideration. Get me plead with you to despise the overtures of the evil one and accept that which is offered you in the Son of God. Satan may tell you that your past sins are such that it is needless for you to expect mercy, but he is a liar from the beginning, and you are very foolish to believe it. The Scriptures say, God is love, and with Him is mercy.

F. B. Meyer, of London, tells of a lady friend whose little boy came home from school with scarlet fever. They brought him in a carriage, wrapped in warm blankets, and as they were carrying him through the hall, the mother said, My darling, mother has a room upstairs for you and herself, and she is going to sit by your bed and never leave it until you are well, And mamma is going to help you fight against this fever. And she shut herself up in the bed room with him and for weeks watched with a mothers love. One day he said to her, Mother, you have not kissed me lately. Dont you love me quite as much since I have got all these marks? She put her arms about his face, and kissed him many times, and said, I loved you before, my baby, but I never loved you so well as now. And Meyer comments, So, dear soul, cursed with the sin which thou hast taken into thy heart, God hates the sin, but He loves thee. He will never love you less. Your sinfulness, your weakness, your spiritual relapses, all appeal to the great heart of God, who, like a mother, is full of love. And if you will tonight, you can, by your very weakness, make saving appeal to His strength, and He will come to your health and fight with you against the fever of sin, until you have had the victory and stand complete in His Son.

Fuente: The Bible of the Expositor and the Evangelist by Riley

CRITICAL NOTES

Mat. 14:1. At that time.Season (R.V.). In our idiom we should bring out the idea by giving a somewhat different turn to the expression, viz., about that time (Morison). Herod.Antipas, son of Herod the Great by Malthace. Under his fathers will he succeeded to the government of Galilee and Pera, with the title of tetrarch, as ruler of a fourth part of the Roman province of Syria (Plumptre).

Mat. 14:2. He is risen from the dead.The policy of the tetrarch connected him with the Sadducean priestly party rather than with the more popular and rigid Pharisees, and a comparison of Mat. 16:6, with Mar. 8:15, at least suggests the identity of the leaven of Herod with that of the Sadducees. The superstitious terror of a conscience stained with guilt is stronger than his scepticism as a Sadducee (Plumptre). Therefore, etc.(See R.V.). In consequence of having risen from the dead he is thought to be possessed of larger powers (Carr).

Mat. 14:3. In prison.At Machrus, in Pera, on the eastern side of the Dead Sea, near the southern frontier of the tetrarchy. Here Antipas had a palace and a prison under one roof, as was common in the East (cf. Neh. 3:25). It was the ordinary arrangement in feudal castles. At Machrus, now Mkhaur, remains of buildings are still visible. These are probably the rains of the Baptists prison. Herod was living in this border fortress in order to prosecute the war with his offended father-in-law, Aretas. He was completely vanquisheda disaster popularly ascribed to his treatment of John the Baptist (Carr). Herodias.Daughter of Aristobulus, son of Herod the Great.

Mat. 14:4. It is not lawful.Josephus adds that besides this motive for imprisoning John, Herod was also afraid lest John should excite a popular tumult (Ant., XVIII. Mat. 14:2). But this apprehension must have originated in the Baptists denunciations of his adultery (Lange). Her first marriage was with her full uncle, and her second, if marriage it can be called, when her husband and Herods wife were both living, was with her step-uncle, and thus triply unlawful (Maclaren).

Mat. 14:6. The daughter of Herodias.Salome. Danced.The kind of dancing is obviously that which disgraces the East to the present day. Nothing but shamelessness or inveterate malice, or both combined, could have driven a princess of royal blood to practise such a profession before the assembled magnates and the Roman officers of the court of Herod (Reynolds).

Mat. 14:8. Being before instructed.Better, being prompted or instigated. The word does not imply that the girl had been instructed before she danced what to ask for, and St. Mark distinctly states (Mar. 6:24) that she went out from the banquet hall to ask her mother what use she was to make of the tetrarchs promise. The mothers absence shows that the supper was one for men only, and that it was among them, flushed as they were with wine, that the daughter had appeared in reckless disregard of all maiden modesty (Plumptre). A charger.A wooden platter or trencher.

Mat. 14:9. The king.The tetrarch is freely called king, inasmuch as he was a sovereign within his territory (Morison). Oaths sake.The sake of his oaths (R.V.). It would appear that Herod had repeated his oath; perhaps, in the exuberance of his enthusiasm, he had repeated it (ibid.).

Mat. 14:11. His head was brought.If Herod had been at Tiberias, his usual residence, the messengers would have required two days to execute their commission. Following the opinion of Maldonatus, Grotius, and others, Meyer holds that the feast had taken place in Machrus itself. According to Hug and Wieseler, it was celebrated at Julias or Livias, another place of residence of Antipas, situate not far from Machrus, in the mountains on the eastern side of the Dead Sea. This view seems to us to have most in its favour (Lange). If the festivity was held in the palace at Tiberias, then, not improbably, John had been removed to that place, as Herod might wish to have him under his own eye (Morison).

MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.Mat. 14:1-12

The approach of danger.This passage is like an episode. The name of the Saviour is mentioned only at its beginning and end. All the rest of the story is an account of the way in which Herod, the tetrarch, was led to put John the Baptist to death; of what there was, on the one hand, to deter him from committing so great a crime; and what there was, on the other, to bring it about. The consideration of these points will probably show us why we have them related, viz. because of the light they throw on the position of the Saviour at this particular time.

I. What there was to deter.There was, first, the general opinion of the multitude of that day respecting the Baptist. They all counted him a prophet indeed (Mat. 14:5). It was a serious thing to lay hands on any one who was even believed to stand in such a highly exceptional place. Prophets had not been at all plentiful for many years now in the land. To touch this prophet, therefore, now at last vouchsafed, was a very serious thing, if there was any degree of truth in the common belief. Even, indeed, if there were none at all in it, such a step was one which involved no slight measure of risk. The family of the Herods had found it well worth while, from a worldly point of view, to profess respect for the religious opinions, and even prejudices, of the Jews; witness the temple itself in the condition of glory to which Herod the Great had brought it in direct pursuance of a policy of that kind. To kill John the Baptist, therefore, in the circumstances named, would be to reverse that policy in a most dangerous and ostentatious degree. It would be to outrage the belief of the multitudes instead of respecting it, and that in a most scandalous way. Well, therefore, might one whose family position had not always been independent of popular feeling (cf. the probable reference of Luk. 19:14), hesitate on this account before determining to put John the Baptist to death. Also, next, there was much in Herods own opinion of that eminent servant of God to make him hesitate before doing so. Evidently he had some idea himself that John was truly a prophet. Elsewhere, indeed, (Mar. 6:20) we are told expressly that he knew that he was a righteous man and a holy, and kept him safe. As also that when he heard him, he did many things (so some ancient authorities), and heard him gladly. Even here, also, where nothing is said expressly to quite the same effect, there are several indications, hardly less strong, of the same impression within him. It is clear, e.g. that he thought John the Baptist a kind of man in connection with whom the performance of miracles to almost any extentnot excluding even the greatest of all, that of being raised again from the deadmight not unreasonably be expected (Mat. 14:2). Most awful, therefore, even to his mind, must have been the actual step of ordering such a mans deaththe death of one who might be expected, afterwards, to be brought back again from the dead! Be his words what they might be in other respects (Mat. 14:4), it was no light thing to put an end to them by taking his life!

II. What brought it about.Herods own love of sensual indulgence was the first thing to do this. Already the strength of this evil influence had leaped over several hindrances in its way. Already it had led him to no small measure of crime. He had put away one who belonged to him of right; he had taken one who belonged to another, and that other his brother; he had done this notwithstanding the plain remonstrances of a man whom he looked upon (see above) as a prophet (Mat. 14:4); and lastly, because that man had still continued to disapprove of his conduct, he had taken him away from his work and confined him in prison, and even thought of his death (Mat. 14:5). In this way, therefore, he had placed himself on the incline which sloped down to that murder; and had begun that in his heart which, if it went on, would end in that crime (cf. Jas. 1:15; 1Jn. 3:15). The bitter enmity of Herods partner in evil was the next thing which helped to bring this crying consummation about. This is one of the evilsthe great evilsof partnership in trangression. It seldom happens that both partners are equally advanced in obduracy and perverseness. It happens still more seldom that the less advanced of the two holds the other one back. How should this be indeed when they are both on that slope of which we have spoken? Does not that slope itself, rather, give all its advantage to that which is already, so to speak, the naturally heavier will of the two? And must it not be, therefore, that, in the end, they both come to the foot, whatever reluctance on the part of one of them there may be for a time? It was so in this case, because of yet another cause of which we are told. Shall we say there came that which tripped up Herod as he was trying to steady himself on that slope? If we did, it would not be an inapt description of what finally led to his fall. The daughter of Herodias came in and so danced as to make the king dance in thought, as it were, and promise with an oath to give her whatsoever she should ask. She, put forward by her motherapparently beforehandasked for the head of the Baptist. He, sorely grieved, and still most unwilling to do so, felt constrained to give way. He feared his oath; he feared them that sat by; he feared, in short, to do right; and so became distinguished ever afterwards as the Herod who put John the Baptist to death.

This was the man who had now heard of the miracles of Jesus. What was to be expected, that being the case? That the two would soon be brought into contact, if things went on as before. That this would lead necessarily, Herod being such as he was, to their being brought into conflict. And that this, finally, would expose the Saviour to a danger not known by Him previously, even to that of which, probably some time after, we read in Luk. 13:31. From this time, therefore, we must look on the Saviour as not so free as He had been; and as moving about with yet another thundercloud over His head. Here He is in the country and under the notice of the murderer of the Baptistof another Ahab, as it were, sitting to rule with another Jezebel by his side. The position adds to the pathos as well as to the solemnity of all that He bore for our sakes.

HOMILIES ON THE VERSES

Mat. 14:1-12. The martyrdom of John.It takes a long time for news of Christ to reach the ears of Herod. Peasants hear of Him before princes whose thick palace walls and crowds of courtiers shut out truth. Note the alarm of the conscience-stricken king. In his terror he makes confidants of his slaves, overleaping the barriers of position in his need of some ears to pour his fears into. He was right in believing that he had not finished with John, and in expecting to meet him again with mightier power to accuse and condemn. If twere done when tis done, says Macbeth; but it is not done. There is a resurrection of deeds as well as of bodies. We may best gather up the lessons of the narrative by taking the actors in the tragedy.

I. We have in Herod the depths of evil possible to a weak character. The singular double which he, Herodias, and John present to Ahab, Jezebel, and Elijah, has often been noticed. In both cases a weak king is drawn opposite ways by the stronger-willed temptress at his side, and by the stern ascetic from the desert. How John had found his way into kings houses we do not know; but, as he carried thither his undaunted boldness of plain-spoken preaching of morality and repentance, it was inevitable that he should find his way from the palace to the dungeon.

1. In this wicked world weak men will always be wicked men; for it is less trouble to consent than to resist, and there are more siren voices to whisper Come than prophets to thunder It is not lawful. Strength of will is needful for all noble life.

2. We may learn from this man, also, how far we may go on the road of obedience to Gods will, and yet leave it at last. What became of all his eager listening, of his partial obedience (Mar. 6:20), of his care to keep John safe from Herodias malice? All vanished like early dew. What became of his conscience-stricken alarms on hearing of Christ? Did they lead to any deep convictions? They faded away and left him harder than before. Convictions not followed out ossify the heart. If he had sent for Christ, and told Him his fears all might have been well.

3. He shows us, too, the intimate connection of all sins. The common root of every sin is selfishness, and the shapes which it takes are protean and interchangeable. Sensual crimes and cruelty are closely akin. Sins are gregarious, and a solitary sin is more seldom seen than a single swallow.

4. Herod is an illustration, too, of a conscience fantastically sensitive, while it is dead to real crimes. He has no twinges for his sin with Herodias, and no effective ones at killing John, but he thinks it would be wrong to break his oath. The two things often go together; and many a brigand in Calabria, who would cut a throat without hesitation, would not miss mass or rob without a little image of the Virgin in his hat.

II. The next actors in the tragedy are Herodias and her daughter.Her portrait is drawn in a few strokes, but they are enough. In strength of will and unscrupulous carelessness of human life she is the sister of Jezebel, and curiously like Shakespeares awful creation, Lady Macbeth; but she adds a strain of sensuous passion to their vices, which heightens the horror. Many a shameless woman would have shrunk from sullying a daughters childhood by sending her to play the part of a shameless dancing-girl before a crew of half-tipsy revellers, and from teaching her young lips to ask for murder. But Herodias sticks at nothing, and is as insensible to the duty of a mother as to that of a wife. We have a hideous picture of corrupted womanhood. The criminality of the daughter largely depends upon her age, of which we have no knowledge. Probably she was old enough to be her mothers fellow-conspirator, rather than her tool, and had learned only too well her lessons of impurity and cruelty. She inherited and was taught evil; that was her misfortune. She made it her own; that was her crime.

III. There is something dramatically appropriate in the silent death of the lonely forerunner.The faint noise of revelry may have reached his ears, as he brooded there, and wondered if the coming King would never come for his enlargement. The King has come and set His servant free, sending him to prepare His way before Him, in the dim regions beyond. A world where Herod sits in the festal chamber, and John lies headless in the dungeon, needs some one to set it right.

IV. It needed some courage for Johns disciples to come to that gloomy, blood-stained fortress, and bear away the headless trunk which scornful cruelty had flung out to rot unburied. When reverent love and sorrow had done their task what was the little flock without a shepherd to do? They show by their action that their master had profited from his last message to Jesus. At once they turn to Him, and, no doubt, the bulk of them were absorbed in the body of His followers. The best thing any of us can do is to go and tell Jesus our loneliness, and let it bind us more closely to him.A. Maclaren, D.D.

Mat. 14:1-2. Miseries of a guilty conscience.I. Conscience is no respecter of persons.

II. A guilty conscience possesses a retentive memory.
III. Is exposed not only to real, but to imaginary woes.
IV. Will torment a man in spite of all his intellectual theories and all the articles of his religious creed.Homilist.

Mat. 14:3-5. John the Baptists death.

1. Faithful ministers will not spare to tell even kings their sins.
2. It is no new thing that kings and great men take it evil to be reproved of their sins and are ready to persecute faithful preachers.
3. The Lord can make any means serve to keep His servants life so long as He pleaseth, as here He maketh the fear of the people a means of Johns safety for a time.
4. Wicked men do not abstain from any sin but for worldly reasons; they do nothing for regard to God. Herod feared the multitude.David Dickson.

Mat. 14:3. The influence of women on kings.A princess of the house of Bourbon, on being asked why the reigns of queens were, in general, more prosperous than the reigns of kings, replied, Because, under kings, women govern; under queens, men.

Mat. 14:6-11. Herods sacrifice of John the Baptist.

1. When a man hath a mind to an evil work, a time shall be found fit for the doing of it.
2. A time of carnal feasting is a time for plotting and practising against Gods servants.
3. A foolish and graceless heart is easily taken with a small delight, as Herod is marvellously pleased with a damsels dancing.
4. A foolish delight is able to ensnare a man for practising a wicked work, as Herods vain delight engageth him in a rash general promise and oath, and so he is engaged in the murder of the Lords servant.
5. Such as the parents are, such is the education of their children.
6. The malice of the wicked against reprovers of their sin is deadly. John Baptists head must pass for his reproof of incest.
7. Malicious persons will prefer the satisfaction of their malice to anything else. Herodias had rather have Johns head than half a kingdom.
8. A graceless soul may have a wrestling with his lusts ere he commit a sin, and may be sorrowful for carnal reasons to do some wicked deed, as Herod here is loth to kill John
9. A natural conscience is not able to resist a temptation, though it may restrain a man for a time, for Herod, though he be sorry, yet he yieldeth.
10. A sinner ensnared is holden by bands which he might lawfully break, as Herod here by a rash oath.
11. That which indeed is a mans shame will appear unto a foolish sinner to be his credit; and when credit appears, it will more prevail with the wicked than either conscience or carnal fear. Herod here for their sakes that sat with him at meat doth yield that John shall lose his head.
12. Gods dearest servants may be taken away by a light occasion, after that the Lord hath ended His work by them, as here John dieth at the desire of a wanton lass.
13. The bodies of the saints may be abused after death at the pleasure of the persecutors, as Johns head here is made a spectacle to his foes.David Dickson.

Mat. 14:6. Herods ballroom.

1. Before the ball.The news of Christs miracles had reached Herod. He was startled. Who is this Jesus? John risen from the dead? Why these fears? John had reproved Herod, and Herod imprisoned John for eighteen months. The guilt of an unlawful marriage was on his conscience. He rushes into gaiety to drown his troubles. The pleasures of the feast and the ballroom minister to a mind diseased. Men fly to the ball, the theatre, the card-table, the tavern, not simply for pleasures sake, and to taste lifes glad moments, but to drown care, to smother conscience, to laugh away the impressions of the last sermon, to soothe an uneasy mind, to relieve the burden, or to pluck out the sting of conscious guilt! O slaughter-houses of souls! O shambles, reeking with blood!

II. During the ball.A gay scene. The lust of the flesh, the lust of the eye, and the pride of life are there. All that can minister to these are there. Herod is there, stupefying conscience. The fair daughter is there, in all the splendour of gay wantonness. The vile mother is there, lascivious and revengeful. Courtiers are there in pomp and glitter. Music and mirth are there. The dance and the song. But some are absent: John is not there; his disciples are not there. Jesus is not there, nor His disciples. They were present at the marriage festival at Cana; but this ball-room is not for them. It is not the place for a follower, either of Jesus or of John. The beauty of this world is one thing, and the beauty of the world to come another. These scenes of vanity are instructive; they present the world in its most fascinating aspects. These balls are the most seductive specimens of pure worldliness that can be found. Surely the god of this world knows how to enchant both eye and ear. Here the natural man is at home. It is a place where God is not; where the cross is not; where such things as sin and holiness must not be named. It is a ball where the knee is not bent except in the waltz; where music in the praise of Jesus is not heard; where the book of God and the name of God would be out of place; where you might speak of Jupiter, Venus, Apollo, but not of Jesus. It was during that ball that the murder of John was plotted and consummated (Lust hard by hate, Milton); that a drunken, lustful king, urged on by two women, perpetrated that foul deed. Such are the masquerades of time. Such was the coarse worldliness of old days; but is the refined worldliness of modern times less fatal to the soul? Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God?

III. After the ball.Of the chief actors in this ball-room murder nothing more is said. They pass to the judgment seat. They have sent John before them to receive his reward. His lips are silenced, and his disciples bury the body; then they go and tell Jesus. Jesus hears of the murder and is silent! This is the day of endurance and patient suffering. The day of recompense is coming.H. Bonar, D.D.

Murderous though beautiful.Beautiful, innocent-looking creatures are sometimes deadly in their influence The Lucilia hominivorax is rather more than the third of an inch in length; the head is large, downy, and of a golden yellow. The thorax is dark blue and very brilliant, with gay reflections of purple. The wings are transparent, yet prettily tinged; their margins as well as the feet are black. This innocent-looking insect is very beautiful, yet it is an assassin. M. Coquerel has informed us that it sometimes occasions the death of those wretched convicts who have been transported to the distant penitentiary of Cayenne. When this fly gets into the mouth or nostrils it lays its eggs there, and when they are changed into larv, the death of the victim generally follows. The larv are lodged in the interior of the nasal orifices and the frontal sinuses, and their mouths are armed with two very sharp mandibles. They have been known to reach the ball of the eye, and to gangrene the eyelids. They enter the mouth, corrode and devour the gums and the entrance of the throat, so as to transform those parts into a mass of putrid flesh, a heap of corruption. What an emblem are these of the pleasures which, in an unsuspicious form, are apt to fasten themselves upon manbeautiful in appearance, yet ruinous in result!Scientific Illustrations and Symbols.

Remarkable days of high festival are accompanied with great danger of falling into sin.Bengel.

Dancing.A sedate and devout Christian leaves dancing to goats, calves, and children, and orders his steps according to the word of God, and not the directions of the dancing-master.Hedinger.

Mat. 14:9. Herod an example of an alleged necessity of sinning.There is a world of sad meaning in the little word that qualifies the intimation of Herods grief. The king was exceeding sorry; yet (Mar. 6:26). He was sorry; nevertheless. The full half of all the sins of men on earth are committed in this very way, with a feeling of sorrow and an excuse of necessity. But yet even this most trimming wavererbut yetmay demand a hearing. He has his reasonsFor his oaths sake, etc. And they are strong enough reasons; an oath in heaven and a pledge on earththe entanglement of a double obligation, on which God above and man below may equally insist. Are the reasons valid? Such a question we need scarcely ask or answer. But are they alleged honestly, and in good faith? This is a more interesting inquiry, and in dealing with, it we must distinguish between excuses of weakness and apologies for wilfulness.

I. Is it a case of weakness?Is it in all sincerity that you pitifully urge the pleaYou have gone too far to draw back? You would fain do so; but yet. Certainly you are entitled to sympathy. It may be proper, however, to ask you, in all tenderness, two questions deeply affecting your responsibility:

1. How came you into such a position?You are pledged before God; there is your oath. Now, this may mean that you really have involved yourselves so deeply as to admit of a question of conscience or scruple of religion being raised when you attempt to draw back. The far more probable supposition is that what you mistake for a sacred pledging of yourselves in the sight of God, is really nothing more than your being committed in your own opinion. You have formed a resolution more or less deliberately, and it is a mortification of your self-esteem to find that you must alter your course. And then, you are pledged, not only in your own mind, but in the judgment or opinion of men. Have you learned that wickedness makes a tool of wickedness? That tutors in sin invariably become tyrants? Truly you are to be pitied. But the question must be pressed upon you: How came you into a position so embarassing?

(1) That you may apprehend and feel your guilt. There is a risk of your being fondled in the cradle of a spurious sentimental sympathy, when it would be far better for you to be startled, were it even as by the alarum of judgment and the trump of doom.
(2) That you may not despair of recovery. The listless impression of utter helplessness that creeps into the soul when folly or excess has contrived to cast its lethargic spell over you, is like the stupor that steals upon the senses of the benumbed traveller as, weary and wayworn, amid the northern ice, he yields to the seduction of an insidious slumber. It is real kindness to break, however painfully, that sleep of death.
2. What really hinders your escape from your present embarrassment?Assuming still that yours is a case of weakness rather than wilfulness, we ask you to consider the real value and force of your excuses. To what do they amount? Your vow, your oathwhat is that but a feeling of false pride? The opinion or expectation of your fellow-menwhat is that but a feeling of false shame? Even at the last hour, might not Herod have frankly owned a fault in himself, and fearlessly disowned the fellowship of those who sat at meat with him? Had he summoned up courage enough to abandon his false pride and his false shame, that night, so dark and bloody, might have been to him, ere it closed, the dawn of a bright and blessed day.

II. But the partition between weakness and wilfulness is very slight and tender.The growth of this wilful spirit may be traced:

1. In your more deliberate justifying of yourselves.

2. In your more daring defiance of God.

We close with two brief remarks.

1. How unsatisfying, at the best, are these pleas!
2. And how unsubstantial!R. S. Candlish, D.D.

Herods oath.There are two things required in an oath:

1. That it be lawfully taken.
2. That it be lawfully observed and kept. Herod offended against both these. For:
1. He sinned against the first because he took an oath in a vain and foolish thing, without any necessity.
2. He sinned against the second, for he was not content to swear foolishly, but, which was worse, he did wickedly perform and grant what was wickedly desired.Richard Ward.

Mat. 14:12. A solitary death; a great sorrow.

I. Our text tells of a death.It was a sudden and violent death. It was a solitary death. No congenial spirit was with the departing to cheer him with a thought of hope or with a breath of prayer. The life itself went out in inactivity. It might seem, man might call it, a failure. Its latest days were its least brilliant.

II. His disciples came and took up the body and buried it.They who might not minister to the life shall minister to the death. No jealousy, no tyranny, survives death; so now the disciples are free to come and take the body.

III. Unhappy that sorrow which cannot tell itself to Jesus.There are such sorrows. The burning fever of passion, whether in the form of baffled lust, or dissatisfied ambition, or self-defeated speculation, will not, scarcely can, go, quite as it is, to tell Jesus. And yet if it would, it would not be cast out. Little do we know, the best of us, of the largeness of that heart.C. J. Vaughan, D.D.

Johns burial.

1. The faithful must not be ashamed at the suffering of the saints, but testify their respect to the living and to the dead.
2. When pastors are cut off men must resort to the Chief Shepherd so much the more.David Dickson.

Telling Jesus.

I. They went and told.

1. Human sorrow must speak.
2. Will speak to the tried friend.
3. Will make an effort to find himthey went.

II. They told Jesus.

1. He waited to be told.
2. Was willing to be told.
3. Encouraged them to tell. Go and tell Jesus your doubts, fears, sins, sorrows.J. C. Gray.

Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell

Section 33

JESUS HEARS OF THE ASSASSINATION OF JOHN THE BAPTIST (Parallels: Mar. 6:14-29; Luk. 9:7-9)

TEXT: 14:113a

1 At that season Herod the tetrarch heard the report concerning Jesus, 2 and said unto his servants, This is John the Baptist; he is risen from the dead; and therefore do these powers work in him. 3 For Herod had laid hold on John, and bound him, and put him in prison for the sake of Herodias, his brother Philips wife. 4 For John said unto him, It is not lawful for thee to have her. 5 And when he would have put him to death, he feared the multitude, because they counted him as a prophet. 6 But when Herods birthday came, the daughter of Herodias danced in the midst, and pleased Herod. 7 Whereupon he promised with an oath to give her whatsoever she should ask. 8 And she, being put forward by her mother, saith, Give me here on a platter the head of John the Baptist. 9 And the king was grieved; but for the sake of his oaths, and of them that sat at meat with him, he commanded it to be given; 10 and he sent and beheaded John in the prison. 11 And his head was brought on a platter, and given to the damsel: and she brought it to her mother. 12 And his disciples came, and took up the corpse, and buried him; and they went and told Jesus.

13 Now when Jesus heard it, he withdrew from thence in a boat, to a desert place apart: . . .

THOUGHT QUESTIONS

a.

How do you explain this apparent presence of conscience in a man who had, apparently without conscience, been willing to follow the demands of his lust in order to marry his brothers wife after divorcing his own (if, in fact, he actually succeeded in divorcing her!)?

b.

Why do you suppose Herod linked the activity of Jesus with the person and ministry of John the Baptist? Had John worked any miracles? Had Jesus thundered great judgments upon Herod? From news about Jesus, then, how could the king logically be drawn to suppose that John had arisen from the dead?

c.

With so many personal spies at his service, how could Herod be so ignorant about Jesus as to confuse Him with John the Baptist?

d.

How do you explain the two apparently contradictory reports about Herods attitude regarding John the Baptist:

(1)

And though he wanted to put him to death, he feared the people . . .

(2)

Herod feared John, knowing that he was a righteous and holy man, and kept him safe. When he heard him, he was much perplexed; and yet he heard him gladly. (Mar. 6:20)

How could both statements be true?

e.

Why should Herod, the powerful ruler of Galilee and Perea, fear the multitude of common people so much that he dared not put John to death?

f.

How would you analyze the difference in attitude toward John shown by Herod and by Herodias? Why did their attitudes differ?

g.

Do you think Herodias plotted the death of John, caused Salome to dance before Herod, thus luring him into the rash oath that would make possible the demand for Johns death? Or did Herodias merely seize an unexpected opportunity suddenly presented to her by the puzzled daughters request? What is your opinion?

h.

Once Herod had made the oath before God and before those men present, did he have to keep it, even if it meant he must commit a crime to maintain his word? What were the moral alternatives open to Herod when Salome returned with her criminal request? Be careful; God regards the breaking of an oath as sin.

i.

Luke (Luk. 9:9) reports that from the moment that Herod began to hear the reports about Jesus, he sought to see Him. Why would Herod, wicked as he was, desire to have opportunity of audience with Jesus? How do you think Herod would go about seeking to see Him? Publicly? Privately?

j.

Why did Johns disciples, after the burial of their teachers body, go and tell Jesus?

PARAPHRASE AND HARMONY

At that time Herod Antipas, tetrarch of Galilee and Perea, heard about the fame of Jesus, the miracles and ministry of His Apostles as they went through the villages of Galilee preaching the gospel that men should repent. Jesus name had become well-known, so the king heard about it and all that was going on. This left him perplexed, because it was whispered by some that John the Baptist had been raised from the dead. Others suggested, It is Elijah. Still others affirmed that either one of the old prophets or one like them had risen. But when Herod himself heard it, he said to his men, This is John the Baptist, whom I beheaded: he has been raised from the dead. That is why these wonderful powers are at work in him. But who IS this man about whom I hear such news? Herod began seeking to see Jesus.
Earlier, Herod himself had sent men to arrest John. They bound him and locked him in prison. Herod did this for Herodias, the wife of his brother Philip, for he had married her. John kept saying to Herod, It is not right for you to take your brothers wife!
Now Herodias held a grudge against John and longed to kill him, but she could not, since Herod respected John, knowing him to be a righteous and godly man. So Herod protected him from harm. Whenever he heard him preach, he was deeply disturbed and yet he listened gladly to his messages. Ironically, though he wanted to put John to death. Herod feared the masses, for they considered John to be a prophet of God.
But an opportunity came when Herods birthday arrived. Herod gave a banquet for his court officials, military officers and leading Galileans. When Herodias daughter, Salome, came in and danced before the company, she pleased Herod and his guests.
Then the king promised the little girl with an oath, Ask me for anything you desire, and I will grant it,even half of my kingdom!
Then Salome went out to ask her mother, What shall I ask for?
Herodias said, The head of John the baptizer!
So, prompted by her mother, she came in immediately, rushing up to the king, requesting, I want you to give me here at once the head of John the Baptist on a platter!
The king was exceedingly sorry. However, because of his oaths made in the presence of his guests, he did not want to break his word to her. So he commanded it to be given. Without delay the king ordered an executioner to behead John and bring his head. The soldier went and beheaded him in the prison, brought his head on a platter and gave it to the girl. She, in turn, presented it to her mother.
But when Johns disciples heard about his murder, they came, took his corpse and buried it in a tomb. Then they went to inform Jesus. So when He heard the news, He withdrew from the Capernaum area to a lonely deserted area on the east side of the Sea of Galilee.

SUMMARY

The guilt-ridden conscience of Herod Antipas began to plague him more severely when he mistook the reports about Jesus miracles and ministry for the resurrection of John the Baptist whom the king had murdered. At an earlier period Johns fearless preaching directly struck the public image of both Herod and Herodias. Consequently, neither could forbear from silencing this voice of God in the land, accusing them of gross incest and adultery. Herodias wished to murder John; Herod, however, preferred only to imprison him, since the tetrarch himself highly respected the prophet. However, a thoughtless oath at a public dinner party cost Herod his desire to protect the Baptist. Ignoring all conventions, Herodias demanded the head of the great prophet be brought immediately on a charger. Herod gave the fatal order, preferring to commit murder than repent of his oath. Faithful disciples of John buried his headless corpse and reported the horrible facts to Jesus.

INTRODUCTION:
WHY DID MATTHEW INCORPORATE THIS ACCOUNT?

As with our other attempts to capture the organization and direction of Matthews thought, so here too we ask how this narrative as it is organized and set in this place would have been intended to affect the original readers, and, thus, how it reveals the genius of the Holy Spirit who inspired Matthew so to order it. The striking chronological order within the narrative itself draws attention to itself:

1.

Herod hears about the fame of Jesus and attributes the phenomena to a resurrected John the Baptist.

2.

Herod imprisoned John for his accusations relative to Herodias.

3.

Herod assassinated John against his own conscience.

Whatever motive may be attributed to Matthew for his inserting it at this point in his narrative in precisely this order, must be attributed to Mark also. Luke, on the other hand, having already spoken of Johns imprisonment at an early point in his gospel, described as the capping climax of Herods wickedness and the eventual conclusion of Johns work (Luk. 3:18-20), does not inform us of the circumstances surrounding his murder, limiting himself to cite Herods words: John I beheaded . . . (Luk. 9:9) from which we are to intuit what Matthew and Mark describe in their historical flash back. Their use of this literary device is completely legitimate and nicely changes the pace of simple chronological reporting. Still, the puzzle remains: why did they both use it here?

1.

Was it, as Gonzlez-Ruiz (Marco, 136) believes?

(It was) to emphasize the ridiculous attitude of that controversial monarch who was partly slave to his passions and partly interested in the austere figure of the Baptist. In the final analysis, that Herod was more consistent with himself than the orthodox Pharisees who collaborated with him while faking an extreme moral dignity.

While this latter observation is a reasonable psychological consideration, it is doubtful that Matthew or Mark is merely moralizing about wicked kings in the style of a Josephus. Their purpose is to present and, expound Jesus of Nazareth.

2.

Or, was Gonzlez-Ruiz (ibid.) right to point out that this passage, as read originally, establishes the theological independence of Christs movement from that of John, by recording the liquidation of John and the scattering of his group, in order thereby to show that the congregation created by Jesus was completely new, while, at the same time, preserving the high honor of the martyred prophet? This would tend to discourage any who were tempted to seize upon Johns style of piety as somehow normative for Christianity and canonize John himself as a representative Christian, when, as a matter of fact, Johns work ended tragically before Jesus established His Kingdom. (Cf. Act. 18:24 to Act. 19:7; cf. the Mandean, or Sabian, Ebionites, who, while other Ebionites revered Peter the Apostle, glorified John the Baptist. See Schaff, History of the Christian Church, II, 433, 434.) Perhaps the Essenic Ebionites, forced by the facts Matthew here states, could not adopt John as their saint, notwithstanding his ascetic life style. But because these tendencies did not mature until the late first and second century, some might doubt that their rebuttal were our Gospel authors purpose. However, this would be no hindrance to the Spirits foresight to see any future tendency where previously given information could forestall it. Besides, who today could say how many disciples of John had difficulty swinging into line behind Jesus after the demise of their master?

3.

Since Matthew and Mark intend to glorify the Christ, they have omitted the circumstances of His forerunners death until this point, because those facts were relatively less important. Now, however, in their analysis of Jesus Christ, they must picture, in addition to the religious opposition to Him, the political risks also. Further, because Herods treacherous interest in Jesus is but another limitation of His freedom of movement from this historical moment forward, hence part of the explanation of Jesus decisions, and because Herods curiosity arises out of a historical fact of special interest to godly admirers of John, this is a convenient point at which to connect those otherwise disparate notes.

4.

There is a lateral psychological effect of postponing any direct mention of Johns martyrdom until exactly this point, when it could have been recorded earlier. The assassination of John, the great forerunner of Jesus, at the hands of impious men is but an ominous warning of what would happen to the Lord Himself just a little over a year later. Now, if this retelling of Johns heroic end prepares the reader for the suffering of Jesus, a fact which the original readers probably already knew, the psychological impact of the entire episode must be another: if Jesus left John unavenged, either by miraculous intervention or revolutionary uprising against world evil, and if Jesus Himself had to undergo such brutal opposition of sinners against Himself before arriving at His glorious goal, what must be the lot of any genuine disciples who cast their hope on Jesus? Whatever they may have seen in Him up to this point, they must recognize the unwelcome reality that all who would live godly in Christ Jesus will be persecuted, while evil men and imposters will go on from bad to worse, deceivers and being deceived. (Cf. 2Ti. 3:12) In this sense, then, this episode is a telling example of the kind of coexistence in the world between the sons of the Kingdom and the sons of the evil one, as that concept was communicated by the Parables in Matthews Chapter Thirteen.

5.

Plummer (Matthew, 199), too, feels that this insertion needs explanation:

So detailed a narrative of Johns death would not have been given merely to explain the craven fear of Antipas that Jesus was the murdered Baptist risen from the dead. The story of Johns end is required to complete the account of his message to the Messiah and to illustrate the Messiahs eulogy of him (Mat. 11:2-19); and as the one narrative begins with a message carried by Johns disciples from Machaerus (Mat. 11:3), so the other narrative ends with one. (Mat. 14:12)

To conclude, perhaps a combination of these various factors may have decided this notable literary side-trip into a Herodian dinnerparty.

NOTES

A. HERODS OPINION OF JESUS (Mat. 14:1-2; Mar. 6:14-16; Luk. 9:7-9)

1. Herod hears about Jesus

Mat. 14:1 At that time, does not refer strictly to the events mentioned in chapter 13, but more generally to the wide-ranging, intensive evangelistic activities of Jesus and His Apostles in Galilee, before the crisis and collapse of His popularity near the beginning of Jesus third year of ministry. (Cf. Mat. 14:13 to Mat. 15:21; John 6 all) Mark and Luke connect this event directly with the mission of the Twelve in Galilee which Matthew recorded in chapter Mat. 10:1 to Mat. 11:1. (Cf. Mar. 6:7-14; Luk. 9:1-7) Herod Antipas, the tetrarch, loosely called king by courtesy, not by right (see on Mat. 14:9), ruled only Galilee and Perea from his capital at Tiberias on the Lake of Galilee, In fact, it was Herodias ambitious urging him to convince the emperor Caligula to recognize Herod officially as king that precipitated his ruin. (Ant. XVIII, 7, 2; Wars, II, 9, 6) If it be thought puzzling that the Synoptic authors should spend even one line on this weak, minor ruler of Palestine, let it be recalled that THIS Herod was, by a quirk of history, to become one of the judges of Jesus Christ. (Luk. 23:6-12; Act. 4:27. See also introductory note 3 above.)

Herod heard the report concerning Jesus and all that was done (Lk.), for his name had become known (Mk.). He was actually hearing of the expanded evangelistic power of Jesus multiplied preaching force represented by the six two-man teams, but the undeniable result of their magnificent work is not self-glorifying, because the attention of all Galileeand, consequently, that of Herod,is concentrated only on Jesus. Their mission, their labors and their attitude unselfishly held up the name of Jesus before Israel! Herod heard the report, because he would not himself go hear the itinerate Galilean rabbi, and had to depend upon the intelligence reports. He had to depend upon reports, also because Jesus deliberately avoided Herod so as not to precipitate the crisis of the cross before He had enjoyed sufficient opportunity for the training of the Twelve. The vices and vexations of court life and the uncertainties of Middle-East political relations would have more than filled Herods major attentions, leaving minor religious figures and movements relatively in the background of his mind until their importance threatened his tranquility, Perhaps Herods absence from Galilee on trips to Rome and his preoccupation with the war with the vindictive Arabian king, Aretas, would explain much of Herods ignorance about the exact identity of Jesus.

2. Herods interpretation of the news

Mat. 14:2 Herod said to his servants . . . How did Matthew, or any of Jesus disciples, supposedly far removed from any connection with Herods corrupt court, learn that Herod was making these presumably private, self-incriminating observations? Is it possible that Chuza, Herods steward, overheard it and reported the conversation to his wife, Joanna? (Luk. 8:3) And did she pass the word directly to the Lord? Or did this entire scene come through Manaen, Herods foster-brother (sntrofos, also rendered familiar friend), who later became a noted teacher and prophet in the Antiochean church? (Cf. Act. 13:1) His servants (tos paisin auto) are his courtiers. (In 1Ma. 1:6; 1Ma. 1:8 pas means the generals of Alexander the Great; cf. Gen. 41:10; Gen. 41:37 f; 1Sa. 16:17; 1Sa. 18:22-26; 1Sa. 22:7 ff, 1Sa. 22:17; 2Sa. 3:38; 2Sa. 10:2; 2Sa. 12:15-21; 2Sa. 15:21; 2Sa. 15:34; Jer. 36:31; Jer. 37:2) He is not merely chatting with his household servants (doloi, oiktai or other); rather, he is taking counsel with responsible men in his court.

This is John the Baptist . . . risen from the dead; that is why these powers are at work in him. However wicked Herod may have been, he could not shake himself free from his own presuppositions nor his conscience. Resurrection from the dead was a fact of Old Testament history. Was Herod perhaps troubled by Jewish history of the apparition of the prophet Samuel to King Saul with the message of doom? (Cf. 1Sa. 28:8-19) Was he troubled by reports of resurrections reportedly done by Jesus Himself at Nain just 15 miles southwest of Tiberias, or up at Capernaum 6 miles north of his capital? (Cf. Luk. 7:11-17; Mat. 9:18-26) Further, his own admission of Johns prophetic greatness, when combined with a not totally unfounded fear of Gods vengeance, may have pushed him to conclude tentatively that God, in fact, resurrected His great prophet.

Was Herod himself sympathetic to the Pharisean views? (Cf. Act. 23:8) Edersheim sees the Herodian party as combining strict Pharisaic views with devotion to the reigning family. (Life, I, 240) But Jesus seems to distinguish the influence of Herod from that of the Pharisees and probably also that of the Sadducees. (Cf. Mat. 16:6; Mat. 16:11-12; Mar. 8:15) Other commentators, perhaps harmonizing these texts cited, see Herodianism as essentially Sadducean religiously. If so, Herods Sadduceism, which technically denied the resurrection from the dead, melted before the glaring sun of his own conscience.

While John had done no miracles during his ministry (Joh. 10:41), so powerful must have been the effect of his life and work that the tetrarch has no difficulty believing that so mighty a prophet should be risen and now working miracles too. It is unnecessary here to superimpose the idea supposedly prevalent among the ancients that departed spirits were endowed with superhuman powers, or that Herod therefore supposed that the risen John had brought these powers with him from the spirit world. (McGarvey, Fourfold-Gospel, 370) Rather, if Herods understanding of God had been at all sharpened by Johns preaching (Mar. 6:20), then the ancients views may have had no bearing at all on Herod, since he could have truly imagined that God would raise and empower John. His actual deduction about Jesus is: This is John . . . risen from the dead, Nor is it necessary to ascribe to him a belief in the transmigration of souls (from John to Jesus), since he is simply confused, having never seen Jesus, as had, for example, some of his own courtiers, as their arguments imply. (Mar. 6:15; Luk. 9:8)

These powers are at work in him. Plummer (Matthew, 201) rightly sees that all these conjectures about Jesus are indirect evidence of the reality of His miracles. In fact, all that Herod heard of all that was done, Jesus name and fame, can point to nothing less than the mighty miracles which were characteristic of the ministry of the great, ancient prophets. In fact, the counsellors conjectures would have been meaningless, had His miracles not been of such character that their first reflex explanations of the phenomena should be It is Elijah!, It is a prophet, like one of the prophets of old!

3. Others opinions

While Matthew briefly reports only Herods views, Mark and Luke relate the ignorant suggestions of his courtiers stabbing at an explanation of the marvel. They reject Herods view, because they, having perhaps seen and heard both John and Jesus, would not confuse the two. So they seek another explanation.

4. Herods desire to see Jesus

Herods tormented conscience refused their comforting logic only partially, because Luke reports him as musing: John I beheaded, but who is this about whom I hear such things? At this point Herod began seeking to see Jesus (Luk. 9:9), a fact of significance, because the suspicious kings sinister interest is now directed fully at Jesus. Perhaps it was to apply tests that would have settled in his own mind this tormenting question of identity. After all, the trouble he had suffered earlier was supposedly concluded with Johns assassination, but here was an as yet unidentified person who is bringing the whole question to life again. Was his guilty conscience yearning merely to identify Jesus?

On the other hand, did the ghost of John rise in Herods mind, not because of a superstitious dread, but rather because he desired that the Baptist rise again? What a relief it would have been to Herod were John alive again! Trapped into slaying him, Johns murderer must have been haunted by the deed. The news about Jesus may have temporarily awakened that vain, impossible desire to right what had been done. But, since Jesus was not John, Antipas remained an unpardoned murderer with no way out, but to repent. When a man refuses to be ruled by God, he begins to be ruled by tyrants a thousand times worse, even though they be but the ghosts of his own imagination.

While Luk. 9:9 seems to point to some definite endeavor to get to see Jesus, it is to be doubted that Herod himself would stoop to wandering about among the multitudes to hear Himunless he were so desperate as to attempt something incognito. Was he hoping that the Lord would visit Tiberias so that, without too much trouble, the encounter with Him could be arranged? If so, the silence of the Gospels regarding any such visit to Tiberias on the part of Jesus suggests that Herod kept waiting in vain until the very end, because Jesus, fully aware of the kings treachery, deftly avoided all contact with him until the Last Week trials. (Study Jesus movements after the crisis and collapse of the Galilean ministry: Mar. 7:24; Mar. 7:31; Mar. 8:13-15; Mar. 8:27; Mar. 9:30; Luk. 13:31 ff; Luk. 23:7-12)

B. THE HISTORICAL FLASH BACK: THE DEATH AND BURIAL OF JOHN

1. John imprisoned by Herod to appease Herodias

Mat. 14:3 For Herod had laid hold on John. (Mat. 4:12; Mar. 1:14; Luk. 3:19-20) The Synoptics clearly link Johns arrest with the general period following Jesus baptism and before He moved from Judea to Galilee. John (Joh. 3:22-30) pictures the Baptist as free to evangelize in the Aenon-Salim area until Jesus trip to Galilee through Samaria. (John 4) From this point John disappears into Herods prison whence he sent his last recorded message to Jesus. (Mat. 11:2 ff) The apparently easy access enjoyed by his disciples is explicable on the basis of Herods own capricious attitude. (Mar. 6:20; see also on Mat. 14:12.)

WAS JOHN EVER AT MACHERUS FORTRESS?

Josephus (Ant. XVIII, 5, 2) locates Johns prison as in the castle at Macherus, 20 miles southeast of Jericho on the east of the Dead Sea, about 100 miles southeast of Galilee, Several supposed discrepancies in this construction of the events have been noticed. (Cf. Kraeling, Rand-McNally Bible Atlas, 385; also ISBE, 1959a)

1.

Josephus himself affirms (ibid., 5, 1) that Macherus . . . is a place on the borders of the dominions of Aretas and Herod . . . Macherus . . . was subject to her father, Aretas. But Aretas the Nabatean king is the outraged father ready to make war against Herod for the insult of discarding Aretas daughter in favor of Herodias, Although the fortress was in the territory inherited by Herod Antipas from his father, Herod the Great, having actually been fortified by the latter (Wars, VII, 6, 12), it may have been held by Herod and Aretas conjointly by some unrecorded agreement. Thus it may have been in Aretas hands when his daughter fled to him there before Herod was aware that she had already privately learned of his infidelity to her in favor of Herodias. Consequently, John the Baptist who piqued Herod for his stern denunciations of this infidelity would not have been imprisoned in a castle that AT THAT MOMENT was subject to the embattled father, Aretas!

2.

The birthday party to which the principle men of Galilee were invited would probably have been held, not 100 miles to the south of their Galilean homes, but most likely at Tiberias, Herods capital on the Lake of Galilee.

3.

Further, there is no hint in the Gospel story that any significant time elapsed between Herods order to execute John and the actual presentation of his head on a platter as requested by Herodias and Salome, i.e., time required to send a soldier from Galilee down to Macherus to return with Johns head.

ANSWERS TO THE OBJECTIONS

1.

Josephus can make mistakes, but the alleged error of his placing Macherus in Aretas dominion while affirming that Herod beheaded John at Macherus, as if the castle were under his own influence, is an affirmation that he makes within two consecutive paragraphs. (Ant. XVIII, 5, 12) The close proximity of the two expressions which supposedly create so glaring an error would represent an unusual inadvertence on the part of Josephus, or else it would be a historical fact so obvious to him that he saw no need to clarify what appears to us to be a discrepancy. The quirks of reality are often stranger than can be invented.

Aretas apparently did not himself live at Macherus, but in Arabia, because Josephus affirms that his daughter, to anticipate Herod, made as if she were going to Macherus, but upon her arrival there, she just kept traveling until she soon came to Arabia . . . and she soon came to her father, and told him of Herods intentions.
The solution may be that, though Macherus was officially within Aretas jurisdiction, it may have been available by special treaty to Herod by virtue of his marriage to Aretas daughter. If such an agreement provided for common access, then until Aretas declared war on Herod (shortly after Johns death?), Herod could use the Macherus castle as if it were his own. (Study the relation of his grandfather, Antipater of Idumea, with the Arabians: Wars, I, 8, 9)

Was Herod, even at the time of Johns murder, living in this border fortress to direct the war with his offended former father-in-law, Aretas?

2.

What if Herod, in a gesture of personal bravado, paid the round-trip travel expenses of his Galilean princes clear down to Macherus just to combine a military and political visit to that castle, and, while there, to celebrate his birthday with a feast?

3.

The assumption that time would be required for the executioner of John to travel from Galilee to Macherus to behead him and return is eliminated by the above-mentioned considerations.

4.

If Edersheim (and others, see on Mat. 14:6) is right in thinking that the banquet in our text is not merely a birthday party, but rather a grand feast celebrating Antipas accession to the tetrarchy, such a trip from Galilee to Macherus as that demanded by the facts related by the Evangelists and Josephus, would not at all be unfitting.

5.

Since the very war with Aretas was not merely over Herods repudiation of Aretas daughter, but also a border dispute with a king who lived at Petra (Ant., XVIII, 5, 23), where could Herod better pursue his battle plan than from a fortress on the Nabatean frontier about 88 miles from Aretas capital? What more logical headquarters could he find where he could gather his courtiers, officers and leading men of Galilee to counsel him in the prosecution of the war?

Despite the conjectures, the hypothesis of Josephus credibility is the better, because the above suggestions show a possible harmonization of the Gospel accounts and Josephus, thus helping us better to visualize the situation and assure ourselves of the Evangelists accuracy in describing Johns death as a historical fact.

For the sake of Herodias, his brother Philips wife. 4 For John said to him, It is not lawful for you to have her. A simplified version of the Herodian family tree will show the relationships on which Johns charge was based:

Josephus (Ant. XVIII, 5, 4) explodes:

Herodias, their sister, was married to Herod [Philip], son of Herod the Great, who was born of Mariamne, the daughter of Simon the high priest, who had a daughter, Salome; after whose birth, Herodias took upon her to confound the laws of our country, and divorce herself from her husband, while he was alive and was married to Herod [Antipas] her husbands brother by the fathers side; he was tetrarch of Galilee; but her daughter Salome was married to Philip, the son of Herod, the tetrarch of Trachonitis.

The bracketed additions to Josephus text are by the translator Whiston, wisely added because of the multiple confusions created in Herod the Greats family by the latters using the same name to name different people. Negative critics could accuse the Synoptic authors of a historical blunder wherein they seem to confuse Philip the tetrarch for the first husband of Herodias, when in reality he later became her son-in-law. In this case Matthew and Mark would be guilty of confounding the Herod of Rome, mentioned by Josephus, with his half-brother, Philip the tetrarch of Trachonitis, as well as of making the latter Herodias husband. But Whistons additions are perfectly justifiable for the reasons collected by Edersheim (Life, I, 672, note 2):

1.

Among the eight sons of Herod the Great, three are also named Herod. Of only one, i.e., Herod Antipas, do we know the second name. It is not very probable that the other two did not also have some distinguishing name. While Josephus speaks of both Herodias first and second husbands as simply Herod, the Evangelists use only the distinctive name of the former: Philip.

2.

Herod the Great must have named two sons Herod Philip by different mothers, which, though problematic, is not impossible, because:

a.

He had two sons named Antipas, or Antipater, sons of different mothers, Doris and Malthace. Antipas may be a short form of Antipater. (See Arndt-Gingrich, 75; cf. Ant. XIII, 14, 1!)

b.

He had two wives of the same name: Mariamne.

While as yet non-Biblical historical documentation is lacking to prove that Herodias first husband was named Philip, as the Evangelists affirm, the above-mentioned considerations definitely lift the Gospel narratives above the suspicion of inaccuracy levelled at them by the detractors. There is no confusion in the Gospel narrative over the identity of Herodias first husband, as some critics allege, (Cf. Metzger, A Textual Commentary, 35) In fact, the Philip in question here is never termed the tetrarch, as is his half-brother in Luk. 3:1. Thus, Matthew and Mark are as knowledgeable as Josephus on this point. (Contrast Emil Kraeling, Bible Atlas, 385.)

On the basis of the foregoing it is now possible to see why John charged: It is not lawful for you to have her. The legal points in his accusations are two:

1.

INCEST: as discernible from the genealogical chart above, the relation of consanguinity between Antipas and Herodias was within the forbidden limits, because she was his own step-niece, being the daughter of his half-brother, Aristobulus. (Cf. Lev. 18:16; Lev. 20:21) The only exception to these laws was the levirate marriage in the event of the death of a childless brother. (Deu. 25:5 ff) However, Herodias had already borne one daughter to Philip, i.e., Salome, moreover Philip himself was still alive. The crime, then, is incest. Farrar notes (Life, 296, note 2):

Even the Romans regarded such unions with horror; and never got over the disgust which the Emperor Claudius caused them by marrying his niece Agrippina; but they were almost the rule in the Herodian family.

2.

ADULTERY: Herodias husband and Herods wife, daughter of Aretas, were both still alive. (Cf. Ant. XVIII, 5, 12) John interpreted the marriage institution as did Jesus. (Mat. 5:32; Mat. 19:3-9; Luk. 16:18; Mar. 10:11-12) In fact, Marks version (Mat. 6:18) clearly quotes John as labelling Herodias as your brothers wife, as also Luk. 3:19. Even though Herodias succeeded in divorcing her husband, Philip (or Herod) of Rome, it appears that Herod Antipas himself had not been able to effect his divorce from Aretas daughter, because she outwitted him before he could legitimize his separation from her. But that annoying detail did not hinder the lusty tetrarch from taking up his adulterous-incestuous union with Herodias in open defiance of truly Jewish sensibilities.

These particular charges, added to the other public rebukes of Herods misdeeds (Luk. 3:19), blew the safety valve by exposing the tetrarch and his lover as common sinners before the Jewish law. Herod Antipas himself had not a drop of Jewish blood in his veins, being the son of Herod the Great, a pure Idumean (Ant. XIV, 7, 3 also 15, 2), and Malthace, a Samaritan woman (Wars, I, 28, 4). Whereas the Idumeans submitted to the use of circumcision, and the rest of the Jewish ways of living; at which time therefore this befell them, that they were hereafter no other than Jews (Ant. XIII, 9, 1), yet the Herods could be reproached for being but an Idumean, i.e., a half Jew (Ant., XIV, 15, 2). Johns attack is legally based on the Mosaic legislation to which the Idumean Herods never gave anything but the most distant attention. But the very Jewishness of Johns rebuke can easily be construed as a political threat, because it exposes Antipas unwillingness to be governed by those laws to which truly JEWISH kings must submit.

Mat. 14:4 For John kept saying to Herod (legen) on what occasions? Is the direct statement, It is not lawful for you to have her, a summary of the Baptists message addressed to Herods face? While the Gospels do not affirm that John uttered this blistering condemnation either in the wilderness before the approving multitudes or in the audience of the tetrarch himself, it would seem more consonant with Johns known character to envision him fearlessly denouncing the prince personally. He had not feared to expose the hypocrisy and iniquity of the religio-political power-bloc at Jerusalem. His single-minded fearlessness and sense of right and duty probably drove him to encounter Herod head-on.

2. Herodias tries to avenge herself against John.

Mar. 6:19 : And Herodias had a grudge against him, and wanted to kill him, but she could not for Herod . . . kept him safe. Accustomed to the self-importance of the royal house, the grandeur of Rome and the broadening of travel, Herodias was not about to permit a brassy-voiced backwoods revivalist to call hereven by implicationan incestuous adulteress! While as fully pagan as Herod, she apparently had less conscience. Stung by Johns condemnation, she took it as a personal affront, flew into a terrible rage, screaming fiercely her hatred and demanding Johns execution.

She is under stress not only because of Johns publicly denouncing her as an adulteress. She is also menaced, because if she must return to her first husband, or at any rate, leave Herod, to whom she has attached her ambitions, these very ambitions must be immediately relinquished, and her personal struggle for supremacy must begin all over at a time when she sees herself beginning to arrive at her goals. Quite insecure since her childhood, being the orphaned daughter of Aristobulus who was murdered by her grandfather, Herod the Great, murderer of her grandmother, Mariamne I, she had been married to her half-uncle, Herod Philip, only son of Herod the Great and Mariamne II, even before she was of age. (Ant, XVII, 1, 2) This would have guaranteed the throne to her husband in the event of the unforeseeable death of Antipater, the heir apparent, because Herod the Greats will set Herod Philip as next in line, (Ant, XVII, 3, 2) Unfortunately for Herodias, Herod Philips mother, Mariamne II, was caught in a plot to murder Herod the Great, for which the latter divorced her, and blotted her son out of his testament. (Wars, I, 30, 7) Herodias thus found herself married to a Herod, who, however wealthy (Ant. XVII, 8, 1; 11, 5), had become just another private citizen who could not even boast a portion of a semi-royal position. Now that she is finally enjoying her first ladyship, i.e., married to Antipas, Johns righteous sentence threatens to snatch it from her, No wonder she was nervous!

Lest our self-righteousness blind us to the Herodias in our own spirit, have we never felt the same bitterness and anger toward someone who challenged our goodness and rebuked us for some cherished sin? Our mere shock at committing murder to turn off the embarrassing accusation must never blind us to what the Lord thinks about our hatred and desire for revenge, since the spirit behind both is essentially the same, and will be judged accordingly. (See on Mat. 5:21-22.)

Herodias . . . wanted to kill him. But she could not, for Herod . . . kept him safe. Did Herods self-estimate of his own goodness grow in direct proportion to his effectiveness in blocking Herodias agitated urging? Did he satisfy himself for yielding to one temptation (to live with her) by reminding his conscience that he did not yield to the other (to surrender John to her)? Was this his attempt to bargain with Divine Justice?

3. Herods mixed motives blocked any effective action.

Mat. 14:5 And though he wanted to put him to death he feared the people, because they held him to be a prophet. Herod makes an interesting character study because of the contradictory elements that constitute his personality:

1.

Sheer political expediency demanded the death of an enemy so dangerous to the crown as John, and yet extraordinary measures must be taken to avoid public displeasure on the part of a nation conscious of the divine call and the righteousness of that enemys accusations. Josephus (Ant. XVIII, 5, 2) writes:

. . . Herod . . . feared lest the great influence John had over the people might put it into his power and inclination to raise a rebellion, (for they seemed ready to do anything he should advise), thought it best, by putting him to death, to prevent any mischief he might cause, and not bring himself into difficulties, by sparing a man who might make him repent of it when it should be too late.

Herod feared the nationalistic Zealots, because of his collaboration with Rome; he feared the Romans because his tenuous power depended upon their good grace as long as he preserved order in his realm; therefore he feared John, because the latter could easily, by inciting the Zealots and others of Herods political enemies, dynamite everything Herod had so laboriously constructed. In fact, but for the refusal of Jesus to head such an insurrection after Johns murder, Herod would have quite probably faced the violence of civil war, precisely BECAUSE he murdered John! (Joh. 6:15; Mat. 14:12-13) Ironically, from a purely self-serving political standpoint, to eliminate John meant political suicide for Antipas! The notorious scarcity of genuine prophets in Israel for centuries made it a particularly serious matter to manacle, much less murder, this rare man. Further, the Herods in general, primarily because they were merely tolerated Idumeans, had followed a very astute policy of seeking to ingratiate themselves with the Jewish people. To hinder this holy man, from the peoples standpoint, meant to outrage public opinion and reverse the pacifying policy to a most dangerous degree.

Note a similar mental block in the minds of the Jewish authorities when Jesus quizzed them about Johns authority: If we say, From men, we are afraid of the multitude; for all hold John to be a prophet . . . (Mat. 21:26) Fear of public opinion, more than fear of God, keeps men from acting consistently with their real views, reducing them to moral cowards and hypocrites.

Matthews statement of Herods murderous intention toward John may reflect Antipas original reflex action before actually hearing John on numerous occasions and, because of which preaching, mellowed for the other motives mentioned by Mark (Mar. 6:20):

2.

Herod feared John, knowing that he was a righteous and holy man, despite his own political conviction demanding his death. What a contrast: the ragged prisoner in Herods presence stood free and uncondemned by a holy God, while the richly-robed monarch himself grovelled in his own moral filth in the presence of the same God John so valiantly proclaimed! Herod feared John, because he feared Johns God. In fact, John made his God so real to the vile tetrarch that the latter could not but bow his crowned head in awesome respect at the unsullied sincerity and unrelenting courage of the prophet. He possessed not even the suspicion of a defense against the truth of Johns accusations. Herod was conscious that before him stood a MAN whose soul was honed razor-sharp by constant communion with God, a man who knew precisely what he thought and where he was going, and for whom the reality of righteousness was his daily bread. Here stood a mighty rock of a man whose moral power laughed at all the waves of shame and insults beating helplessly against him, whom the threats of imprisonment and death could not shake and the bribes of office, wealth and glory could not buy. Herods court was filled with enough reeds shaken by the wind, time-serving, self-seeking men clothed in soft raiment, who pliantly bent morality and truth whenever Herod willed. But here is a giant of a man who is not afraid to live the life of the living God in the presence of dying men, and the tetrarch could not but admire this rare specimen. Though Antipas pile up defense upon defense against the forerunners message, no vindication could satisfy even the corrupt tetrarch himself, because he sensed that he had at last come face to face with reality itself, the truth of God incarnate in one single man who would not budge. Either Antipas must surrender to God and to John, or . . .

Whereas Mark mentions only Antipas conviction that John was a righteous and holy man, it is evident, from Antipas surmise about Jesus, that the former considered John to be the kind of man from whom not even the performance of miracles to almost any extenteven his resurrection from the deadmight not be reasonably expected. Either Antipas too sees John as a prophet of God, which is more likely, or his surmise about Jesus reveals a paganish superstition, which is not altogether unlikely either.

3.

Herod kept him safe (Mar. 6:20) probably includes the ideas involved in the alternate textual reading included in the KJV: he did many things, now corrected to he was much perplexed (the difference between epoei and eprei in the next phrase). The verb suntero means not only to protect, defend against harm, contextually pointing to protective custody from Herodias murderous clutches, but also to keep in mind; be concerned about, and to hold or treasure up (in ones mind, memory). This latter significance suggests that he treated John with respect and a kindness limited to their respective positions and circumstances. It appears, thus, that Herods official stand on John collided with his personal concern. Whereas he must officially silence that embarrassingly public accusation that menaced his throne, yet, once John was securely locked in Herods dungeon, the king could safely be generous with him whom he really respected. But Herod was unwilling to do the one thing that would free him from his guilty conscience: break with his beloved sins and Herodias. Did he hope that such kind treatment shown John could atone for his adultery, or be substituted for doing the very thing God demanded of him? But in the long view, what became of the kings sollicitous carefulness for the wilderness preacher, his eager listening to his message? The inadvertence of an unguarded moment and a rash promise wiped it all out! And even later, his alarmed conscience, shaken by news about Jesus, did not lead to any deep repentance either.

4.

When he heard him, he was much perplexed; and yet he heard him gladly. (Mar. 6:20 b) Herods perplexity was caused, on the one hand, by his unwillingness to make a break with the luxury and licentousness he desired, and, on the other, by his consciousness of the rightness of Johns denunciations and his fear of Gods wrath. The word rendered perplexed (aporo) beautifully sketches his embarrassment, uncertainty and mental inability to resolve his dilemma. Here is a man whose will is completely blocked in the presence of clear-cut choices, because of the contradictory demands of his desires.

a.

He heard him gladly, perhaps because John was a link with a better past. Herod too had been a boy once, trying to make sense out of the world, and had perhaps set higher ideals for himself than were common among the corrupt Herodian courts. Later, gradually slipping and finally plunging to the hilt in the powerful vices which his unique position offered him, and even now, compromised completely by his incestuous paramour, he cannot shake that lingering appreciation for integrity, principle and the service of God in the life of another young man who made it.

b.

He heard him gladly perhaps for a more sinister reason. Did Herod frankly enjoy the verbal beatings John gave him? That is, because of the vicarious punishment he received thereby, did he actually like to hear his sins aired and condemned? His guilty conscience would not let him rest, but his desires would not let him repent either. Is it possible that the more John leveled his fiery denunciations at Herod, the happier Herod could feel psychologically? Naturally, since this type of catharsis does not lead to repentance and restitution, the temporary feeling of psychological cleansing lasts only until the whole scene is forgotten under the rush of other interests, other lusts, which, in turn, bring on the felt need for another blistering by Johns fearless declaration of divine truth and righteousness. In this sense, Herod NEEDED John, keeping him on call for his private catharsis.

(Compare the mixed motives of another ruler and his preacher. Act. 24:24-27, Paul and Felix)

4.

At his public birthday celebration Herod rashly vowed anything to Herodias daughter, Salome.

Mat. 14:6 But when Herods birthday came (genesois d genomnois to Herdou), the tetrarch gave a banquet for his courtiers and officers and the leading men of Galilee. (Mar. 6:21) Some, with Edersheim (Life, I, 672), doubt that what is involved here is a simple birthday party for a few choice guests. They think it, rather, the anniversary of the death of Herod the Great and, consequently, the anniversary of the accession of his son Herod Antipas to the tetrarchy. The debate revolves around the word gensia and the probabilities of Herods character; the outcome of the discussion strengthens the Gospels position.

Gensios, according to Rocci, 381, refers either (in the neuter plural as in our case) to the anniversary date of the death of a parent, or to the feast for the anniversary of the birth, but in Mat. 14:6 Rocci prefers birthday. Arndt-Gingrich (153) also think it means birthday celebration, but point out that gensia earlier . . . meant a commemorative celebration on the birthday of a deceased person. Vine (Expository Dictionary, 128) notes that the interpretation the day of a kings accession . . . is not confirmed in Greek writings. The irrelevance of this latter remark is illustrated by the fact that we are not dealing only with Greek writings as such, but with Jewish Greek of the LXX (cf. Gen. 40:20) as well as the Jewishness of both our Gospels and of the situation described. Edersheim (ibid.) cites the Rabbinic equivalent in Abod. Z. 10a where Yom Ginuseya is expressly and elaborately shown to be the day of accession. He further shows that the event described in our text certainly took place before the Passover, and this was the time of Herods (the Great) death and of the accession of Antipas.

It is impossible to establish the likelihood of the celebration of Herodian birthdays, because of the unpredictability of the human personality, and because Herod, with perfect consistency, could be deliberately affecting imperial manners where he could manage it. Plummer (Matthew, 202, note 2) cites Origen as arguing that birthday celebrations are wrong, affirming that we find in no Scripture that a birthday was kept by a righteous man. Pharaoh and Herod Antipas are the two examples he offers, a fact which argues that Origen translated gensia birthday rather than accession day.

The foregoing conclusionless debate only demonstrates the probable authenticity of the Evangelists narrative against any who would question their veracity by doubting that Herod would drag his courtiers clear to Macherus for a little birthday party. Further, as suggested above (Was John ever at Macherus?), the tetrarch and his court may have been at Macherus, as Josephus informs us, on quite other business than birthday parties, in which case, Herod may have wished to combine several things together by uniting the celebration of his accession to the throne (or his birthday) with the presence of his courtiers and generals at his southernmost military post.

Mark notes that the opportunity Herodias had so diligently sought, came. While Herod dallied, wavering between the threatenings of his conscience and the satisfaction of his desires and the day-to-day prosecution of his reign, Herodias singlemindedly plotted the venting of her rage. Was it at her insistence that Herod should give a banquet on his birthday? Did she draw up the list of big names to invite as witnesses of her vendetta, choosing men whose doubtful moral fiber could be counted upon not to quail at murder? Did she groom Salome for her chorus-girl act so as to entice some rash promise from Herod? Did she leave Salome deliberately uncoached as to what to request, or was this feigned unpreparedness also part of the act? Josephus attitude toward Herodias describes her as an ambitious plotter, fully capable of managing from offstage every move in the scene the Gospels describe here. (Cf. Ant, XVIII, 7 12; Wars, II, 9, 6) Or, did Herodias merely seize an unexpected opportunity suddenly thrust into her hands by the puzzled request of her daughter? Her quick-wittedness to grasp this unparalleled opportunity is certainly the deliberately sought outlet for months of frustrated revenge.

The daughter of Herodias danced in the midst and pleased Herod. The girl, Salome, was also daughter of Herod Philip of Rome, apparently brought along with Herodias when the latter divorced her husband for Antipas. (Ant. XVIII, 5, 4) The attentive reader of the Greek in Mar. 6:22 will notice what seems to be a mistake on Marks part:

1.

With the reading auto in the text, the girl is described as Herods daughter: his daughter came in. In verse 24 she is correctly described as Herodias daughter, whom Josephus identifies as step-niece of Antipas. But Mark makes no blunder here, because, in the wider Jewish usage, any younger female relative may be called daughter, or else, because, by virtue of Herods illicitly contracted marriage to Herodias, Salome became the daughter of Herod.

However, Metzger (A Textual Commentary, 89f) believes that according to this reading the girl is herself named Herodias, i.e., Herodidos is taken as an appositive genitive with daughter, thus naming her Herodias. However, in light of the historical and contextual difficulties such a translation causes, it is better to consider Herodidos to be a genitive of origin or relationship, thus identifying Herods unnamed daughter as of Herodias, without naming her. (Cf. Blass-Debrunner, Grammar, Sect. 162, 168) The interpretation would be stronger, however, had Mark added the article ts before Herodidos, but such a solecism as the text now stands might not overly trouble a Hebrew writing in Greek as he constructs this concatenation of genitives with different meanings.

2.

With the reading auts ts, however, the situation becomes more picturesque and significant: the daughter of Herodias herself came in and danced. This reading draws instant attention to the shocking lowering of this girl of rank who thus displays herself in this dance. However, the former textual variant must not be ignored, because of the strength of its external attestation.

The daughter of Herodias is described later (Mat. 14:11) as a girl or korsion, a diminuitive form of kre, a girl; maiden; virgin, or even a married daughter, or bride, hence korsion would indicate a little girl, a child. (Rocci, 1073) Nevertheless, we have no way of ascertaining her exact age, nor, on that basis, what kind of dance she did, nor, on the basis of this, how she pleased Herod and his guests. Various commentators have pictured, not impossibly, a lucious teenager doing something like an Egyptian belly dance. However, is it possible that we have a mere child doing some more innocent presentation particularly well, who rightfully deserves the applause she received? Then, after taking her bows, did she wiggle into her new daddys arms for a kiss of approval and the promise of some future bauble? It is psychologically possible that Herod in his (drunken?) exuberance would have made just such a promise to this child just to see if her young mind were as keen as her ability to perform. This, if it turns out as Herod desires, would become one more way of showing off Herodian pride, since she is his grand step-niece. Unsuspecting the outcome, Herod may even have thought her taking counsel with her mother a mark of maturity.

Mat. 14:7 So that he promised with an oath to give her whatever she might ask, to which he rashly added: even half of my kingdom. (Mar. 6:23) Is Herods swaggering manner a conscious imitation of real emperors? (Cf. Est. 5:3; Est. 5:6; Est. 7:2; 1Ki. 13:8)

About this same period, Caligula was making this same kind of patronizing promise to Antipas step-nephew, Agrippa I, at Rome. On that occasion, too, Caesar felt he could not back down from his promises, because of so many witnesses to his promises. See Ant. XVIII, 8, 7.

The inconsiderateness of these oaths, however often repeated for emphasis (cf. oaths Mat. 14:9), becomes apparent from the fact that they were never made with that seriousness of purpose, that consciousness of God and that appreciation of truth and righteousness that must always accompany a proper oath. (See on Mat. 5:33-37.) Otherwise, when confronted with such a request as Herodias demanded, which took such unfair advantage of the broad terms of his promise and oaths, he would not have been caught so completely off guard.

5. Herodias requires Johns murder which Herod reluctantly orders.

Mat. 14:8 Prompted by her mother summarizes a short, behind-the-scenes conversation narrated by Mark: She went out and said to her mother, What shall I ask? And she said, The head of John the baptizer. And she came in immediately with haste to the king and asked, saying, I want you to give me at once the head of John the Baptist here on a platter. The words at once . . . here on a platter point to the nearly immediate possibility of instant compliance with her request, hence to the nearness of Johns prison.

This gesture of asking her mother is absolutely no indication of Salomes chronological age, since psychological subjection to an ambitious, domineering mother is possible from the cradle to the grave, It is perfectly natural for a little girl to ask her mother, but it may also have been perfectly natural for a Salome to suffocate her own desires in favor of a Herodias ambitions. Agreed, she was not mature enough to make her own decisions, but what does THAT tell us about her age?

Mat. 14:9 And the king was (Mark: exceedingly) sorry, but because of his oaths and his guests, he commanded it to be given. Did Herods oaths really obligate him to grant this criminal request? No, he had two valid options:

1.

The actual request made was not contemplated in the oath-covered promise. Despite the exceedingly general nature, of his promise, he might honorably have declared that his, generosity implied, so necessarily that it needed not be expressed, an intention to give her an expensive gift, or at any rate, what was lawful and proper. So, when she demanded that a crime be committed, the oath was no longer valid and his obligation to keep it ceased.

2.

Even if all the men present had objected that the very generality of his promise should be interpreted to include even this request, Herod Antipas could have REPENTED of his oath. An oath is a solemn promise guaranteeing the seriousness and certainty of its fulfillment because of mans awareness of Gods presence to witness the affirmations. But this very awareness of Gods concern in the transaction must remind the swearer of Gods interest, not only in the validity of human promises, but also in the sacredness of human life. Ethically, the choice between the murder of an innocent victim of an adulteress revenge and the possible embarrassment because of a broken oath, should have been easy to solve on the basis of moral priorities. But this awareness of God and this sense of ethical priorities was notoriously absent in the case of Antipas. From this standpoint his oath and what it should have stood for was better honored by being broken than by being kept. To have repudiated the hasty oath would not have been sin, but repentance. If the oath must be considered valid, repentance was his only way out, but it WAS a way out! (Lev. 5:4-5) Despite Johns preaching, Herod had so long followed a pattern of refusal to repent that, now when he needs desperately to respond better to this crisis of conscience, he cannot. Though his conscientious awareness of Johns righteousness, holiness and innocence threw him into deep grief (perlupos genmenos, lupethes), other factors blocked any effective decision to repent of his oaths.

Herod is an example of the supposed necessity for sinning. Though stricken with a feeling of grief at what necessity made him do, he felt the apparent validity of his reasons: For the sake of his oaths . . . But these are the justifications of a man whose conduct was governed, not by the unchanging ethical principles of right and wrong, but by a vague sense of honor and a flexible, dubious conventionalism derived from his own profligate society and its traditional customs. So, the snare which entrapped Antipas was of the flimsiest quality, because he could have repudiated his oaths, and because he knew he was gratifying a cruel hatred with which he did not really agree.

Herods conscience was dead to real crimes like adultery, incest and murder, but supersensitive to the point of scrupulousness about a broken oath! What moral blindness to uphold a dubious point of honor at the expense of elementary justice!
The second factor blocking Herods decisive refusal of so wicked a request is his guests. His oaths and his guests, as factors, must be taken together, because of the unspoken social pressure these witnesses supplied. His oaths had not been spoken in a vacuum nor merely for the sake of Salome. He intended to impress his guests and now their very existence pressured him, as if they said, Can Herods word to any of us be trusted, if here in his presence he breaks his most solemn oaths? The kings fear of being disgraced in their presence proves that both his oaths and Salomes request were heard by the entire group. The moral immobility of each single guest at this sudden turn of events which unavoidably involved the life or death of Gods prophet, is the more eloquent against them, because of their unpreparedness to impede the tragic conclusion of a merry feast brought on by Herods cowardly acquiescence. It is unfair to believe that all the guests were cutthroats, because the politician in Herod may have invited some reasonably good men for political window dressing. Even Herod himself had balked at killing John before this. But in these few seconds after Salome delivered her mothers demand, no voice of protest, no remonstrating with the tetrarch to repent of his oath, is recorded. How mistakenly Herod read the thoughts of the most reflective among them: Let Herod show us by royal example for once the high regard with which the life of an innocent private citizen in his realm is to be regarded! Even at the doubtful cost of temporary embarrassment! Let the king repent of his oath, refuse the iniquitous request, spare the life of Gods prophet, and his kingdom may stand forever! Nevertheless, the order was given and executed before they reacted, and a valiant, innocent victim lay dead because of this inaction. Would Herod have repented of his oaths, had but one or two brave men stood up to defend John? (Contrast Eph. 5:3-18; cf. Jeremiah 26 all; Jer. 36:25; 1Sa. 14:43-46.) Certainly it was too much to hope that Herod himself should have correctly read the thoughts of any men of character in the group, for how could a man, so habitually insensitive to other people, hope to understand their deepest thoughts at a crisis like this? Or, on the other hand, did those guests, with their consciences deadened and reflexes slowed by wine, actually express their insistence that he maintain his oaths? The monstrousness of his distorted ethic is well-measured in Edersheims exclamation (Life, I, 674):

Unfaithful to his God, to his conscience, to truth and righteousness; not ashamed of any crime or sin, he would yet be faithful to his half-drunken oath, and appear honourable and true before such companions!

Mark (Mar. 6:26) underlines another deciding factor that tipped the scales in Herods mind: He did not WANT to break his word to her. (ouk ethlesen athetsa) His desires, or wishes, conspired against his conscience, will and intelligence, and because he was accustomed to do whatever he wished, he simply did what instinctively seemed most natural to him. He could have repented, objected and refused, but he did not want to.

What irony: some men defy the blazing judgment of an angry God rather than face a snicker from an unpredictable crowd, or a tongue-lashing from their women! Herod was just another weakling like Ahab, who although they recognized the divine mission in Gods prophets, John or Elijah, and gestured with the pride of a Xerxes, meekly folded before those vicious wretches, Jezebel and Herodias, to whom they were slaves!

Mat. 14:10 he sent and had John beheaded in the prison. 11 and his head was brought on a platter and given to the girl, and she brought it to her mother. What a dainty dish to set before the king! Yet from that platter the now lifeless eyes of the holiest man Herod had ever known stared at him. Sinners like Herodias and her dancing daughter seemed momentarily to have conquered by silencing the prophets voice, but too late. John had already indicted them of evil, already thundered the judgment of the living God in their hearing. Already their consciences had been warned. John had won, because by lifting his head, they only hurled him into the presence of his Vindicator and their Judge!

Ironically, their crime precipitated the very security crisis Herod and Herodias had hoped to avoid, because to their publicly condemned adultery is now added the infamy of murdering a popular holy man.

6. Johns body is buried by his disciples and Jesus is informed.

Mat. 14:12 And (Mark: when the disciples heard of it) his disciples came and buried it (Mark: in a tomb). And they went and told Jesus. When Johns followers heard of it, who told them? Was Chuza, Herods steward (Luk. 8:3) also present at that fatal banquet and a horrified witness to the scene when Johns disembodied head was presented to the tetrarch? Was he the contact in the Herodian bureaucracy through whom Johns disciples could be assured of access to their master in the dungeon? It is not unlikely, because Herod needed not only fawning pawns who would bend truth and righteousness at his demand, but also a few dependably upright, godly men to whom he could entrust the administrative oversight of his affairs. Where would he have been able to find a more faithful manager than among those men with ability who possessed the undoubted character of a John the Baptist? Was Chuza perhaps a disciple of John, whose wife had already swung over to Jesus, and whose own sentiments agreed with everything John stood for? If so, he may have moved rapidly and certainly to contact other godly men to come to prepare the corpse for a proper burial in a tomb. Did Chuza, himself a conspicuously wealthy man, provide the tomb, in somewhat the same way Joseph of Arimathea offered his for the entombment of the Lord? Too many unknown factors prohibit any certainty, In fact, perhaps even the remorse of Herod himself played some role here too, facilitating the burial.

Then went and told Jesus: why?

1.

They have no decent alternative, While some disciples of John had chosen previously not to follow Jesus in order to remain loyal to their master (see notes on Mat. 9:14-17), now they have no other option to their dark despair and heartbreak but to seek Him out who was now their last hope. This significant choice to go to Jesus throws light upon Johns attitude toward the Lord. When he received the Lords answer to his impatient question, apparently he was satisfied. (Mat. 11:2-7) This contentment with Jesus was communicated to his disciples and in their blackest day they turn to Him.

2.

Did they go to Jesus to prod Him into action? In the same way John had sent to Jesus, hoping He would do something immediate about the wretched state of the nation, perhaps these disciples go to the Lord, hoping He might be more ready to do something about Johns death. If He had not hurried the beginning of the Messianic Kingdom when the Baptist had challenged Him earlier, perhaps Johns tragic end would shock Him into instant action. Would He raise John from the dead, as He had others?

3.

Did these disciples believe that the Messiahs kingdom must automatically mean the overthrow of Herods? Does their move indicate a positive political switch of allegiance from their late master, and a readiness to crown Jesus their king in order to revolt politically against Herod? Were these very disciples of John among those who fomented the grassroots movement to proclaim Jesus the Messianic Sovereign? (Joh. 6:14-15) What a task Jesus must have had to cool their bitterness and calm their demands for revenge! As righteous Judge of the world and grateful Kinsman and Friend of the great martyr, in this case He could sympathize perfectly with the rightness of vengeance. But here Jesus could not violate His own priorities by turning aside from His goal to save the world, in order to satisfy a definitely secondary priority, that of avenging John.

4.

Or did they hurry to warn Jesus who was even then evangelizing in Herods Galilee, lest He too fall by the butchers sword? The reality of the danger to the Lord is measured by His instant move to push His popularity to its logical climax and collapse, and subsequently, by His constant movement to outmaneuver His enemies.

5.

Whatever their specific motive, they probably felt that Jesus would be understanding in their grief.

Mat. 14:13 a Now when Jesus heard it, he withdrew from thence in a boat, to a desert place apart. What a blow against truth and righteousness had been struck: the voice of the Messiahs forerunner and the message of this great prophet had just been forever silenced on earth! This tragedy was not altogether unexpected, since Jesus had forewarned His disciples that all who would be faithful to God may expect similar rejection. (Mat. 5:10-12; Mat. 10:14; Mat. 10:16-39) But this is a personal loss to Jesus: His cousin, John, has just been mercilessly chopped down in a tyrants dungeon! (Cf. Luk. 1:36)

When Jesus heard it, He had been evangelizing mainly in Galilee west of the Jordan, as were also His disciples. (See on Mat. 14:1.) If John was decapitated in the Macherus prison, several days would have elapsed before common travelers could have brought the news the 100 miles from that fortress east of the Dead Sea to central Galilee. When Jesus heard it, He withdrew? The disciples of John, Jesus own followers, and a shocked nation were impatient for Jesus to denounce that dastardly deed in a declaration of holy war against all wickedness in government and religion. But Jesus is deliberately silent, as far as His official, public pronouncements go. Nothing more striking, nothing more out of step with human politics, could be imagined. Nevertheless, here is written the patience, meekness and wisdom of the Son of God who must firmly resist the almost overwhelming temptation to turn aside from His unique mission, in order to avenge His beloved herald. And yet this silence, so frustrating to those who expected decisively crushing vengeance from the Lord, is the divine self-government that keeps God from bludgeoning every sinner instantly whenever he tramples truth and mercy underfoot. There must be time to repent. If the Apostles and disciples are going to be dragged before governors and kings for my sake, to bear testimony before them (Mat. 10:18), this moment of mercy offered the highest authorities in the land must not be snatched away from them by hasty vengeance, no matter how justified. But the silence of God, seen here in Jesus Christ, must not be mistaken for apathy, because His silence is but that ominous quiet that precedes the violent firestorm of divine justice that must finally break over sinful men. Jesus, further, understood perfectly the principle of escalation: to become even distantly embroiled in a holy revolt against Herod must necessarily enflame to fever pitch the emotions of the nation to the point of violent explosion and national upheaval and, at the same time, involve Rome by whose grace Herod ruled. In the certain war, any hope of establishing a spiritual kingdom on earth would be completely wiped out. In short, it would be totally self-defeating. For the sequel, see the next section which flows directly out of this one.

A KING AND HIS PREACHER

King Herod Antipas

John the Baptist

Herodias

A. A Guilty King

1.

His conscience was awakened by another voice of righteousness proving that Gods voice could not be stilled by murdering His prophets.

2.

Awakened by a nearly forgotten remorse over Johns murder.

A. A Fearless Preacher

1.

Not only before the nation of Israel, making holiness a way of life among a degenerate people.

2.

But also before the King

a.

No soft, easy sermons

b.

Rather, It is not lawful for you to have your brothers wife!

A. A Vindictive Woman

1.

Justly condemned for her incestuous adultery.

2.

Out for revenge on John.

3.

Cared not what measures she took.

B. A Weak-willed Adulterer

1.

Divorced own wife without just cause (Ant., XVIII, 5, 1)

2.

Seduced and married his brothers wife

3.

Beguiled by Salomes dancing

4.

Feared John (Mar. 6:20)

5.

Fear the people (Mat. 14:5)

6.

Feared official scorn (Mat. 14:9; Mar. 6:26)

B. A Strong and Righteous Man

1.

By Jesus estimate (Mat. 11:11)

2.

Even in Herods eyes (Mar. 6:20)

3.

Afraid of no one but God

B. A Woman of Loose Morals

1.

Not satisfied with own husband.

2.

Accepted Herods advances and hand in marriage (Ant. XVIII, 5, 4)

3.

Unrelenting murderess of John

C. Openly Confused and Confusing

1.

Herod desired Johns death but feared men

2.

Herod feared John

3.

Herod protected him

4.

Herod heard him gladly although much perplexed

5.

A rash, foolish oath:

a.

Made in haste in dubious circumstances to a dancing girl while himself perhaps half-drunk

b.

Could have been broken by repentance but kept to avoid scorn.

C. Openly Convinced and Convincing

1.

Absolutely certain of his divine commission

2.

He spoke Gods word, not his own opinions, regardless of personal cost or danger.

3.

He lived in real harmony with his own beliefs; he was genuine.

C. Openly Corrupt and Corrupting

1.

Corrupted Herod further after immoral beginning

2.

Corrupted her own daughter for her own nefarious purposes:

(assuming her majority)

a.

Salome, shameless like her mother.

b.

Danced, though improper for a princess so to expose herself,

c.

Collaborated with her mother, though it meant murder.

D. A Bitter Remorse

1.

The king was exceedingly sorry, but did not repent.

2.

The king lost last voice of God, since Jesus would not speak to him but once, and then through Pharisees. (Luk. 13:31)

3.

The king lost all but the woman who ruined him. (Ant., XVIII, 7; Wars, II, 9, 6)

D. A Glorious Maryrdom

1.

Not only preceded Jesus in life, but also in death.

2.

Also preceded Him into the regions of light where God awaited this faithful prophet!

D. A Disgraced Consort

1.

Her high-vaulting ambition over reached itself: jealous of the glittering kingship of Agrippa I, she pushed Antipas to seek the title king. A suspicious Caligula banished Antipas.

2.

Herodias faithfully followed Herod into exile, (Ant., XVIII, 7; Wars. II, 9, 6)

A KING AND HIS LORD

Herods Attitude Toward Jesus

Jesus Attitude Toward Herod

A. He left Herods curiosity forever unsatisfied.

1.

By apparently shunning Tiberias altogether

2.

By refusing to do miracles for Herod.

B. He eluded Herods opposition

Morgan (Matthew, 187): He passed with quiet dignity out of the reach of the man, left him to his terror, his fear and his frenzy; abandoned him.

C. He never feared Herod

1.

Neither his influence (Mar. 8:15)

2.

Nor his power (Luk. 13:32-33)

D. He rejected Herod permanently by leaving him to his own self-appointed doom.

A. Avid Curiosity (Luk. 9:9; Luk. 23:8)

1.

Perhaps to hear the more humane message of Him who was the opposite of John (cfr. Mat. 11:18-19)

2.

To see miracles (Luk. 23:8)

3.

To have a new confessor?

B. Fear of Jesus Influence, Covert Hostility

1.

Did he use the Pharisees? Luk. 13:31

2.

His fear was due to the popular influence of Jesus ministry.

C. Totally Frustrated (Luk. 23:7-12)

Herod was totally helpless before a Man who had no fear of him and who knew that Herod could not kill Him.

FACT QUESTIONS

1.

Explain the intensity of the impression made upon Herod by Jesus miracles.

2.

How long did John the Baptists ministry continue?

3.

When did he preach to Herod? Publicly in the wilderness or privately before Herod himself?

4.

Why was John imprisoned? When? i.e., what other major incident(s) helps to coordinate our data and establish this general period? Where was he imprisoned, and where do we learn this detail? How long was he in prison?

5.

What message did he send to Jesus while he was in prison? How did Jesus answer it?

6.

When, how and why was John killed?

7.

How many miracles did John the Baptist perform? List them.

8.

Which of the Herods killed John? What is a tetrarch? In what sense was he called a king?

9.

Explain how Herod could be so ignorant about Jesus. Then explain how Jesus name could have become known to Herod.

10.

Explain why Herod could feasibly expect John to rise from the dead. Would Herod have believed in life after death, if, as some believe, he were a Sadducee?

11.

Who was Herodias? What was her character? What was her role in this drama? Who was Philip her former husband, i.e., what was his exact relation to Herod Antipas? Why was this marriage to Antipas unlawful?

12.

Who were the guests at the birthday dinner party of Herod?

13.

List the OT passages that Herod could have cited for repenting of his oath.

14.

State whatever principles of right and justice apply to Herods case, that should have caused him to break his oath rather than keep it in this case.

15.

What happened to the body of John after he was beheaded?

16.

What does the action of Johns disciples after Johns death indicate about the relations between John and Jesus, especially after John had sent Him the great question about Jesus Messiahship?

17.

According to the Synoptics, where were Jesus and His Apostles when word came of Johns murder? What were they doing? How did Jesus react publicly to the news?

18.

Much intimate detail of Herods private life is reported in this section. Where could the Apostles and Jesus have learned this information, without making use of special inspiration that would reveal these otherwise unknown facts?

19.

Luke (Luk. 9:9) reports Herods desire to see Jesus. When and where was this desire fulfilled?

Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series

XIV.

(1) Herod the tetrarch.The son of Herod the Great by Malthace. Under his fathers will he succeeded to the government of Galilee and Pera, with the title of Tetrarch, and as ruler of a fourth part of the Roman province of Syria. His first wife was a daughter of Aretas, an Arabian king or chief, named in 2Co. 11:32 as king of the Damascenes. Herodias, the wife of his half-brother Philip (not the Tetrarch of Trachonitis, Luk. 3:1, but son of Herod the Great by Mariamne, and though wealthy, holding no official position as a ruler), was daughter of Aristobulus, the son whom Herod put to death, and was therefore niece to both her husbands. Prompted partly by passion, partly by ambition, she left Philip, and became the wife of Antipas (Jos. Ant. xviii. 5, 4). The marriage, at once adulterous and by the Mosaic law doubly incestuous, shocked the conscience of all the stricter Jews. It involved Antipas in a war with the father of the wife whom he had divorced and dismissed, and it was probably in connection with this war that we read of soldiers on actual duty as coming under the teaching of the Baptist in Luk. 3:14. The prophetic spirit of the Baptist, the very spirit of Elijah in his dealings with Ahab and Jezebel, made him the spokesman of the general feeling, and so brought him within the range of the vindictive bitterness of the guilty queen.

Heard of the fame of Jesus.The words do not necessarily imply that no tidings had reached him till now. Our Lords ministry, however, had been at this time at the furthest not longer than a year, and possibly less, and Antipas, residing at Tiberias and surrounded by courtiers, might well be slow to hear of the works and teaching of the Prophet of Nazareth. Possibly, the nobleman of Capernaum (Joh. 4:46), or Manaen the foster-brother of the tetrarch (Act. 13:1), or Chuza his steward (Luk. 8:3), may have been among his first informants, as the servants (the word is not that used for slaves) to whom he now communicated his theory as to the reported wonders.

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

Chapter 14

THE TRAGIC DRAMA OF JOHN THE BAPTIST ( Mat 14:1-12 )

14:1-12 At that time Herod the tetrarch heard the report about Jesus, and said to his servants, “This is John the Baptizer. He has been raised from the dead, and because of this, these deeds of power work in him.” For Herod had seized John the Baptizer, and had bound him and put him in prison, because of Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife, for John insisted to him: “It is not right for you to have her.” So he wished to kill him, but he was afraid of the crowd, for they regarded him as a prophet. On the occasion of Herod’s birthday celebrations the daughter of Herodias danced in public and delighted Herod. Hence he affirmed with an oath that he would give her whatsoever she might ask. Urged on by her mother, she said, “Give me here and now the head of John the Baptizer on a dish.” The king was distressed, but, because of his oath, and because of those who sat at table with him, he ordered the request to be granted. So he sent and had John beheaded in the prison. And his head was brought on a dish and given to the maiden; and she brought it to her mother. His disciples came and took away the body and buried him. And they came and told Jesus about it.

In this tragic drama of the death of John the Baptist, the dramatis personas stand clearly delineated and vividly displayed.

(i) There is John himself. As far as Herod was concerned John had two faults. (a) He was too popular with the people. Josephus also tells the story of the death of John, and it is from this point of view that he tells it. Josephus writes (Antiquities of the Jews, 18. 5. 2): “Now when many others came in crowds about him, for they were greatly moved by hearing his words, Herod, who feared lest the great influence John had over the people might put it into his power and inclination to raise a rebellion (for they seemed ready to do anything he should advise), thought it best, by putting him to death, to prevent any mischief he might cause, and not bring himself into difficulties by sparing a man who might make him repent of it when it was too late. Accordingly he was sent a prisoner out of Herod’s suspicious temper to Machaerus … and was there put to death.” As Josephus read the facts, it was Herod’s suspicious jealousy of John which made him kill John. Herod, like every weak and suspicious and frightened tyrant, could think of no way of dealing with a possible rival other than killing him.

(b) But the gospel writers see the story from a different point of view. As they see it, Herod killed John because he was a man who told the truth. It is always dangerous to rebuke a tyrant, and that is precisely what John did.

The facts were quite simple. Herod Antipas was married to a daughter of the king of the Nabatean Arabs. He had a brother in Rome also called Herod; the gospel writers call this Roman Herod, Philip; his full name may have been Herod Philip, or they may simply have got mixed up in the complicated marriage relationships of the Herods. This Herod who stayed in Rome was a wealthy private individual, who had no kingdom of his own. On a visit to Rome, Herod Antipas seduced his brother’s wife, and persuaded her to leave his brother and to marry him. In order to do so he had to put away his own wife, with, as we shall see, disastrous consequences to himself. In doing this, apart altogether from the moral aspect of the question, Herod broke two laws. He divorced his own wife without cause, and he married his sister-in-law, which was a marriage, under Jewish law, within the prohibited relationships. Without hesitation John rebuked him.

It is always dangerous to rebuke an eastern despot, and by his rebuke John signed his own death warrant. He was a man who fearlessly rebuked evil wherever he saw it. When John Knox was standing for his principles against Queen Mary, she demanded whether he thought it right that the authority of rulers should be resisted. His answer was: “If princes exceed their bounds, madam, they may be resisted and even deposed.” The world owes much to the great men who took their lives in their hands and had the courage to tell even kings and queens that there is a moral law which they break at their peril.

(ii) There is Herodias. As we shall see, she was the ruination of Herod in every possible sense, although she was a woman not without a sense of greatness. At the moment we simply note that she was stained by a triple guilt. She was a woman of loose morals and of infidelity. She was a vindictive woman, who nursed her wrath to keep it warm, and who was out for revenge, even when she was justly condemned. And–perhaps worst of all–she was a woman who did not hesitate to use even her own daughter to realize her own vindictive ends. It would have been bad enough if she herself had sought ways of taking vengeance on the man of God who confronted her with her shame. It was infinitely worse that she used her daughter for her nefarious purposes and made her as great a sinner as herself. There is little to be said for a parent who stains a child with guilt in order to achieve some evil personal purpose.

(iii) There is Herodias’ daughter, Salome. Salome must have been young, perhaps sixteen or seventeen years of age. Whatever she may later have become, in this instance she is surely more sinned against than sinning. There must have been in her an element of shamelessness. Here was a royal princess who acted as a dancing-girl. The dances which these girls danced were suggestive and immoral. For a royal princess to dance in public at all was an amazing thing. Herodias thought nothing of outraging modesty and demeaning her daughter, if only she could gain her revenge on a man who had justly rebuked her.

THE FALL OF HEROD ( Mat 14:1-12 continued)

(iv) There is Herod himself. He is called the tetrarch. Tetrarch literally means the ruler of a fourth part; but it came to be used quite generally, as here, of any subordinate ruler of a section of a country. Herod the Great had many sons. When he died, he divided his territory into three, and, with the consent of the Romans, willed it to three of them. To Archelaus he left Judaea and Samaria; to Philip he left the northern territory of Trachonitis and Ituraea; to Herod Antipas–the Herod of this story–he left Galilee and Peraea. Herod Antipas was by no means an exceptionally bad king; but here he began on the road that led to his complete ruin. We may note three things about him.

(a) He was a man with a guilty conscience. When Jesus became prominent, Herod immediately leaped to the conclusion that this was John come back to life again. Origen has a most interesting suggestion about this. He points out that Mary, the mother of Jesus, and Elisabeth, the mother of John, were closely related ( Luk 1:36). That is to say, Jesus and John were blood relations. And Origen speaks of a tradition which says that Jesus and John closely resembled each other in appearance. If that was the case, then Herod’s guilty conscience might appear to him to have even more grounds for its fears. He is the great proof that no man can rid himself of a sin by ridding himself of the man who confronts him with it. There is such a thing as conscience, and, even if a man’s human accuser is eliminated, his divine accuser is still not silenced.

(b) Herod’s action was typical of a weak man. He kept a foolish oath and broke a great law. He had promised Salome to give her anything she might ask, little thinking what she would request. He knew well that to grant her request, so as to keep his oath, was to break a far greater law; and yet he chose to do it because he was too weak to admit his error. He was more frightened of a woman’s tantrums than of the moral law. He was more frightened of the criticism, and perhaps the amusement, of his guests, than of the voice of conscience. Herod was a man who could take a firm stand on the wrong things, even when he knew what was right; and such a stand is the sign, not of strength, but of weakness.

(c) We have already said that Herod’s action in this case was the beginning of his ruin, and so it was. The result of his seduction of Herodias and his divorce of his own wife, was that (very naturally) Aretas, the father of his wife, and the ruler of the Nabateans, bitterly resented the insult perpetrated against his daughter. He made war against Herod, and heavily defeated him. The comment of Josephus is: “Some of the Jews thought that the destruction of Herod’s army came from God, and that very justly, as a punishment for what he did against John, who was called the Baptist” (Antiquities of the Jews, 18. 5. 2). Herod was in fact only rescued by calling in the power of the Romans to clear things up.

From the very beginning Herod’s illegal and immoral alliance with Herodias brought him nothing but trouble. But the influence of Herodias was not to stop there. The years went by and Caligula came to the Roman throne. The Philip who had been tetrarch of Trachonitis and Ituraea died, and Caligula gave the province to another of the Herod family named Agrippa; and with the province he gave him the title of king. The fact that Agrippa was called king moved Herodias to bitter envy. Josephus says, “She was not able to conceal how miserable she was, by reason of the envy she had towards him” (Antiquities of the Jews, 18. 7. 1). The consequence of her envy was that she incited Herod to go to Rome and to ask Caligula that he too should be granted the title of king, for Herodias was determined to be a queen. “Let us go to Rome,” she said, “and let us spare no pains or expenses, either of saver or gold, since they cannot be kept for any better use than for the obtaining of a kingdom.”

Herod was very unwilling to take action; he was naturally lazy, and he also foresaw serious trouble. But this persistent woman had her way. Herod prepared to set out to Rome; but Agrippa sent messengers to forestall him with accusations that Herod was preparing treacherously to rebel from Rome. The result was that Caligula believed Agrippa’s accusations, took Herod’s province from him, with all his money, and gave it to Agrippa, and banished Herod to far off Gaul to languish there in exile until he died.

So in the end it was through Herodias that Herod lost his fortune and his kingdom, and dragged out a weary existence in the far away places of Gaul. It is just here that Herodias showed her one flash of greatness and of magnanimity. She was in fact Agrippa’s sister, and Caligula told her that he did not intend to take her private fortune from her and that for Agrippa’s sake she need not accompany her husband into exile. Herodias answered, “Thou indeed, O Emperor, actest after a magnificent manner, and as becomes thyself, in what thou offerest me; but the love which I have for my husband hinders me from partaking of the favour of thy gift; for it is not just that I, who have been a partner in his prosperity, should forsake him in his misfortune” (Antiquities of the Jews, 8. 7. 2). And so Herodias accompanied Herod to his exile.

If ever there was proof that sin brings its own punishment, that proof lies in the story of Herod. It was an ill day when Herod first seduced Herodias. From that act of infidelity came the murder of John, and in the end disaster, in which he lost all, except the woman who loved him and ruined him.

COMPASSION AND POWER ( Mat 14:13-21 )

14:13-21 When Jesus heard the news (of the death of John), he withdrew from there in a boat, into a deserted place alone. When the crowds heard of it, they followed him on foot from the towns. When he had disembarked, he saw a great crowd, and he was moved with compassion for them to the depths of his being, and healed their sick. When it had become late, his disciples came to him: “The place is deserted,” they said, “and the hour for the evening meal has already passed. Send the crowds away, in order that they may go into the villages, and buy themselves food.” But Jesus said to them, “Give them food to eat yourselves.” They said to him, “We have nothing except five loaves and two fishes.” He said, “Bring them here to me.” So he ordered the crowds to sit down on the green grass. He took the five loaves and the two fishes, and looked up to heaven, and said a blessing, and broke the loaves and gave them to the disciples, and the disciples gave them to the crowds; and they all ate and were satisfied. They took up what was left over, twelve baskets full of the fragments. The number of those who ate was about five thousand men, apart from women and children.

Galilee must have been a place where it was very difficult to be alone. Galilee was a small country, only 50 miles from north to south and 25 miles from east to west, and Josephus tells us that in his time within that small area there were 204 towns and villages, none with a population of less than 15,000 people. In such a thickly populated area it was not easy to get away from people for any length of time. But it was quiet on the other side of the lake, and at its widest the lake was only 8 miles wide. Jesus’ friends were fisherfolk; and it was not difficult to embark on one of their boats and seek retirement on the east side of the lake. That is what Jesus did when he heard of the death of John.

There were three perfectly simple and natural reasons why Jesus should seek to be alone. He was human and he needed rest. He never recklessly ran into danger, and it was well to withdraw, lest too early he should share the fate of John. And, most of all, with the Cross coming nearer and nearer, Jesus knew that he must meet with God before he met with men. He was seeking rest for his body and strength for his soul in the lonely places.

But he was not to get it. It would be easy to see the boat set sail and to deduce where it was going; and the crowds flocked round the top of the lake and were waiting for him at the other side when he arrived. So Jesus healed them and, when the evening came, he fed them before they took the long road home. Few of Jesus’ miracles are so revealing as this.

(i) It tells us of the compassion of Jesus. When he saw the crowds he was moved with compassion to the depths of his being. That is a very wonderful thing. Jesus had come to find peace and quiet and loneliness; instead he found a vast crowd eagerly demanding what he could give. He might so easily have resented them. What right had they to invade his privacy with their continual demands? Was he to have no rest and quiet, no time to himself at all?

But Jesus was not like that. So far from finding them a nuisance, he was moved with compassion for them. Premanand, the great Christian who was once a wealthy high-caste Indian, says in his autobiography: “As in the days of old, so now our message to the non-Christian world has to be the same, that God cares.” If that be so, we must never be too busy for people, and we must never even seem to find them a trouble and a nuisance. Premanand also says: “My own experience has been that when I or any other missionary or Indian priest showed signs of restlessness or impatience towards any educated and thoughtful Christian or non-Christian visitors, and gave them to understand that we were hard-pressed for time, or that it was our lunch–or tea–time and that we could not wait, then at once such enquirers were lost, and never returned again.” We must never deal with people with one eye on the clock, and as if we were anxious to be rid of them as soon as we decently can.

Premanand goes on to relate an incident which, it is not too much to say, may have changed the whole course of the spread of Christianity in Bengal. “There is an account somewhere of how the first Metropolitan Bishop of India failed to meet the late Pandit Iswar Chandar Vidyasagar of Bengal through official formality. The Pandit had been sent as spokesman of the Hindu community in Calcutta, to establish friendly relations with the Bishop and with the Church. Vidyasagar, who was the founder of a Hindu College in Calcutta and a social reformer, author and educationalist of repute, returned disappointed without an interview, and formed a strong party of educated and wealthy citizens of Calcutta to oppose the Church and the Bishop, and to guard against the spread of Christianity. formality observed by one known to be an official of the Christian Church turned a friend into a foe.” What an opportunity for Christ was lost because someone’s privacy could not be invaded except through official channels. Jesus never found any man a nuisance, even when his whole being was crying out for rest and quiet–and neither must his followers.

(ii) In this story we see Jesus witnessing that all gifts are from God. He took the food and he said a blessing. The Jewish grace before meals was very simple: “Blessed art thou, Jehovah our God, King of the universe, who bringest forth bread from the earth.” That would be the grace which Jesus said, for that was the grace which every Jewish family used. Here we see Jesus showing that it is God’s gifts which he brings to men. The grace of gratitude is rare enough towards men; it is rarer still towards God.

THE PLACE OF THE DISCIPLE IN THE WORK OF CHRIST ( Mat 14:13-21 continued)

(iii) This miracle informs us very clearly of the place of the disciple in the work of Christ. The story tells that Jesus gave to the disciples and the disciples gave to the crowd. Jesus worked through the hands of his disciples that day, and he still does.

Again and again we come face to face with this truth which is at the heart of the Church. It is true that the disciple is helpless without his Lord, but it is also true that the Lord is helpless without his disciple. If Jesus wants something done, if he wants a child taught or a person helped, he has to get a man to do it. He needs people through whom he can act, and through whom he can speak.

Very early in the days of his enquiring, Premanand came into contact with Bishop Whitley at Ranchi. He writes: “The Bishop read the Bible with me daily, and sometimes I read Bengali with him, and we talked together in Bengali. The longer I lived with the Bishop the closer I came to him, and found that his life revealed Christ to me, and his deeds and words made it easier for me to understand the mind and teaching of Christ about which I read daily in the Bible. I had a new vision of Christ, when I actually saw Christ’s life of love, sacrifice and self-denial in the everyday life of the Bishop. He became actually the epistle of Christ to me.”

Jesus Christ needs disciples through whom he can work and through whom his truth and his love can enter into the lives of others. He needs men to whom he can give, in order that they may give to others. Without such men he cannot get things done and it is our task to be such men for him.

It would be easy to be daunted and discouraged by a task of such magnitude. But there is another thing in this story that may lift up our hearts. When Jesus told the disciples to feed the crowd, they told him that all they had was five loaves and two fishes; and yet with what they brought to him, Jesus wrought his miracle. Jesus sets every one of us the tremendous task of communicating himself to men; but he does not demand from us splendours and magnificences that we do not possess. He says to us, “Come to me as you are, however ill-equipped; bring to me what you have, however little, and I will use it greatly in my service.” Little is always much in the hands of Christ.

(iv) At the end of the miracle there is that strange little touch that the fragments were gathered up. Even when a miracle could feed men sumptuously there was no waste. There is something to note here. God gives to men with munificence, but a wasteful extravagance is never right. God’s generous giving and our wise using must go hand in hand.

THE MAKING OF A MIRACLE ( Mat 14:13-21 continued)

There are some people who read the miracles of Jesus, and feel no need to understand. Let them remain for ever undisturbed in the sweet simplicity of their faith. There are others who read and their minds question and they feel they must understand. Let them take no shame of it, for God comes far more than half way to meet the questing mind. But in whatever way we approach the miracles of Jesus, one thing is certain. We must never be content to regard them as something which happened; we must always regard them as something which happens. They are not isolated events in history; they are demonstrations of the always and forever operative power of Jesus Christ. There are three ways in which we can look at this miracle.

(i) We may look at it as a simple multiplication of loaves and fishes. That would be very difficult to understand; and would be something which happened once and never repeated itself. If we regard it that way, let us be content; but let us not be critical and condemnatory of anyone who feels that he must find another way.

(ii) Many people see in this miracle a sacrament. They have felt that those who were present received only the smallest morsel of food, and yet with that were strengthened for their journey and were content. They have felt that this was not a meal where people glutted their physical appetite; but a meal where they ate the spiritual food of Christ. If that be so, this is a miracle which is re-enacted every time we sit at the table of our Lord; for there comes to us the spiritual food which sends us out to walk with firmer feet and greater strength the way of life which leads to God.

(iii) There are those who see in this miracle something which in a sense is perfectly natural, and yet which in another sense is a real miracle, and which in any sense is very precious. Picture the scene. There is the crowd; it is late; and they are hungry. But was it really likely that the vast majority of that crowd would set out around the lake without any food at all? Would they not take something with them, however little? Now it was evening and they were hungry. But they were also selfish. And no one would produce what he had, lest he have to share it and leave himself without enough. Then Jesus took the lead. Such as he and his disciples had, he began to share with a blessing and an invitation and a smile. And thereupon all began to share, and before they knew what was happening, there was enough and more than enough for all.

If this is what happened, it was not the miracle of the multiplication of loaves and fishes; it was the miracle of the changing of selfish people into generous people at the touch of Christ. It was the miracle of the birth of love in grudging hearts. It was the miracle of changed men and women with something of Christ in them to banish their selfishness. If that be so, then in the realest sense Christ fed them with himself and sent his Spirit to dwell within their hearts.

It does not matter how we understand this miracle. One thing is sure–when Christ is there, the weary find rest and the hungry soul is fed.

IN THE HOUR OF TROUBLE ( Mat 14:22-27 )

14:22-27 Immediately he compelled his disciples to embark in the boat and to go on ahead to the other side, until he should send away the crowds. When he had sent away the crowds, he went up into a mountain by himself to pray. When it was late, he was there alone. The boat was by this time in the middle of the sea, battered by the waves, for the wind was contrary. About three o’clock in the morning, he came to them walking on the sea. When the disciples saw him walking on the sea they were alarmed. “This is an apparition,” they said, and they cried out from fear. Immediately Jesus spoke to them. “Courage!” he said. “It is I. Do not be afraid.”

The lesson of this passage is abundantly clear but what actually happened is not. First of all, let us set the scene.

After the feeding of the multitude Jesus sent his disciples away. Matthew says that he compelled them to embark on the boat and go on ahead. At first sight the word compelled sounds strange; but if we turn to John’s account of the incident we will most likely find the explanation. John tells us that after the feeding of the multitude, the crowd wished to come and to make him a king by force ( Joh 6:15). There was a surge of popular acclamation, and in the excited state of Palestine a revolution might well have there and then begun. It was a dangerous situation, and the disciples might well have complicated it, for they, too, were still thinking of Jesus in terms of earthly power. Jesus sent away his disciples because a situation had arisen with which he could best deal alone, and in which he did not wish them to become involved.

When he was alone, he went up into a mountain to pray; and by this time the night had come. The disciples had set out back across the lake. One of the sudden storms, for which the lake was notorious, had come down, and they were struggling against the winds and the waves, and making little progress. As the night wore on, Jesus began to walk round the head of the lake to reach the other side. Matthew has already told us that, when Jesus fed the crowds, he made them sit down on the green grass. By that we know it must have been the springtime. Very likely it was near the Passover time, which was in the middle of April. If that is so, the moon would be full. In ancient times the night was divided into four watches–6 p.m. to 9 p.m., 9 p.m. to 12 midnight, 12 midnight to 3 a.m., and 3 a.m. to 6 a.m. So at three o’clock in the morning, Jesus, walking on the high ground at the north of the lake, clearly saw the boat fighting with the waves, and came down to the shore to help.

It is then that there is a real difficulty in knowing what happened. In Mat 14:25-26 we read twice about Jesus walking on the sea, and the curious thing is that the two phrases in the Greek for on the sea are different. In Mat 14:25 it is epi ( G1909) , ten ( G3588) , thalassan ( G2281) , which can equally mean over the sea, and towards the sea. In Mat 14:26 it is epi ( G1909) , tes ( G3588) , thalasses ( G2281) , which can mean on the sea, and which is actually the very same phrase which is used in Joh 21:1 for at the sea, that is by the sea-shore, of Tiberias. Still further, the word which is used for walking in both Mat 14:25-26 is peripatein ( G4043) , which means to walk about.

The truth is that there are two perfectly possible interpretations of this passage, so far as the actual Greek goes. It may describe a miracle in which Jesus actually walked on the water. Or, it may equally mean that the disciples’ boat was driven by the wind to the northern shore of the lake, that Jesus came down from the mountain to help them when he saw them struggling in the moonlight, and that he came walking through the surf and the waves towards the boat, and came so suddenly upon them that they were terrified when they saw him. Both of these interpretations are equally valid. Some will prefer one, and some the other.

But, whatever interpretation of the Greek we choose, the significance is perfectly clear. In the hour of the disciples’ need Jesus came to them. When the wind was contrary and life was a struggle, Jesus was there to help. No sooner had a need arisen, than Jesus was there to help and to save.

In life the wind is often contrary. There are times when we are up against it and life is a desperate struggle with ourselves, with our circumstances, with our temptations, with our sorrows, with our decisions. At such a time no man need struggle alone, for Jesus comes to him across the storms of life, with hand stretched out to save, and with his calm clear voice bidding us take heart and–have no fear.

It does not really matter how we take this incident; it is in any event far more than the story of what Jesus once did in a storm in far-off Palestine; it is the sign and the symbol of what he always does for his people, when the wind is contrary and we are in danger of being overwhelmed by the storms of life.

COLLAPSE AND RECOVERY ( Mat 14:28-33 )

14:28-33 Peter got down from the boat and walked on the water to come to Jesus. But, when he saw the wind, he was afraid; and, when he began to sink below the water, he cried out, “Lord, save me!” Immediately Jesus stretched out his hand and grasped him. “O man of little faith!” he said. “Why did you begin to have doubts?” And when they got into the boat, the wind sank. And those in the boat knelt in reverence before him, saying, “Truly you are the Son of God.”

There is no passage in the New Testament in which Peter’s character is more fully revealed than this. It tells us three things about him.

(i) Peter was given to acting upon impulse and without thinking of what he was doing. It was his mistake that again and again he acted without fully facing the situation and without counting the cost. He was to do exactly the same when he affirmed undying and unshakable loyalty to Jesus ( Mat 26:33-35), and then denied his Lord’s name. And yet there are worse sins than that, because Peter’s whole trouble was that he was ruled by his heart; and, however he might sometimes fail, his heart was always in the right place and the instinct of his heart was always love.

(ii) Because Peter acted on impulse, he often failed and came to grief. It was always Jesus’ insistence that a man should look at a situation in all its bleak grimness before he acted ( Luk 9:57-58; Mat 16:24-25). Jesus was completely honest with men; he always bade them see how difficult it was to follow him before they set out upon the Christian way. A great deal of Christian failure is due to acting upon an emotional moment without counting the cost.

(iii) But Peter never finally failed, for always in the moment of his failure he clutched at Christ. The wonderful thing about him is that every time he fell, he rose again; and that it must have been true that even his failures brought him closer and closer to Jesus Christ. As has been well said, a saint is not a man who never fails; a saint is a man who gets up and goes on again every time he falls. Peter’s failures only made him love Jesus Christ the more.

These verses finish with another great and permanent truth. When Jesus got into the boat, the wind sank. The great truth is that, wherever Jesus Christ is, the wildest storm becomes a calm. Olive Wyon, in her book Consider Him, quotes a thing from the letters of St. Francis of Sales. St. Francis had noticed a custom of the country districts in which he lived. He had often noticed a farm servant going across a farmyard to draw water at the well; he also noticed that, before she lifted the brimming pail, the girl always put a piece of wood into it. One day he went out to the girl and asked her, “Why do you do that?” She looked surprised and answered, as if it were a matter of course, “Why? to keep the water from spilling … to keep it steady!” Writing to a friend later on, the bishop told this story and added: “So when your heart is distressed and agitated, put the Cross into its centre to keep it steady!” In every time of storm and stress, the presence of Jesus and the love which flows from the Cross bring peace and serenity and calm.

THE MINISTRY OF CHRIST ( Mat 14:34-36 )

14:34-36 When they had crossed over, they came to land at Gennesaret. When the men of that place recognized him, they sent the news that he had come to the whole surrounding countryside, and they brought to him all those who were ill, and besought him to be allowed only to touch the fringe of his robe; and all who touched him were restored to health.

This is just one of Matthew’s almost colourless little connecting passages. It is a sentence or two of the gospel story that the eye might easily pass over as quite unimportant; and yet it is very revealing of Jesus.

(i) There is beauty in it. No sooner did Jesus appear anywhere than men were crowding and clamouring for his help; and he never refused it. He healed them all. There is no word here that he preached or taught at any length; there is simply the record that he healed. The most tremendous thing about Jesus was that he taught men what God was like by showing men what God was like. He did not tell men that God cared; he showed men that God cared. There is little use preaching the love of God in words without showing the love of God in action.

(ii) But there is also pathos here. No one can read this passage without seeing in it the grim fact that there were hundreds and thousands of people who desired Jesus only for what they could get out of him. Once they had received the healing which they sought, they were not really prepared to go any further. It has always been the case that people have wanted the privilege of Christianity without its responsibilities. It has always been the case that so many of us remember God only when we need him. Ingratitude towards God and towards Jesus Christ is the ugliest of all sins; and there is no sin of which men are more often and more consistently guilty.

-Barclay’s Daily Study Bible (NT)

Fuente: Barclay Daily Study Bible

60. DEATH OF JOHN THE BAPTIST, Mat 14:1-14 .

It was while me apostles were on their trial mission that John was beheaded. Thus Jesus spreads his operations, and the harbinger leaves the scene, simultaneously. As an old writer says, Jesus provided that for one preacher slain twelve should spring up in his place.

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

1. At that time In narrating the death of John the Baptist, Matthew follows a peculiar order of facts. He gives us: 1. A conversation of Herod with his servants, in which the king expresses the opinion that Jesus was John the Baptist risen from the dead, (Mat 14:1-2.) 2. To explain this expression of the king’s, he goes back in time, and narrates how John was slain by Herod, (Mat 14:3-12.) 3. He last informs us how Jesus retired on receiving intelligence of the Baptist’s death, (Mat 14:13.) The real order of the facts in time was, first, The Baptist’s death; second, The retirement of Jesus; and third, The conversation of Herod. The phrase, at that time, must therefore have an indefinite extension, and mean at that general period of our Lord’s ministry.

Herod This was Herod Antipas. This prince succeeded Herod, surnamed the Great, as ruler of Galilee, in the infancy of our Saviour, and is the only Herod so called afterward in the Gospels. He was the son of Herod the Great, (of whom we have given some account in Mat 2:1,) by Malthace. When Herod the Great died, he appointed by will Archelaus, his son by the same Malthace, king of Judea, and this Antipas tetrarch of Galilee; but this will must receive the sanction of the supreme authority, Augustus, emperor of Rome. Both brothers appeared before the emperor, who so changed the arrangement as to give to Archelaus the province of Judea, with the title, not of king, but of ethnarch, (or nation-ruler;) to Herod Philip, a son by Cleopatra of Jerusalem, Batana, Trachonitis, and Auranitis, provinces lying east of the Sea of Galilee; and to this Herod Antipas, Galilee and Perea. (See note on Mat 2:22.) After the banishment of Archelaus by the emperor, Judea had no more a native king or prince. Shiloh had come, and the sceptre departed. It was placed under the general Roman prefecture of Syria, and was ruled by a series of special Roman governors, residing at Cesarea. Such was the government during the most of Jesus’s life and all of his ministry. The successive governors were Coponius, Ambivius, Annius Rufus, Valerius Gratus, and Pontius Pilate. Herod Antipas was first married to a daughter of Aretas, king of Arabia. Forming an unlawful attachment for Herodias, the wife of his brother Herod Philip, (see note on Mat 14:3,) he became involved in a course of guilt which ended in his ruin. Aretas commenced a war upon Herod to avenge the insult to his daughter. See note on Mat 14:6. Herod’s armies were defeated, and ruin seemed impending. This he evaded by appealing to Rome, and obtaining from the emperor an order requiring Aretas to desist from the war.

Herodias seemed to be his evil genius. When Herod’s nephew, Agrippa, brother of Herodias, had obtained from the emperor the title of king, she prompted her unlawful husband to ask the same dignity at Rome. Agrippa anticipated the design, and when they appeared at the court he met them with an accusation of treason against the emperor Herod was therefore deposed and banished, with Herodias, to Lyons in Gaul, where he died.

Tetrarch A Greek word, signifying a ruler of a fourth part of a kingdom. Under the order of the emperor, the kingdom of Herod the Great was, upon his death, divided into three tetrarchies, and given to Herod’s sons, as already mentioned. The tetrarchs and ethnarchs were very ambitious of the title of king, and were often so styled by courtesy. Heard of the fame of Jesus Herod Antipas was near at the birth of Jesus, through his life, and at his death. He had attained manhood when the arrival of the Magi, announcing a newborn rival for the throne, created a panic at the court of Herod his father. He may have shared in the excitement, and have imagined that the rival prince was slaughtered in the massacre at Bethlehem. As ruler of Galilee he was the temporal sovereign of Jesus; and from his jealousy, suspicions, and threats as ruler, Jesus was obliged to be cautious in his own movements, and to hold the enthusiasm of his followers in check. Indeed, from about this time it may be remarked that our Saviour’s influence is more spreading, yet more secret. The ruling powers of Judea have decided against him because he is no conquering Messiah. The ruler of Galilee is suspicious lest he prove a warlike opponent. Our Lord’s greatest miracles, the feeding of the multitudes, are in the dominions of Herod Philip.

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

‘At that time (season) Herod the tetrarch heard the report concerning Jesus.’

John had stirred the people in Peraea, another part of Herod’s territory east of Jordan. But his ministry had been restricted to preaching. He had performed no miracles. Now, however, came news to Herod of great crowds gathering to hear a prophet who performed amazing miracles, who was right here in Galilee. To a man like Herod, who bore a heavy burden of guilt this news was disturbing. As far as he was concerned there could only be one explanation (it was after all unusual that two such prophets should arise one after the other). This must be John the Baptist returned with heavenly power.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

Jesus Is Confirmed As The Son of God, Begins To Establish His New Congregation, Reaches Out To Gentiles, Is Acknowledged As Messiah By His Disciples, and Reveals His Inherent Glory (13:53-17:27).

The advance of the Kingly Rule of Heaven leading up to the final consummation having been made clear by His parables Jesus is now confirmed as the Son of God (Mat 14:33; Mat 16:16; Mat 18:26) and begins to establish a new open community (Mat 14:13-21; Mat 15:32-39; Mat 16:18; compare Mat 12:25; Mat 12:50; Matthew 5-7; Mat 9:15-17). This idea of commencing a new open community was not in itself a novelty among the Jews. The Pharisees had formed their own open community, the Essenes had formed an open community, Qumran had formed a closed community, the disciples of John the Baptist had formed their own open community. The difference was that all of those communities were preparatory, each in its own way awaiting the coming of God’s future Kingly Rule. But as we have seen, Jesus was now establishing God’s Kingly Rule among men (Mat 6:10; Mat 6:33; Mat 11:12; Mat 13:38; Mat 13:41). Those who came to Him therefore entered under God’s Kingly Rule.

And as He does so a new vision opens before Him, and His outreach goes out to the Gentiles as well as the Jews (Mat 15:21-28; Mat 15:31; Mat 16:13). His acceptance of this comes out in His feeding of both Jews and Gentiles with the bread of heaven (Mat 15:32-39). It is thus on mixed Jewish and Gentile territory that He is revealed to be the Messiah (Mat 16:13-20). The section closes with a clear demonstration of His Sonship and authority over the Temple (Mat 17:24-27).

But all this is built on the fact of rejection by His own home town (Mat 13:53-58) and by the civil authorities, the ‘powers that be’, in Galilee (Mat 14:1-13), followed by the continuing hostility of the most religious and respected men of the day, in combination with the teachers from Jerusalem (Mat 15:1-14; Mat 16:1-4). Those who ‘hear’ do not hear, those who ‘see’ do not see, and their hearts are hardened. But those who follow Him will both hear and see (Mat 16:17; compare Mat 11:25; Mat 13:7), even though their faith is small (Mat 14:31 (compare Mat 6:30); Mat 17:20). We can thus understand why He found it necessary to move north. The way was not to be easy.

One theme of this section is feeding. The food of the godless authorities is the head of John the Baptist on a platter (Mat 14:11) while in contrast those who seek Him feed on the bread of Heaven (Mat 14:13-21). The Gentiles who seek Him may ‘eat of the children’s food’ (Mat 15:27-28). They too thus eat of the bread of Heaven (Mat 15:32-39). The leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees is false teaching (Mat 16:5-12). That is not to be partaken of.

Note how, following the ministry of chapter 10, mention had been made of the imprisonment of John (Mat 11:2), followed by the approach of the Scribes and Pharisees to ‘attack’ Jesus (Mat 12:1-14). Now those ideas are repeated and intensified. The imprisoned John is martyred (Mat 14:1-12) and the aggressive Pharisees and Scribes are now ‘from Jerusalem’ (Mat 15:1).

Analysis of the Section Mat 13:53 to Mat 17:27

a Jesus comes to His home country. A prophet is without honour in His own country (Mat 13:53-57).

b He did not many mighty works in His home town because of their unbelief, but because of His mighty works Herod thinks that Jesus is John raised from the dead (Mat 13:58 to Mat 14:2).

c Herod arranges for the execution of John and does to him whatever he will (Mat 14:3-12).

d Jesus reveals His glory, and that He has brought food from Heaven, by feeding five thousand at one time. Then He is alone in the Mountain (Mat 14:13-21).

e Jesus walks on the water in a stiff and contrary wind and Peter is called on to walk the way of faith in the face of the tempest (Mat 14:22-31).

f They proclaim Him as the Son of God (Mat 14:32-36).

g The Scribes and Pharisees challenge Jesus about ritual washing (Mat 15:1-9).

h Jesus shows that the Pharisees are rejected because they have not been planted by the Father and are blind guides (Mat 15:10-20).

i The Canaanite woman may, as a Gentile ‘puppy’, eat of the children’s food (Mat 15:21-28).

j The crowds throng to Jesus, and the dumb, the maimed, the lame, and the blind are healed and ‘they glorified the God of Israel’ (Mat 15:29-31).

i The feeding of four thousand on Gentile territory. They eat of the children’s food (Mat 15:32-39).

h The Pharisees and Sadducees seek a sign and are refused one, apart from that of Jonah, and are described as evil and adulterous for doing so (Mat 16:1-4)

g The disciples are to beware of the teaching of the Pharisees and Sadducees (Mat 16:5-12).

f Jesus is confessed as the Son of the living God (Mat 16:13-20).

e The Son of Man must suffer, and His disciples are called on to walk the way of suffering (Mat 16:21-28).

d Jesus’ glory is revealed to His three chosen disciples in the high mountain. Then they see no man but Jesus only (Mat 17:1-8).

c Elijah has come but ‘they have done to him whatever they would’ and they realise that He means John the Baptist and is referring to what happened to him (Mat 17:9-13).

b The disciples fail to heal the paralytic boy because of their unbelief, but faith will move mountains, thus although Jesus will be tried and executed He will be raised from the dead (Mat 17:14-23).

a Jesus is not recognised in His own country as the Son and therefore pays the Tribute, but He does it from His Father’s treasury (Mat 17:24-27).

Note that in ‘a’ Jesus is unrecognised for what He is because He is known too well as the son of the carpenter, and in the parallel He is unrecognised even though He is the Son of God. In ‘b’ Jesus is unable to heal in His own country because in their unbelief they do not bring their sick, although His mighty works connect Him with the resurrection, and in the parallel the disciples fail to heal because their faith is insufficient, and Jesus reveals His faith by assuring His disciples of His resurrection. In ‘c’ Herod does to John the Baptist whatever He wills, and in the parallel John the Baptist is declared by Jesus to be the coming Elijah, to whom men did what they willed. In ‘d’ Jesus displays His glory be feeding five thousand and more from five loaves and two fishes, and in the parallel He displays His glory on the Mount of Transfiguration. In ‘e’ Jesus walks on water in a stiff and contrary wind, and Peter stumbles, and in the parallel Jesus reveals He must walk the way of suffering, as must His disciples, and Peter again stumbles. In ‘f’ He is proclaimed to be the Son of God, and in the parallel He is proclaimed by Peter as the Son of the Living God. In ‘g’ the Scribes and Pharisees dispute about ritual washing, and in the parallel Jesus warns against the teaching of the Pharisees and Sadducees. In ‘h’ the Pharisees are declared not to have been planted by His Father, and to be blind guides, and in the parallel the Pharisees and Sadducees are refused the kind of sign that they want and are declared to be evil and spiritually adulterous. In ‘i’ the Canaanite woman is allowed to eat of the children’s food (that of Israel), and in the parallel the four thousand ‘eat of the children’s food’. Centrally in ‘j’ the crowds in Gentile areas throng to Jesus; the dumb, the maimed, the lame, and the blind are healed (His Messianic work is done among them) and ‘they glorify the God of Israel’.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

Jesus Is Unable To Do Many Mighty Works In His Home Town, But His Mighty Works Impress Herod Who Thinks That He May Be John The Baptist Raised From The Dead (13:58-14:2).

The mighty works of Jesus, which they have heard of through the tales spreading from elsewhere (Luk 4:23), have not impressed His own home town. They refuse to believe that He can do them and so do not bring their sick to be healed. But Herod is impressed and sees Him as John the Baptist raised from the dead.

Analysis.

a And he did not perform many mighty works there because of their unbelief (Mat 13:58).

b At that time (season) Herod the tetrarch heard the report concerning Jesus, and he said to his servants, “This is John the Baptist. He is risen from the dead” (Mat 14:1-2 a).

a “Therefore do these powers work in him (Mat 14:2). p

Note that while His home town do not believe in His mighty works, in the parallel Herod does so. Centrally we have the conclusion that he comes to. It must be John the Baptist who is risen from the dead.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

The Death of John the Baptist ( Mar 6:14-29 , Luk 9:7-9 ) Mat 14:1-12 records rejection of John the Baptist’s doctrine by Herod and his death. When comparing this story in the Synoptic Gospels, we see that Mar 6:14-29 records the most lengthy account of the death of John the Baptist. Mark gives more detail of the reason for his death, which was because of his preaching a Gospel of repentance to King Herod, and it records Herod’s perplexity of Jesus’ miracles; thus making an emphasis upon preaching and miracles. Luke’s Gospel gives the shortest account by simply noting Herod’s testimony of perplexity as to who Jesus was, having heard so many things about Him. Matthew’s record of this account is placed among a collection of accounts of how to handle those who are offended by the doctrine of the Kingdom of Heaven; for the death of John the Baptist was an opportunity to get offended.

The Spirit of Jezebel – We are told that the spirit of Elijah rested upon John the Baptist in the New Testament (Luk 1:17). Note, however, how the same spirit that raised up Jezebel against Elijah also came against John the Baptist in the form of Herodias; for Herodias sought to kill John the Baptist as Jezebel sought the life of Elijah.

Luk 1:17, “And he shall go before him in the spirit and power of Elias , to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just; to make ready a people prepared for the Lord.”

The Response of Herodias – Naturally, the woman (Herodias) responded with more emotion to John’s rebuke that did the man (Herod). Herodias eventually succeeded in having John killed, while the king was trying to appease both sides in this dispute.

Mat 14:2  And said unto his servants, This is John the Baptist; he is risen from the dead; and therefore mighty works do shew forth themselves in him.

Mat 14:2 Comments – Billy Graham says Herod made this statement because his conscience was bothering him about the execution of John the Baptist. [477]

[477] Billy Graham, “Sermon,” Billy Graham Classics: Billy Graham in Memphis, The Liberty Bowl, Memphis, Tennessee, 1978, (Charlotte, North Caroline: Billy Graham Evangelistic Association), on Trinity Broadcasting Network (Santa Ana, California), 20 March 2010.

Mat 14:4  For John said unto him, It is not lawful for thee to have her.

Mat 14:4 Comments The part of the Mosaic Law that John the Baptist used to condemn King Herod is found in Lev 18:16, “Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy brother’s wife: it is thy brother’s nakedness.”

This type of incestuous sin may have been brought into the family of Herod Antipas (4 b.c. a.d. 39), as the king was unrepentant, and expressed itself with his grandson, Herod Agrippa II (a.d. 50 100), who is believed to have had an incestuous relationship with his sister Bernice (Act 25:13) (see Josephus, A ntiquities 20.7.2-3). [478]

[478] E. M. B. Green and C. H. Hemer, “Bernice,” in New Bible Dictionary, second edition, ed. J. D. Douglas (Wheaton, Illinois: Tyndale House Publishing, c1962, 1982), 132.

Act 25:13, “And after certain days king Agrippa and Bernice came unto Caesarea to salute Festus.”

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures

Examples of Offences and Confessions of Faith in the Kingdom of Heaven – Mat 13:54 to Mat 17:27 deals with perseverance in the Kingdom of Heaven as does the previous narrative section (Mat 11:2 to Mat 12:50); however, the emphasis here is upon the rejection and acceptance of the doctrines of the Kingdom. This narrative section carries forward previous themes as well, seen in the fact that Jesus continues to train the Twelve as He performs miracles and ministers to the people (the theme of the second major division), and seen in the fact that Jesus faces increasing persecution from the Jewish leaders (the theme of the third major division). In addition, Jesus now reveals Himself to the Twelve and predicts His Passion and Resurrection. This narrative material is related to the fourth major discourse that will follow (Mat 18:1-35) in that Jesus will then teach His disciples on the same topic of how to deal with offenses. The emphasis in this narrative material is that it serves as a testimony of the fulfillment of Isa 29:13, reflecting the theme of this division of Matthew on persecutions from within.

Isa 29:13, “Wherefore the Lord said, Forasmuch as this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men:”

This prophecy tells us that there will be those who appear to be members of the Kingdom, but their doctrine in wrong because their hearts are not with God. The remedy to persevere amidst this challenge is to come to the revelation of God’s Word, a doctrine founded upon the confession that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, a confession of faith made by Peter (Mat 16:16) upon which the doctrines of the New Testament Church are founded.

Mat 13:54 to Mat 17:27 has one of the most difficult structures to identify within the Gospel. [471] The key to understanding its structure is the fact that it generally alternates between those who deny the deity of Jesus Christ and those who acknowledge Him. Regarding the passages of denial, the Jews deny the testimony of Jesus and John the Baptist (Mat 13:54 to Mat 14:12), the testimony of the Scriptures (Mat 15:1-20), and the testimony of Jesus’ miracles (Mat 16:1-12). Regarding the passages of acceptance, David Turner recognizes clear “affirmations of faith” woven in the midst of these denials of Jesus’ deity. [472] The pericopes that show the Jews denying the testimony of Jesus and John the Baptist are followed by a series of miracles that solicit a confession from the Twelve declaring Jesus as the Son of God (Mat 14:33). The pericope that shows the Jewish leaders denying the Scriptures for tradition is followed by the Syro-Phoenician woman’s confession of faith in Jesus’ words (Mat 15:28). The pericope that shows the Jews denying the testimony of miracles performed by Jesus is followed by the confession of Simon Peter at Caesarea Philippi that Jesus is the Son of God (Mat 16:16). These events climax when Jesus reveals various aspects of the atonement and the responsibility of His disciples to this revelation (Mat 16:21 to Mat 17:27).

[471] David L. Turner, Matthew, in Baker Evangelical Commentary on the New Testament, eds. Robert Yarbrough and Robert H. Stein (Ada, MI: Baker Academic, 2008), 357.

[472] David L. Turner, Matthew, in Baker Evangelical Commentary on the New Testament, eds. Robert Yarbrough and Robert H. Stein (Ada, MI: Baker Academic, 2008), 357.

Outline: Here is a proposed outline:

1. The Rejection of Jesus & John the Baptist Mat 13:54 to Mat 14:36

2. The Rejection of Old Testament Scriptures Mat 15:1-39

3. The Rejection of the Miracles of Jesus Mat 16:1-20

4. The Revelation of the Atonement of Jesus Christ Mat 16:21 to Mat 17:27

Mat 13:54 to Mat 14:36 The Rejection of the Doctrine of Jesus and John the Baptist In Mat 13:54 to Mat 14:36 emphasis is placed upon the rejection of the message and doctrine of Jesus Christ and of John the Baptist by the Jewish leaders (Mat 13:54 to Mat 14:12) and the acceptance of Jesus Christ as the Son of God by the disciples (Mat 14:13-36).

Here is a proposed outline:

1. Rejection of Jesus’ Doctrine at Nazareth Mat 13:54-58

2. Rejection of the Baptist’s Doctrine by Herod Mat 14:1-12

3. Acceptance of Doctrine of Jesus Christ: Three Miracles Mat 14:13-36

a) Feeding of Five Thousand Mat 14:13-21

b) Jesus Walks on the Water Mat 14:22-33

c) Jesus Heals the Multitudes in Gennesaret Mat 14:34-36

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures

Handling Offences and Persecutions in the Kingdom of God Mat 13:54 to Mat 18:35 emphasizes the theme of how God’s children are to handle offences and persecutions over doctrinal issues within the Kingdom of Heaven. [468] The narrative passage of Mat 13:54 to Mat 17:27 emphasizes the many occasions when offences came into Jesus’ ministry from the Jewish leaders and shows us how Jesus responded to offences. This narrative material builds upon the theme of the previous narrative material found in Mat 11:2 to Mat 12:50 regarding man’s reactions to the King. [469] This is because persecutions will come from those who adhere to false doctrines when we preach the Gospel and we must learn how to handle these offences. In this fourth narrative section, Jesus also explains to His disciples the dangers of offending others. Thus, the fourth discourse (Mat 18:1-35) teaches the disciples how to properly deal with these offences within the Church, which Jesus experiences in the preceding narrative passage.

[468] Benjamin Bacon identifies the theme of 13:54 to 18:35 as church government and the problems of church unity. He says, “Because of this unmistakable interest dominating the whole structure of Division B (Matthew 18) we naturally expect from previous experience of our evangelist’s use of his material that Division A will lead up to this Discourse on church government with narrative selections of corresponding character. In reality such is the case” See Benjamin W. Bacon, Studies in Matthew (New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1930), 397, 410.

[469] Craig Blomberg says two major themes are carried over from the previous narrative material, which are the increased intensity of the rejection of Jesus Christ and His message, and the progressive, Christological revelation of His identity to the Twelve. He says the development of these two themes create “sharper lines of demarcation between insiders and outsiders.” See Craig L. Blomberg, Matthew, in The New American Commentary, vol. 22 (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1992), 226. David Turner describes the two leading themes in the fourth narrative section as “increased oppition and conflict” and the works and teachings of Jesus intended to increase the faith of His disciples. See David L. Turner, Matthew, in Baker Evangelical Commentary on the New Testament, eds. Robert Yarbrough and Robert H. Stein (Ada, MI: Baker Academic, 2008), 358.

The one Old Testament prophecy of this division in Matthew’s Gospel is Mat 15:7-9, which quotes Isa 29:13 and simply prophecies how God’s own people would rejected the Gospel, reflecting the theme of this division of Matthew on persecutions from within.

Mat 15:7-9, “Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying, This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.”

Isa 29:13, “Wherefore the Lord said, Forasmuch as this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men:”

In the fourth major discourse (Mat 18:1-35) that immediately follows the narrative material Jesus lays down principles for His disciples to follow when dealing with offences. He quotes Deu 19:15 as a guideline for His disciples to use when dealing with offences.

Deu 19:15, “One witness shall not rise up against a man for any iniquity, or for any sin, in any sin that he sinneth: at the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses, shall the matter be established.”

We may compares this major division of material to the General Epistles of 2 Peter , 1, 2, 3 John and Jude in that they also emphasize persecutions that come from those who hold fast to false doctrines.

The section of Matthew emphasizing sanctification through perseverance from persecutions within (Mat 13:54 to Mat 18:35) closes with a transitional sentence that concludes each of the five discourses, telling us that Jesus had ended His teaching (Mat 19:1).

Mat 19:1, “And it came to pass, that when Jesus had finished these sayings, he departed from Galilee, and came into the coasts of Judaea beyond Jordan;”

Literary Evidence of a Common Theme between the Fourth Narrative Section and the Discourse that Follows There is literary evidence that connects the third narrative-discourse section with the fourth narrative-discourse section. While these two macro structures share the same theme of perseverance in the faith for the child of God, there is literary evidence to confirm this connection. [470] For example, the fourth narrative section is related in retrospect to the third discourse in the fact that the Greek word is used nine times in the Gospel of Matthew, with six uses in the third discourse (Mat 13:13-15; Mat 13:19; Mat 13:23; Mat 13:51) and three uses in the fourth narrative (Mat 15:10; Mat 16:12; Mat 17:13). This literary evidence reflects the common theme of the servant of God’s need to persevere in the faith in the midst of offenses by hold fast to one’s understanding and confession of faith in God’s eternal Word. In addition, the fourth narrative section shares a common theme with the fourth discourse that follows in the use of the Greek words and , key words Jesus uses four times in the course of the fourth narrative (Mat 13:57; Mat 15:12; Mat 16:23; Mat 17:27), as well as six times during the fourth discourse (Mat 18:6-7 [three], 8, 9). Note that this key word opens and closes the fourth narrative section (Mat 13:57; Mat 17:27).

[470] The thematic scheme of perseverance connects third and fourth narrative-discourse sections. Scholars acknowledge the connection of these sections. For example, A. G. van Aarde says, “ Matthew 13:53-17:27, the fourth micronarrative, in an associative manner relates retrospectively to the third discourse (13:1-52) and prospectively to the fourth discourse (18:1-35), while correlating concentrically with the corresponding third micronarrative (11:2-12:50).” He again says, “the “structural interrelatedness of chapters 13, 14-17 and 18 fits into the concentric and progressive structure of the Gospel of Matthew as a whole.” See A. G. van Aarde, “Matthew’s Portrayal of the Disciples and the Structure of Matthew 13:53 17:27,” Neotestamentica 16 (1982): 21, 22.

Sanctification: Perseverance – Numbers Versus Fourth Discourse which Deals with Persecutions from Within – We see in the book of Numbers the establishment of the journey of perseverance that the children of Israel endured during the forty-year wilderness journey. In a similar way the fourth discourse on church discipline establishes the perseverance of the Church that every believer must endure.

The narrative passage of Mat 13:54 to Mat 17:27 emphasizes the many occasions when offences came into Jesus’ ministry from the Jewish leaders. In this passage, Jesus explained to His disciples the dangers of offending others. Thus, the fourth discourse (Mat 18:1-35) teaches the disciples how to properly deal with these offences within the Church, which Jesus experiences in the preceding narrative passage.

In summary, the fact that Matthew 11-18 deals with obstacles and persecutions along the journey as a servant of the Lord is a clear reminder of how the children of Israel wandered in the desert facing similar challenges in the book of Numbers.

Outline Here is a proposed outline:

1. Narrative: Examples of Offences Mat 13:54 to Mat 17:27

2. The Fourth Discourse: Dealing with Offences Mat 18:1-35

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures

The Death of John the Baptist.

The fame of Jesus reaches Herod:

v. 1. At that time Herod the tetrarch heard of the fame of Jesus,

v. 2. and said unto his servants, This is John the Baptist; he is risen from the dead, and therefore mighty works do show forth themselves in him.

Herod Antipas, son of Herod the Great, was tetrarch of Galilee and Perea until 39 A. D. In ambition, political sagacity, and love of splendor he equaled his father. The new city of Tiberius on the Sea of Galilee was a monument of his luxurious tastes. At that time the tidings of Jesus reached the royal palace. Herod had been so busy with his political schemes at Rome, with his adulterous pleasures, and with his ambitious plans in general, that he had paid little attention to his country. Just now, however, he seems to have made Tiberius his residence for some time, and so he heard of Jesus, about whom the whole country was speaking. He immediately draws the conclusion that it must be John the Baptist resurrected who was performing such extraordinary miracles. Evidently the conscience of Herod was bothering him on account of the murder of John the Baptist, of which he was guilty.

Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann

EXPOSITION

Mat 14:1-36

CHRIST‘S POWER TO SUPPLY AND PROTECT AND HEAL, PREFACED BY A STATEMENT OF HEROD‘S RELATION TO HIM.

Mat 14:1-12

Herod‘s opinion of Jesus, and a parenthetical account of his murder of John the Baptist. Parallel passages: Mar 6:14-29; Luk 9:7-9; Luk 3:19, Luk 3:20.

Mat 14:1

At that time; season (Revised Version); Mat 11:25, note. Herod the tetrarch; i.e. Antipas, youngest son of Herod the Great, and by one of his father’s wills named his successor on the throne, but by the last will appointed only tetrarch of Galilee and Peraea. Though not legally king, he sometimes received the title by courtesy. “In point of character, Antipas was a genuine son of old Herodsly, ambitious, and luxurious, only not so able as his father.” He was deposed by Caligula, A.D. 39, when, at the instance of Herodias, he had gone to Rome to try to obtain the same title of king that had been granted to her brother Agrippa I. (Schurer, I. Mat 2:18, 36). Heard of the fameheard the report (Revised Version); Mat 4:24, noteof Jesus.

Mat 14:2

And said unto his servants. According to Luke, the following assertion was brought forward by some, but was, it would seem, summarily rejected by Herod (Luk 9:7, Luk 9:9); according to Mark (, Westcott and Hort, text) it was common talk, and agreed to by Herod. If a reconciliation of so unimportant a verbal disagreement be sought for, it may perhaps lie in Luke representing Herod’s first exclamation, and Matthew, with Mark, his settled belief. Clearly Herod did not originate it, as the summary account in our Gospel would lead us to suppose. This is John the Baptist (Mat 3:1 and Mat 4:12, notes). (For this opinion about our Lord, compare, besides the parallel passages referred to in the last note, also Mat 16:14.) He (, Mat 1:21, note) is risen from the dead. The other dead still lie in Hades ( ). Plumptre, on Mark, adduces a curious passage from Persius, 5:180-188, which he thinks is based on a story that when Herod celebrated another of his birthdays (cf. verse 6) in Rome, in A.D. 39, he was terrified by a Banquo-like appearance of the murdered prophet. The superstition that already suggested to Herod the resurrection of John might well act more strongly on the anniversary of the murder, and after he had connived at the death of the One who, by his miracles, showed that he possessed greater power than John. And therefore; “because he is no ordinary man, but one risen from the dead” (Meyer). Mighty works do show forth themselves in him ( ) do these powers work in him (Revised Version). “These” (, the article of reference), i.e. these which are spoken of in the report (verse 1). may be

(1) specifically miracles (cf. Mat 13:58), in which case they are regarded as potentially active in John before their completion in history; or

(2) the powers of working miracles, as perhaps in 1Co 12:28. Observe that this passage confirms the statement of Joh 10:41, that John performed no miracle. Observe that it is also an indirect witness to the fact of our Lord performing miracles. For Herod’s utterance is not such as a forger would have imagined.

Mat 14:3

For Herod had laid hold on John, and bound him. Although had simplifies the meaning to the English reader, as definitely marking what must have been the case, that John’s imprisonment began some time before, yet in the Greek only the aorist is used to commence a vivid narrative. And put him in prison; “put him away in prison ( ).“ So of Micaiah by Ahab (2Ch 18:26, LXX., but not Lucian’s text). Probably here in allusion to the distance of Machaerus from Herod’s usual residence at Tiberius. Possibly, also, a reference to John being safer there from the designs of Herodias. Anyhow, notice the stages in Herod’s actioncapture, binding, imprisonment in a place where he was quite out of the way. For Herodias’sake. John was imprisoned, according to the New Testament,

(1) as a punishment for his rebuke of Herod;

(2) to protect him from Herodias’ vengeance.

(On the statement by Josephus, that it was for political reasons, see Mat 3:1, note.) His brother Philip’s wife. According to Josephus (‘Ant.,’ 18.5. 4), the first husband of Herodias was “Herod,” son of Herod the Great by Mariamne the high priest’s daughter, and the daughter of Herodias, Salome, married Philip the tetrarch, who was also the son of Herod the Great by Cleopatra of Jerusalem. Hence many critics (e.g. Ewald; Schurer, I. 2.22) suppose the account in Matthew and Mark to be mistaken, and due to a confusion of Herodias with her daughter. But, although it is curious that two sons of Herod the Great should have been called Philip, yet, in view of their being by different mothers, it cannot be pronounced impossible (“Antipas” and “Antipater” are not precisely identical). Besides, Herod the son of Mariamne would probably have had some other name than that of his father alone. It is noticeable that, in the same context, Josephus speaks also of Antipas by the name Herod only.

Mat 14:4

For John said unto him, It is not lawful ( , Mat 12:2) for thee to have her. Herod Philip being still alive. Bengel remarks, “Causas matrimoniales non possunt plane abdicare theologi.” Was he thinking of Luther’s unfortunate advice to Philip of Hesse?

Mat 14:5

And when he would have put him to death, he feared the multitude (cf. Luk 20:6). Mark has, “And Herodias set herself against him, and would have put him to death; and she could not; for Herod feared John.” The more detailed account in Mark is doubtless the more exact. Perhaps the facts of the case were that, in the first heat of his resentment, Herod wished to kill John, but feared the anger of the people, and that afterwards, when he him in his power and Herodias still urged his death, Herod had himself learned to respect him. Observe

(1) that it is quite impossible to suppose that either evangelist had the words of the other in front of him. The difference does not consist merely of addition or explanation;

(2) that these are exactly the kind of verbal coincidences which might be expected to be found in two oral traditions starting from a common basis. For they counted him as a prophet ( ); so Mat 21:26.

Mat 14:6

But when Herod’s birthday was kept; came (Revised Version); , dative of time (Winer, 31:9), with the addition of a participle. Birthday. So “Pharaoh’s birthday” (Gen 40:20, ). Thayer’s Grimm refers to “Alciphr. Epp. 3, 18, and 55; Dio Cass., 47, 18, etc.,” for being used in the same sense. The Talmudic (see Levy, s.v.) apparently represents the same word, and (preceded by ) has the same meaning (cf. Schurer, I. 2:27). Possibly Jews found an easier word to pronounce than the more classical . The daughter of Herodias; i.e. Salome, daughter of Herod Philip and Herodias; she afterwards married her half uncle, Philip the tetrarch (Mat 14:3, note). She could not now be less than seventeen or eighteen years old (cf. Gutschmid, in Schurer, I. 2:28), so, in the East, could only just be still called a (Mat 14:11). Mark’s text (like the Greek of Codex Bezae here) speaks of her as though she herself was called Herodias, and was the daughter of Antipas and Herodias; but the issue of this union could not then have been more than two years old (Schurer, loc. cit.). Besides, the trait mentioned by Mark (Mar 6:25), that she came back with haste to the king, asking for the head of the Baptist, implies that she was more than a child. Rendel Harris suggests that the confusion is due to an early Latinization of the Greek from an ambiguous ejus. Danced. Probably with the same kind of voluptuous dance as that of the Egyptian almd described by Warburton. But that a member of the royal family should so dance before a company must have been almost unheard of. Before them; in the midst (Revised Version). Matthew only. Such a dance with men sitting round would be specially abhorrent to the Jewish mind. And pleased Herod. And of course, as St. Mark adds, “them that sat with him” (cf. verse 9).

Mat 14:7

Whereupon he promised with an oath to give her whatsoever she would ask.

Mat 14:8

And she, being before instructed; being put forward (Revised Version); (Act 19:33, Received Text; Deu 6:7, LXX.). The word implies that the girl herself would not have thought of it, and perhaps that she had at first some little reluctance. But if so, it was soon over, for she came back “in haste” (Mark). Of her mother. St. Mark explains that she left the room to ask her mother. Said, Give me. This is the gift I want. Here. And evidently at once. The word excludes the possibility of the feast being in Tiberias, if John was slain at Machaerus, as the passage in Josephus states (cf. Mat 3:1, note). There is no very great difficulty in supposing the chief men of Galilee, etc. (Mark), to have gone as far as Machaerus to pay their respects to Herod and to partake of the feast, but whether the statement in Josephus is accurate, and how, if it be so, it is to be reconciled with the preceding statement that Machaerus belonged to Aretas, are questions not easily answered (see Schurer, I. 2.26). John Baptist’s head in a charger; in a charger the head of John the Baptist (Revised Version). She defines here still more closely ( ), and then states her request. On the form of her demand for John’s death, Chrysostom says that she wished to see his tongue lying there silent, for she did not merely long to be freed from his reproaches, but to insult and jeer him ( ). Charger. A wooden trencher.

Mat 14:9

And the king was sorry: nevertheless for the oath’s sake; better, and though the king was grieved, yet for the sake of his oaths ( ...). That he was grieved at John’s death is a verbal contradiction to verse 5, but after some weeks’ or months’ delay psychologically quite possible (cf. note there). Kubel attributes the change to his conscience recoiling when his wish had a sudden chance of being accomplished; or it may be that he still fearest the multitude (cf. verse 5), and felt anxious lest he should bring about some political disturbance. Oaths; for in making the promise of verse 7 he would certainly take more than one. And them which sat with him at meat. Had he uttered the promise and the oaths in private, it would have been different, but now there were so many witnesses. Observe that these said nothing to stop him. They were no friends of the enthusiast who was now a prisoner. He commanded it to be given her.

Mat 14:10, Mat 14:11

And he sent, and beheaded John in the prison, and his head was brought in a charger (verse 8, note), and given (the fourth time that the word “give” has come in five verses; the head of the herald of the kingdom becomes a royal gift) to the damsel( , verse 6, note)and she brought it to her mother. But a few minutes after she had first spoken her request (verse 8, note).

Mat 14:12

And his disciples came. “And when his disciples heard thereof, they came” (Mark). Perhaps they were not permitted to be so much with him as at an earlier period in his imprisonment (Mat 11:2). But if the murder was in the evening, as would appear probable from the circumstances of it, they would naturally not be in the castle at the time. And took up the body; the corpse (Revised Version, ). And buried it; him, (Revised Version, ). It is right in Mark, but St. Matthew has preserved the more popular form of expression. And (Revised Version adds they) went and told Jesus. Matthew only. In Mark (Mar 6:30; cf. also Luk 9:10) this expression dearly belongs to the next paragraph, and is predicated of the twelve apostles on their return from their mission (Mar 6:7-12; our Mat 10:5). It looks as though some confusion had arisen in the source before St. Matthew used it. As the words stand here they show the kindly feelings which both John and his disciples felt towards our Lord

Mat 14:13-21

The feeding of the five thousand. Parallel passages: Mar 6:30-44; Luk 9:10-17; Joh 6:1-13. The miracle was deemed so characteristic of our Lord’s work, in his care for men and his power to sustain them, and more especially in its being a parable of his readiness to supply spiritual food, that it was recorded not only by each of the three evangelists who used the framework, but also by the one who depended entirely upon his own materials. But though St. John’s account of it is on the whole independent, yet even this has expressions which are certainly due to the influence of the source used by the synoptists, or, less probably, of one or other of our present Gospels.

The evangelist relates

(1) the occasion of the miracle

the preparation of the disciples (verses 15-18);

(3) the miracle itself (verses 19, 20);

(4) a summary statement of the numbers fed (verse 21).

Mat 14:13

When Jesus heard of it (cf. Mat 14:12, note), he departed. (For the form of the sentence, see Mat 4:12; Mat 12:15.) Thence by ship; in a boat (Revised Version); Mat 8:23. Into a desert place apart. Defined in Joh 6:3 as “the mountain;” in Luk 9:10 as “a city called Bethsaida.” The spot appears to have been in part of the plain El-Batiha, which is at the northcast corner of the Sea of Galilee on the Gaulonitis side of the Jordan, and in which stood Bethsaida-Julias. Mar 6:45 implies that there was a second Bethsaida on the western side of the lake, which, though not alluded to by Josephus, is expressly spoken of in Joh 12:21, and is probably referred to in all the other passages of the New Testament where the name Bethsaida occurs. And when the people (the multitudes, Revised Version) had heard thereof, they followed him on foot out of the cities. The fact that it was near a feast time (Joh 6:4, the Passover, if the text be right; and cf. infra, Joh 6:19, note) perhaps accounts for the multitudes being so large. Some at least would be on their way up to Jerusalem.

Mat 14:14

The first half of this verse is found verbally in Mark (Mar 6:34); comp. also Mat 9:36, note. And Jesus went forth; came forth (Revised Version); i.e. from the more retired place where he had been conversing with his disciples. And saw a great multitude. “The multitudes” of Mat 9:13 have now become one body. And was moved with compassion toward them; and he had compassion on them (Revised Version). The true reading, , regards the Lord’s pity at, so to say, a later stage than the common reading, . It was not only directed towards them, but actually resting on them. And he healed (, Mat 4:23, note) their sick ( ). here only in Matthew, elsewhere in the New Testament in Mar 6:5,Mar 6:13 [Mar 16:18]; 1Co 11:30. As compared with , it “seems to point to diseases predominantly marked by loss of bodily power (‘diuturno languore teneri,’ Calvin), while the more common is simply used to denote sickness generally” (Bishop Ellicott, on 1 Corinthians, loc. cit.). But in our passage it is used without any such limitation (cf. Luke, “And he healed them that had need of healing”). Mark and John do not speak of miracles of healing on this occasion.

Mat 14:15

And when it was evening. But not as late as the “evening” of Mat 14:23. It appears that the first evening was from the ninth to the twelfth hour (our 3 p.m. to 6 p.m. at the equinoxes), and the second evening was for a short time, perhaps forty minutes, after sunset (cf. Mat 8:16, note). His (the, Revised Version) disciples came to him, saying. St. John alone has recorded our Lord’s previous conversation with Philip (Joh 6:5-7). This is a desert place; the place is desert (Revised Version), which better marks the parallelism with the next clause. And the time is now (already, Revised Version) past ( ); i.e. probably the hour at which he was accustomed to dismiss his audience. For he would often have to consider their wish to get home before nightfall. Send the multitude away; the multitudes (Revised Version); for now again they are regarded separately as having to go in different directions. That they may go (go away) into the villages, and buy themselves victuals; food (Revised Version). One at least of the disciples would have a keen eye for the amount of the contents of the common purse.

Mat 14:16

But Jesus said unto them, They need not depart; they have no need to go away (Revised Version). Matthew only. The Lord takes up the expression. There is no need for them to move from this place, desert though it is. Give ye them to eat. Ye; emphatic, he throws upon his disciples the duty of feeding them, and, strange though the command seemed to them (cf. 2Ki 4:43), they carried it out.

Mat 14:17

And they say unto him, We have here () but five loaves (Mat 4:3, note), and two fishes (Mat 7:9, note). St. Matthew omits the question, “Shall we go and buy?” etc., which comes in Mark and Luke, and essentially in John (verse 5).

Mat 14:18

Matthew only. He said, Bring them hither to me ( ). This gives the sense, but still more is implied. He takes up their . “Yes,” he says, “it is possible to feed them where we are, and especially where I am. For there is not the poverty of supply here that you think there is.” Observe that for the disciples to bring them “here” was in itself an act of faith.

Mat 14:19

And he commanded the multitude; the multitudes (Revised Version). Here also the plural (Mat 14:15), because they are thought of as grouped over the ground. To sit down; i.e. to recline as at a meal (). On the grass ( ). The addition of “green” () in Mark suits the time of the Passover (verse 13, note), but hardly of any later feast, for the grass would have been dried up. And took the five loaves, and the two fishes. He used all the means there were. And looking up to heaven. So also Mar 7:34; Joh 17:1. He blessed. He may well have used the blessing that is still used over bread (“Blessed art thou, Jehovah our God, King of the world, that causest bread to come forth from the earth”); for this can be apparently traced to the second or third century A.D., and is probably much older still. (For the habit of saying grace before meals, cf. Mat 15:36; Mat 26:26; Rom 14:6; 1Co 10:30; 1Ti 4:5; see also 1Sa 9:13.) And brake, and gave the loaves to his disciples, and the disciples to the multitude. That the people received the bread at the hands of the disciples is not mentioned by St. John. Perhaps because his chapter dwells so much on the need of direct contact with Christ. But Christ’s work through his agents, both before and after his time on earth, is an important point with the synoptists.

Mat 14:20

And they did all eat, and were filled (, Mat 5:6, note). And they. Undefined, but seen from Mat 16:9; Joh 6:12, to have been the disciples. Took up of the fragments that remained; that which remained over of the broken pieces (Revised Version); i.e. of the pieces broken by our Lord for distribution (Joh 6:19). Twelve baskets full. The disciples personally lost nothing by the miracle (Joh 6:15, note), the provision basket that each always carried was now replenished. Baskets; “cofyns” (Wickliffe); (cf. Luk 9:17, note; and the Talmudic saying, “He that has bread in his basket is not like him that has not bread in his basket,” Talm. Bab., ‘Yoma,’ 74b).

Mat 14:21

And they that had eaten were about five thousand men, beside women and children. Only Matthew mentions the presence of other than men. We may assume that no great number of women and children were there; and this, considering the distance that most had been obliged to go (verse 13), is what we should expect. “Observe here the diminutive , little children, whom their mothers either carried in their arms or led by the hand” (Meyer).

Mat 14:22-33

Christ’s power over the elements. He walks on the water and stays the storm. St. Peter’s attempt to walk on the water is successful so long as he exercises faith on Christ. Jesus receives homage as Messiah. Parallel passages: Mar 6:45-52; Joh 6:15-21. It is strange that the incident of St. Peter is recorded in Matthew only, and not in Mark, for it serves to emphasize what is a leading thought of the preceding narrative, even in Mark, viz. the power that believers receive by virtue of faith on Christ (verses 16, 19). With Christ in the boat, difficulties cease (verse 32); they that believe on him can triumph as he did (verses 28-31; cf. the thought of Joh 14:19, end). For St. John’s purpose the mention of St. Peter was not necessary; since, by way of introduction to the following discourse, be desired rather to familiarize his readers with the idea of Christ’s body being triumphant over earthly limitations (cf. verse 19, note).

Mat 14:22

And straightway Jesus constrained his disciples. It was not their wish to leave him, especially when the multitudes seemed likely to elect him king (Joh 6:15). But from the temptation to side with the multitudes our Lord desired now to shield them. Separation and physical work (Mat 14:24) would calm their excitement, and the object lesson that their Master already ruled over wind and sea would lead them to more perfect trust in his methods. Another reason for his sending them forward may have been that they should use the failing light; and yet another, that he himself desired time for prayer. To get into a ship; a boat ( ); cf. Mat 8:23 (the boat, Revised Version, reading ). And to go before him ( : Mat 2:9; Mat 21:9). For he would follow. He fulfilled his promise much more literally than they anticipated. Unto the other side. “Unto Bethsaida” (Mark); “unto Capernaum” (John). Probably they landed at the western Bethsaida (Mat 8:13, note), in Gennesaret (Mat 8:34), and went on to Capernaum, where our Lord again addressed the people (Joh 6:24-26). While he senttill he should send (Revised Version); , Mat 13:33the multitudes away. Why should this take up time? Why did he not dismiss them then and there? Possibly they were too eager to carry out their own plans on his behalf to attend to only one expression of his wish.

Mat 14:23

And when he had sent the multitudes away. Matthew speaks merely of the dismissal as such ( ); Mark refers to his parting words ( , i.e. probably to the multitude). He went up into a mountainthe mountain (Revised Version); Mat 5:1, noteapart. is to be joined with the preceding, and not to the following words (cf. Mat 5:13; Mat 17:19). And when the evening was come (Mat 5:15, note), he was there alone. For some eight hours, if it was spring or autumn (Mat 5:25).

Mat 14:24

But the ship; boat (Revised Version); Mat 14:22. Was now; rather, already, when the following incident happened. In the midst of the sea. So also the text of the Revised Version, but its margin, “was many furlongs distant from the land.” Westcott and Hort prefer the latter, with Codex B and the Old Syriac. It somewhat resembles Joh 6:19. Tossed; distressed (Revised Version). For suggests not physical motion, but pain and anguish, the idea being transferred in figure to the boat. In Mark it is applied more strictly to the disciples. With waves; by the waves (Revised Version). The agents of the torture ( ). For the wind was contrary. Yet he came not at once, for he would teach us to bear troubles bravely (cf. Chrysostom).

Mat 14:25

And in the fourth watch of the night. Therefore some nine hours after sunset (Mat 14:23, note). They had been battling for hours, and had only gone about three miles and a half (Joh 6:19). Jesus went; came (Revised Version); , not , with Received Text. Unto them, walking on the sea ( ); contrast Mat 14:26 ( ). Here there is more thought of motion (cf. Mat 14:29), but in the next verse the advance is almost forgotten, and the fact of Christ being on the water is all-important; “they saw him on the sea, walking.”

Mat 14:26

And when the disciples saw him walking on the sea, they were troubled, saying, It is a spiritan apparition (Revised Version, )and they cried out for fear.

Mat 14:27

But straightway Jesus spake unto them (, not ). He was evidently near them. Saying, Be of good cheer (, Mat 9:2); it is I; be not afraid. Encouragement, self-manifestation, recall from present terror. But the absence of in Joh 6:20 suggests that it is, perhaps, a duplicate rendering of the Aramaic for . For the LXX. commonly translates “fear ye not” by (e.g. Exo 14:13; Exo 20:20). One or two second-rate manuscripts omit in Mark, but this may be only due to a reminiscence of John. It is also omitted in Tatian’s ‘Diatessaron’ (edit. Hemphill).

Mat 14:28-31

St. Peter‘s venture. Matthew only.

Mat 14:28

And; , slightly adversative, because St. Peter’s words were so contrary to what might have been expected. Peter answered him and said, Lord, if it be thou ( ). No doubt is implied (Mat 4:3, note). Bid me ( ); jube me (Vulgate). He will only come at Christ’s command. In this lies the differenceand it is a decisive differencefrom the second temptation (Mat 4:6). Come unto thee on the water. Not “bid me walk on the water;” for he does not want to perform a miracle, but to come to Jesus. His request is not due to the hope of making a show, but to impulsive love. Observe, too, that he seems to have realized that the Lord would enable his followers to do as he himself did (cf. Chrysostom). On the water; the waters (Revised Version); rough though they were. Had we any ether account of this incident, it would be interesting to see if it contained these words. They read very like an explanatory addition by the narrator.

Mat 14:29

And he said, Come. Our Lord takes him at his word, and gives the command. It is not merely a permission. Observe that our Lord never blames him for having made the request. His venture of faith would have been altogether successful had his faith continued. And when Peter was come down out of the ship. The Revised Version has more simply, And Peter went down from the boat, and. He walked on the water. For the narrator was chiefly interested in his walking there (contrast Mat 14:28). To go to Jesus; rather, and came to Jesus. The true text states what did, in fact, happen, notwithstanding Peter’s lack of faith (cf. Mat 14:31).

Mat 14:30

But when he saw the wind boysterous ( is clearly a gloss, and therefore omitted by the Revised Version). He was afraid; and beginning to sink. The natural tendency to sink, which he had had all the time, was counteracted before by his faith, which enabled him to receive Christ’s power. But now that his doubt made him incapable of receiving this, he sank (cf. Meyer). He cried (), saying, Lord, save me (Mat 8:25). Aphraates quotes an apocryphal saying of our Lord’s, “Doubt not; lest ye are engulfed in the world, as Simon; for he doubled, and began to sink in the sea.”

Mat 14:31

And immediately. Without any waste of time, just as in Mat 14:27. Jesus stretched forth his hand. So that St. Peter had come up to him (Mat 14:29). And caught him; and took hold of him (Revised Version, : cf. Heb 2:16; Heb 8:9). And said; saith (Revised Version). The writer passes to more vivid narration. Unto him, O thou of little faith (); Mat 6:30, note. But in Mat 17:20 (Westcott and Hort) the substantive is used of faith in a more active sense. Wherefore ( ); “, literally rendered” (Dr. Guillemard). Didst thou doubt? (). In the New Testament, Mat 28:17 only. Christ saves first, and rebukes afterwards. Perhaps the need for help was more immediate than in Mat 8:26, or possibly the fervency of St. Peter’s love deserved gentler treatment.

Mat 14:32

And when they were comegone up (Revised Version)into the ship, the wind ceased. Apparently not before, so that Peter may still have walked a little further on the water in the midst of the storm, but upheld by the Lord’s hand.

Mat 14:33

Matthew only. Thenand (Revised Version, )they that were in the ship; boat (Revised Version). If there were others than the disciples in the boat, as is probable, these also would be included; but the disciples would naturally take the lead (cf. the notes on Mat 8:23, Mat 8:27). Came and. The Revised Version omits these two words, with the manuscripts. They are due to the analogy of Mat 8:2; Mat 9:18. Worshipped him (Mat 4:9, note). In Mat 8:27 we read of wonder; here, of homage. Saying, Of a truth (); cf. Mat 5:18, s.v. “verily.” The word seems to imply that the suggestion did not enter their minds now for the first time. Two had, perhaps, heard the words spoken at the baptism (Mat 3:17), and most of them, if not all, the utterance by the demons in Mat 8:29. Yet these utterances in reality far surpassed what they even nosy imagined (vide infra). Thou art the Son of God ( ). Although the phrase is not of the definite form found in Mat 26:63 and Mat 16:16, where it is used with express reference to the Messiahship of Jesus (cf. for the intermediate form, Mat 27:40 with 43), yet it is impossible to take it here as merely referring to a moral relation between Jesus and God. In Mat 27:54 this might be sufficient (Luke has “righteous”); but here there is no question of coming up to a standard of moral uprightness, but rather of manifestation of power, and this is connected with Messiah. His authority over the elements leads to the homage of those who witness its exercise, and forces from them the expression that he is the promised Representative of God on earth (Psa 2:7; cf. Mat 2:15, note). Observe, however, that not even so is it a profession of faith in his absolute Divinity. (Kubel’s note on this subject in Mat 8:29 is very good.)

Mat 14:34-36

On landing at Gennesaret numbers come to him and are healed. Parallel passage: Mar 6:53-56, which is fuller.

Mat 14:34

And when they were gone overhad crossed over (Revised Version); Mat 9:1they came into the land of Gennesaretto the land, unto Gennesaret (Revised Version, with the true text). The plain El-Ruwer, part of the northwest side of the lake, and some three miles long by one broad, extending, roughly, from Chorazin (perhaps Khan Minyeh; but comp. Mat 11:21, note) to Magdala. (For its fertility, see Josephus, ‘Wars,’ 3.10.8.)

Mat 14:35

And when the men of that place had knowledge of him, they sent out into all that country round about (cf. Mat 3:5). Matthew alone states definitely that this zeal was shown by the inhabitants of the Plain of Gennesaret. Mark’s words (Mar 6:55) are vaguer. And brought unto him all that were diseased; sick (Revised Version); cf. Mat 4:24; Mat 8:16.

Mat 14:36

And besought; and they besought (Revised Version); i.e. the sick, for probably the change of person takes place here and not at” that they might touch.” Him that they might only touch the hem of his garment (Mat 9:20, Mat 9:21, notes): and as many as touched were made perfectly whole (); were made whole (Revised Version). For here is probably not intensive, but rather gives the thought of being brought out safe through the danger. In the LXX. is a common rendering of , “escape.”

HOMILETICS

Mat 14:1-12

The death of John the Baptist.

I. HEROD THE TETRARCH.

1. He heard of the fame of Jesus. Herod Antipas was a weak, cruel, voluptuous tyrant; he resembled his father in his vices, not in his capacity and energy of character. He heard of Christ’s miracles; it seems strange if, as the words appear to imply, he now heard of Christ for the first time. For Christ had long been preaching in Galilee; about a year, perhaps more. Great multitudes had flocked to hear him; his mighty works had excited a far spread interest and wonder. Herod may have been absent from Galilee during much of the time, possibly at the distant fortress of Machaerus, where John the Baptist, was imprisoned. But his life was spent in ostentatious display and sensual excesses. He would take no interest in a religious movement unless his fears were aroused by the popular excitement which it caused. His courtiers would not listen themselves to the preaching of Jesus; or if any did, such as the nobleman whose son was healed by the Lord at Capernaum, or Chuza, Herod’s steward (possibly identical with that nobleman), whose wife Joanna ministered to our Lord, they would not relate to the hardhearted selfish tyrant teaching so uncongenial to his character. The miracles, it is true, would excite more interest; they would stir up his curiosity. Some account of them reached him at last. Thus the ruler of Galilee was perhaps one of the last men in the province to hear of the Saviour. The great in this world are not always great in the kingdom of heaven. The tumult of political cares and the glitter of earthly pomp often prevent them from hearing the fame of Jesus. His blessed work goes on among the lowly. Souls are healed, the eyes of the blind are opened. The good news does not, reach those who dwell in kings’ houses. Thank God, it is not always so; there are men high in rank who are also living near to Christ.

2. His superstitious fears. Herod is thought to have been a Sadducee. Probably he had no real religious convictions. But inconsistencies are common in human nature; the unbelieving are not unfrequently superstitious. Herod was haunted by a guilty conscience. The spectres of those whom he had foully murdered troubled his dreams. Christ’s mighty works excited his attention. No ordinary man, he knew, could do such things. It must be some one more than mortal; some one in whom the powers of the unseen world were active and energetic. And conscience whispered, and an awful shudder thrilled through the despot’s soul, “It is JohnJohn, whom I beheaded.” Better to be the most miserable prisoner perishing in the gloomy dungeons of Machaerus than that tyrant, whom the world called happy, terror-stricken in his gilded palace.

3. He desired to see Christ. The Lord would not come; he departed into a desert place. “I will come and heal him,” he said, when the centurion sent for him. He would not go to Herod. For what were Herod’s motives? Partly mere curiosity; partly that awful power of conscience which seems sometimes to draw the criminal to the scene of his crime or the murdered body of his victim; partly, perhaps, malice and fear; he would have slain the Lord as he had slain the prophet. The Lord Christ doth not manifest himself to those who seek him from motives such as these. Herod saw him at last. The sight did him no good; it increased his condemnation. He set Christ at nought, and shared with Pilate the guilt of his death.

II. THE IMPRISIONMENT OF JOHN.

1. The sin of Herod. He had married Herodias. That wicked woman had ensnared him with her deceitful beauty. She was not contented with the quiet life of her husband Philip; she sought rank, wealth, magnificence. Antipas was the greatest prince of the family. She lured him to his ruin. She heeded not sin and shame and scandal, so that she might compass her wicked purpose. Now she was the tetrarch’s queen, but her soul was stained with the double guilt of incest and adultery. What is beauty of person when it hides a black and loathsome soul? Herod was weak and self-indulgent. He fell into the snares of Herodias. He took her from her husband. The stronger will of that wicked woman led him on from sin to sin; she became a second Jezebel to a second Ahab.

2. The rebuke of John. John had had considerable influence with Herod. “Herod feared John,” St. Mark tells us, “knowing that he was a just man and a holy, and observed him [or rather, ‘kept him in safety’]; and when he heard him, he did many things [or rather, ‘he was much perplexed’], and heard him gladly.” Herod had paid some attention to John; partly, perhaps, from political reasons, for John had been for some time a great power in the land; partly from curiosity and some sort of languid interest in John’s mission and character. He was struck, too, with the intense earnestness of his preaching; he felt the power of his commanding personality. Worldly men sometimes take a sort of interest in religious matters. Statesmen are forced to do so from the widespread influence of religious motives. Men are attracted by a strong character or great spiritual eloquence. But this external interest in religion may coexist with irreligious habits and a hatred of religious restraints. John the Baptist knew this. He did not care to retain Herod’s favour at the cost of condoning his sin. He wanted Herod’s soul; his spiritual good, not his patronage. So he rebuked him boldly for his sin: “It is not lawful for thee to have her.” John possessed in a high degree that holy courage which is so often necessary in dealing with souls. It is easy to speak to the humble and the timid of their faults; but when the sinner is great and powerful, stern, perhaps, and masterful, it needs a brave man then to set his sin before him, and to urge him to repentance. John did so plainly. The guilty pair must be separated. Nothing else could avail Herod; no affectation of religion, no costly gifts, no patronage of John’s cause. He could not be saved in his sinthat was impossible; he must at any cost tear himself from it.

3. Herod‘s answer. He cast John into prison. Wicked men will do the like now as far as lies in their power; they will do all they can to injure the faithful Christian who reproves them for their souls’ good. So it was with Herod. John might reprove the Pharisees and Sadducees, the publicans and soldiers; but when he came to reprove Herod himself, then he shut up John in prison. It was a hard lot for one like John, accustomed to the free open life of the desert, to be penned up in some wretched dungeon. Herod would have put him to death at once; his own anger prompted him, Herodias urged him in her unfeminine malice. But he feared the people; and, as St. Mark tells us, he feared and respected John himself. Herod feared John, he feared the people; he did not fear God. John feared God, and that holy fear raised him above all other fears; he feared nothing else, but only God. Oh for that brave and holy faith to keep the fear of God in our hearts, and in that fear always to obey him! Worldly men are restrained from crime by some lower motive; it was selfish fear that kept Herod for a time from the awful guilt of murder.

III. THE BIRTHDAY FEAST.

1. The dance of Salome. There were high festivities at Machaerus to celebrate Herod’s birthday or perhaps his accession to the crown. He had gathered a great company round himhis lords, high captains, and chief estates of Galilee. We may be sure that his guests were entertained with all the costly luxury of the time. Even the Roman Persius had heard of the sumptuousness of these Herodian banquets (5:180). But there was one show which could not have been expected. Salome, Herod’s own niece, the great-granddaughter of Mariamne, the descendant of the long line of Asmonaean princes, so utterly forgot the delicacy of a Hebrew maiden and the decorum of a princess as to dance alone in the midst of Herod’s nobles when excited with feasting and heated with wine. Vashti, the Persian queen, had forfeited the crown rather than even appear at such a banquet. Salome, it seems, came unbidden, and in all the bright beauty of her early youth danced before the assembled guests. It was unbecoming, indecent. But the guests were delighted; and, strange to say, Herod too was pleased, though it was his own niece, and now his stepdaughter, who was thus transgressing the accepted rules of society. Feasting and wine often lead to sin. A simple life is safest for a Christian.

2. Herod‘s rash oath. In his excitement and folly he promised her with an oath whatever she would ask. He invoked the holy Name of God at this wild, dissolute feast. He swore to what he knew not. Wine and luxury help the devil in his work of slaying souls. The plot had been laid. The princess was instructed by her wicked mother. The malice of hell lurked under the girlish beauty of Salome. That fatal oath was to bring the most awful guilt upon the soul of Herod. For Salome claimed his promise. “I will that thou forthwith give me in a charger the head of John the Baptist.” She would have it immediately. The tetrarch was weak and vacillating; she would hold him to his wicked oath. She would have it there and then on a chargeron one of the great dishes, perhaps of silver or gold, which had been used at that gorgeous banquet; a thing ghastly and horrible exceedingly. The king was sorry. He had hated John; once he wished to kill him. But not now. He feared the people; his old reverence for John returned; he shrank from the fearful deed. But he had sworn; all his courtiers had heard him. He had not cared for the shame of his niece; but he thought it shame that a prince should break his word, should be false to his oath. He thought much more of those half-drunken guests who sat around than he thought of God. For, had he thought of God’s honour, his conscience would have told him that to break such an oath was far less insulting to the honour of God than to keep it. It was sinful exceedingly to swear as Herod had done, and so to expose himself to the snare of the devil. But it was beyond all comparison more wicked to keep that wicked oath than to break it. Herod’s grief did not save him; it was only the sorrow of the world; not godly sorrow, not repentance.

3. The martyrdom. The wicked woman gave him no time for thought; she forced him to send an executioner immediately. John was beheaded in the prison. It was a noble death, the death of a hero, the death of a high saint of God. Salome might bear the bleeding head upon the golden chargera strange burden for a young and beautiful princess; Herodias might exult over it in her gratified malice. The holy martyr’s soul was safe in the Paradise of God. Herod might wear his blood stained diadem; John had received the crown of glory that fadeth not away. He has left behind him a glorious example. Let us ask God to give us his grace that we may truly repent according to the Baptist’s teaching; and after his example constantly speak the truth, boldly rebuke vice, and patiently suffer for the truth’s sake.

4. The burial. The disciples of John cared for his decent burial. Herod, conscience-stricken, perhaps, already, did not hinder them. They laid his body in the grave, and then went and told Jesus. It was as he would have wished. He himself while living had sent his own followers to Christ. “Behold the Lamb of God!” he said to them; and now that he was dead, to whom should his disciples go but to the Lord whom he had honoured, before whose face he had been sent? We should go to Christ in all our troubles; we should tell him. He will listen; he will give us his loving sympathy. He will be a Father to the fatherless, and a Husband to the widow. In our great and in our little troubles, in the bitter sorrow of bereavement, in the petty vexations of daily life, let us tell Jesus. If we come to him in faith and love, we shall never come in vain.

LESSONS.

1. Christians are sometimes called to rebuke vice; let them do it fearlessly when it is their duty.

2. Much feasting often leads to sin; the Christian must be temperate in all things.

3. Rash oaths are full of guilt; take not God’s holy Name in vain.

4. One sin leads to another; hate the beginnings of sin.

5. Bring all your troubles to Christ; he will help you to bear them.

Mat 14:13-21

The feeding effective thousand.

I. THE LORD‘S DEPARTURE FROM GALILEE.

1. He went by ship into a desert place. His apostles had returned from their mission (Luk 9:10); they needed rest, “for there were many coming and going, and they had no leisure so much as to eat.” He had also heard of Herod’s superstitious fears, and that he was desirous to see him. The Lord would not meet the tyrant; he departed out of his tetrarchy. He crossed the lake to a place near Bethsaida Julius, in the dominions of Herod Philip. His hour was not yet come; he would not expose himself to the cruelty of Antipas, nor would he satisfy his curiosity.

2. The people followed him. It seems to have been long before Herod heard of the fame of Jesus. The humble inhabitants of Galilee heard of all his movements; they followed him on foot out of the cities. The poor Galilaeans were better instructed than the wealthy, wicked prince. They followed Christ whithersoever he went; so should we. They went with him into the desert, trusting in him; so should we always trust. While he is with us, we are safe.

3. His compassion.

(1) He went forth, perhaps from the ship. He found, not the quiet which the apostles needed so much, but a great multitude. They had looked for retirement, and they found crowds of people; they had looked for rest, and they found more work awaiting them.

(2) His forgetfulness of self. He had compassion on the multitude. Wearied as he was, he healed their sick. The Lord is an Example to us here as always. We are apt to repine if work is thrust upon us when we need rest. We must learn of Christ; we must imitate his compassion for the needy and suffering, and take, as he did, every opportunity of doing good to the souls or bodies of our neighbours. He began to teach them many things, the other evangelists tell us; he spake unto them of the kingdom of God.

II. THE MIRACLE.

1. The conversation with the apostles. The multitude was great; the place was desert; the hour was late; there were no ordinary means of providing for their wants. The disciples were burdened with a deep sense of responsibility. The Lord had himself, earlier in the afternoon, put the question to Philip, “Whence shall we buy bread, that these may eat?” (Joh 6:5). Then the difficulty was only suggested; it was not removed; it became more pressing as the day wore on. Later in the evening the disciples came to Christ, not to ask advice, but to give it; it was late, they said, too late already. “Send the multitude away, that they may go into the villages, and buy themselves victuals.” There was something of presumption, perhaps, in this advice; certainly there was a want of faith. They did not understand the Lord’s majesty, his power, his love. We too often wish to dictate to Almighty God what we think he should do for us. It is best to trust ourselves absolutely to his providence, he doeth all things well. He himself knoweth what he will do. “They need not depart,” the Lord replied. It can never be necessary for any needs of ours to depart from Christ. In the greatest tumult of business, in the utmost poverty, in the most imminent danger, faithful souls will not depart; they will draw nearer to the Lord, as temptations thicken round them. He who has learned to know and love the Lord Jesus will cling closest to him in want, in peril, in distress. “Give ye them to eat,” he added. There is an emphasis on the pronoun. It was good that they should feel their helplessness. They had but five loaves and two small fishes. It was nothing for that great multitude. How often we feel our ability, our strength, our means, utterly inadequate to fulfil the work which the Lord has given us to do! If we offer them to him in simple trustfulness, he will multiply them. “Bring them hither to me,” he said. He asks us for what we can give him, what is in our power. Let us bring our offerings in faith, he will accept them, if only we bring that offering which he most desiresour hearts, ourselves, if we give him that, then those little offerings which we thought unworthy of his acceptance shall be honoured, and will, it may be, by his grace become the means of working great results.

2. The feast in the wilderness. He bade them sit down in companies. He would have order, not confusion. They must sit in their ranks; they must not press rudely round him; they must not try to anticipate one another; they must so sit that the apostles could move freely among them; each must wait till his turn came. Mark how, even in these smaller matters of courtesy and order, the Lord gives us an example for the regulation of our daily life. He looked up to heaven, teaching us to recognize the great truth that it is our Father in heaven who gives us day by day our daily bread, and that we should always look to him in every time of need. Then he blessed; he blessed God, the Giver of all; he blessed the food. As God in the beginning blessed his creatures, saying, “Be fruitful and multiply,” so now God the Son, by whom all things were made, blessed this little store of food, that through the power of that Divine blessing it might be multiplied to the satisfaction of the hunger of that great multitude. He gave thanks, St. John tells us. Our food is blessed to our use. It is sanctified by the word of God and prayer when it is received with thanksgiving. We learn of Christ to ask a blessing on our food. To eat bread with unwashen hands, the Pharisees said, was against the tradition of the elders; to eat without asking a blessing is against the example of the Lord Jesus Christ. Let us follow that example, recognizing at every meal the bounty of our heavenly Father; let us look up to heaven, as Christ did, and make the grace before and after meat a real act of worship. “Whether therefore ye eat or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God.” Then the Lord brake the bread, as he brake it a year afterwards at the institution of the Holy Eucharist; as he brake it on the resurrection day, when be was made known to the two at Emmaus in the breaking of bread. He gave the loaves to his disciples, and the disciples to the multitude. And lo! “they did all eat, and were filled.” It was a mighty miracle, beyond our comprehension, but no wonder to him who filleth all things living with plenteousness. “He was in the world, and the world was made by him.” It was only to be expected that the presence of the Son of God should be marked by wonderful works. His presence in the form of man was of all wonders the greatesta mystery of almighty power, a mystery of ineffable love.

3. The twelve baskets full. The Lord had provided largely for his guests. There was enough and to spare. That which remained over and above was more than the five loaves and the two fishes, the little store which they had at first. He bade his disciples, “Gather up the fragments which remain, that nothing be lost.” He is an Example at once of generous bounty and of carefulness. He would have nothing wasted. The Christian should guard against waste, that he may have to give to the needy.

4. The number. There were five thousand men, beside women and children. The men were arranged in companies of fifty; they were easily numbered. The women and children seem to have sat apart. Probably there were not many. The multitude seems to have been gathered together for the Passover (Joh 6:4), which only men were commanded to attend; though religious women, like the virgin Mary, went sometimes with their husbands. The Lord cared for all alikemen, women, and children. So should his servants do.

5. Lessons of the miracle. Herod feasted in his palace with his nobles, Christ in the wilderness with his disciples; Herod’s feast was costly and luxurious, Christ’s very simple. The sumptuous banquet of Herod ended in guilt and murder. It was a godless feast, profaned by wicked oaths. The Christian should never be present at any festivities, any amusements, on which he cannot ask the blessing of God. The simplest food, when Christ is present, when we feel that it is he who gives and he who blesses, satisfies the Christian’s wants. The presence of Christ gives peace and blessedness in the wilderness. Without Christ the gorgeous palace is a desert. Christ can prepare a table in the wilderness; he can provide for his people wherever they are. The multitude had followed him into this desert place. He had compassion on them; he would not send them away fasting. So he hath compassion now on all who seek first the kingdom of God; he knows that we have need of food and raiment; he will give them. Let us trust in him. but let us pray with the deepest earnestness not for the meat which perisheth, but for that which endureth unto everlasting life. He who on that day fed the five thousand with earthly food, feeds now the ten thousand times ten thousand of his saints with the bread which came down from heaven. He himself is the spiritual Food of believers. “He that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst.” They need nothing more whom he feedeth with that heavenly food. All the cravings of their souls are stilled; all the yearnings of their hearts are satisfied with his gracious presence who is the Bread of life. Let us feed on him in the daily life of faith; let us ask him to feed us with the spiritual food of his own most precious body and blood in the holy sacrament which he himself ordained.

LESSONS.

1. Try, like Christ, to forget self and to care for others.

2. Trust him always; he will multiply the five loaves if we are following him.

3. Feast with Christ, not with Herod; with Christians in a Christian home, not with the wicked in unholy revelry.

Mat 14:22-36

The walking on the sea.

I. JESUS LEFT ALONE.

1. He sends the disciples across the lake. He “constrained his disciples to get into a ship.” It is a strong word. He compelled, he forced them; evidently they were very unwilling to leave him. St. John’s narrative throws a light upon this. The miracle had produced a great impression; it was in accordance with the hopes of the Jews; it was what they looked for in the expected Messiah. It must be he, the multitude thought; he is come indeed. This great Wonder worker is surely the Christ of God. They were right; but their conception of the work of the Christ was not the true one. He was to reign at Jerusalem, they thought; to set them free from the tyranny of Herod, from the detested Roman yoke. They wanted to “take him by force, to make him a King” (Joh 6:15). The Lord was not blinded by popular excitement. He was a King indeed, but his kingdom was not of this world. His kingdom was to come, but in the way appointed by God; and that was the way of the cross. He would not attempt to seize it prematurely, whether at the prompting of the evil one (Mat 4:8, Mat 4:9) or at the clamour of the multitude. The apostles shared the enthusiasm of the crowd. They had been prominent in the distribution of the miraculous food; doubtless the people magnified them. They were great men now; they hoped to sit near to the Lord, on his right hand and on his left, in his kingdom. They had a right above all other men, they may well have thought, to be with their Master in this day of triumph, as they had been faithful to him in his tribulations. They were very unwilling to leave him. But he forced them to go. This excitement was not good either for the multitude or for the disciples. Ambition is an evil thing, especially the ambition of reaching the high places of the Church. The best of men have their faults; the apostles had theirs. Christ forced them to leave him for a time when their hearts were set on earthly triumphs. Religion loses all its beauty when men try to make it a means for self-exaltation.

2. He dismisses the multitude. He could do it more easily and quietly now that the apostles were gone. They were probably the most enthusiastic. They had to be forced; the others were dismissed. Doubtless that enthusiasm was mainly honest zeal for their Master’s glory; though selfish motives, such as those just mentioned, were perhaps unconsciously mingled with it. But even that honest enthusiasm was mistaken. It could do only harm; it would excite the suspicions of Herod (“that fox,” Luk 13:32), and the hostility of the Roman governor. Christ’s hour was not yet come. He would not anticipate the time appointed in the counsels of God. He sent the multitude away. Their disappointment, we may be sure, was great. The apostles, perhaps, were more than disappointed; perhaps they were vexed and even angry; he had to force them to leave him. How often it is so now! Success, popularity, excites us. We hope for great things; perhaps our hopes for spiritual victories include (though we scarcely know it) hopes for our own advancement. Then we are disappointed. He teaches us the holy lesson of patience. We must wait for him, for his time. The Lord reigneth; but it doth not always please him to manifest his power when we expect and wish it.

3. He retires to a mountain for prayer. He had retired to a mountain; he had prayed there all night long, before he called his apostles. Now he does the like. This great Popularity did not dazzle him. He knew that that excited multitude did not understand his mission or his purpose. He himself would the very next day turn that popularity into suspicion or even active opposition. He would offer them the bread of life, and they would not receive it; many of his disciples would go back and walk no more with him. It was a crisis in his earthly life. He retired to collect his thoughts, to hold communion in solitude with his heavenly Father. It is what we should do in times of excitement and difficulty. The hours spent in earnest prayer are the best spent hours of our lives; they give strength, calmness, perseverance. The Lord prayed long. When the evening was come, he was there alone; he prayed on into the late night. A few hours before he had more than five thousand zealous adherents round him. Now they had left him; he himself had sent them away. He was alone, with only God. He was preparing himself, we may reverently believe, for the struggle which lay before himthe controversies, the desertions, the bitter opposition. He was holding communion with the Father. He never sought counsel of men; for in some sense he was always alone. His Divine nature isolated him, not from human sympathy and lovethat was precious even to him (Mat 26:40)but from human advice, human help. He could receive strength only from heaven (Luk 22:43).

II. THE MIRACLE.

1. The disciples. They were in peril now, and the Lord was not with them in the ship, as he had been once before. There was a great wind; the ship was tossed with waves; they were in distress, toiling in rowing. But the Lord saw them in their danger; he saw them from the lonely mountain where he was kneeling in prayer; he saw and came. So he sees us now from heaven, where he ever liveth to make intercession for us. He sees all our trials; and he comes, as then he came, to help and to save. He sent them from him when they would have made him a King; he comes to them now they need his help.

2. They see him coming. It was darkthree or four in the morning; they were struggling still with wind and wave. They see suddenly an august Form moving over the surface of the water, coming towards them, seeming as though it would pass by. It was a strange sight in the darkness of that tempestuous night. It increased their terror. It must be an apparition, they thought. It boded ill. Danger, death, was at hand. They cried out for fear. Then in that moment of agony there came a well known voice, sweet and clear, amid the din of the storm, “Be of good cheer; it is I; be not afraid.” So the good Lord cheers his people now, in sickness, sorrow, in the hour of death. “It is I,” he saith. He comes to his people in the hour of need. He sees them in their distress from afar off, from the heaven where he is making intercession for them. He comes, manifesting himself in all his love and mercy to those who cry to him in fear and peril. He cometh; it seems sometimes as though he would pass by and leave us in our anguish. But it is only a trial of our faith, to make us feel our need of himthat without him we can do nothing. Faithful, earnest prayer always brings him to our side. When he is with us, we can fear no more. “It is I; be not afraid.” He is not afraid who hath the blessed presence of the Saviour. Wind and wave may roar; but when the Lord moves over the tossing billows there is peace and hope for the fearful trembling soul even in the immediate nearness of the king of terrors. “It is I; be not afraid.” May we hear that gracious word, rosy we feel that gracious presence, in the hour of our death!

3. Peter. Peter, ever impulsive, ever impetuous, was not willing to wait for the coming of the Lord; he would go to him, and that upon the water. So ardent souls think to do great things and expose themselves sometimes to great perils, over-estimating their own faith, under-estimating the danger, thinking perhaps too much of self, too little of others. “Bid me come unto thee,” Peter said, as if he had a special interest in the Lord above his brother apostles, as if he indeed loved him more than these (Joh 21:15). He would not come, indeed he dared not, without the Lord’s bidding; but he asked for that bidding, instead of waiting, as the Christian should wait, to hear his Master’s will. Balaam, with baser motives, sought permission to expose himself to danger; he obtained his request, and it ended in his ruin. Peter was saved, but “scarcely” (1Pe 4:18; perhaps his narrow escape was in his thoughts when he wrote those words), by the Lord’s direct interposition. Christ himself, when tempted to do the like, taught us the course of duty. “It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.” But the Lord said, “Come.” He said it, we may be sure, in love, to teach Peter his own weakness and the danger of presumption. Peter came, and he too walked upon the water. While he was strong in faith, looking unto Jesus, he felt the truth of that blessed promise, “When thou passest through the waters, I will be with thee; and through the rivers, they shall not overflow thee.” But his faith failed. He ceased to look with the steadfast gaze of trustfulness upon the face of Christ. “He saw the wind boisterous.” It had been so from the beginning. He would not have seen it had his eyes been still fixed upon the Saviour. And now he was afraidhe who but a moment before had been so daring. His very skill in swimming (Joh 21:7) failed him in his extremity. Earthly resources will not help us when our faith gives way; and faith will give way when men look at their troubles, not at their Lord. He felt himself sinking. His friends were near, his brother disciples; but they could not help him in that great peril. In deep distress, in the hour of mortal anguish, One, only One, can help. “Out of the deep have I cried unto thee, O Lord. Lord, hear my voice.” Peter still believed in Christ’s love and power. His faith had not the calm strength which he had attributed to it, but it was true and real; it was like the faith of the poor father at the Mount of the Transfiguration: “Lord, I believe; help thou mine unbelief.” He looked again to Christ; “Lord, save me!” he cried. It is the prayer of humility and penitence and serf-abasement. The trial had done him good. The danger had shown him his weakness. The old self-confidence was gone; it returned afterwards, and was dispelled forever by the deep repentance which followed a yet graver, a far more humiliating failure. Now he felt his weakness. His first request was unbecoming, not such as a sinner should make; his second was a true prayer, such a prayer as we all should lift up out of the depths of our heart to our loving Saviour. Such a prayer is never made in vain. “Immediately Jesus stretched forth his hand, and caught him, and said unto him, O thou of little faith, wherefore didst thou doubt?” The Lord waited not one moment. The needed change was wrought; Peter felt his helplessness. The Lord stretched forth his hand. So doth he now. We feel, when we come to him with strong crying and fervent prayer, that gracious hand holding us up, lifting us out of distress and terror, drawing us closer to himself. “O thou of little faith,” he said, in gentle sweet reproof. Peter’s faith never wholly failed him; but it was mingled with doubt. That doubt, that divided mind, divided between faith and fear, might have been his ruin had not the Lord in his great mercy saved him. Let us learn never to doubt the love of our dear Lord. If only he is with us, let us think, not too much of our difficulties and distresses, but of his grace and power. “Lord, increase our faith,” be that our constant prayer.

4. The adoration of the disciples. They came into the ship, the Lord and the thankful, penitent apostle. Immediately the wind ceased. Immediately, St. John tells us, the ship was at the land whither they went. Then they that were in the ship came and worshipped him. They did not forget to offer the sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving for his great mercies vouchsafed unto them. “Of a truth thou art the Son of God,” they said. It was the first time, except the cases of John the Baptist and Nathanael (Joh 1:34 and Joh 1:49), that men had given this title to the Lord. It followed a night of exceeding great terror. Our trials are blessed if they bring us near to Christ, if they help us to realize his love and power, if they bring us to our knees in awe and love and adoration.

III. THE RETURN TO THE LAND OF GENNESARET.

1. The sick brought to him. He was recognized at once; all knew him as the Healer, the Wonder-worker. The men of the place went out into all that country round about, and brought unto him all that were diseased. That care for the afflicted, that eagerness to bring them to the Saviour, is an example to us; let us go and do likewise.

2. They were healed. They believed in him; their faith was like that of the woman who followed him when he was on his way to heal the daughter of Jairusa faith deep and strong, if not altogether the faith of the instructed Christian. They did not, however, come behind him, as she did; they asked his permission to touch the hem of his garment, and all who touched were made perfectly whole. So it is now. He cleanseth from all unrighteousness those who come to him touching him with the touch of faith.

LESSON.

1. Let us learn of the Lord not to desire popular applause, not to seek the high places of the world.

2. Let us learn in all times of difficulty and anxiety to seek for peace and guidance in fervent, persevering prayer.

3. Let us trust in him; he will help us in our troubles. “It is I,” he saith; “be not afraid.”

4. Let us shrink from presumption; we are safe when we distrust ourselves, when we trust only in Christ.

5. Let us always look unto Jesus; in temptation, in sorrow, in agony, let us look steadfastly to him. He will stretch forth his hand; he will not let us sink.

HOMILIES BY W.F. ADENEY

Mat 14:1, Mat 14:2

Herod’s hypothesis.

Men’s minds were much perplexed about the wonderful life of the new Prophet, and various theories were started to explain it. Here we have the king’s hypothesis. This has something in common with the other suggestions, and also a peculiar aptness in regard to Herod himself.

I. IT IS NOT EASY TO ACCOUNT FOR JESUS CHRIST. The very variety of the theories shows that the problem was not solved at a glance. It was evident to his contemporaries that our Lord was no ordinary man. And yet these people saw little more than his outer life. The teaching of his apostles and the revelation of Christ in his Church have brought out far greater marvels in his nature. It we accept him and his claims, his Divine nature and mission will explain all. But if we reject him we have still to account for him. And just here is the great difficulty for all unbelievers. It is not enough for them to urge certain objections against the Christian position. Christ remains the wonder of all history. How could the carpenter of Nazareth live and teach and work and revolutionize the world as Jesus did if he was only a village artisan?

II. MEN VAINLY TRY TO EXPLAIN THE NEW BY THE OLD. Herod thinks of the one great man whom he has known. Others recall the historic figures of Hebrew prophecy (Mat 16:14). In all this there is no idea that God is surpassing antiquity; that he is making a new start with a greater revelation and glory than anything yet witnessed on earth. It was difficult to understand Jesus Christin part, because he was not a repetition of antiquity. So long as there was no idea of a new work of God, the New Testament gospel could not be entertained. The same mistake was made later and in another way by those Jewish Christians who wished to limit Christianity by tying it to the ordinances of the old Law; and the old mistake is repeated today by those who think that Christ must be explained by what we know of the ordinary workings of human lives and characters.

III. THE GUILTY CONSCIENCE INVENTS ITS OWN TORMENTOR. Herod’s hypothesis is the creation of his conscience. The stain of blood is on his soul, and it colours all his thoughts. He is a murderer, and he is haunted by suspicions of the return of his victim. He cannot silence the voice of the faithful prophet. Although he has shut him up in a dungeon, although at the instigation of his wicked wife he has lawlessly murdered him, he cannot forget him, cannot elude his warning voice. There is no escape from the guilt and consequences of sin, except by the narrow door of repentance. A king may be a slave to the terrors of his own evil conscience.

IV. THE REJECTION OF CHRISTIAN TRUTH IS OFTEN ACCOMPANIED BY THE ACCEPTANCE OF A FOOLISH SUPERSTITION. Herod could not bring himself to accept the claim of Christ; yet he was willing to believe in a most extraordinary alternative. In early ages multitudes who rejected the Christian gospel yielded to the spell of ridiculous charlatans in the profession of magic. Today we see the negation of the gospel accompanied by a ready belief in what is called “spiritualism.” There is no superstition so abject as the superstition of scepticism. It is the greatest mistake to suppose that the unbeliever is always walking in the white light of reason. Christian faith is the true way of escape from unchristian superstition. To believe in Christ as the Son of God who has risen from the dead is the best security for intellectual sanity in religion.W.F.A.

Mat 14:3-12

The murder of John the Baptist.

This is introduced quite incidentally to account for the superstitious terror of Herod; but the story is so graphic that we seem to be carried into the midst of the scene of dissipation and crime. It is a hideous picture, and its chief lessons are of warning, and yet its gloom is not utterly unrelieved, for the portrait of the Baptist stands out in grand contrast to its vicious surroundings.

I. THE PROPHET‘S FIDELITY. John the Baptist was a prophet of repentance. His was a difficult task, because he aimed at making it effective. It is easy to denounce sin in the general; no one will be affected. It is safe to accuse the weak of their wickedness; they cannot retaliate on their censor. Therefore the temptation is to take one or the other of these courses; but the first is useless, and the second mean and cowardly.

1. John denounced particular sins. He did so with the various classes who came to his baptism. The animus of Herodias’ hatred springs from the fact that his shaft went home to one great and shameful act of wickedness.

2. John fearlessly accused the great. He was not stern with the miserable outcast, and meek with the sinner in high places. Pharisees could rail at the weeping penitent and be silent about the sin of the harlot-queen. John preached to the court; but he was no court preacher. The faithful prophet must denounce the sins of princes as well as those of peasants.

II. THE PRINCESS‘S SHAME. In the flush and splendour of her youth, the highest-born maiden of the land lowers herself to perform a disgraceful dance under the gloating gaze of a company of half-drunken men of pleasure. The sin of the guilty mother is already bearing bitter fruit in the shame of her ill-trained daughter. We are appalled at the contrast between the lofty character of the faithful prophet and the miserable state of the princess on whose young soul the bloom of innocence is so early destroyed. The ruin of natural modesty prepares for a more horrible evilcallousness in brutal crime. Thus the loss of the pure simplicity of maidenhood leads to the hardened heart of unwomanly cruelty. None are so cruel as the dissolute.

III. THE QUEEN‘S VINDICTIVENESS. It was the king’s sin that John denounced, for that was the first evil; and the prophet was a man, and one who dared to bring a vile deed home to its true author. But naturally the queen feels the sting of the reproach most keenly. Then, instead of admitting its justice and humbling herself, she turns on the preacher like an infuriated tigress. Her very ferocity shows that her conscience has been wounded. When people will not repent at the word of a faithful admonitor, they flame out in a rage against him as though he were their mortal enemy. If they did but see the truth they would own him as their best friend.

IV. THE KING‘S WICKED WEAKNESS. Herod himself had some respect for the prophet. He even kept him, as he might have kept an actor or a singer, to amuse his idle hours; or perhaps be was somewhat drawn to the serious teaching of John. Yet he weakly yielded to the bloodthirsty demand of the daughter of Herodias. He was moved by two considerations.

1. His oath. But it was a gross error to suppose that his oath could be made to demand compliance with the savage request made to him under it, for the most awful oath cannot bind a man to do wrong.

2. His fear. He dreaded to be thought weak by his guests. In this he revealed the very weakness he wanted to avoid. There is no cowardice so despicable as that which does wrong from fear of ridicule.W.F.A.

Mat 14:15-21

Jesus feeding the multitude.

On the death of John the Baptist Jesus retired to the eastern side of the lake, oppressed with grief and longing for a time of seclusion. But it was one of his trials that he was forbidden the rest of privacy when he most craved it. The crowds followed him with such enthusiasm that they quite forgot to provide themselves with needful food, and therefore when the evening was come they were out among the lonely mountains faint and hurry. Jesus had not brought about this awkward situation. But he could not see distress without desiring to remove it. Thus there was an adequate occasion for the wonderful feeding of the thousands.

I. JESUS HAS COMPASSION ON BODILY DISTRESS. He had manifested this compassion earlier by healing the sick who were brought out to him in this remote region; and now the sight of the weary multitude touched his heart, as it became apparent to him that the evening shadows would find them far from home and without the means of providing themselves with their evening meal

1. The motive of Christ was compassion. This was the motive of his life work and of his atoning death. He came into the world because he took pity on the world’s misery. The same motive moved him in particular actions. This is the grand Christian motive. The passion of pity is a peculiarly Christ-like feeling that seems to be rising among us in the present day.

2. The trouble was bodily distresshunger. Then it is a Christ-like thing to feed the hungry. We are not to neglect men’s bodies in caring for their souls.

II. JESUS HELPS THROUGH EARTHLY MEANS. He utilized the existing provisions. He did not create food out of nothing, but he wrought with the loaves and fishes already in hand. They were few, but he did not despise them, for they were invaluable in affording a foundation for his miracle. Christ now uses the instruments of human work. We have to contribute our share, and if we selfishly or despairingly refuse to do so we have no right to look for his blessing.

III. JESUS PRODUCES WONDERFUL PROVISIONS. We do not know how the miracle was wrought; we cannot even conceive of it. But we do not know how God makes the corn to grow in the fields. Nature only seems to us less wonderful than miracle because we are familiar with her external aspect and her visible processes. But behind all nature, as behind every miracle, there is the unfathomable mystery of life and being which God only understands. It is enough for us that our Lord is not thwarted, that there is nothing to which he sets his band in which he fails. He is powerful as well as pitiful. We bemoan the distress we cannot aid. When Christ is moved with compassion he helps effectively.

IV. JESUS SATISFIES THE HUNGRY. He gave no princely banquet, but mere loaves and fishesthe common barley loaves of the poor, the familiar fishes of the lake. His object was not to pamper jaded appetitesthat was not needed in the keen mountain air; he simply fed the hungry. Moreover, he gave what he received, and of the same kind. He will bless our work according to its character and quality. He gives the increase, but it is according to the seed we sow”after its kind.”

Surely this miracle is more than a miracle; it is a sacrament, a sacred symbol, as our Lord shows in the discourse that follows in St. John’s account (Joh 6:1-71.). Christ is the real Bread of life, feeding hungry souls.W.F.A.

Mat 14:22-33

Walking on the sea.

The wonderful feeding of the thousands produced a great effect, rousing the multitude to enthusiasm, so that the people actually tried to three on an insurrection in support of the kingship of Jesus, and so that he had to dismiss them with haste, sending his disciples across the sea, and retiring to the mountains for prayer. Then it was that the sudden squall fell on the lake, and the need of his disciples called him to their aid.

I. JESUS IN PRAYER.

1. He was much in prayer. No doubt he thus obtained spiritual refreshment after the toils and vexations of the day. Here he found the joy of communion with his Father without distracting influences. To Jesus prayer was a necessity; it was also a joy. He could not have treated it as a formal duty. If Christ could not live without prayer, is it possible for the Christian to be healthy in the neglect of it?

2. He prayed in solitude. He hated the showy prayers of the religious people of his day, ostentatiously offered up in the marketplace, primly uttered in the synagogue. He hungered to be alone with God. He found God among the mountains.

3. He prayed at critical moments. E.g. at the grave of Lazarus, in Gethsemane. Now there was great danger of an insurrection which would wreck his plans. To him, too, the third temptation may have returned, and he may have sought strength to overcome it. Prayer is most valuable in the soul’s hardest struggles with temptation.

II. THE DISCIPLES IN TROUBLE. Away from their Master they were overtaken by a tempest. It would seem that they were rowing up north in order to take Jesus on board at a spot further along the eastern shore. Therefore it was for his sake that they were facing the contrary wind, for had they turned directly homewards they would have been able to run before the gale. Trouble may come upon the servants of Christ in their very efforts to keep near him and to serve him.

III. THE COMING OF CHRIST. In that wild, dark night, while the wind lashed the sea to fury, it must have howled with fearful blasts among the rocks of the wilderness where Jesus stood alone in his prayer, and then he must have recognized the danger this would mean to his disciples. He was never selfish in his devotions. It was his habit to permit the interruption of his most sacred hours of retirement by some cry of distress, some appeal for help. So he came down to his disciples on the sea. It must have been an act of faith on his part to venture on the black, boiling waters. But faith was working through love. The sea must be risked in an unheard of miracle to save his friends out on its waste of waters. It is not surprising that the disciples could not believe their eyes, and mistook their Saviour for a spectre. Sometimes his deliverances are quite as unexpected, and almost too good to be believed. It is difficult for our faith to keep pace with his far-reaching grace.

IV. ST. PETER‘S ADVENTURE. This singular sequel is quite true to the character of the apostle. His impetuosity, his enthusiasm for Christ, his failure to measure his own weakness, are all in accordance with what we know of “the prince of the apostles.” But perhaps in the incident we may detect a touch of humour. There was no necessity for the apostle to walk on the water. Yet Christ indulged his whim and permitted it to be a means of revealing Peter’s weakness, and of introducing one source of strength. Foolish, needless, and even ridiculous adventures may be turned to good ends. We learn to know Christ even by means of the follies of which we are heartily ashamed.W.F.A.

HOMILIES BY P.C. BARKER

Mat 14:1, Mat 14:2, Mat 14:3-5, Mat 14:6-12

The ruin of reckless rashness.

Note, in introduction, that in an historic point of view this stretch of verses, numbering twelve in our Gospel and seventeen in St. Mark’s Gospel, is remarkable for the way in which it gives the information with which it is charged. The same way is identically followed in the parallel of St. Mark; and one not dissimilar in its leading feature in that of St. Luke. As regards the two former, the narrative, starting from tile fact that Herod is startled by the growing notoriety and repute of Jesus, continues (until, indeed, it finds its end) by glances at two several retrospective passages of the history (an ill history) made by him. These two retrospective glimpses concern Herod’s first and second dealings with John the Baptisthow, first, he was tempted to put him in prison, and yielded to the temptation; and how, secondly, he was snared on by his own sin, in first, second, and third degree, till he put him to death by beheading him. Notice this career in its simplest steps of sin.

I. A MARRIAGE ALLIANCE INCESTUOUS, ADULTEROUS, AND AT THE EXPENSE OF A HALF BROTHER.

II. A GOOD MAN IMPRISONED FOR HOLY TESTIMONY AGAINST THIS, MADE IN THE UNDENIED DISCHARGE OF HIS DUTY AS A PROPHET OF RELIGION.

III. BY THAT IMPRISONMENT, NOT ONLY CRUEL PRESENT INJUSTICE DONE TO THE VICTIM, BUT THE WAY PAVED FOR THE PERPETRATION OF YET WORSE CRUELTY AND INIQUITY.

IV. UNDER THE STIMULUS OF DEBAUCHERY, A BOASTFUL AND RECKLESS PROMISE MADE.

V. UNDER THE BLINDEDNESS OF DEBAUCHERY, A SNARE LAID, WHICH TOO EFFECTUALLY FITTED IN WITH RISKS ALREADY SELF–HAZARDED AND SELF–CHALLENGED.

VI. THE SNARE ENTERED WITH VAINLY HEARD, VAINLY UTTERED REMONSTRANCES OF CONSCIENCE.

VII. IN THAT SNARE A TERRIBLE FALL; AND IRRETRIEVABLE HARM BOTH DONE AND TAKEN.

VIII. LATER ON, CONSCIENCE CALLING ON A VERY FAITHFUL ALLY CALLED MEMORY, STARTLED AND GALVANIZED INTO LIFE BY CIRCUMSTANCES AND EVENTS THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN, AND EVEN EASILY MIGHT HAVE BEEN, ALL MATTER OF INTEREST AND JOYCREATORS AND STRENGTHENERS OF PEACE INSTEAD OF DISTURBERS AND DESTROYERS OF IT.B.

Mat 14:13-21

.The sacrament miracle. Distinguish this miracle of the feeding the five thousand, so glorious in all its incidents, and with its full fourfold narration, from that of the feeding the four thousand, recorded by Matthew (Mat 15:32-39) and Mark (Mar 8:1-9) only. Lead to the consideration of this miracle by dwelling briefly on

I. THE MOTIVES OF THIS MIRACLE, There was one leading motivea kind human compassion, a condescending memory of the bodily want of the multitude of people, and a gentle consideration of the same. We may imagine that the mixture of “women and children” among the repeatedly mentioned “five thousand men” will have added to the feeling of thoughtful pity in Christ. But beside this predominating incentive, it may well be that this occasion proffered itself, considering certain peculiar characteristics of the miracle (for which see next head), as a most fit occasion for such a miracle, as would be adapted to utilize itself, in the most direct moral service, like an acted discourse, for instance. It was a wide spoken discourse indeed for thousands upon thousands, who never heard so plainly as when they were now thus fed; nor were open to blame, in anything like all cases, for its being able to be thus said. This multitude scattered again from this sacred spot to their homes over wide stretches of their country, what sermons they would take with them, and what memories would again and again warm up in their hearts! And yet again, the occasion was one of special import for the small circle of disciples. Philip, for one, was “proved,” and we need not doubt that all the other disciples were both proved and reproved, when they learned the truth to very reality of that word, “They need not depart; give ye them to eat.” And forthwith, after the commission, were furnished with the means to execute it, and did execute it, and distributed that true shadow of a sacrament, to say the least of it, from the very fingers of the Lord of all sacraments.

II. THE MIRACLE ITSELF. There is a sense in which every miracle is not merely a wonder of Power, but an inscrutable wonder of power. We cannot pass from the limited finite power, over the border into the unlimited, without confessing that, though we gaze at or gaze into the unbridged abyss, it is an abyss, and we can nothing else than only gaze! But the character of some miracles lends itself to help our imagination, to guide and give strength to our weak power of thought. And we say within ourselves that a fever stayed by a word, palsy and paralysis cured, a blind eye, a deaf ear, a dumb tongue re-energized, and even water converted into wine, are wonders of power more easy to track than that a solitary loaf of bread find another at its side by an absolute fresh act of creation in a moment and by a word. This once seen through, the multiplication may seem to follow more easily on the level of some other miracles. But this is not to be “once seen through.” Notice, again, of this miracle, that it was neither one of the absolute necessity of the heart of mercy allied with the hand of might, nor one of such very secondary character of kindness and goodness (it is said with all perfect reverence) as when for the purposes of a marriage feast water was made wine. Christ divinely and humanly pitied the fainting hunger of the men who had long lingered around him, and of their women and children; but when he made the water into wine we cannot say it was similar pity. Again, we are not told at what point the miraculous multiplication of the bread took effectunder the “blessing,” and at the “breaking” of the five loaves and two fishes in the hands of Christ, or as the disciples distributed, or as the people ate. Though we are not told it, this is one of the untold things that we can scarcely find difficulty in supplying; and this without charge, or any self-charge even, of presumptuousness. We need not suppose unnecessary wonders, such as that the little original store and stock of material could be handled by those who distributed, when parted into several thousand minute portions. Even this would point to the increase as taking place in the blessing and under the manual acts of Christ. Again, we are not told of any expression either of surprise or of any other kind upon this subject, as made by any of the multitude either at the time or subsequently, or by any disciple, such as might give us a suggestion, or throw light upon it. Again, we are not told what time it took, or what sort of difficulty, if any, the disciples encountered in their work of distributing to some hundred companies of those set down, in parties of fifty each. That the large multitude were thus arranged speaks design of itself, and we can see the disciples threading their way with their distributing baskets, by aid of the passages, and, so to say, the aisles left. There were some eight hundred to be ministered to by each of the twelve disciples. Nor have we any statement as to how and where the “women and children” got their portions; the suggestion of our verses 19-21, nevertheless, would leave us in no practical doubt that they were grouped in the companies of the fifties and hundreds. With all these things untold, the miracle itself stands confessed in its simplest grandeur, in its irrefragable evidence, and for its welcome satisfyingnesssome through it to acknowledge “that Prophet that should come into the world;” some to show tomorrow that they were thankless for the moral feast, even if they had eagerly partaken of the literal one; but some also, we cannot doubt it, and we know not how many, to remember it for days and years to come, and to speak of it far and wide with grateful heart and tongue.

III. THE MULTIFORM PARABLE THAT IS INCORPORATE WITH THIS MIRACLE.

1. It is a parable of Christ feeding the wide world.

2. It is a parable of Christ feeding that world by the human instrumentality of his servants, his disciples, his apostles, those some certain called from the mass, and called by him, and “sent forth” by him.

3. It is a parable of what effect Christ’s “blessing” can have and shall have on his own appointments, his own appointed provision, his own appointed “means of grace,” his own appointed methods of distribution, and his own ordering of his Church and its ministers.

4. To devout, thoughtful, reverent faith, surely it constitutes itself, it welcomely forces itself, into a parable of a sacramentthe sacrament in “one kind” for the fulness of time was not yet comethe sacrament of the food of the blessed body of the Lord himself! How many a time has the individual, humble, and praying believer lighted on what should seem some small morsel of Divine truth, and of the Divine Word, and as he meditated, how it opened, how it refreshed his fainting state, how it filled his eye, and feasted his highest powers of feeling and of imagination! And how many a time have the true ministers of Christ, the bishops and pastors of the flock of God, begun to think and begun to speak upon what seemed a word, a sentence, a verse, but it has increased under meditation, under prayer, under the familiar, common, sometimes despised “preaching” of Christ’s last charge and commission, and under the realization of the priceless “blessing” of his last promise, while multitudes have listened, been divinely fed, learned to love and to adore and to live a new life, and the human feeder and the fed all been satisfied!B.

Mat 14:22-33

A contention of sense and faith.

The last miracle was one the teaching of which was certainly good for all, alike for the disciples and the multitude; and of the two for obvious and natural reasons, perhaps more so for the former than for the latter. But, letting alone the teaching force of it, that foregoing miracle had for its practical object the benefit of the five thousand with women and children, allaying their hunger and bringing home to their heartsof what ever character those heartssome sense of and some persuasion of the thoughtful consideration of the Lord. For the small number of the twelve disciples there was never any great difficultyprobably never any at allin supplying “all their need.” But the present miracle was one for the disciples themselves. It was good alike for their body and soul. It may, perhaps, be said to have been in higher kind also, even as limb and life are ever of more import than the satisfying of hunger, though this may be intense. Though we are not at all bound to find herein the reason of its following so distinctly in each account upon the other, yet the link of thought may be helpful. And far is it from being out of analogy with the truth, that he who so cares for the vast flocks scattered, needy, distracted with fear, or callous with indifference, shows no small proportion of that care in also caring for the shepherds and bishops and pastors of the flock, whom he has set, and whom he ever still is setting, over them. It certainly is so in the history now before us. Notice here

I. AN INSTANCE OF CHRIST SENDING HIS SERVANTS TO TRY THEIR WAY BEFORE HIM TO FEEL AND TO TEST THEIR OWN QUANTUM OF STRENGTH AND RESOURCES; AND OF HOW, THEN, IN SUCH CASES HE IS WITH THEM, AND OVERTAKES THEM TO THE VERY MOMENT OF THEIR REAL NEED. Distinguish with emphasis such cases from those in which forwardness and self-confidence and unsafe zeal lead the way. And notice what room there is in the dispensation of the Spirit for full account to be taken of this principle. How needful it is, how desirable it is, for us often to feel that there is One who trusts us to go onward awhile, and apparently as though by ourselves, but whose eye and whose love are none the less ever near to us! And notice, further, that these are not for a moment to be counted artificial devices of the vast and infinitely wise superintending Providence, even though for wise and high ends. There were reasons why the disciples were sent onward before Christ.

II. AS INSTANCE OF A CERTAIN APPARENT CONSPIRACY AND ACCUMULATION OF THE DIFFICULTIES OF NATURE CONTENDED WITH, BY THE INCREASE OF CONSCIOUS HUMAN EFFORT AND TOIL; AND YET WITHOUT AVAIL, OR WITH VERY LITTLE AVAIL. Darkness, wind, and stormy waves were all “contrary” to the disciples; but they rowed where sails would not serve; and they toiled; and yet there came the hour when the most that they could say for themselves and their effort was that they did not retreat, that they could just hold their way. But this was much to be able to say.

III. AN INSTANCE OF THE FIRST APPEARANCE OF HELP BEING JUDGED TO BE EITHER AN EMPTY FORM, OR A FORM, IF NOT EMPTY, CHARGED WITH SOME SPECIES OF ADDITIONAL FEARFULNESS. Remark that the version, “a spirit,” is not most correct to the word used, or probably to the real description of the alarm excited in the minds of the disciples. Nor can any justification be adduced from the passage of any scriptural warrant for belief in certain superstitions. It may be said to be Scripture, on the other hand, which defines spirit, and determines the reality of spirits, and does not deny, indeed, that spirits may take “phantom” appearances, but in this place certainly does not state it. The word is not the same as that used, e.g. in Act 12:15, nor does it point in the same direction.

IV. AN INSTANCE OF THE BOUNDLESS GENTLENESS OF THE PITY, “LIKE AS A FATHER‘S,” WITH WHICH THE LORD DISPELS HIS SERVANTS‘ FEAR, AND REPLACES IT WITH ALL THE EXULTATION OF AN UNEXPECTED EXPERIENCE OF COMFORT AND REPOSE.

V. AN INSTANCE OF A GLORIOUS EPISODE OF FAITH, AND THE FAITH THAT SIGHTS IMITATION AND LIKENESS. Faith is the very father of great thought and great enterprise for some; for others it is patient endurance of the storms, and the vanquisher of fears, and exquisite rest from anxiety. But in its noblest attempts, it knows no measure and owns no limit, while it keeps its firm look on its Lord. It partakes of the omnipotence of its unseen object.

VI. AN INSTANCE OF AN INGLORIOUS LAPSE OF FAITH. The cause of this very plainly marked herethe eye turned away from its great object, and confused by the difficulties of sense.

VII. AN INSTANCE OF A VERITABLE SCRIPTURE PHOTOGRAPH OF THE CHURCH OF THE LORD JESUS CHRIST IN THE TUMULT, THE DARKNESS, THE STORM OF THE WORLDBUT SAFE; CHRIST NEAR IT, THE EYE OF CHRIST ON IT, CHRIST HIMSELF IN IT, AND ITSELF AT LAST WITH HIM IN THE HAVEN.B.

HOMILIES BY MARCUS DODS

Mat 14:1-12

John’s death.

Herod Antipas is a character not quite easy to understand, but possibly on that account all the more worth understanding. Weak men are always difficult to understand, no principle you can calculate on guiding their conduct. Herod was not a bloody man like his father, but, like Ahab, his irresolution was used by the resolution of his wife. Before his doubly unlawful marriage much hope might have been entertained for him, with men like the apostles among his peasantry, not without good influences in his own palace and family, and even himself showing an interest in the spiritual movements of his time. But this miserable woman spoilt his life. What could he do in compliance with John’s requirements when he understood her fierce, unscrupulous, vindictive temper so well as to feel quite helpless in her hands? What we learn from this act of Herod’s is:

1. That wherever a person forms connection with one less scrupulous than himself, he puts himself at a great disadvantage for living righteously. This pressure becomes extreme when the connection is so close as that of marriage. And many a marriage of this kind involves the parties in difficulties as trying if not as tragic as those which now involved Herod.

2. Again, we see the tendency of sin to spread and injure many. The sensualist often lays the flattering unction to his soul that, however vile his sin may be, he at least injures only himself. When Herod laid aside his self-respect and allowed his passions to be inflamed by the dancing of a wanton, he was not conscious of injuring any one. But before the sun was set his coarse profligacy had suddenly thrust itself into the most sacred life, and carried ruin with it. And in a thousand ways do sins of the flesh, which we flatter ourselves shall hurt nobody but ourselves, make us much wickeder than we wish, and carry us to consequences disastrous to others as well as to ourselves.

3. It is in our Lord’s treatment of Herod that we see the full result of this passage in his history. When brought before his judgment seat he would not vouchsafe a word to his judge. By his treatment of John, Herod had forfeited his right to judge our Lord. Any interest he now professed in Jesus was false. He played round the margin of higher things, and flattered himself he would one day take the plunge; but this trifling only hardened his heart, and had made him incapable of understanding the gravity and importance of the matters that were brought before him. This is no unusual experience. Many men deal so shiftily with conscience, and constantly make enjoyment their real end in life, that there is left in them no capacity for earnest spiritual thought and feeling. Had Herod saved John’s life and braved the anger of Herodias, he would probably have saved the life of Jesus also. But since that first opportunity of playing the man, he had steadily fallen, till he not only sacrificed a greater than John, but was unconscious of the enormity of his guilt. To such a man what could our Lord have to say? Here we may discern the reason why many men who seem to be inquirers after truth are left in darkness. They omit the preliminaries. Like Herod, who said nothing about John’s death, they neglect to do the obvious duties that daily call them. They do not act on the light they have, and therefore they get no more. By trifling with former convictions and dealing insincerely with conscience, they reach that molt appalling of human conditions, in which they cannot receive help even from him who is the Way, the Truth, and the Life.

Turning now to the heroic figure in this tragedy, we are struck first with the completeness given to John’s character both by his rebuke of Herod and by his death. All Jews were more or less scandalized by the conduct of the king; but, so far as history informs us, none were honest enough or bold enough to tell him how his conduct stood related to the Law. (Compare conduct of courtiers of Henry VIII. when asked if his divorce were lawful.) Such freedom from fear and favour as John’s is rarely attained, and attained only by those whom the truth makes freeby those who are themselves living so true a life that all personal interests are eclipsed by the steady shining of the truth. That must shine whatever else goes out. We may be tempted to askWhat good did John do by his boldness? He did not make Herod repent, and he only made things look more hopeless for the righteous. And so with ourselves, the good we attempt is not done, and we ourselves are permanently injured. Were it not better for us to turn forever away from those unattainable heights which only heroes can climb? But:

1. John could not have helped rebuking Herod. He was sent to turn people to repentance. Herod invited him, and he must speak.

2. Are we sure John’s conduct was fruitless? It is by admiration of such heroic acts that men are practically brought within sight of a spiritual world, in presence of which all earthly glory and gain seem poor and tarnished. It is through such acts that we are enabled to believe in the righteousness of God. Righteousness becomes a new thing when it assumes a visible form upon earth, and condemns our unrighteousness with irresistible force. Lastly, it is true direct success did not attend John’s efforts; and if we are to act righteously and courageously, we must not do so in expectation that such conduct will always bring us in this life outward comfort and personal safety. But let no one think of his own life as so commonplace, so padded round with social safeguards and comforts, that no act of heroism can ever be required of him. Acts requiring true moral courage and absolute self-sacrifice are called forevery day, and your day and opportunity will no doubt also come. And out of very feeble and commonplace material heroes are made by John’s fundamental quality, fidelity to Christ. It is knowledge of Christ and sympathy with him, loyalty to him and genuine love for him, which carry the soul forward to greater things than otherwise it could dare.D.

Mat 14:22-33

Peter walking on the sea.

This time was a crisis in the life of our Lord. Thousands of people had followed him into a secluded part of the country, and insisted that he should proclaim himself King. It would have been a lesson to leaders of men to have seen how he induced the huge mob quietly to disperse. But the strain was tremendous. He had to control not merely the clamouring, infatuated thousands, but himself also. What more seductive to the human spirit than the being carried by acclamation to the place of highest influence, entrusted with power to work out one’s own ideas of what is for the welfare of men? Feeling, therefore, the difficulty of the conflict, he gave himself, as soon as the victory was gained, to prayer. He spent the night calming, steadying, fortifying his spirit by fellowship with the Father. Thus prepared, he went to seek his disciples. Why did our Lord adopt at this time so extremely unusual a mode of action. He never did singular things, although he had power to do anything. His power was infinite, so were his sobriety of mind and self-control. His motive probably was the desire to rescue his disciples from difficulties into which he himself had brought them. For consider their probable state of mind. They had first met with the deep disappointment of hearing our Lord distinctly decline a crown; they had been made conscious that, so far from helping their Master, they were sometimes encumbrances to him. But, worst of all, they had been compelled, against their own will and judgment, to embark. They seemed to have very good reason for murmuring at their Master, and yet here on their own lake, in their own boat, they do his bidding. And they had their reward. They kept on as he had told them, and therefore they were overtaken by his presence and help. The disciples, then, could not fail to be impressed chiefly with Christ‘s mindfulness of them. His appearance showed them that no interests of his own, however distracting, could make him oblivious of them and their necessities; it showed them also that nothing could prevent him from bringing them the aid they required. Is it not likely that a great part of his prayer through the night was occupied with them and their individual temptations to deny him and go with the multitude? And it were well if we could attain to the knowledge they now acquired regarding Christ’s mindfulness. We seem at times to be so entirely delivered over to unsympathetic and almost unintelligent agents and influences, that it seems impossible the help of one so spiritual can penetrate to us or avail us aught; but he can make himself understood by the dullest forces of nature, and can find his way to us through the wildest turmoil. The men who had taken the wild fury of wind and sea as a part of the day’s work, and had without any quickening of pulse faced the dangers they were professionally familiar with, are appalled at once and together by the single Figure that approaches them without menace or noise. They saw in it a whole world of unconceived possibilities, and coming at that hour when already they were hard pressed, they concluded it came as the herald of doom. God’s way of helping us is often so different from the one we have planned, that when it comes we murmur instead of being grateful. The transport of reaction finds expression, as usual, through Peter. We need not try to account for the extraordinary request he now made, further than by saying that it was due to the sudden joy of meeting the Friend in whom was all safety, after a night of such tension and toil and disturbance of thought. And the Lord approved Peter’s impulse, else he would not have bid him come, and eventually does not rebuke him for attempting the thing, but for not succeeding. Impulse has its fit place, only it needs to be strongly backed. There are things now that need to be done, but which will seem as impossible as walking on the sea except to the eye of warm feeling. This unreasoning impulse of Peter’s, too, penetrated more deeply into the nature of miracle than a good deal of our would be wisdom penetrates. For it saw no reason why the miracle should not be evinced in Peter’s person as well as in Jesus’. And our Lord, by ascribing Peter’s failure solely to lack of faith, implies that any one with faith enough could walk on the sea just as he himself did, He himself did it by faith. But did our Lord mean that if only a man believed he could walk on the water, this would give him power to do so? Certainly not. Faith is needed, but a legitimate occasion is also needed. It is harmony, identification with God and his will, that give power to work miracle. The miracles of our Lord are, therefore, a great promise to human nature; in the Person of Jesus it was shown what that nature is capable of when in its right and normal relation to God. But the results of faith did not last one moment beyond the faith itself. Peter’s fear for one moment excluded faith; the waves shut him off from God, and at once he sank. We do not by once believing receive the Spirit in retention as our own; the Spirit proceedeth from the Father and the Son, and only while connected with the Son does the Spirit flow from him to us. We fail and sink as soon as we separate ourselves and begin to live by ourselves and for ourselves. We are strong with a strength far beyond our own when we live in God, with his will at heart and intending to work as his hand in the world. But that is the perfect human condition, habitually realized by our Lord alone. There is a lower condition consistent with salvationthe condition in which Peter, conscious of his weakness and seeing his danger, cries, “Lord, save me!” Is there any part of your life, any matter of thought or conduct in regard to which you feel that you are sinking, and must shortly be overwhelmed altogether? then consider the prompt, willing, efficient help that answers the cry. The lasting result of this incident on the disciples was their deepened conviction of our Lord’s Divinity. How are we to arrive at that conviction; to feel that our proper attitude is one of worship, and that in his presence we are secure against all calamity; that for rest of mind and spirit, for education of conscience, for fulness of help in all for which we are insufficient, we need go no further than him? I do not suppose that this one miracle would have convinced that boat’s crew; but their minds had been gradually accumulating material for understanding him, and this incident was but a more brilliant light set in front of that material, and which gave the right reading of it. The same material, or nearly the same, is available for us. Let us be patient, sincere, and hopeful. These men who were with him from day to day did not all at once reach the joy of recognizing in the Friend they had learned to love their God and Saviour; but their experience of his love, his truth, his wisdom, his power, gradually separated him in their thoughts from all others and gave him the highest place.D.

HOMILIES BY J.A. MACDONALD

Mat 14:1-12

The morals of a tragedy.

Here we have a tragedy in which the principal actors are, on the one side Jesus and John the Baptist, and on the other Herod, Herodias, and Salome. We propose to bring out some of its lessons. Learn, then

I. THAT THE HAUGHTIEST DESPOT IS HIMSELF RULED BY THE MEANEST THINGS.

1. What is meaner than vile passion?

(1) Capricious lust ruled the destinies of Herod. The king is ruled by the beast. The beast excites the murderer. The man is bedevilled.

(2) “He that ruleth his heart is greater than he that taketh a city.” Brute force may take the city. Brute force may imprison the saint. Moral force rules the heart. It vanquishes sin. It vanquishes Satan.

2. What is meaner than the pander of vile passion?

(1) This Herodias was. A despicable woman, who could abandon her living husband to consort with his brother.

(2) The tetrarch was the creature of that wretch. He consented to her stipulation that he should divorce his lawful wife. He became a murderer to please her.

(3) How much lower can the despot sink? Let those who would be honourable eschew despotism. Be admonished by the “dog in office;” by the “beggar on horseback.”

II. THAT THE DIVERSIONS OF THE WORLD ARE COMMON OCCASIONS OF SIN.

1. Feasting.

(1) This in the abstract is innocent. There are religious festivals.

(2) Excesses have to be avoided (see Pro 23:31-33).

(3) The folly of the fool comes out of his merry heart.

“There cannot be a better glass, wherein to discern the face our hearts, than our pleasures; such as they are, such are we” (Bishop Hall; see Pro 10:23; Hos 7:5).

2. Dancing.

(1) This may evince a holy excitement, as when David danced before the ark. His dancing would be the hilarious stepping of a soul full of holy triumph.

(2) The dancing of Salome was of another kind. The dancing of the ballroom is a pernicious invention to excite criminal passion. It has often led to the sacrifice of chastity, and to murder afterwards to conceal shame.

(3) Christian mothers who send their daughters to the dancing school should remember the mother of Salome (cf. 2Ch 22:3).

3. Company.

(1) The company of the good is from the Lord. It was none the less edifying to the disciples of John because a prison was the place of meeting.

(2) The company of the wicked is from the devil. It is none the less demoralizing when the meeting place is in a palace.

(3) Tyrants will have flatterers for their courtiers. They hate reprovers. John’s words were rough like his raiment (see 1Ki 22:8; Pro 9:8; Pro 15:10-12). The prisoner is not bidden to the feast.

(4) Unlike the princes of Jehoiakim (see Jer 36:25), the guests of Antipas had not the spirit to protest against the oaths or the murder, and so they became accomplices in both. To their notions of honour the Baptist’s head must be sacrificed.

III. THAT A PARTIAL SURRENDER TO TRUTH IS NO SECURITY AGAINST CORRUPTION.

1. Herod for some time spared John‘s life.

(1) In the first flush of his resentment for John’s reproof, he was minded to put John to death. In this, too, he was encouraged by Herodias. But he was restrained by his fear of the multitude, “because they counted John as a prophet.”

(2) The fear of man is to the wicked a greater restraint than the fear of God. Men fear to be hanged for what they fear not to be damned (see Ecc 7:17). The fear of man restrains; the fear of God constrains.

2. He even listened to John‘s sermons.

(1) The consequence was that he had a new motive for sparing John’s life, which was still coveted by Herodias. He now “feared John, knowing. that he was a righteous man and a holy, and kept him safe.”

(2) He heard John with a conviction which “much perplexed him; and he heard him gladly” Wicked men are not insensible to the beauty and power of great principles. Many such listen gladly to faithful gospel preaching.

(3) He went further; “he did many things” at the instance of John.

3. But he did not forsake all his sins.

(1) He retained Herodias. How many things in the way of reformation will men do while they hold to the sin that easily besets them!

(2) He detained the Baptist in prison. There he lay for eighteen monthsa term equal to that of his public ministry. Thus was the tyrant responsible for the crime the public ministry of that great re. an might have prevented.

(3) The sequel was that, though “the king was sorry,” yet he murdered his monitor to gratify his mistress.

IV. THAT THE WICKED HAVE TO DREAD RETRIBUTIVE RESURRECTIONS.

1. Crime distorts the conscience.

(1) “The king was sorry.”

(a) Sorry at his banquet. Note: Sorrow accompanies the joys of earth.

(b) Sorry that he had pledged his oath to the damsel when he saw the consequence.

“How human passion contradicts itself! Now war is waged for an inch of land; now half a kingdom is sacrificed to the will of a young coquette!” (Quesnel).

(2) But his honour was at stake. “Herod had so much religion as to make scruple of an oathnot so much as to make scruple of a murder” (Bishop Hall). Can a wicked oath justify a wicked deed?

(3) “For the sake of them that sat at meat with him”. The law of honour would condemn Herod as a coward if he did not keep his oath. Yet was he such a coward that he would rather brave the anger of God than the contempt of vain men. So he murdered a great prophet for very tenderness of conscience!

(4) “The king was sorry.” Men enter on a new stage of crime when the restraints of fear yield to self-indulgence. A new step in sin is seldom made without compunction. A guilty man is ever miserable under the power of self-accusation, reproach, and remorse.

2. Phantoms arise frown the distortion.

(1) Christ had been now preaching and working miracles about two years, yet Herod had not heard of him. The fame of the good moves slowly to the great (cf. 1Co 1:26; 1Co 2:8).

(2) The guilty conscience is quick in its conclusions. Herod saw in the miracle worker John the Baptist whom he had beheaded risen from the dead. Blood cries from the conscience of the murderer. He cannot rid himself of that gory visage.

(3) Where now is the Sadducee? The “leaven of Herod” is understood to be the doctrine of the Sadducees. They denied the resurrection (see Act 23:8). But Sadduceeism staggers when conscience is awake.

(4) The resurrections of the conscience, however, are premonitory of those of the last day. John will yet in verity confront Herod before the bar of God.J.A.M.

Mat 14:13-21

The table in the wilderness.

Jesus had several reasons for his crossing the lake to the desert of Bethsaida.

1. He was there out of the jurisdiction of Herod.

(1) Antipas, instigated by Herodias, had recently beheaded the Baptist, and might have been moved to proceed against Jesus, who he suspected was his victim risen from the dead (see Mat 14:1, Mat 14:2). Jesus could have secured himself by Divine power, but, as our Exemplar, he chose to do so by human prudence. It is lawful in times of peril to fly from persecution when we have no special call of God to expose ourselves to it.

(2) Herod desired to see Jesus, but was unworthy of that honour. So, when afterwards they came face to face, “Jesus answered him nothing” (cf. Luk 9:9; Luk 23:8, Luk 23:9; cf. also the case of Saul and Samuel, 1Sa 15:35; 1Sa 20:24).

2. He avoided the pressure of the people and gained some leisure to converse with his disciples newly returned from their progress.

3. He intended to spread before the multitude a table in the wilderness. He knew that the people would follow him. Note: Jesus sometimes leaves us that we may follow him. He lures us into spiritual solitudes to show us there the wonders of his compassion and goodness. The scene is before us.

I. THERE ARE THE GUESTS.

1. They are many.

(1) Seldom do we hear of a banquet spread for ten thousand. There were “about five thousand men.” They were easily reckoned, for they were ranged in companies of fifty. “Beside” these were the “women and children.”

(2) Yet these thousands were only representative of the thousands of millions who are daily feasted upon the bounty of Divine providence. Also countless millions of animated organisms. “Thou openest thine hand, and satisfiest the desire of every living thing.”

(3) They were also representative of the host for whom God has provided the bounties of his grace. From these none are excluded who have not excluded themselves.

2. They are earnest.

(1) Their interest is excited by the “signs which Jesus did on them that were sick” (see Joh 6:2). They travelled round the lake on foot, many of them a distance of about four miles.

(2) They brought with them their sick to be healed. Perhaps, in some cases, sought his healing for those at their homes too invalided to be carried. Certain it is that Jesus required faith for healing. It is equally certain that “he had compassion on these, and healed their sick.” He “healed them that had need of healing” (Mat 14:14; Luk 9:11).

(3) They are earnest in attention to his teaching. Luke tells us that Jesus “received them, and spake unto them of the kingdom of God” (Luk 9:11). From the texts of his power he unfolded his wisdom. Such is the effect that they are scarce restrained from proclaiming him king (see Joh 9:14, Joh 9:15).

3. They are needy.

(1) This fact is recognized in the prudence of the disciples (verse 15). Note: Disciples are often more apt to show discretion than faith.

(2) If they need the bread that perisheth, how much more do they need that which endureth to everlasting life! Jesus “had compassion on them, because they were as sheep not having a shepherd” (Mar 6:34). The poor people were woefully neglected by the Pharisees and scribes.

(3) “They have no need to go away.” In their eagerness after Jesus they had forgotten their ordinary food; but Jesus had not forgotten them. “Seek ye first his kingdom, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you.”

II. THERE IS THE TABLE.

1. It is spread in the wilderness.

(1) The disciples did not yet properly estimate the resources of their Lord. Instead of looking to him for the supply of their wants, like Israel in the desert, they were for returning to Egypt. Are there now no disciples in that prudent apostolical succession?

(2) When the Lord said, “Give ye them to eat,” still they did not properly consider who it was that spake to them. They now looked to their own resources and found them utterly inadequate. In this error also the disciples have many successors.

(3) Soon, however, they discovered that the God of Israel was among them. The five loaves and two fishes were so multiplied that the thousands were satisfied, and the fragments left were greatly in excess of the original store. Hallelujah!

2. This recalls an earlier scene.

(1) Every reflective person in that company would be reminded of the earlier miracle when their fathers in the wilderness were fed from heaven with manna. Even the desert was suggestive. Moreover, “the Passover, a feast of the Jews, was nigh” (see Joh 6:4), and many in this company were on their way to Jerusalem to celebrate that feast, so significantly recalling the history of the Exodus.

(2) Who, then, but the same God of Israel, who fed the fathers with that heavenly bread, is this Jesus who now feeds their children no less miraculously?

3. This also anticipates a later scene.

(1) This broken bread was a type of the Bread of life, to be broken for the spiritual nourishment of believers (see Joh 6:26, Joh 6:27). “By it” Jesus “proclaimed himself the Bread of the world, the Source of all life, of which there shall be enough and to spare for all evermore” (Trench).

(2) The Lord gave the bread to denote the life we have in communion with him. The identity of the teaching in the argument of Jesus upon this miracle (see Joh 6:1-71.), with the teaching of the Eucharist, cannot be missed.

(3) This, by parity of reasoning, invests with new interest the corresponding miracle of the multiplication of the wine at the marriage (see Joh 2:1-11). The communion of Christ is the cheer of our joy as well as the food for our need.

III. THERE IS THE SERVICE.

1. The King heads his table.

(1) “We have here but five loaves, and two fishes.” God often permits his servants to be brought low that they may have the more frequent opportunities of trusting him.

(2) “Bring them hither to me.” If we bring our frugal fare to Jesus for his blessing, he will make it a sufficiency for the body and a sacrament to the soul (cf. Psa 37:19; Hag 1:9). He clothes himself with a body that he may encourage us to depend upon him for the supply of our bodily wants. He takes special care of the bodies of those who are engaged in his service.

(3) “Looking up to heaven, he blessed, and brake.” God’s creatures must be received with thanksgiving (see 1Sa 9:13; Act 2:46, Act 2:47; Act 27:35; 1Ti 4:4). But the blessing of Jesus was more than a thanksgiving.

(4) The presence of Christ can turn a wilderness into a paradise (cf. Isa 41:19, Isa 41:20; Isa 51:3).

2. The disciples are the servitors.

(1) They are commissioned to order the multitude into companies (see Luk 9:14). These fifties are representative of the Churches of Christendom, which are presided over by the ministers of Christ. What Christ designed for his Churches he signified by his servant John (Rev 1:1-4).

(2) They were commissioned to give the loaves to the multitude. Receiving the bread of life themselves, they are strengthened to minister it to others. Through their hands the multitudes are to receive it from the Lord (cf. ch. 24:45; 2Co 5:20; 2Co 6:1).

(3) The bread multiplies in their hands. Herein the Word of God proves itself to be the living bread. So it is like seed. The living Word is the life of the word preached. As seed is multiplied, not by hoarding, but by sowing, so is the Word. “There is that scattereth, and yet increaseth.” Note: What we give in charity should first be given to Christ, that his blessing may multiply its benefit. They that have little must relieve others out of that little, that they may have more.

(4) They are instructed to “gather up the broken pieces which remain over, that nothing be lost” (Joh 6:12). What they gave they received back manifold. There were “five loaves,” one forevery thousand men; they gathered up twelve hand baskets full, one for each apostle. They had also fragments over from the fishes.J.A.M.

Mat 14:22-33

Lessons of the storm.

The wonderful narrative before us suggests many lessons, amongst which the following may be noted, viz.

I. THAT JESUS IS A PARTY TO THE TROUBLES OF HIS DISCIPLES.

1. These are often induced by their own folly.

(1) After the miracle of the loaves the multitudes were eager to proclaim Jesus as their national King. From what we learn from John (Joh 6:15), it would seem the disciples were more disposed to second their wishes than to aid their Master in his efforts to send the people away. In this they were moved by the ignorant prejudices of the times. Note: The ignorance of his disciples has ever been a trouble to Christ.

(2) This was the occasion of their having to embark and put to sea, and consequently of their having to encounter a terrific storm. Note: We may expect to encounter afflictions and perplexities when, from whatever motives, we are so foolish as to oppose the will of Christ.

2. Satan has a malignant hand in them.

(1) Evil spirits are concerned in the mischief of destructive storms. The history of Job shows what power Satan has over the elements when he is permitted to use it. When our Lord, in another storm, “rebuked the winds and the sea” (see Mat 8:26), did he not recognize blameworthy intelligence as working behind these elements?

(2) The closing petitions of the Lord’s Prayer, “And bring us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one,” show that not only is Satan, in some of his agencies, concerned in every mischief, but that he is so of set malignant purpose. It shows, moreover, that our defence is prayer.

3. Jesus has a benevolent hand in them.

(1) He constrained his disciples to enter the boat and put to sea. This was to relieve himself from their embarrassing sympathy with the prejudices of the multitude. This in itself was a benevolence. It put them out of the way of working further mischief.

(2) He knew, when he constrained them to enter that boat, that they would have to encounter the storm. He permitted the evil spirits to exert their power upon the elements, or, otherwise, commissioned those elements to war. But his design here also was benevolent. It taught the disciples:

(a) That those who will not submit to the ruling of Christ’s wisdom will have to sail without him in the voyage of life.

(b) That in voyaging without Christ the way is difficult and perilous.

(c) That the policy of their ignorant prejudice in making Christ a civil Ruler, if carried out, would, instead of bringing the tranquillity they pictured to themselves, bring them into a political hurricane.

(3) If, then, Jesus is a party to the troubles of his disciples, and that his hand in those troubles is benevolent, let us bless him for them. Let us also be quick to learn the lessons they are intended to teach.

II. THAT JESUS IS PRESENT WITH HIS DISCIPLES IN THEIR TROUBLES,

1. He is present in spirit when invisible.

(1) When he had dispersed the multitudes “he went up into the mountain apart to pray.” He knew the temper in which his disciples had sailed; he foresaw the coming storm; he remembers them in prayer. By that intercession the malignity of Satan is restrained, and the fury of the winds and waves so moderated that the lives are preserved.

(2) And if Jesus from that mountain height could see and sympathize with his disciples in that tempest, so does he still, from the height of heaven, see and sympathize with his followers in every trouble of their lives.

2. He is present, moreover, in power.

(1) In the crisis of extremity that power is seen. The disciples were now “about five and twenty furlongs” from the shore, in the centre of the inland sea, and the storm most distressing. Just then Jesus “came unto them, walking upon the sea.”

(2) That blessed presence is as powerful as it is timely. The Egyptian hieroglyphic for impossibility was a man’s feet walking on the sea. Things impossible to men are possible with God (cf. Job 9:8). In this miracle the law of gravitation is inverted, and the liquid waves are converted into an adamantine way.

(3) Now he enters the boat. Behold, instantly, all is calm!

III. THAT CREDULITY IS THE COMPANION OF UNBELIEF.

1. The heart is slow to discern Christ.

(1) There he is walking upon the sea, yet is he not identified even by his own disciples. Why did they not recognize him instantly? Who else could it possibly be?

(2) But they deemed this too wonderful to be Christ. What, too wonderful for that Blessed One who in this very lake districtat Chorazin, Bethasaida, Capernaumhad wrought so many miracles! Who on this very sea had stilled a tempest with a word! Who but a few hours earlier had feasted ten thousand upon five barley cakes! Yet such was the fact.

(3) Are we more quick to discern Christ in the wonders of providence than the apostles were to recognize his presence in the wonders of this history? How seldom do we see deeper than the second causes of things!

2. It mistakes him for a phantom.

(1) “And when the disciples saw him walking on the sea, they were troubled, saying, It is an apparition; and they cried out for fear” (cf. Act 12:15).

(2) This “fear” suggests that they even mistook Jesus for a demon or evil spirit. How frightful are the distortions of the credulity of unbelief!

(3) The disciples were terrified at an apparition which was designed for their salvation. When in their extremity they “cried out for fear,” then came their relief. By a word, “It is I; be not afraid,” the deepest fear is turned into the highest joy (cf. Psa 112:4). The calm now succeeds the storm in the soul.

IV. THAT NATURAL RESOURCES ARE USELESS IN SPIRITUAL CONFLICTS.

1. Seamanship failed in this storm.

(1) Several of the disciples were brought up as fishermen, and knew how to handle the oar (Mar 6:48). But here they were at their wits’ end, so furiously was the sea working in the storm. This was not purely an elemental strife; it was a spiritual conflict, brought about for spiritual purposes.

(2) Their salvation was of the Lord. He laid the storm. We too shall exclaim, “Of a truth thou art the Son of God,” when he tranquillizes the mind which the prince of the powers of the air had disturbed and troubled. Only in so far as the love of Christ is in us can we worship him as Love.

2. The swimming art failed in these waves.

(1) Peter’s fault was not his courage when he said, “Lord, if it be thou”since it is thou”bid me come unto thee upon the waters.” Courage is fearlessness, and intelligent fearlessness is faith. Faith is the opposite of doubt and fear.

(2) The Lord permits us to try our strength that we may discover our weakness. Peter in the ship was bold; timid on the angry sea. Men are often confident in speculation, diffident in practice.

(3) Peter was borne up on the water in proportion to his faith, as the children of Israel were victorious as the hands of Moses were held up (Exo 17:11). “The true position of every disciple is this: So to see the deep that is beneath him as to lose all confidence in himself, and so to see the Saviour that is near him as to lose all terror of the billows” (Anon.).

(4) Peter was a good swimmer (see Joh 21:7), but he trusts not to his swimming in this peril. Those who rely on grace lose confidence in nature. Christ is the sufficient confidence of his saints.J.A.M.

Mat 14:34-36

Philanthropy.

After Jesus had come to his distressed disciples walking on the sea, and calmed for them the fury of the storm, with their Master now in their company, they had a pleasant run to the land of Gennesaret. Behold now another scene of wonder. “When the men of that place knew him,” etc. Here we have a fine example of philanthropy, in which there is

I. A TRUE SYMPATHY WITH HUMANITY. The evidences of this are:

1. A knowledge of what it is. This is expressed in the single word “sick.” And this implies:

(1) Disorganization;

(a) physical;

(b) intellectual;

(c) moral.

(2) Disability, viz. in every part of our nature.

(3) Suffering.

(4) Death.

2. An estimate of what it ought to be. This also may be expressed in the single word “healthy.” And this implies:

(1) That the elements of our nature work together harmoniously.

(a) As to the organs of the body;

(b) as to the faculties of the intellect;

(c) as to the will and the affections of the heart.

(2) That consequently there is strength and competence in all our powers.

(3) Moreover that there is happiness.

(a) The sense of immunity from pain;

(b) the sense of vigour.

(4) And there is life. This is more than existence. Physically, it is existence under the best conditions. So, morally, it is union with God.

3. A yearning for its regenerations. This is the crucial point. There are theorists who have noble conceptions of what men ought to be, who do not endeavour to exemplify their ideal, nor to induce others to do so. Such a theorist may be a devil.

II. AN ACTIVE PUBLIC SPIRIT. This is evinced in:

1. The quick discernment of the presence of the Healer.

(1) The men of Gennesaret recognized Jesus as soon as he landed on their shore. He had been amongst them before. Gennesaret, the ancient Chinnereth (see Deu 3:17; Jos 19:35), the district in Lower Galilee in which Capernaum was situate. Probably they had been amongst those who witnessed the miracle of the loaves on the preceding day.

(2) They were more noble than their neighbours, the Gergesenes, who “besought Jesus that he would depart out of their coasts,” for they welcomed him among them. Note: If Christ were better known he would be better trusted, and not rejected as he is too often.

(3) The discernment of the day of opportunity is an important step towards its improvement (cf. Luk 19:24; Joh 1:10). It is better to know that there is a prophet amongst us than that there has been one (see Eze 2:5).

2. The prompt gathering into that presence of the sick.

(1) The men of Gennesaret lost no time, but sent instantly messengers through all parts of the surrounding country to advise the sick that the Healer had arrived. Note: Those who know Christ should preach him.

(2) If these men of Gennesaret had tasted of the loaves, and that this zeal was an effect of the miracle upon them, this lesson is suggested, viz. that the inward reception of the truth will create a desire for the removal of outward evil. When the word comes into the heart it will renovate the life.

(3) The zeal of the men of Gennesaret was transfused into their messengers. Mark gives a graphic description of their activity.

3. The earnest supplication of the Divine blessing.

(1) The religious is the truest philanthropy.

(a) Religion benefits the body. Its precepts conduce to health. Their violation is the chief cause of disease.

(b) Religion benefits the soul. The soul is the grander part. The philanthropy which terminates in the body is imperfect.

(2) It is prayerful. “They,” the men of Gennesaret, “besought Jesus that they,” the sick, “might only touch the border of his garment.” Note:

(a) The prayer was importunate. “Besought him.”

(b) It was mixed with faith. “That they might only touch.” The virtue was not in the garment, but in the touch, which, as an act of faith, was to be rewarded.

(c) It was mixed with gratitude. Eastern people show respect to their princes by kissing their sleeve or skirt.

(3) They were evidently influenced by the example of their countrywoman. For she was of Capernaum who introduced this idea of touching the hem of the garment (see Mat 9:20-22). The precious ointment which was upon the head of Jesus ran down to the skirts of his garment (Psa 133:2).

(4) “As many as touched were made whole.” If ministers could cure bodily diseases they would have many clients; for, unhappily, men are commonly more concerned about the body than about the soul. The cure of disease, morally considered, is the removal of evils and errors, by which the faculties recover their true tone and balance, and the mind becomes enriched with truth and goodness.J.A.M.

HOMILIES BY R. TUCK

Mat 14:4

John’s rugged faithfulness.

How John came into contact with Herod, or how he was called to administer such a public reproof, we are not informed. It is quite possible that, in the Divine inspiration, he had done somewhat as Elijah had done before himsuddenly appeared at court,a strange weird figure before which the soldiers shrank back,marched straight into the presence of Herod, and with no preamble or apology, declared, “It is not lawful for thee to have her.” It is, however, quite possible that Herod may have sent for him, hoping to get his conscience eased by securing the prophet’s approval of his act; and no doubt Herod had some fine excuses and explanations to offer. Men always have when they have resolved to satisfy their own fancies and vices. And at Eastern courts there are always people willing enough to flatter their king, and encourage him in his vices. John stands out in strong contrast with all such.

I. A MAN WHO KNEW THE RIGHT. We are often confused because, though we may know the right, there are special circumstances in each particular case which disturb our judgment. We can see the abstract right, but it is difficult to see the right in just this case. It cannot be right that a man should have his brother’s wife. And yet advisers at court may make out that high policy makes that necessary in this case. Compare Cranmer helping Henry VIII. to secure his shameless divorce. John the Baptist listened to no excuses of policy, which were but excuses of passion. He knew the right.

II. A MAN WHO SPOKE OUT THE RIGHT HE KNEW. So often we “keep silence in the evil time.” We think we can do no good by speaking out, and may only bring trouble on ourselves. The men who have influenced the generations are the men of strong convictions, who could not keep silence. John, on this occasion, might have been cautious; he might have spoken like a courtier, eased his message, spoken carefully, and taken care not to offend. His mission was to the conscience of the wicked king. There shall be no trimming in his message; it shall smite right home. It is bald, bare, strong, uncompromising. “It is not lawful for thee to have her.” People are sometimes what they call “faithful,” but they are only irritating and humiliating. True faithfulness is conscience rousing.

III. A MAN WHO SUFFERED FOR THE RIGHT HE SPOKE. Not really at the hands of Herod. Really at the hands of Herodias, the unscrupulous woman who was the Jezebel to this Ahab. A man who fears the personal consequences of witnessing to the right, or doing the right, will never stand beside rugged, faithful John in the Divine approval.R.T.

Mat 14:7

The foolishness of unlimited promises.

“He promised with an oath to give her whatsoever she would ask.” We are sometimes invited to promise before we are told what is to be asked. It should never be done. No man can tell whether it is right to promise until he knows what is to be promised. In the case now before us, we find a man excited with wine and company, and not really himself. It is necessary to realize the gay but degrading scene, and the skilfulness of the wicked scheme carried through by Herodias. To us dancing is a modest and beautiful amusement, whatever may be thought of its relation to religious people. But at Eastern feasts, girls of bad character were often introduced, who amused the guests, and excited evil passions, by rude movements and antics, and dancing in filmy garments. “Herodias knew the tetrarch’s weak point as well as Madame du Barry knew that of Louis XV. of France, and sought to bend him to her will, even though it were by the sacrifice of her daughter’s modesty.” She made Salome act before these guests as if she were an Almeh-dancer. Herod loses all self-control, and foolishly promises her anything.

I. A SURRENDER OF JUDGMENT. A man should always consider and decide before he promises. A man may surrender his judgment to God. He may yield his judgment in discussion with his fellow men, because a better judgment may be given. But he may never give away his judgment, and let some one else judge for him. Then a man is weak, unmanly. By unlimited promise Herod surrendered his manhood, his right to control his conduct.

II. AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE UNSCRUPULOUS. Their trouble always is that their plans may be considered, weighed, judged. So their scheme always is to get things carried through before they can be thought about. “Tomorrow” is the weakness of the undecided, and the ruin of the unscrupulous. If Herod had said, “We will see about the promise tomorrow,” John Baptist would not have lost his head. That unlimited promise broke the barriers down; and unscrupulous Herodias pressed her opportunity.

III. A CURSE ALIKE FOR THOSE WHO GET AND THOSE WHO GIVE. Is it possible for us to estimate the moral effect of this abominable transaction on Herodias and Salome? The worst thing that can ever happen to us is to be successful in some shameless enterprise. Salome’s life was a horror, almost worse than that of Herodias. Then estimate the misery of Herod. His conscience that ever reminded him of the head in the charger. His dreadful fears that John had risen from the dead. Never promise without knowing what you promise.R.T.

Mat 14:9

Vain regrets.

“And the king was sorry.” But no good came of his sorrow. It was too late. He had lost his opportunity. He had put his foot upon a slide, and down he had to go. Plumptre says, “It was the last struggle of conscience. In that moment there must have come before his mind his past reverence for the prophet, the joy which had for a time accompanied the strivings of a better life, possibly the counsels of his foster brother Manaen.” Every man must have his regrets. Things done in all good faith turn out very different to our expectations, and we regret that we did them. But, if we are strong men, we work at the correction or the remedying of our unintended evil. And regret sometimes is an important element in repentance. Regret concerns the result of action. Repentance concerns the wrong of action.

I. REGRETS ARE VAIN WHEN CHARACTER IS WEAK. Undisciplined people are always full of regrets; but they do them little or no good. Herod was sorry that he had made that unconditional promise. But he was too weak to refuse to do the wrong to which it led. The weak fear of man extracted the order for the beheading; he was ashamed before that assembly to recall his too hasty promise. “Like most weak men, Herod feared to be thought weak. It was not so much his regard for the oath which he had taken, but his shrinking from the taunt, or whispered jest, or contemptuous gesture of the assembled guests, if they should see him draw back from his plighted word.” When the character is weak it is

(1) always sensitive to public opinion;

(2) it is always subject to the sway of stronger characters.

Herod may be as sorry as he pleases, but his regret is helpless and vain. Public opinion will drag him on into crime, and so will the shameless companion of his sins.

II. REGRETS ARE VAIN WHEN CIRCUMSTANCES ARE MASTERFUL. A man may be sorry, and may even try to put right his wrong, yet find all his efforts in vain. The man who plays with the fates will be dragged on to his doom by them. It is easy to set going a train of circumstances, but even the strong man vainly tries to check their unfoldings; they become masterful; and he must see the misery he has made, and be punished by seeing it. Our life is so ordered that good, sooner or later, inevitably unfolds good; and evil, sooner or later, inevitably unfolds misery. Let a man do the prudent, the thoughtful, the self-restrained, the good, and he will never know the misery of vain regrets.R.T.

Mat 14:13

The first impulse of the sorrow stricken.

There may have been more than one reason for our Lord’s retirement on this occasion. He may have designed to secure a time of close personal intercourse with the apostles. They had just returned from their trial mission; they were in a very excited frame of mind, and sorely needed a time of quiet guidance and teaching. He may also have felt that the violent death of John the Baptist, of which very imperfect accounts must have reached him, put his own life in peril, and made it advisable to remove from more public scenes for a while. But the accounts leave on us the impression that our Lord was specially affected by the news of John’s death, and felt the longing for quietness and seclusion, which is the first impulse of the sorrow stricken; in this showing himself tempted and tried even as we are, and so having a “fellow feeling of our infirmities.” The point on which we dwell is that the first desire of the sorrow stricken is a mixed one. He both seeks quietude and he seeks company; and often he restlessly changes from the one to the other. This peculiarity we find in Jesus, in “the Man Christ Jesus.”

I. THE IMPULSE TO SEEK LONELINESS. This perhaps always comes first. Sorrow sends us into retirement. The stricken care to see nobody. Leave them alone in their grief. This is illustrated in two scenes of Christ’s life.

1. In the case before us, when Jesus received the sad news of the violent death of a friend and fellow worker. He wanted to be alone. He went into quietude. He passed across the lake, to the lonely eastern side, away from the pressure of the crowds. Silence, separation, are the felt needs of such an hour.

2. In the case of Gethsemane, when Jesus was in immediate anticipation of calamity, and overwhelmed with mental distress. Then he sought the quiet of the garden, the shade of the olives, and even separation from the trusted three. None may see the Man in his sublime soul wrestlings. He must be alone.

II. THE IMPULSE TO SEEK COMPANY. This is quite as marked. The stricken man wants to be alone, and yet cannot bear to be alone, he wants to feel that friends are near; that he can reach them. He must sometimes speak out the woe to them, or it would grow unendurable. This is illustrated in the same two scenes of Christ’s life. In the first, our Lord must have the apostolic company with him. “Come ye into a desert place, and rest a while.” In the second, he must feel that the chosen three were close at hand. Truly a “fellow feeling of our infirmities.”R.T.

Mat 14:22

The necessity for constraint.

Thomson puts together the narrative so as to bring out the reason for Christ’s constraining the disciples; or, rather, a first and external reason which prepares for the discernment of the deeper reason.

I. THE EVIDENT NECESSITY FOR THE CONSTRAINT. “As the evening was coming on, Jesus commanded the disciples to return home to Capernaum, while he sent the people away. They were reluctant to go and leave him alone in that desert place; probably remonstrated against his exposing himself to the coming storm and the cold night air, and reminded him that he would have many miles to walk round the head of the lake, and must cross the Jordan at Bethsaida before he could reach home. To quiet their minds, he may have then told them to go on toward Bethsaida, while he dismissed the crowd, promising to join them in the night, which he intended to do, and actually did, though in a manner very different from what they expected. Still they were reluctant to leave him, and bad to be constrained to set sail. In this state of anxiety, they endeavoured to keep near the shore between this and Bethsaida, hoping, no doubt, to take in their beloved Master at some point along the coast. But a violent wind beat off the boat, so that they were not able to make Bethsaida, nor even Capernaum, but were driven past both; and when near the Plain of Gennesaret, at the northwest corner of the lake, Jesus came to them walking on the sea.” This illustrates well the surface explanation of these events; but it does not satisfy, because it does not give any reason for our Lord sending the disciples away. Why did he not keep them to help him in dismissing the crowd?

II. THE REAL NECESSITY FOR THE CONSTRAINT. We must look below the surface, and then some interesting things come to view. The miracle of feeding the thousands excited the people, and led them to regard Jesus as the delivering Messiah, and there and then proclaim him as the expected King. And our Lord’s disciples, instead of repressing this excitement, were carried away by it, and would have joined in this mistaken acclamation. Herein lies the explanation of the following things.

1. Their uselessness as helpers in dismissing the excited crowd, seeing they were themselves excited.

2. Christ’s determination to get them out of the way.

3. Their unwillingness to go.

4. Our Lord’s constraint.

5. The revelation of his mystery and spirituality, in the walking on the sea, as corrective of the material notions to which they were giving room.R.T.

Mat 14:23

The soothing power of prayer.

Earnest effort should be made to realize the strain, and excitement, and fatigue, and distress of that day to Christ. In some senses it was the very hardest day of his active ministry. Appraise carefully the spiritual, and even physical, influence of the following things.

1. Anxiety concerning the excitement of his disciples because the devils had been subject to them on their first mission.

2. Distress on hearing of the violent death of John.

3. Effort to put personal feeling aside in order to teach and heal the crowds who gathered at his landing place.

4. The spiritual strain of expending miraculous force in multiplying the few loaves.

5. Excitement at the dangerous intentions of the people to make him king.

6. Annoyance at his disciples when they would take part with the people.

7. Necessity for acting promptly and vigorously in checking the beginnings of mischief.

8. Pain to find his disciples still imprisoned in material conceptions of him and of his mission. Surely when all was over, the disciples were on the lake, and the last lingerer of the crowd well out of sight, Jesus must have been utterly exhausted, and needed some soothing, healing balm. Where could he get it? He knew. He shows us the place of soothing. It is the place of prayer.

I. PRAYER SOOTHES BY ENABLING US TO CAST OUR CARE ON GOD. The simple soothing mission of prayer is not often dwelt on. It is too much treated as a means of getting something. Its best blessings may be said to be the good things it does for us, rather than the good things it obtains for us. Prayer allays excitement. Prayer soothes the worried. Prayer quiets the restless. Prayer stills our atmospheres. And all because it just means telling God. If we begin to tell excitedly we soon fall into the deep peace which his presence and sympathy always breathe.

II. PRAYER SOOTHES BY ASSURING US THAT GOD CARES FOR US. And that, of necessity, means the mastery of the circumstances that trouble us. We are in the midst of difficulties, and they worry; they seem to be masterful. We go to God in prayer, and feel that he is in the midst of them, ruling and overruling; and we are calmed and rested. There are no real difficulties. “Greater is he who is for us than all who can be against us.”R.T.

Mat 14:26

A first lesson on the spiritual presence.

The answer of the disciples to the sight of Jesus walking on the sea revealed the fact that they shared the superstitious sentiments of their age. They said, “It is a spirit.” “Orientals continue to believe, as of old, in supernatural agencies, not only in the all-pervading and all-controlling providence and personal influence of the Deity, which they have ever pushed to extreme fatalism, but also in the existence and activity, either for good or for evil, of spirits and invisible beings, who people the air.” Our Lord desired to guide his disciples to worthier apprehensions of spiritual things, through the proper apprehension of himself as a spiritual Being and a spiritual Messiah. Our Lord had wrought many miracles which displayed his power, and revealed him as

(1) Lord of Nature in all her moods;

(2) of death in all its stages;

(3) of devils in all their forms of mischief;

(4) of souls in all their spiritual needs.

Now, by this walking on the sea, he would reveal to them something of the mystery which belonged to his own Person. And this particular revelation was called for by the fact that the disciples had encouraged the attempt of the people to make their Master a merely earthly king (Joh 6:15).

I. CHRIST‘S BODILY PRESENCE DID BUT ILLUSTRATE HIS SPIRITUAL PRESENCE. It should be clearly seen that our Lord was with his disciples in a double sense. He was with them spiritually, just as he is still with us; but, besides that, he was with them in bodily relations, in ways that could be apprehended by their senses. That bodily presence was given to teach them what the spiritual presence is and involves. The record of that bodily presence is preserved that it might do the same thing for us. Christ, by coming on the sea, taught the disciples two things.

1. That he would be with them when they could not see him.

2. That they must not wonder if he came to them in strange forms and manifestations. He was teaching them how to use their wings in the spiritual atmosphere, as the mother bird teaches her fledgelings.

II. CHRIST‘S BODILY PRESENCE WAS PRESENTLY TO PASS INTO A SPIRITUAL PRESENCE. The first suggestion was the loss of bodyweight which enabled Jesus to walk on the water. The second suggestion was the passing of the bodily into the spiritual at the Resurrection. The third was the passing of the spiritual body beyond the apprehension of the senses at the Ascension. The illustrative bodily presence has gone now, and gone forever; the reality of the spiritual presence of Christ is the possession and the glory of his Church today.R.T.

Mat 14:29, Mat 14:30

The lack of staying power.

“But when he saw the wind boisterous, he was afraid.” It is the weakness of the impulsive man that he has no staying power, and is only good for the little while that the fit is on him. It is the weakness of impulsive, excitable nations, that while they are splendid at a dash, they have none of the persistency that holds on until the end is fully secured. St. Peter often spoke and acted before he thought. Behind him was impulse rather than resolve. So difficulties created at once a new and opposing impulse. He failed as quickly and as unreasonably as he acted. The men who succeed in life are the men who can hold on. St. Peter might have safely walked the water if he had held on the faith with which he started from the boat, and which had received the Master’s approval.

I. ST. PETER ATTEMPTED AN IMPOSSIBILITY. There is nothing that men regard as so impossible as “walking on the sea.“ Men can walk on the narrowest ledges of the loftiest cliffs, or on the thinnest ropes, but not on the water. The Egyptians, in their hieroglyphics, were wont to represent an impossibility by painting the figure of a man with his feet walking upon the sea. St. Peter saw this impossibility overcome by his Master. A sudden thought seized him. He should like to do what his Master did. It was a child’s wish; but it showed love and trust. He spoke it out. The Master said “Come,” and he tried to do the impossible. A nobler man than those who never had such thoughts, and never made such attempts.

II. ST. PETER BEGAN TO SUCCEED WITH HIS IMPOSSIBILITY. A man can walk steadily along a very dangerous place if he looks up at the steadfast sky. He will be giddy if he ventures to look around or to look down. It is thus always in the spiritual spheres. St. Peters can always walk safely, even on the treacherous waters, so long as they look up and away to the steadfast Christ. They will fail and fall as soon as they look around, or down, or within. And the reason is that man is strong when he leans on another, but weak when he trusts to himself. The impulsive man leans for a minute and is strong; then impulse fails, and he is, like Samson, weak as other men.

III. ST. PETER SOON FAILED WITH HIS IMPOSSIBILITY. If he could have kept his eye and mind fixed on Jesus he would have succeeded. But he thought of the wind; and the wind took the place of Jesus. Jesus quickened faith; the wind quickened fear. Faith makes a man strong. Fear wholly unnerves. What St. Peter needed for success was “staying power of faith.” Keeping on trusting. Keeping on “looking off unto Jesus;” “patient continuance in well doing,”R.T.

Mat 14:33

The name which disciples found for Jesus.

In a previous homily attention has been given to the name which Jesus found for himself, “The Son of man.” Here we have the name for the highest thoughts which disciples could reach concerning him, “The Son of God.” Much interest may be found in comparing the leading names given to Christ. God’s name for him. His own name for himself. His disciples’ name for him. The name he was to have. The name he wished to have. The name he came to have. “Emmanuel;” “Son of man;” “Son of God.” The disciples’ confession was made in a moment of wonder at their Lord’s walking on the sea, which convinced them that he was more than man. We need not suppose that they put into the term that full meaning which we associate with it; but they said it to Christ in a spirit of true reverence, offering to him the worship due only to a Divine Being.

I. THE NAME “SON OF GOD” DOES NOT REPRESENT OUR FIRST APPREHENSION OF CHRIST. It is intended that the humanity of Christ should make the first impression upon us. At first sight he is the “Man Christ Jesus.” St. John is even supremely jealous of the truth that “Jesus is come in the flesh.” It may be doubted whether any arguments for the Divinity of Christ can be effective until the truth of his humanity has been fully apprehended. What requires to be seen clearly is that the humanity of Christ cannot be fully and adequately set forth without producing the conviction that he was more than human. What the orthodox party needs to secure is a complete representation of our Lord’s humanity. Imperfect representations have laid the basis of erroneous doctrines concerning our Lord’s Person. We begin with his full humanity.

II. THE NAME “SON OF GOD” REPRESENTS ADVANCED CHRISTIAN ATTAINMENT. Hardly in the instance now before us, which is better regarded as an anticipative exclamation of what would be more intelligently and more considerately stated by and by. We have also to remember that the Jews commonly spoke of tradesmen as “son of the trade,” and these disciples may but have intended a figure for the good man, the “Son of God.” But the term was subsequently used with its fullest meaning. It represents the advanced spiritual apprehension of Christ. He is “the Son of God with power.” The conviction of the Divinity, or Deity, of Christ is seldom or ever reached by arguments. It is the conviction which comes to men by personal dealings with Christ; personal experiences of his power. At first we know him as our Saviour; by and by we know him as our God.R.T.

Fuente: The Complete Pulpit Commentary

Mat 14:1. Herod the Tetrarch Herod is called Tetrarch, because he inherited but a fourth part of his father’s dominions. However, he exercised a regal authority in Galilee, and is styled a king, Mat 14:9 and Mar 6:14. This was Herod Antipas. See ch. Mat 2:1.

Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke

Mat 14:1 f. ] See Mat 13:54-58 . The more original narrative in Mar 6:14 ff. (comp. Luk 9:7-9 ) introduces this circumstance as well as the account of the Baptist’s death, between the sending out and the return of the Twelve, which, considering the excitement that had already been created by the doings of Jesus, would appear to be rather early. Yet Luke represents the imprisonment of John as having taken place much earlier still (Luk 3:19 ff.).

] Antipas . Comp. note on Mat 2:22 . Not a word about Jesus, the Jewish Rabbi and worker of miracles, had till now reached the ear of this licentious prince in his palace at Tiberias; because, without doubt, like those who lived about his court, he gave himself no particular concern about matters of this sort: he, upon this occasion, heard of Him for the first time in consequence of the excitement becoming every day greater and greater.

. , as in Mat 4:24 .

Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary

B. CHRIST MANIFESTS HIMSELF AS THE HIGH PRIEST IN HIS SUFFERINGS; BEING REJECTED BY THE POLITICAL DESPOTISM OF HEROD, THE RULER OF GALILEE

Mat 14:1-33 (Mar 6:14-56; Luk 9:7-17; Joh 6:1-21)

Contents:Jesus withdraws Himself from the court of Herod Antipas, who had just murdered John the Baptist. The priestly realm of the Lord in the desert among the poor people; or, the first miraculous feeding of the multitude. Priestly sway of the Lord amid the terrors of the night at sea.

1. Retirement of the Lord from the vicinity of Herod. Mat 14:1-13

1, At that time Herod the tetrarch heard of the fame of Jesus, 2And said unto his servants, This is John the Baptist; he is risen from the dead; and therefore mighty works do shew forth themselves in him.1 3For Herod had laid hold on John, and bound him, and put him [out of the way]2 in prison for Herodias sake,3 his brother Philips4

4, wife. For John said unto him, It is not lawful for thee to have her. 5And when he would have put him to death, he feared5 the multitude, because they counted [held] him as a prophet. 6But when Herods birthday was kept,6 the daughter of Herodias danced before them, and pleased Herod. 7Whereupon he promised with an oath to give her whatsoever she would [should] ask. 8And she, being before instructed of [led on by]7 her mother, said, Give me here John Baptists head in a charger [platter].89And the king was sorry:9 nevertheless [but] for the oaths sake, and them which sat 10[that reclined] with him at meat, he commanded it to be given her. And he sent, and beheaded John in the prison. 11And his head was brought in a charger [platter], and given to the damsel: and she brought it to her mother. 12And his disciples came, and took up the body,10 and buried it, and went and told Jesus.

13When Jesus heard of it, he departed [withdrew from, ] thence by ship into a desert place apart: and when the people had heard thereof , they followed him on foot out of the cities.

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

Chronological Arrangement.The offence which Christ had experienced in His own city is followed by another offence on the part of His sovereign. This may have been another practical reason why Matthew records in this connection what had taken place on a former occasion. The chronological succession of events appears from Joh 6:1. After the return of Jesus from the festival of Purim, He passed over the Sea of Galilee, as it would seem near Tiberias. Evidently the feeding of the multitude, here recorded, was the first occasion of that kind; the circumstances are the same as in Johnfive loaves, two fishes, five thousand people, twelve baskets full of fragments;the narrative being followed in both Gospels by an account of Christs walking on the sea. On the other hand, Luke reports the return of the Apostles (Luk 9:10), after having recorded that Herod had wished to see Jesus. Christ, however, withdraws with His disciples into the wilderness near Bethsaida (on the other side of the lake). There the miraculous feeding of the multitude took place. Mark records in the same manner and connection the motive for His passage across the sea, as also His feeding the multitude and walking on the waters. From all this we conclude that this event took place at the time when Jesus again met His disciples in Galilee, on His return from the visit to Jerusalem, which closed with His last missionary journey through Galilee. On the other hand, Mat 11:12-13, represents the Saviour as again going about with His disciples.

Mat 14:1. Herod Antipas ( = ), the son of Herod the Great and of Malthace, a Samaritan. In his testament, Herod had appointed him tetrarch of Galilee and Pera. Antipas entered into a secret contract of marriage with Herodias, the daughter of Aristobulus, his half-brother, and the wife of another half-brother, Herod Philippus; and in consequence repudiated his lawful wife, the daughter of Aretas, king of Arabia. Aretas declared war and conquered Herod; but was prevented by the Romans from following up his victory. From motives of ambition, Herodias persuaded her weak and indolent husband to repair to Rome, after the accession of Caligula, in order to secure for himself the title of king, which had been previously obtained by Herod Agrippa, the nephew of Antipater (Jos. Antiq. 18, 7, 1). But, on the accusation of Agrippa, Antipater was deposed by the emperor, and banished to Lyons, where Herodias, his wife, followed him. He died in Spain, whither probably he was afterward transported. From the first, Herod was a light-minded, unreliable, prodigal, and luxurious prince; hence also he proved superstitious and cunning (Luk 13:32; Mar 8:15), and on certain occasions, either from folly or weakness, utterly heartless, cruel, and callous (see the history of the Passion). Jewish tradition likewise represents him in an unfavorable light. Herod Philippus, the son of a high priests daughter, was disinherited by his father, and lived as a private citizen. He must not be confounded with Philip the tetrarch. According to Jerome (Contra Rufin. 3:42), Herodias vented her fury even against the dead body of John the Baptist. The daughter of Herodias here spoken of was by the first marriage; her name was Salome (Jos. Antiq. 18, 5, 4).On the title , comp. Bretschneider, Lexicon. The term tetrarch, or ruler over a fourth part of the country, is here used in a general sense, and as equivalent to ethnarch. Properly speaking, Herod was a triarch. See Matthew 2.

At that time.The sovereign over the country of Jesus seems now to have heard of Him for the first time. Grotius suggests that Antipater had only returned from Rome; Baronius, that he had been engaged in war with Aretas. In our view of the matter, the tetrarch had been wholly absorbed by the pleasures and the follies of his court, until, as his conscience became aroused, he began to bestow more attention upon such events and tidings. However, it is probable that at the time when Jesus went through the various cities along the Sea of Galilee, Antipater had resided at Machrus, which was at some distance from the scene of the Saviours preaching.

Mat 14:2. Unto his servants,or slaves, viz, his courtiers. An Oriental mode of expression.

This is John the Baptist.It has sometimes been argued that Herod was a Sadducee, partly on the ground of a mistaken combination of Mar 8:15 with Mat 16:6 (the expression in the one passage being, the leaven of Herod, in the other, the leaven of the Sadducees), and partly from the notion, now exploded, that the Sadducees were immoral libertines. But then the difficulty naturally arose, how he could in that case have believed in the resurrection of the dead. Wetstein suggests that an evil conscience had awakened in his breast doubts and fears on this subject; while Meyer infers from the passage that he had not been a Sadducee. Still more unsatisfactory is the explanation offered by Grotius, and others, that Herod had referred to the transmigration of souls, as the monarch distinctly speaks of the resurrection of John. The Jews never seriously entertained such a doctrine, although it has sometimes been imputed to the Pharisees. In our opinion, Herod was neither a Pharisee nor a Sadducee by conviction, although he was identified with the latter party, chiefly, perhaps, from tendencies shared by the whole of his family. In this view of the case, it is quite conceivable that he should have spoken under the influence of a conscience roused and quickened by superstitious fears, and that all the more readily, that the people generally, and even the courtiers of Herod, seem at that time to have been speculating upon, and discussing the character and mission of Jesus. The rejection of the Pharisees must to a certain extent have counteracted the public testimony borne to Jesus. Hence some said that He was Elijah; others, that He was one of the old prophets, perhaps Jeremiah; while some broached the idea, that in Him John the Baptist was risen from the dead (Luk 9:7). We may readily suppose that, in the circumstances, some of the flatterers at court, in their desire to quiet the fears of their prince, may have caught at this. Suffice it, Herod immediately took it up. It might serve various purposes. At any rate, it implied a kind of denial of the Messiah-ship of Jesus; besides, it would diminish his guilt, accord with his superstitious disposition, flatter his theological ambition (remember Henry VIII.), and serve as apology for his desire to see Jesus, which to some might appear suspicious. Nay, he may even have given expression to these views in a semi-hypocritical manner, as a fox, Luk 13:32. At all events, a theological curiosity like that of Herod, and such motives, could only repel the Lord Jesus.

Mat 14:4. It is not lawful, Lev 18:16; Lev 20:21.Josephus adds, that besides this motive for imprisoning John, Herod was also afraid lest John should excite a popular tumult (Antiq. 18, 5, 2). But this apprehension must have originated in the Baptists denunciations of his adultery.

Mat 14:6. Herods birth-day.The anniversary of his accession to the throne, his kingly birth; Psa 2:7; 1Sa 13:1. Suicer, Thesaurus, i. p. 746; Wieseler, 293.11The dativ. abs. [according to the true reading] is probably intended to indicate that the feast was nearing its close; hence that the guests were intoxicated, and that the excitement of thescene offered the most favorable opportunity for accomplishing the satanic purpose of Herodias.

Danced before them.The dance of Salome was, without doubt, mimic, and probably voluptuous. Hor. Od. 3, 6, 21. [Meyer.] The poor girl was on the mothers side a grandchild of Mariamne, the Asmonean princess. Her dancing was a crime not only against the Baptist, but also against Philip her own father. To engage in a profane dance, and that, as the text has it, in the midst, referring probably not merely to the banqueting-hall, but to the circle of spectators which formed around herwas to forget even the decency and decorum of a Jewish maid.

Mat 14:8. But she being prepared (wrought upon, led on) by her mother.Meyer: , induced, instigated, not instructed. But the verb includes the idea of instructing along with that of training and determining. In the present instance, not merely was moral resistance overcome, but, evidently, cunning and detailed instructions had been given. Every one of the expressions used by her points to the determination of taking Herod by surprise.

Mat 14:9. And the king was sorry.This is not incompatible with Mat 14:5. Herodias had on former occasions sought to kill the Baptist. (Lachmann, following Cod. C. and others, reads in Mar 6:19.) But Herod (influenced by her) was merely willing, or inclined toward it (; the word is frequently applied to inclination, where as yet there is no decision). Two opposite motives kept him in a state of indecision. On the one hand, he was urged on by the rancor of Herodias; while, on the other, he was kept back by fear of the people. Nor was his sorrow merely caused by a sudden call of conscience; he was startled by this terrible demand, made in so daring and ghastly a manner, which awakened him all at once from intoxication to full consciousness of the important political consequences of this act.

For the sake of the oath.An instance of sinful performance of an oath (Meyer). But the remark about them that reclined with him at table is significant. Two elements besides his oath seem to have determined himhis princely honor, and the hatred of the court to the Baptist. In all this fashionable throng, no angels voice was heard on behalf of John.

Mat 14:11. And his head was brought in a platter.The narrative seems to imply that the head of the Baptist was brought while the feast still lasted. This circumstance, however, suggests the place where the banquet was held. If Herod had been at Tiberias, his usual residence, the messengers would have required two days to execute their commission. Fritzsche assumes that Herod was at the time actually at Tiberias, and concludes that the narrative must be incorrect in this particular. Following the opinion of Maldonatus, Grotius, and others, Meyer holds that the feast had taken place in Machrus itself. According to Hug and Wieseler, it was celebrated at Julias or Livias, another place of residence of Antipas, situate not far from Machrus, in the mountains on the eastern side of the Dead Sea. This view seems to us to have most in its favor. Not only was there a royal palace at Livias, but the narrative, more especially in Mark, conveys the impression that the messengers of Herod were despatched to some distance.

Mat 14:12. And went and told Jesus.An evidence that the faith of the Baptist had been entirely re-established by his embassy to Jesus, and that it had also served to attach the disciples of John to the person of the Savioura bond further strengthened by the death of their master. However, some of Johns disciples may have taken offence when Christ still persevered in His course of endurance and submission; and this may have driven them into the an tagonism which afterward issued in the formation of a separate sect. The execution of the Baptist took place shortly before Easter, in the year 782 (Joh 6:4). When in the summer of the year 781 Jesus returned from Judea to Galilee, John was at Znon, near Salim, in the midst of his ministerial activity. But when, toward the month of Adar (about March) of the year 782, Christ journeyed to Jerusalem to attend the festival of Purim, John had been already for some time confined to prison. Accordingly, we infer that his imprisonment must have taken place during the autumn of the year 781, and that he was confined for fully half a year. Thus his active life was somewhat shorter than that of the Lord. While the operations of Christ gradually extended from Galilee to Judea, the reverse was the case with those of the Baptist. Commencing his work in the wilderness of Judah, he gradually passed through the lower valley of the Jordan to Salim and non, Joh 3:23, and lastly to the court of Herod. And as the Lord met death at Jerusalem, so His forerunner at the court of the ruler of Galilee.

Mat 14:13. When Jesus heard of this.Referring in the first instance to the tidings brought by the disciples of John. Besides, we must not overlook, as an additional motive for Christs departure, the impression produced by these tidings upon the disciples. No doubt the Apostles, as well as the disciples of John, were deeply moved by the news of the Baptists execution. The enthusiasm with which they had returned from their first mission had in great measure given place to depression. This seems to be implied in the language of Mark: Come ye yourselves apart, and rest a while. Luke conveys the impression that Antipas was taking measures to brine about an interview with Jesus. This determined Christ immediately to leave the place where He then wasprobably Tiberias, whither Antipas may in the interval have returned. The motives of the Saviour were, moral abhorrence and distrust of Herod, and the necessity of restoring the disciples to a right state of feelingthe more so, that Judas was in his heart already forsaking the cause of the gospel. On the eastern shore of the lake, and in the wilderness, He and they were safe under the mild sway of Philip, the only one of Herods sons who deserved the name of a good prince. (See the article in the Encyclops.)

Into a desert place apart.According to Luk 9:10, in Gaulonitis, near the eastern Bethsaida. In the dominions of Philip, Jesus found a safe retreat, where His followers might recover their tone of mind, and prepare for going forth anew.

DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL

1. On three different occasions was the Lord repelled by the duplicity and utter want of all character in Herod. On the occasion just considered, this prince was anxious for an interview, partly from political motives, and partly from superstitious curiosity, in the hope of thereby assuaging the voice of conscience. Again, shortly before the Saviour for the last time left Galilee, Herod conveyed to Him by a third party a threat, for the purpose of inducing Him immediately to quit his territory (Luk 13:31). Lastly, on the day of Christs final sufferings we mark the same bold and carnal intrusiveness, inducing him to ask for signs and miraclesdemands which the Saviour met with unbroken silence, Luk 23:8. Thus Antipas may be designated as the representative of that class with whom the Saviour enters upon no terms,whom He avoids when they flatter, rebukes when they threaten, and at last punishes by complete silence. Again, we may learn from the case of Antipas, the sad upshot of a disposition to be interested in , and patronizingly to condescend to, the gospel, which characterizes the relation of so many superstitious worldlings toward that which is holy.

2. Herod seems to have been inclined to bestow on the Lord the vacant place of honor formerly occupied by John at his court (comp. Mar 6:20). But Christ treats the execution of the prophet as aimed against Himself. And so it really was. After all, every true martyrdom is the martyrdom of Christ in the world.

3. Besides the two elements already adverted tothe Lords independence of all worldly pomp and His wisdomwe may also notice in this history both the faithfulness of Johns disciples, and the earnestness of the poor people who followed Him on foot out of all their cities.
4. It is a strange fact that the marriage offences in the families of princes during the Middle Ages appear to have been partly an heir-loom of the Crusades, and thus to point back to the Arabs and to Hagar. The Idumeans were a race kindred to the Arabs. The history of the family of Herod is full of such offences. Nor can we fail to perceive the increased importance attaching to such sins in the case of princes, though, in general, the family must ever be regarded as the root of the state.
5. The vows of Herod. Sinful vows must be repented of. Gossner: God would rather have us break our word than His word.

HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL

How the great of this world stand affected toward the message concerning the works of Jesus: 1. It is late of reaching them; 2. it is ill understood; 3. it is wrongly interpreted.Herod Antipas the figure of a weak despotism, as Herod the Great was of a strong tyranny. 1. Wherein they agree: In their contempt of men, selfishness, want of feeling, cunning, and affectation of Intellectual and spiritual aspirations. 2. Wherein they differ: In the case of strong despots, pride and cruelty are foremost, and voluptuousness only secondary; while the reverse is the case with weak tyrants.How a Herod seeks to appease his conscience: 1. By superstition; 2. by theological pretensions; 3. by an affectation of Interest in spiritual achievements.How superstition and the service of sin support and minister to each other.Sketch of a demoralized court: 1. Hypocritical religiosity; 2. dissolute manners and marriage scandals; 3. a poor statecraft; 4. luxurious festivities; 5. bloody donations and payments.Sad portraiture of the world and its pomp: 1. Its religion and its theology; 2. its pretended liberty and its love: 3. its works and its feasts; 4. its interest in the Beautiful and its art; 5. its oaths and its scrupulous honor.Bloody marriages connected with the history of martyrs (Ahab. Herod, etc.12).The feast of Herod viewed in the light of his reign.The festivities of worldliness.The character of HerodHerodias.The courtiers.The flattery and deceit of the fashionable world.How the tempter watches for the moment of our intoxication.Cordial agreement between the wicked both at the beheading of John and at the crucifixion of Christ.The sorrow of Herod, and the fear of Pilate.How they both thought themselves excused.Salome; or, awful lessons given by a mother.Art in the service of sin.The oath of Herod; or, how he wishes to be conscientious in his own way.The courage and faithfulness of John the Baptist.Becoming, modest, and yet firm and faithful manner, in which the Baptist reproved the sin of Herod.Faithful unto the end.Different estimate attaching to the blood of prophets: 1. In the sight of the wicked, and of their blind instruments; 2. of vain people; 3. of faithful disciples; 4. of the Lord Himself.Bloody presents of tyrants and of enemies of the truth.How the sufferings of the saints often serve to efface both their disappointments And their weaknesses.How the Lord applied as to Himself the death of John.How in reality it was Christs death which was encompassed.Christ suffering in His martyrs.How moral abhorrence drives the Lord across the wide sea, and far into the wilderness.Conduct of Jesus toward Antipas.The decease of John a prelude to that of Christ.Comparison between the end of John and that of Christ: 1. The one long confined, the other suddenly carried away; 2. in the one case the secrecy of the prison; in the other, the concourse of the people at Golgotha; 3. the one beheaded, the other crucified, etc.Blessing of good princes in whose territories believers have often found a refuge.Safe retreats which the Lord in ancient and in modern times has prepared for His own.The servants of the Lord recovering themselves in retirement.

Starke:Courts are generally the paradise of foxes and of flatterers.Hedinger: Many an honest man has paid with his fortune and success, if not with his life, for the dancing, the flattery, or the calumnies of a harlot.A sedate and devout Christian leaves dancing to goats, calves, and children, and orders his steps according to the word of God, and not the directions of the dancing-master.Incest, adultery, and unlawful divorce, were combined in this instance.Hedinger: Persecution, reproach, and death are like daily bread to faithful preachers.Great lords may issue their injunctions, but they cannot annul one of Gods commandments.The servants of the Lord must bear testimony to the truth, whatever may befall them in consequence.J. Hall Courage and impartialitytwo very necessary qualities in a preacher.Zeisius: There is nothing in which courts are more deficient than in preachers of the truth.Osiander: The noble and the mighty too frequently imagine that they are at liberty to do anything they please, just as if there were no God in heaven.What folly to be afraid of man and of the devil, and not to fear God!In the godless, one affection often restrains another; so that it is nature, not grace, which restrains them from many a sin.A thoughtless oath.Contradiction: To swear by the name of God in the midst of sinful festivities.Thoughtless and daring promises.Curse of parents who encourage their children to sin.Canstein: There is nothing so bad or so devilish which an adulterous and shameless woman would not undertake and perform, Pro 23:27-28.It is the way of the wicked to prefer their own honor to that of God.Hall: It is more difficult to arrest sin in its progress than to avoid its commencement.Zeisius: The death of Gods people is precious in His sight, however grievous the torments which men may inflict on them.Abel the first just one under the Old, John under the New, Testament.The birthday of Herod to full shame, that of John to full glory.Majus: In general, harlots are not afraid of shedding blood, and often murder their own children.Osiander: The splendid banquets of the wicked have often a very sorrowful termination.True disciples and hearers will reverence a faithful teacher even after his death.Zeisius: Let the bodies of the saints be honorably committed to the grave: they are the temples of the Holy Spirit.Quesnel: Let us open our hearts to Christ.It is an alleviation of our misery to be able to communicate it to friends.It is an act of friendship to warn another of his danger.

Heubner:Anecdotes on the connection between unbelief and superstition; instances of a bad conscience, of bold reproof from the pulpit, p. 205207.Courtiers have enough to do to discuss their worldly affairs. But when the kingdom of heaven spreads among the people, the great of this world take notice of it, if it were only on account of the political influence which it may exert.Frequently, however, the world takes notice of what passes in the kingdom of heaven from hostility to it, or in order to mock.The coarser unbelief, the nearer to superstition.How did Herod come to think of John?An uneasy conscience.An evil conscience sees terrors everywhere.A Jezebel could not be wanting in the history of the second Elijah.Fear of the people often acts as a curb upon despotism.The fear of God delivers from that of man.Worldly festivities often become the occasion of iniquitous deeds.Danger, when mothers try to show off their children,Sinful promises can never be binding.False ambition.Tyrants are themselves under the most abject tyranny.The head of a prophet a spectacle to gaze on. (The body of Coligny was exposed during the massacre of St. Bartholomew, and his head sent to Rome.)

Footnotes:

[1] Mat 14:2.[ ; Lange: darum walten die Wunderkrfte in ihm; Ewald: desswegen wirken die Heilmchte in ihm; J. Wesley: Therefore these mighty powers exert themselves in him; Green (Gram. of the N. T., p. 151): The Spiritual Powers are active in him; Conant and the revised N. T. of the Am. Bible Union: therefore do these powers work in him.P. S.]

[2] Mat 14:3.Lachmann: , after Cod. B. So also Origen twice. [Cod. Sinait. sustains the more expressive reading instead of .P. S.]

[3] Mat 14:3.[Conant and the N. T. of the A. B. U. more smoothly: for the sake of Herodias.P. S.]

[4] Mat 14:3. is wanting in Cod. D., Vulg., etc. Meyer regards it as an insertion from Mark.

[5] Mat 14:5.[Lange: er war willens (geneigt) ihn su tdten, frchtete sich aber, etc. Conant and the N. T. of the A. B. U.: and he desired () to put him to death, but feared ()P. S.]

[6] Mat 14:6.Lachmann, Tischendorf: , after B., D., Z. [Cod. Sinait sustains this reading for the received reading: .P. S.]

[7] Mat 14:8.[Lange translates : bearbeitet von; Luther: zugerichtet; de Wette: bewogen; Stier: angestiftet; Meyer: gefrdert, dazu gebracht; Ewald still stronger: aufgestachelt. Conant: The verb means to lead forward, to lead on, the only use of in this compound. The error of the English vernacular Bible originated in the Vulgate rendering prmonita. Margin of the Bishops Bible: Or enticed, or induced.P. S.]

[8] Mat 14:8.[Tyndale, Coverdale, Cranmer, Genevan, and the Bishops Bible, all correctly render : in a platter (a large, shallow dish), for which the translators of King James substituted: in a charger, which also means a large dish, but now more commonly a horse used in battle. Wiclif and the Rheims Vers. have: in a dish, the Lat. Vulg.: in disco.P. S]

[9] Mat 14:9.The reading: is not quite sure. Lachmann and Tischendorf [also Tregelles and Alford] read with B., D., etc.: . [But this does not affect the sense, nor the English rendering.P. S.]

[10] Mat 14:12.Lachmann, after the oldest authorities, reads: . [Cod. Sinait. sustains , corpse, against the usual , body.P. S.]

[11][The word may just as well be taken in he usual sense, birthday, as is done by Meyer. See his references in loc.P. S.]

[12][Remember also the fearful night of St. Bartholomew, Aug. 24, 1572, and the massacre of the Huguenots in Paris, after the marriage of Henry of Navarre with the sister of the king of France, to which all the leaders of the French Protestants had been treacherously invited, to be must cruelly murdered. Pope Gregory XIII., on hearing the news of the destruction of twenty or thirty thousand Protestants in one night, and the probable destruction of heresy in France, caused a Te deum to be sung in the churches of Rome, and a medal to be struck in commemoration of this infernal tragedy. This approbation is one of the foulest deeds of popery and one of the darkest spots on the pages of its history, deplored and condemned even by many Catholics. Comp. Wachler: Die Beuthochzeit, Leip., 1828, and the respective sections in the Histories of the French Reformation.P. S.]

Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange

CONTENTS

This Chapter opens with an account of Herod’s having murdered John the Baptist. In the after part we have the relation of some of the miracles of Christ.

Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

“At that time Herod the tetrarch heard of the fame of Jesus, (2) And said unto his servants, This is John the Baptist; he is risen from the dead; and therefore mighty works do show forth themselves in him. (3) For Herod had laid hold on John, and bound him, and put him in prison for Herodias’ sake, his brother Philip’s wife. (4) For John said unto him, It is not lawful for thee to have her. (5) And when he would have put him to death, he feared the multitude, because they counted him as a prophet. (6) But when Herod’s birthday was kept, the daughter of Herodias danced before them, and pleased Herod. (7) Whereupon he promised with an oath to give her whatsoever she would ask. (8) And she, being before instructed of her mother, said, Give me here John Baptist’s head in a charger. (9) And the king was sorry: nevertheless for the oath’s sake, and them which sat with him at meat, he commanded it to be given her. (10) And he sent, and beheaded John in the prison. (11) And his head was brought in a charger, and given to the damsel: and she brought it to her mother. (12) And his disciples came, and took up the body, and buried it, and went and told Jesus.”

What a vast variety of solemn thoughts arise from this short, but affecting narrative of the death of John the Baptist. The cruelty of the actors, the implacable hatred of the human mind, towards this poor Prophet, the savage feelings of Herod’s guests, and, above all, the Lord’s providence in the appointment! what endless meditations arise from these, and the like subjects, suggested by the event. Oh! what a proof the whole brings of that solemn scripture: The righteous shall rejoice when he seeth the vengeance, he shall wash his feet in the blood of the wicked. So that a man shall say, verily, there is a reward for the righteous, verily he is a God that judgeth the earth. Psa 58:10-11 . Reader! pause over the subject. Who that would desire truly to know to what a state the human nature is reduced by the fall of man, must learn it; under divine teaching, from such savage instances as are here exhibited. What one man is capable of doing, all are; and, but for restraining grace, if temptations arose to prompt to like acts, would do. The seeds of every sin are in every heart, the same by the fall. Reader! do you believe this? Yes! if God the Holy Ghost hath convinced you of sin. And until this is feelingly known in the heart, never will the infinitely precious redemption by the Lord Jesus Christ be understood or valued. Oh! how precious to them that believe is Jesus! 1Pe 2:7 . Hence a child of God reads this account of Herod, therefrom to abhor himself, and to love Jesus! 1Co 4:7 .

Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

Mat 14:4

It is an hard condition that the necessity of our calling casts upon us, in some cases, to run upon the pikes of displeasure Prophecies were no burdens, if they did not expose us to these dangers. We must connive at no evil; every sin unreproved becomes ours.

Bishop Hall.

Reference. XIV. 4-8. W. Lefroy, Christian World Pulpit, vol. lxv. 1904, p. 118.

Mat 14:6-8

No sign of a nation perishing is so sure as the corruption of woman Messalina was more ominous than Nero, Herodias than Herod.

Dr. John Ker.

To be nameless in worthy deeds, exceeds an infamous history. The Canaanitish woman lives more happily without a name than Herodias with one. And who had not rather have been the good thief than Pilate?’

Sir Thomas Browne.

References. XIV. 10. J. M. Neale, Sermons Preached in Sackville College Chapel, vol. iv. p. 109. XIV. 10-12. F. E. Paget, Sermons for the Saints’ Days, p. 221.

Telling Jesus

Mat 14:12

They told Jesus. They did something before that. They took up the body of their master, the Baptist, and buried it, and went and told Jesus. They were two men. They had conveyed and expressed the doubt of their imprisoned master; they said to Jesus, ‘Art Thou He that should come, or look we for another? This is our master’s question, and we wish to take back a reply.’ At the moment of the text their stern, austere, commanding master was dead, killed, beheaded by a cruel sword. When they took up the body and buried it they went and told Jesus; they who had once been the bearers of a doubt were now the bearers of a fact that did little to dissipate that doubt. They went from one master to another, and they went along the road of misery a well-frequented path. They transferred their allegiance from the Baptist to the Saviour of the world, and they joined hands with Him, so to say, over the dead body of their master.

Is this the only text in the New Testament which represents the truth that men come to Jesus Christ in trouble? It is not, but I think it is the jewel; I believe there is no brighter diamond in all the cabinet of grace. They came to Jesus in trouble; they had a tale to tell, they had a story full of blood to relate to this unique Listener. There are certain people to whom we do go in trouble; we go to them by a kind of natural right of instinct; we are sure they will understand, we are specially sure that they will listen to us: and there is a listening that is sympathy, and there is a sympathy that is a resurrection. They went and told Jesus.

I. There must be something about the dear Jesus that drew everybody to Him who had a tale of sorrow to tell. Once a message was sent to Him to the effect that’ he whom Thou lovest is sick’. Why did they not go to some other man? Why did not the suffering sisters call in some neighbourly helper? No matter what his name or what his vocation, he is a man, he is human and by so much he will sympathize: go, tell him. Why go a mile or two when your neighbour is next door? Your neighbour may be a thousand miles away. Always discriminate between proximity and identity in all its deepest significance as a sympathetic ministry. What a tribute to Jesus that He could listen to men’s trouble! Let such listening be one of His credentials.

II. Go to tell Jesus about your successes. The disciples returned to Him and said, ‘Master, even the devils were subject unto us through Thy name’. See the radiance of their faces, see how they misconstrue the kingdom of heaven, see in what an elementary atmosphere they live and move and have their being;. ‘Lord, even the devils.’ They thought He would applaud them, they thought He would stand up His full stature and say, ‘I told you it would be so, you must believe Me ever after this; this is exactly what I prophesied, and I call upon you to bear witness accordingly ‘. That was not the Son of God. What did He do? He said, ‘Rejoice not that the devils are subject unto you, but rejoice rather that your names are written in the book of life’; and their brows fell, their chief toy was taken from them, they were disappointed. We always report the wrong thing. We tell of numbers, statistics, and balance-sheets, and great successes, and wonderful funds a quarter of a million strong, and half a million, and a whole million; and Jesus says, ‘Rejoice not in your million-fold funds, but rejoice rather that you have brought a blind soul into the light and a bound soul into liberty’.

III. They went and told Jesus about their zeal for His cause, they almost outran one another in the race; it was who was to be there first to tell Jesus all about it. About what? ‘Master, we saw one casting out devils in Thy name, and we forbade him.’ Jesus would be delighted, Jesus would say, ‘My dear allies and brethren, how faithful you are, how strongly I am lieutenanted by such men as you! You forbad the man who was casting out devils in My name; I congratulate you, I will telegraph this over all the spaces of the universe.’ Nothing of the kind; that was not the Son of God. He said, ‘Forbid him not’; He went dead against the whole policy of the crude zealous, undisciplined disciples. They were always doing foolish things, they were often doing the wrong; thing, they were prone to set the pyramid on its apex. The same spirit prevails Today. Do not laugh at these centuries-old people, they are living now, all the men are living now.

‘Casting all your care upon Him’ why? ‘For,’ or because, ‘He careth for you’. Not because He is great, majestic, infinite, incomprehensible; these are more or less empty words in such circumstances as my soul’s need. But the Apostle says, ‘Go to Him because He wants you to go, because He is waiting for you to go, take all your tears and leave them with Him, all your sorrow, for, because, He careth for you.’ The shepherd that cares for the flock will abide with it all the night, though the wind be troubled by the howling of the wolf.

Joseph Parker, City Temple Pulpit, vol. vi. p. 40.

References. XIV. 12. Mark Guy Pearse, Jesus Christ and the People, p. 212. XIV. 12; XXVIII. 8. A. Maclaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture St. Matthew IX.-XVII. p. 269. XIV. 13-21. W. M. Taylor, The Miracles of Our Saviour, p. 268. J. Laidlaw, The Miracles of Our Lord, p. 74. XIV. 13-36. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. liii. No. 3046.

Christ’s Compassion

Mat 14:14

Christ had sought retirement by crossing the lake for two reasons, the murder of John, and the return of the Apostles from their mission. The need for rest is emphasized in St. Mark’s Gospel.

There were crowds because of the approach of the Passover, and these crowds outran them round the head of the lake, so that when the boat neared the landing-place, they were all there, and the hope of retirement and privacy had gone. So our text is very emphatic as showing us a glimpse into our Lord’s heart, in circumstances that would have annoyed most of us.

I. The Unwearied Toil and Endless Patience of the Master. How valuable these and the like hints are of Christ’s true humanity. His weariness in body, His longing for quiet and repose of mind, and how gladly He puts it aside without a word of reproach for intruding on His leisure, or a word of regret that it is so broken in upon.

II. The Penetrating Look. He saw the multitude. Why was compassion the emotion? Possibly this refers primarily to their weary travel-stained appearance. The visible taken as a symbol. So, a crowd is ever a pathetic sight.

III. The Compassion of Christ. If we could see a man as he is we should pity. Christ’s eye beholds all our hidden evils and sorrows, and the result is pity, not aversion, not anger, not indifference.

The true human sympathy of Jesus. This sympathy was a spring of His action. Some of His miracles are drawn out by entreaty, and some are wrought by His unsought love spontaneous. This pity is the revelation of God. This pity is eternal. This pity is extended to each of us.

IV. The Work to which Compassion Leads. (1) The healing His care for the body. (2) The teaching His revelation of the greatness of His compassion. It comes before we ask, is brought near to each of us, but cannot be forced upon us. Take it, and we become of His flock, the Lamb which was slain and is alive for evermore.

A. Maclaren.

References. XIV. 14. H. M. Butler, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xlviii. 1895, p. 94. XIV. 14-16. J. Flanagan, ibid. vol. lxi. 1902, p. 291. XIV. 14-33. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. li. No. 2925. XIV. 15-21. Archbishop Trench, Notes on the Miracles of Our Lord, p. 217.

The All-sufficiency of Christ

Mat 14:16

The miracle was meant for a token of Christ’s Messiahship, no doubt. But, also, it was the natural expression of His real loving care for men’s bodily wants, and, in that aspect, is along with the others quite invaluable. Also it was meant as a symbol. He is the Bread for men’s souls. And so regarded, the words of the text may carry lessons not unimportant in their bearing upon the great task of the Church to hold forth the Bread of life to the whole world. The Church has enough to feed the world.

I. The All-Sufficiency of Christ He is the Bread of life, and is enough to satisfy the desires of every single soul. It addresses itself to the great primal wants universal, and deep as manhood, the sense of sin, the longing for deliverance, the gropings after God, the need of guidance, enlightenment, authority. This all-sufficiency of Christ is (1) shown in the very nature of the message; (2) attested by the experience of all Christians, for if one heart can so be satisfied, then the world must be; (3) confirmed by the history of His Church. There are many failures, but successes enough to show the divinity of the message. (4) The Gospel in its development is the natural root of all progress for society. ‘They need not depart.’ The relations between Christianity and moral, social progress are clear enough. The Gospel develops into all moral, social, political reforms and perfections and enters every sphere of human life. But the relations between the Church and these have been wrong on both sides. Christian men have tended to neglect them, and others have shoved Christianity on one side

II. Adequacy of our Resources. They are sufficient if Christ’s command be observed: (1) if all are occupied; (2) if each acts in the spirit of Scripture; (3) if we are conscious of our own inadequacy; (4) if we bring them to Christ.

A. Maclaren.

References. XIV. 16. H. C. Shuttleworth, The Church of the People, p. 40. C. Perren, Revival Sermons in Outline, p. 311. Archdeacon Colley, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xliii. 1893, p. 253. P. McAdam Muir, ibid. vol. lxxiv. 1908, p. 369. J. Marshall Lang, Sermon, 1887, ‘They Need not Depart,’ p. 1. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. liii. No. 3046. XIV. 17, 18. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. viii. No. 453. XIV. 19. Christian World Pulpit, vol. xliii. 1893, p. 273. XIV. 19, 20. A. Maclaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture St. Matthew IX.-XVII. p. 282; see also Sermons Preached in Manchester, p. 354. XIV. 19-21. J. Martineau, Hours of Thought on Sacred Things, p. 164.

Superabundant Blessings

Mat 14:20

But the fact that there were twelve baskets full of fragments, after five thousand had been fed, did display the resources of the Saviour, whose we are and whom we serve; and displayed them for our comfort and encouragement. As we look at those well-filled baskets of fragments, we perceive them to be a reminder of the truth that giving does not impoverish God, nor withholding enrich Him. And that, surely, is a reflection worth meditating upon. God has given us much, in manifold ways: yet His resources are not exhausted. Indeed, they are scarcely touched; for there are twelve baskets full of fragments left more to be bestowed than has been received. What a word of cheer for the life that lies before us!

I. The thought here expressed is true in regard to the material things of life. The resources of Nature have been amazingly displayed and developed in the past. ‘As for the earth, out of it cometh bread; and under it is turned up as it were fire. The stones of it are the place of sapphires; and it hath dust of gold.’ Ana men have delved in and cultivated the earth these many years, so that the world’s myriad inhabitants have been fed and enriched. But we may be assured that what is to come out of the earth is immeasurably more than has hitherto been extracted.

Sometimes philosophers and savants would scare us by gloomy prophecies of the exhaustion of those supplies upon which we depend for our very existence day by day. The earth is to be so impoverished that it will not yield its increase, and men of science will have to extract solid means of subsistence out of thin air. Our coal and iron strong-rooms are being steadily depleted of their wealth. The limits of the gold and silver output are within sight. And then what shall we do? We may be satisfied that He who so arranged matters that there were twelve baskets full of fragments after the five thousand had been fed with a handful of barley loaves and fishes will not fail the men who trust in Him now.

There are twelve baskets of fragments remaining.

II. But this fact of superabundant blessing is true in regard to spiritual things. The Almighty has infinite resources, and we may confidently anticipate greater spiritual victories, wider religious conquests, more enduring Gospel triumphs, in the future than any the Church has known, even in the palmiest of the days which lie in the sunny and azure past. ‘What hath God wrought!’ exclaimed England’s greatest evangelist, echoing Balaam’s shout. And truly God had wrought much. It is said that at Bennecour, in France, there are steep, stony slopes which formerly only produced paving-stones; but now those slopes grow all varieties of fruits apricots, cherries, black currants, green peas, asparagus. The soil has been scientifically treated, with almost incredibly successful results. So was it, spiritually, in the days of Wesley and his itinerants. They treated the hard, rocky human soil of Britain religiously and evangelically; and the glorious result has become historic. But how much has happened since! After all that God had wrought, there were twelve baskets full of fragments remaining. In Him all fullness dwells, and He has proved that He possesses inexhaustible treasures of power and truth.

III. And, lastly, this consoling thought of the abounding sufficiency of Divine resources is true in regard to personal needs.

We can all say, ‘Hitherto hath the Lord helped us’; and not only helped us, but helped us bountifully. For God ‘giveth liberally’; our ‘cup runneth over’; it is not half-filled, or even brimming full; it is more than full. We could, most of us, live on less than we have. Our necessities have all been met, and undeserved luxuries have been bestowed upon us. Notwithstanding which, there are twelve baskets full of fragments remaining. Let fear and all its trembling Kith and kin be evicted from heart and mind. Looking back, some of us may well wonder how our manifold necessities have been supplied through many and many a year. God’s protection has been vouchsafed. Life is full of risks; we are in peril with every breath we draw. The prick of a pin, the scratch of a thorn, a breath of air, a speck of dust all these may be more potent than sword-thrust or cannon-shot for our destruction. Verily we live with the sword of Damocles suspended ever over our heads. And it is only by the good providence of God that the fragile hair by which it has been suspended all these years has not been severed. What then? Are God’s resources for our preservation and protection exhausted? Surely not. We may step out bravely, ‘leaning upon the top of our staff,’ which is the tested promise, ‘He careth for you’. He who provided in the years gone by has twelve baskets of fragments still available.

Herbert Windross, The Life Victorious, p. 3.

References. XIV. 22, 23. Archbishop Trench, Notes on the Miracles of Our Lord, p. 228. XIV. 22-33. J. Laidlaw, The Miracles of Our Lord, p. 87. A. B. Davidson, Waiting Upon God, p. 231. W. M. Taylor, The Miracles of Our Saviour, p. 282. XIV. 22-36. A. Maclaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture St. Matthew IX.-XVII. p. 298. XIV. 23. Stopford A. Brooke, Short Sermons, p. 195. XIV. 24. T. L. Cuyler, Christian World Pulpit, vol. 1. 1896, p. 286. XIV. 24, 25. R. W. Hiley, A Year’s Sermons, vol. ii. p. 272. XIV. 24-27 J. H. Newman, Christ Upon the Waters, p. 3. XIV. 25. J. H. Hitchens, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xxxvii. 1890, p. 393. XIV. 26. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xvi. No. 957.

He Said, Come

Mat 14:28-29

First we must lay down this as a certain truth: Peter made a brave attempt and partly failed in it, but the having made it, though with partial failure, is to his eternal honour.

I. Notice that all the Twelve were in darkness and storm, and this by no act or deed of their own, but by their Lord’s command, and by His overruling Providence.

But of these Twelve one, by his own act and deed, desired to be nearer to His Lord, and to be more like Him. All in a certain sense were then like Him, all in the storm; but yet with a difference too. He, alone and undefended; they, protected by the ships. He, standing by His own power on the waves; they, borne up by the vessel. Peter desires, alone of them all, to be more like Him still. He will leave the rest, so he may be nearer to his Lord. He will have none of the shelter of the ships, so he may have the upholding of His Master.

‘Peter said unto Him, Lord, if it be Thou, bid me come unto Thee upon the water.’ Will that Lord, Who knoweth all things, call the offer rash, presumptuous, boastful? Will He command the Apostle to remain where he was placed, and not to court unnecessary dangers, and leave the safeguard that he had? Not so; ‘He saith unto him, Come’.

II. But with Peter’s leaving the ship his difficulties commenced. Then first he began to understand how boisterous was the wind, and how unruly the sea; then first he comprehended his own weakness. And because he there stopped, therefore he began to fail. He should have gone on, and leant more and more upon the strength of that arm on which he had begun to lean. And yet, even then, he was the true and loving servant. He cried out, it is true: but to Whom? Not to his companions, but to the Giver of all help. He did not seek to get back to the boat, he pressed forward all the more to his Lord.

Remember Peter’s prayer. There cannot well be a shorter, for it contains only three words,’Lord, save me’. There cannot be a more effective one, for on the instant it brought Omnipotence to his aid.

‘And immediately.’ One naturally pauses there, for it was not immediately that the Lord heard the prayers even of His truest followers. The nobleman of Galilee, and the Syrophenician woman lead the band of those who have to ask again and again before they have been heard. And yet how the comfort they had besought was delayed, while a prayer of three words finds it immediately! yes, and that although it were confessedly a prayer of weak faith. But there was a reason for this, a reason set forth fourteen hundred years before in the Jewish law. All the sacrifices offered to the Lord were to be without spot or blemish. But there was one exception. A free-will offering needed not to be so; why was this? Doubtless to show the infinite value in God’s eyes of a sacrifice which is not made of necessity, but only because of the willing heart of the giver. And so of St. Peter’s free-will offering now. Because it was a free-will offering, because not for the sake of any worldly benefit, as the centurion and the Syrophenician woman, but only for the sake of being with the Lord, he made it; therefore, was there an immediate answer to his prayer.

III. And it was with no stern rebuke that Jesus rebuked the weakness of His disciple. ‘He caught him by the hand, and said, O thou of little faith, wherefore didst thou doubt?’ We know what wonders one glance of that loving eye has wrought; we see what strength one touch of that loving hand can give. So to be upheld by it, so to lean on it, that is the privilege of those who go out into the storm; who leave the ship’s company to go to the Lord of the ship; who would walk upon the water to go to Jesus.

J. M. Neale, Occasional Sermons, p. 144.

References. XIV. 28. A. Maclaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture St. Matthew IX.-XVII. p. 305. XIV. 28-31. N. Adams, Christ a Friend, p. 143. XIV. 28-33. J. McNeill, Regent Square Pulpit, vol. ii. p. 113. XIV. 29. C. S. Robinson, Simon Peter, p. 226.

Mat 14:30

The sincere Protestant accepts the new revelation; he piously abandons what God has taught him to recognize as error, and he gathers strength by his fidelity. The insincere Protestant, forgetting the meaning of the names under which he was enlisted in the war against falsehood, closes his eyes and clings to his formulas. Therefore, like St. Peter failing through want of faith, he finds the ground turn to water under his feet. His mortal eye grows dull. His tongue learns to equivocate.

Froude.

Reference. XIV. 30. J. Vaughan, Fifty Sermons (9th Series), p. 154.

Mat 14:31

‘I have been reading the New Testament,’ says Eckermann in his Journal for 1831, ‘and thinking of a picture which Goethe showed me lately, where Christ is walking on the water, and Peter coming towards him, on the waves, begins to sink, in a moment of faintheartedness.’ “This,” said Goethe, “is one of the most beautiful legends, and one which I love better than any. It expresses the noble doctrine that man, through faith and hearty courage, will come off victor in the most difficult enterprises, while he may be ruined by the least paroxysm of doubt.”‘

References. XIV. 31. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. v. No. 246; vol. xxxi. No. 1856; vol. xxxvi. No. 2173; vol. li. No. 2925.

Miracles

Mat 14:35-36

I. Here is the adequate cause for the miracles narrated in the Gospels. Christ, the Son of God, must manifest His Divine character, and He manifested it chiefly in three ways:

1. By His holy doctrine, in which He taught all men to love God, Who is Truth, Righteousness, Purity, and Charity, and to love one another as brothers.

2. By His absolutely holy and stainless life.

3. By His power over the material universe around Him, ending in His resurrection from the dead. Had He not shown this power, there would have been something lacking.

II. Consider the fact that miracles are not attributed in the Bible to all great teachers.

John the Baptist, who was the greatest representative of the Prophets, wrought no miracles. But in Christ we see one Whose shoe latchet John was not worthy to bear. Had Christ wrought no miracles His opponents would have made that a reason for disbelieving Him when He said, ‘I and the Father are One’. They would have asked how it was that He Who bade all men honour the Son as they honour the Father, showed no sign that He was possessed of power over nature greater than that of other men.

III. Note that the miracles attributed to Christ are all worthy of Christ, they are works of mercy and beneficence. They are works which show that hunger and thirst, disease and death are things temporal, which are in God’s good time to pass away.

The miracles were an essential feature in the great work of our Incarnate Lord, in bringing about the chief event in the world’s history. They are established by historical testimony of the most trustworthy kind. They accord with reason. Without them we should have been less able to accept the testimony of Christ about Himself. The record of them fills our hearts and minds with faith, hope, and love, for how can we do less than believe in, trust and love that Lord of Whom it is said, ‘They brought unto Him all that were diseased, and besought Him that they might only touch the hem of His garment, and as many as touched were made perfectly whole’.

Canon Charles Bodington, The Twelve Gates of the Holy City, p. 155.

Illustration. We say that all portents are contrary to nature, but they are not so. For how is that contrary to nature which happens by the will of God, since the will of so mighty a Creator is certainly the nature of each created thing? A portent, therefore, happens not contrary to nature, but contrary to what we know as nature.

St. Augustine, City of God, book xxi. chap. viii.

Canon Charles Bodington, The Twelve Gates of the Holy City, p. 157.

References. XIV. 36. W. J. Knox-Little, The Journey of Life, p. 177. XV. 1-13. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xlii. No. 2487. XV. 1-20. J. Morgan Gibbon, Christian World Pulpit, vol. lvi. 1899, p. 184. XV. 2. J. A. Bain, Questions Answered by Christ, p. 28. XV. 8. T. G. Selby, The Strenuous Gospel, p. 296. XV. 9. W. H. Murray, The Fruits of the Spirit, pp. 212, 224, 235. XV. 10-31. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xliv. No. 2597. XV. 11. T. G. Selby, The Cross and the Dice-Box, p. 241.

Fuente: Expositor’s Dictionary of Text by Robertson

Chapter 60

Herod Hears of Christ

Mat 14:1-14

It must not be supposed that Herod had not heard of Jesus Christ until this time, but at this particular juncture the fame of Jesus made a new impression upon the ruler’s mind. There are some hours that are historical, although the very things we remember in those hours have not been unknown to us or even unfamiliar to us aforetime. Notice the kind of fame which Herod heard of Jesus. Was it the fame of his eloquence or the fame of his spirituality? Was the governor struck by the breadth and grandeur of the spiritual conceptions of the new teacher? Probably not. What struck him most, and therein showed the vulgarity of his nature, was the miracles. Some men are more fascinated by lightning than by light. Herod heard of mighty works, grand wonders and astounding signs, but it is not said that he had heard of the beatitudes and revelled in sympathetic appreciation as he listened to the dripping music, the sweet pensive words which fell from the lips of the Teacher on the mountain.

It is even so today: we do not see men in their grandest point; it is some little incidental and transient thing that attracts our vulgar attention, some trick of manner, or tone of voice, or method of assault: but what of the intellectual purview, the spiritual unction, the groping after the infinite, the passion of love, the redeeming care, the eternal patience? No reference is made to the higher qualities of men until long after their ascension. At first we talk about their miracles, their prodigies, signs and tokens, and not a word do we say about the subtle process that has in it ten thousand miracles of insight and sympathy and eloquence of the heart.

Mark the wisdom of Jesus Christ in this matter, he knew how the world must be approached, he understood the value of collateral helps such as miracles; Jesus Christ never intended the miracles to be continuous in the Church, because he knew they would soon drop into commonplace. Man has a wonderful capacity for absorbing miracles, of forgetting the last wonder, and of asking for another. Yet miracles have their place; they are great trumpets that call attention, flashing, dazzling signs that awaken men and make them look, and whilst they are looking, the great Teacher seizes his opportunity to touch and bless the inner nature.

What have we been in these matters? Mere starers, wrought upon by fancy, the victims of our own wonder? Why, what is this but worshipping idols of our own making, bowing down before mean things of our own fashioning? The call to us is to the inner sanctuary, the upper chamber, the place where the Shekinah shines. We are stunned by miracles; we are saved by truth.

Given a mighty thought and a mighty deed, to know which will soonest win the attention of the world and secure its paltry fame, and the deed will outrun the thought. A man who goes into a dangerous place or takes a daring leap, or does some act of romantic madness, is known across a wider horizon than the man who has the divine gift of prayer, and who can work the all but infinite miracle of opening the door of the kingdom of heaven. Who heeds thought or cares for sympathy, or adds up in positive value the tears that flow in commiseration over human distress? The world is a ready reckoner, quick at great batches of figures, totalising them into millions that fill the mouth and daze the imagination where miracles are concerned. But where thoughts, feelings, impulses, inspirations, beatitudes, commendations of virtue are concerned, where is the ready reckoning? We shall learn better by-and-by. Keep in the school of Jesus, and you will learn that there is an arithmetic that is valueless but for momentary convenience, and that the true riches are within that the ornament of a meek and a quiet spirit is in the sight of God of great price, that miracles of the ordinary kind, such as are found in the gospels, are but introductory, when rightly used, to the light that is meant to shine upon the mind, and to lead the heart upward into the great mysteries of truth and fellowship with God.

Herod, having heard of the fame of Jesus, even upon the comparatively low ground of miracles, gave an explanation of what he heard. I cannot tell how many hours of silence preceded the utterance, but the utterance itself came with the suddenness of an unexpected shock. Herod said with startling abruptness, “This is John the Baptist.” We thought his name had been forgotten. No storied marble stood above the headless body to remind the tetrarch, no brass memorial was to be found on all the walls of Herod’s palace to remind him of the death. How was it that he knew so distinctly the name of the murdered man? Is there a recording angel, are there invisible presences dogging our steps and whispering to us unwelcome words now and again, even while the wine is half-way to the livid lips with thirst for its fire? Immeasurable life, mysterious life, accursed memory! Cain took to city building, he will fill his head with masonry; still the dead man looks at him from every foundation he lays. He will build high, but the red blood incarnadines the topmost mortar, and oozes upward to remind him of what he once did.

Some say Herod was a Sadducee, and we know that the Sadducees say that there is no resurrection. If Herod was a Sadducee, this is a startling instance of the power of truth and fact to override our speculative creeds, tear them to pieces, and make us poor indeed. We shall know the value of our creed when the last pressure is put upon it. It is one thing to have a creed over a foaming glass of wine and in the midst of a smoking feast when gaiety fills the house and loud rough laughter is the music of the moment, and another thing to have a creed that will go with us through every hour of the day, through every wilderness, up every steep and rocky place, that will clutch our hand in the dark and say, “You are all right; walk on, and I will take you into the morning.” Herod’s, if he was a Sadducee, was a speculative creed, a thing that pleased the mere intellect for the time being, a piece of rationalism that seemed to fit the occasion. When this great tragedy asserted itself in all those bitter, cruel memories he forgot his Sadduceeism in the presence of an accusing conscience.

Search your creeds through and through, and see if they be faiths that will carry you across the whole bound and scheme of life, or whether they are little transient pleasures, butterflies that live in the sunshine, ephemera that die in the beam that created them. My own experience deepening every day, growing painful in richness, is this: no faith will go with a man up every hill, through every valley, into every pain and every darkness, and through all the light and joy of life, but the faith that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and the only Saviour of the world. Other faiths please me intellectually more, for a little time suggestions coming from other Masters give me some delight within given limits, but the theology of Jesus Christ alone fills the whole horizon, and is equally strong at every point. As a personal experience let this go for what it is worth; if your experience coincides with it, in so far as it does let us add our testimony together until the witness becomes in itself a second gospel, not a gospel of revelation, but a confirming gospel, setting to the gospel of revelation this seal, that we have proved it in actual experience.

Herod felt the pressure of the eternal law of righteousness. There was one sermon he did remember brief as a lightning flash, but so memorable that recollection could never throw it off. Men remember different kinds of sermons. There are some sermons we try to forget, and fail to do so. Sometimes the sermon is in one sentence: it is not at all necessary that you should approve of every sentence in the sermon, or like the sermon as a whole, any more than it is necessary for the man who sits down at the table to consume the luxuries with which it is loaded he may refuse this, or dislike that, but there is enough to satisfy his hunger, and in that satisfaction his contentment should find its pleasure.

If you had interrogated Herod as to the scope of the ministry of John the Baptist in what relation he stood to the ancient prophets and in what precise relation he stood to the coming Messenger, to the Lord himself probably Herod could have given you but lame and imperfect answers. But if you had asked Herod if he could recall one thing that John had ever said, he would have recalled something that was not addressed to the multitude, but that was shot into his own bad heart. He never quoted that sermon but to himself. To himself he preached it probably every day.

The impression made upon Herod’s mind was the deeper because John was know to him as a good man and a just. Our sermons derive force from our character. The solid noble character gives weight to the weakest words. A lofty and pure consistency utters what might, from a literary point of view, be of the most imperfect sort, with an accent that makes it eloquent. The grim ascetic, the stern child of the wilderness, draped in camel’s hair and fed on locusts and wild honey he on whom there rested no spot of shame, of foulness or suspicion said, “It is not lawful for thee to have Herodias as thy wife.” Who dares interfere with such things now? No man of my acquaintance. What preacher dares interfere with the family life of his congregation? Not one. Are there not families that would absorb whole libraries of consolation who would resent the faintest approach towards rebuke? If the preacher sees that you are going to marry the wrong man or the wrong woman, dare he interfere? Only at the expense of his head. The law is the same in all ages. Sympathy at a high price, judgment and rebuke at the price of loss, neglect, persecution, martyrdom. If I were to interfere with your marriages, because of their consanguinity, because of their want of adaptation and proper coincidence and rhythm, what would be your retort? Imprisonment, decapitation. Not in their physical forms thank God we have outlived that vulgarity; but where is there a man who dare ask if the weights are just and the balances equal, or if an enemy has not snipped off part of the yard measure? No man dare interfere with such things now.

The martyrdom having been committed, we come to the twelfth verse, which reads like the bitter music of despair, ending in one troubled hope. Almost every word of the twelfth verse throbs with pathetic suggestion. “And his disciples came” with heavy feet, with heavy hearts, with tearful eyes, with great groaning, with wonder that might at any moment turn into impiety and hard talking against Heaven’s justness. “And took up the body.” A heavy load, yet a precious burden; took it up tenderly, lifted it with care, a body that had never known the meaning of luxury, self-care, indulgence; a body whipped, scourged, mutilated, held in severest discipline, every member of it a slave, a gospel in itself of abstention, discipline, severe and inexorable control. Took up the body the lips gone, the eyes gone, who can tell what was being done with that head? When the head of the eloquent Cicero got into the hands of Fulvia, the woman against whom that eloquent tongue had thundered, she pierced the tongue with sharp instruments, that she might avenge herself upon the eloquence she could not answer.

“Took up the body.” It was all that was left them. They buried it they had nothing else to do: they must needs hide it away. Give me a place that I may bury my dead out of my sight. We think we will keep the dear body for ever, but a law, higher and more inexorable than our desire in such matters, says, “The time will come when you will say ‘Take it out of my sight.'”

Now for the note of a troubled hope. “They went and told Jesus.” He was always hearing calamitous news. When did anybody go to him with news that made his face broaden and brighten and glow with new joy? Whenever the door of the house was battered by an importunate hand it was that some sadder tale than ever might be poured into the ear of Jesus. If you saw a woman speaking to his bent ear, she was pouring into it some tale of woe. If you saw a man accosting him, it was that the man might tell Jesus of some bitter distress at home. We could not do without that hearing ear.

“They told Jesus.” To tell our grief is something: to put our distress into words is to get relief. We can tell the Saviour everything; we keep back no syllable of the tale. You would be lighter of heart if you would tell the Saviour everything that is giving you distress. He is our priest, and to him we must confess. Tell him about your difficulty at home, your trouble with your child, your perplexity in business, the distresses for which there are no words these you can sigh and hint at in your suggestive and eloquent tears. Let there be no want of confidence between you and your Lord. It is not enough that he knows by his omniscience. He asks us to tell him as if he knew nothing. Herein is the mystery and the grace and the satisfaction of prayer. Though the Lord knows everything we are going to say, he entreats us to say it, knowing that in the prayer itself is often hidden the contentment of its own answer.

What effect was produced upon Jesus Christ? “When Jesus Christ heard of it he departed thence by ship into a desert place apart.” It was most natural. There are some occurrences that simply make us quiet. There are shocks we can only answer by eloquent dumbness. He departed and went into a wilderness: it was better to be among the barren sands than amongst murderers and most cruel-minded men. There are times when we are all but inclined to give up our work. Our rain is lost, our dews fall in stony places, our best endeavours are returned to us without echo or answer of joy and gratitude, and we sigh for a lodge in some vast wilderness, some boundless contiguity of shade. This will be only for a while, however, in the case of Jesus Christ. “When he went forth and saw great multitudes he was moved with compassion towards them, and he healed their sick.” He was bound to come back again: the sickness would have a greater effect upon him than the murder. He will not relinquish his work because of instances that might have shocked him with fatal distress. He looks upon the multitudinous man and not only upon the individual mischief-doer and murderer. He was the Son of Man, Jesus Christ always took the broad and inclusive view, and this held him to his work when individual instances might have driven him away from it and afflicted him with fatal discouragement.

It is even so we must look at our work, great or small. If we were to be determined by the action of this man or that we should soon abandon the work and have nothing more to do with it. We have not to look at the individual stumbling-block, at the personal fault-finder and heart-breaker, we have to look upon the multitude, the sum-total of things, we have to listen for the universal human cry, and so long as we hold ourselves to universals rather than to particulars we shall be found steadily in our work. Now and again we may be in the wilderness for a while, shocked and distressed, mourning with a great sorrow some unlooked-for calamity, but as upon the air of the wilderness there come the moan and sigh and wail of the world’s sorrow we shall go out again and be found faithful servants, working to the last limit of our strength, and working till the last glint dies out of the fading day.

To this Jesus let us cling, to this Jesus let us ever more go. Withhold nothing from the Lamb of God. The bitterer our tale the sweeter his reply, the more agony there is in our prayer the greater grace will be in his answer.

Fuente: The People’s Bible by Joseph Parker

XXXII

OUR LORD’S GREAT MINISTRY IN GALILEE

Part VII

STILLING THE TEMPEST, THE TWO GADARENE DEMONIACS, SECOND REJECTION AT NAZARETH, SENDING FORTH THE TWELVE, AND HEROD’S SUSPICION

Harmony -pages 66-75 and Mat 8:18-23 ; Mat 11:1 ; Mat 13:54-58 ; Mat 14:1-12 ; Mar 4:34-5:20 ; Mar 6:1-29 ; Luk 8:22-40 ; Luk 9:1-9 .

When Jesus had finished his discourse on the kingdom, as illustrated in the first great group of parables, he crossed over the Sea of Galilee to avoid the multitudes. While on the bosom of the sea a storm swept down upon them, as indicated by Luke, but our Lord had fallen asleep. So the disciples awoke him with their cry of distress and he, like a God, spoke to the winds and the sea, and they obeyed him. Such is the simple story of this incident, the lesson of which is the strengthening of their faith in his divinity.

Upon their approach to the shore the country of the Gadarenes occurred the thrilling incident of the two Gadarene demoniacs. The story is graphically told here by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, and does not need to be repeated in this interpretation, but there are certain points in the story which need to be explained. First, there are some difficulties: (1) The apparent discrepancy of long standing, relating to the place, is cleared up by Dr. Broadus in his note at the bottom of page 67 (see his explanation of this difficulty);

The long famous instance of “discrepancy” as to the place in this narrative has been cleared up in recent years by the decision of textual critics that the correct text in Luke is Gerasenes, as well as in Mark, and by Dr. Thomson’s discovery of a ruin on the lake shore, named Khersa (Gerasa). If this village was included (a very natural supposition) in the district belonging to the city of Gadara, some miles south-eastward, then the locality could be described as either in the country of the Gadarenes, or in the country of the Gerasenes

(2) Matthew mentions two demoniacs, while Mark and Luke mention but one. This is easily explained by saying that the one mentioned by Mark and Luke was probably the prominent and leading one, and that they do not say there was only one. Second) there are some important lessons in this incident for us: (1) We see from this incident that evil spirits, or demons, not only might possess human beings by impact of spirit upon spirit, but they also could and did possess lower animals. (2) We see here also that these evil spirits could not do what they would without permission, and thus we find an illustration of the limitations placed upon the Devil and his agencies. (3) There is here a recognition of the divinity of Jesus by these demoniacs and that he is the dispenser of their torment. (4) There is here also an illustration of the divine power of Jesus Christ over the multitude of demons, and from this incident we may infer that they are never too numerous for him. (5) The man when healed is said to have been in his right mind, indicating the insanity of sin. (6) The new convert was not allowed to go with Jesus, but was made a missionary to his own people) to tell them of the great things the Lord had done for him. (7) The Gadarenes besought him to leave their borders. Matthew Henry says that these people thought more of their hogs than they did of the Lord Jesus Christ. Alas I this tribe is by far too numerous now.

In Section 55 (Mat 10:1-42 ; Mar 6:7-13 ; Luk 9:1-6 ) we have the first commission of the twelve apostles. The immediate occasion is expressed in Mat 9:36 . (See the author’s sermon on “Christ’s Compassion Excited by a Sight of the Multitude.”) These apostles had received the training of the mighty hand of the Master ever since their conversion and call to the ministry, and now he thrusts them out to put into action what they had received from him. The place they were to go, or the limit of their commission, is found in Mat 10:5-6 . This limitation to go to the Jews and not to the Gentiles seems to have been in line with the teaching elsewhere that salvation came first to the Jews and that the time of the Gentiles had not yet come in, but this commission was not absolute, because we find our Lord later commissioning them to go to all the world. What they were to preach is found in Mat 10:7 and what they were to do in Mat 10:8 . The price they were to ask is found in the last clause of Mat 10:8 . How they were to be supported, negatively and positively, together with the principle of their support, is found in Mat 10:9-11 . The principle of ministerial support is found also, very much elaborated, in 1Co 9:4-13 , and is referred to in 1Co 9:14 as an ordinance of our Lord. The manner of making this operative on entering a city is found in Mat 10:11-12 . The rewards of receiving and rejecting them are found in Mat 10:13 , while the method of testimony against the rejectors is expressed in Mat 10:14-15 .

The characteristics of these disciples are given in Mat 10:16 : “Wise as serpents, and harmless as doves.” If they should have had the characteristic of the dove alone they would have been silly; if the serpent alone, they would have been tricky. But with both they had prudence and simplicity. In this commission we find also that they were to be subject to certain hazards, recorded in Mat 10:18 . Their defense is also promised in Mat 10:19-20 . The extent of their persecutions is expressed in Mat 10:21-22 . Their perseverance is indicated in the last clause of Mat 10:22 . In Mat 10:23 we have the promise that the Son of man would come to them before they had gone through all the cities of Israel. What does that mean? There are five theories about it, all of which are amply discussed by Broadus (see his Commentary in loco).

The consolations offered these disciples, in view of their prospective persecutions, are as follows (Mat 10:24-31 ): (1) So they treated the Lord, (2) all things hidden shall be made known, (3) the work of their persecutors is limited to the body, but God’s wrath is greater than man’s and touches both soul and body, and (4) the Father’s providential care. The condition of such blessings in persecution, and vice versa, are expressed in Mat 10:32-33 . From this we see that they were to go forth without fear or anxiety and in faith. The great issue which the disciples were to force is found in Mat 10:34-39 . This does not mean that Christ’s work has in it the purpose of stirring up strife, but that the disturbance will arise from the side of the enemy in their opposition to the gospel and its principles, whose purpose means peace. So there will arise family troubles, as some yield to the call of the gospel while others of the same family reject it. Some will always be lacking in the spirit of religious tolerance, which is not the spirit of Christ. In this connection our Lord announces the principle of loyalty to him as essential to discipleship, with an added encouragement, viz., that of finding and losing the life. In Mat 10:40-42 we have the identity of Christ with the Father which shows his divinity and also his identity with his people in his work. Then follows the blessed encouragement of the promise of rewards. When Jesus had thus finished his charge to his disciples, he made a circuit of the villages of Galilee preaching the gospel of the kingdom.

From this incident come three important lessons for us: First, we have here the origin and development of a call to the ministry as follows: (1) Christ’s compassion for the perishing and leaderless, (2) prayer to God that he would send forth laborers, and (3) a positive conviction that we should go. Second, there is also suggested here the dangers of the care for fine preaching: (1) If it has its source in anxiety and selfishness it restrains spirituality; (2) it manifests itself in excitement and excess which adulterates spirituality; (3) it leads to weariness or self-seeking and thus destroys spirituality. Third, we have here several encouragements to the preacher: (1) The cause is honorable; (2) the example is illustrious; (3) the success is certain; (4) care is guaranteed; (5) the reward is glorious; (6) the trials become triumphs; (7) the identification with Christ.

The account of the miracles wrought by the disciples of Jesus on this preaching tour impressed Herod Antipas, as well as those wrought by Jesus himself, the impression of which was so great that he thought that John the Baptist was risen from the dead. The account in the Harmony throws light on the impression that was made by the ministry of John. Some were saying that Jesus was Elijah or one of the other prophets, but Herod’s conscience and superstition caused him to think it was John the Baptist, for he remembered his former relation to John. Then follows here the story of how John had rebuked Herod which angered his wife, Herodias, and eventually led to John’s death at the band of the executioner. Josephus gives testimony relative to this incident. (See chapter X of this “Interpretation.”)

There are some lessons to be learned from this incident. First, we are impressed with the courage and daring of the first Christian martyr, a man who was not afraid to speak his convictions in the face of the demons of the pit. Second, the life must leave its impress, but that impress will be variously interpreted according to the antecedents and temperaments of the interpreters. Third, the influence of a wicked woman, often making the weak and drunken husband a mere tool to an awful wicked end. Fourth, the occasion of sin and crime is often the time of feasting and frivolity. Just such a crime as this has often been approached by means of the dance and strong drink. Fifth, we have here an example of a man who was too weak to follow his conviction of the right because he had promised and had taken an oath. He had more respect for his oath than he had for right. Sixth, there is here also an example of the wickedness of vengeance. It is a tradition that when the daughter brought in the head of John and gave it to Herodias, her mother, she took a bodkin and stuck it through the tongue of John, saying, “You will never say again, It is not lawful for you to have your brother’s wife.”

QUESTIONS

1. Give the time, place, circumstances, and lesson of Jesus stilling the tempest.

2. Tell the story of the two Gadarene demoniacs.

3. What two difficulties here, and how is each explained?

4. What seven important lessons for us in this incident?

5. Give the story of the second rejection of Jesus at Nazareth and its several lessons.

6. What was the immediate occasion of sending forth the twelve apostles on their first mission?

7. What preparation had they received?

8. Where were they to go, or what was the limit of this commission?

9. Why was it limited, and was it absolute?

10. What were they to preach, and what were they to do?

11. What price were they to ask?

12. How were they to be supported, negatively and positively, and how do you harmonize the Synoptics here?

13. What was the principle of their support and where do we find this principle very much elaborated?

14. How is this principle referred to in 1Co 9:14 ?

15. What was the manner of making it operative on entering a city?

16. What rewards attached to receiving and rejecting them?

17. What was the method of testimony against those who rejected?

18. What was to be the characteristics of these disciples?

19. To what hazards were they subject?

20. What was to be their defense?

21. What was to be the extent of their persecution?

22. What was text on the perseverance of the saints, and what was its immediate application to these apostles?

23. Explain “till the Son of man be come.”

24. What were the consolations offered these disciples?

25. What was the condition of such blessings?

26. In what spirit were they to go forth?

27. What great issue must they force? Explain.

28. What principle of discipleship here announced?

29. What proof here of the divinity of Jesus Christ?

30. What promise here of rewards?

31. What did Jesus do immediately after finishing his charge here

32. What lessons here on the origin and development of a call to the ministry?

33. What dangers of the care for fine preaching?

34. What seven encouragements from this incident to the preacher of today?

35. How was Herod and others impressed by the miracles of Jesus and his disciples?

36. What several conjectures of Herod and others?

37. What part was played in this drama by John? by Herod? by Herodias and by Salome, the daughter of Herodias?

38. What testimony of Josephus on this incident?

39. What lessons of this incident?

Fuente: B.H. Carroll’s An Interpretation of the English Bible

1 At that time Herod the tetrarch heard of the fame of Jesus,

Ver. 1. At that time, &c. ] When he was cast out by his countrymen, he was heard of at the court. The gospel, as the sea, what it loseth in one place, it getteth in another. But what? had not Herod heard of Christ till now? It is the misery of many good kings that they seldom hear the truth of things. Alphonsus king of Arragon bewailed it. And of Marcus Aurelius, one of the best Roman emperors, it is said, that he was even bought and sold by his court parasites. As for Herod, he may seem to have been of Gallio’s religion, even a mere irreligion. He lay melting in filthy pleasures, and minded not the things above. Whoredom, wine, and new wine had taken away his heart, Hos 4:11 . St Luke, Luk 9:9 , adds that he desired to see Christ, but yet never stirred out of doors to go to him; good motions make but a thoroughfare of wicked men’s hearts; they pass away as a flash of lightning, that dazzleth the eyes only, and leaves more darkness behind it.

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

1 12. ] HEROD HEARS OF THE FAME OF JESUS. PARENTHETICAL ACCOUNT OF THE DEATH OF JOHN THE BAPTIST. Mar 6:14-29 . Luk 9:7-9 , who does not relate the death of John.

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

1. ] This Herod was Herod ANTIPAS, son of Herod the Great, , and own brother of Archelaus (Jos. B. J. i. 28. 4). The portion of the kingdom allotted to him by the second will of his father (in the first he was left as king) was the tetrarchy of Galilee and Pera (Jos. Antt. xvii. 8. 1). He married the daughter of the Arabian king Aretas; but having during a visit to his half-brother Herod Philip (not the tetrarch of that name, but another son of Herod the Great, disinherited by his father) become enamoured of his wife Herodias, he prevailed on her to leave her husband, and live with him. (See below, on Mat 14:4 .) This step, accompanied as it was with a stipulation of putting away the daughter of Aretas, involved him in a war with his father-in-law, which however did not break out till a year before the death of Tiberius (A.D. 37, U.C. 790; Jos. Antt. xviii. 5. 1 3), and in which he was totally defeated and his army destroyed by Aretas; a divine vengeance, according to the Jews, for the death of John the Baptist (Josephus, ibid.). He and Herodias afterwards went to Rome at the beginning of Caligula’s reign, to complain of the assumption of the title of king by Agrippa his nephew, son of Aristobulus; but Caligula having heard the claims of both, banished Antipas and Herodias to Lyons in Gaul, whence he was afterwards removed to Spain, and there died: Jos. Antt. xviii. 7. 1, 2.

The following events apparently took place at Machrus, a frontier fortress between Pera and Arabia: see below on Mat 14:10 .

] It was the fame of the preaching and miracles of the twelve , on their mission, of which Herod heard, probably in conjunction with the works of Christ: see [133] Mark.

[133] When, in the Gospels, and in the Evangelic statement, 1Co 11:23-25 , the sign () occurs in a reference, it is signified that the word occurs in the parallel place in the other Gospels, which will always be found indicated at the head of the note on the paragraph. When the sign () is qualified , thus, ‘ Mk.,’ or ‘ Mt. Mk.,’ &c., it is signified that the word occurs in the parallel place in that Gospel or Gospels, but not in the other or others .

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

Mat 14:1-12 . Death of the Baptist (Mar 6:14-29 , Luk 9:7-9 ). This section might with advantage have been given as a short chapter by itself, and a new start made with the feeding of the thousands which forms the first of a series of narratives together giving the story of the later Galilean ministry (Mat 14:3 to Mat 20:16 ). In this section (Mat 14:1-12 ) Matthew still has his eye on Mark, the story of the fate of the Baptist being there the next after the section in reference to mother and brethren, excepting the mission of the Twelve (Mar 6:7-13 ) already related in Mt. (Mat 10:5-15 ). Indeed from this point onwards Matthew follows Mark’s order. In the foregoing part of this Gospel the parallelism between it and Mark has been disturbed by the desire of the evangelist to draw largely on his other source, the Logia, and introduce teaching materials bearing on all the topics suggested in his introductory sketch of Christ’s early Galilean ministry: Didache , chaps. 5 7; apostolic mission (4:18. 22), chap. 10; Baptist (chap. 3), chap. 11; Pharisees (cha p. 3:7-9), c hap. 12; popular preaching (Mat 4:23 ), chap. 3 Chaps. 8, 9 disturb the order by grouping incidents illustrating the healing ministry.

Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson

Mat 14:1 . . Mk. connects with return of Twelve from their mission (Mat 6:14 ), Mt. apparently with immediately preceding section. But the phrase recalls Mat 11:25 , Mat 12:1 , and it may be the evangelist is thinking generally of a time of prevailing insusceptibility (Weiss-Meyer). : Herod Antipas, tetrarch of Galilee and Peraea for many years (4 39 A.D.), married to the daughter of Aretas, king of Arabia; like his father Herod the Great in cunning, ambition, and love of splendour in building and otherwise, whereof the new city of Tiberias was a monument (Schrer, Gesch. , i. 359). , vide Mat 4:24 . The fame of Jesus penetrated at last even into the royal palace, where very different matters occupied the attention, ordinarily.

Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson

Matthew Chapter 14

Nor is this the whole sad truth. About this time the twelve were sent forth. This we have had in chapter 10, forming part of the special series of events transplanted into that part of the Gospel; but, in point of time, it followed the people’s fleshly judgment of Christ. Their mission was beautifully given before by Matthew, so as to complete the picture of Christ’s patient persevering grace with Israel, as well as to testify the rights of His person as Jehovah, the Lord of the harvest. Here consequently the fact is omitted, but the effect appears. “At that time Herod the tetrarch heard of the fame of Jesus, and said unto his servants, This is John the Baptist: he is risen from the dead; and therefore mighty works do show forth themselves in him.”

This gives occasion to the Spirit of God to tell the tale (vers. 3-12) of the extinction of John the Baptist’s testimony in his own blood. It was not only a blinded people, but in their midst ruled a false and reckless king, who feared not first to imprison, and finally to slay, that blessed witness of God. Not that he did not fear the multitude (ver. 5); for his passions would have impelled to do the deed; nor that he had not sorrow and qualms when it came to the point (ver. g); but what can these restraints avail against the wiles and power of Satan? Bad as Herod was, he was not altogether without a conscience, and the preaching of John had reached it, so far at least as to render him uneasy.’ But the issue was what one might expect who knows that an enemy is behind the scene, hating all that is of God, and goading man on to be his own slave and God’s foe, in the gratification of lust and the maintenance of honour worse than vanity. What an insight into the world and the heart we have here from God! And with what holy simplicity all is laid bare which it would be profitable for us to hear and weigh! “Man being in honour abideth not; he is like the beasts that perish. This their way is their folly; yet their posterity approve their sayings. Like sheep they are laid in the grave; death shall feed on them; and the upright shall have dominion over them in the morning.” So sang the Psalmist, and surely it was right and of God. “And he (the king) sent and beheaded John in the prison; and his head was brought in a charger and given to the damsel: and she brought it to her mother” (vers. 10, 11). Such is man, and such woman, without God.

When word was brought to the Lord about John’s death, He marks His sense of the act at once – “He departed thence by ship into a desert place apart: and when the people had heard thereof, they followed Him.” There was no insensibility in Him, whatever His longsuffering and grace. He felt the grievous wrong done to God and His testimony and His servant. It was the harbinger of a storm still more violent and a deed of blood darker far – the awful sin of His own rejection. He would not hurry the moment, but retires. He was a sufferer, a perfect sufferer, as well as a sacrifice; and while His sufferings rose to their height in that most solemn hour when He bore our sins in His own body on the tree, it would be to ignore much if we limited our thoughts and feelings of His love and moral glory to His closing agony. The Lord, then, so much the more felt the evil, because of His unselfish love and unstained holiness. It is ever felt most in God’s presence, where Jesus felt everything. The work of rejection goes on.

Did this deep sense in His spirit of the growing power of evil in Israel interrupt the course of His love? Far from it. “And Jesus went forth, and saw a great multitude, and was moved with compassion toward them, and He healed their sick” (ver. 14). Let murderous unbelief act as it may, He was Jehovah, present here below in humiliation, but in divine power and grace.

The disciples poorly profit by His grace, and leave small space for the display of His beneficent power. So, when it was evening, they “came to Him, saying, This is a desert place, and the time is now past; send the multitude away, that they may go into the villages, and buy themselves victuals” (ver. 15). “Send the multitude away!” – Away from Jesus? what a proposal! The greatness of the strait, the urgency of the need, the difficulty of the circumstances, which to unbelief are so many reasons for men to do what they can, are to faith just so much the more the plea and occasion for the Lord to show what He is. “Jesus said unto them, They need not depart; give ye them to eat.” Oh, the dullness of man! – the folly and slowness of heart in disciples to believe all! And yet, beloved friends, have we not seen it? Have we not proved the selfsame thing in ourselves? What lack of care for others! What measuring of their wants, in the forgetfulness of Him who has all power in heaven and on earth, and who, in the same breath that assures us of it, has sent us forth to meet the deepest necessities of sin-darkened souls!

“And they say unto Him, We have here but five loaves and two fishes.” Ah! were they, are we, so blind as to overlook that it is not a question of what, but whom, we have? Jesus is nothing to the flesh even of disciples.

He said, “Bring them hither to Me.” Oh for more simplicity in thus bringing every lack and every scanty supply to Him whose it is to provide, not for us only, but for all the exigencies of His love; to reckon on Him more habitually as One who cannot act beneath Himself.

“And He commanded the multitude to sit down on the grass, and took the five loaves, and the two fishes, and looking up to heaven, He blessed, and brake, and gave the loaves to His disciples, and the disciples to the multitude. And they did all eat, and were filled: and they took up of the fragments that remained twelve baskets full. And they that had eaten were about five thousand men, besides women and children” (vers. 19-21).

How blessed the scene, and how the perfectness of Christ shines through it all! In nothing does He depart from grace, spite of the recent display of murderous hatred in Herod; His very retiring apart before it is but a further step in the path of His sorrow and humiliation; and yet there, in the desert, to this great multitude, drawn out by their wants, comes forth this striking testimony. Should they not have assuredly gathered who and what He was? Jehovah had chosen Zion – had desired it for His habitation – had said, “This is My rest forever: here will I dwell; for I have desired it.” But now an Edomite was there, the slave of a ravening Gentile; and the people would have it so, and the chief priests would shortly cry, “We have no king but Caesar.” Nevertheless, the rejected One spreads a table in the wilderness, abundantly blesses Zion’s provision, and satisfies her poor with bread. The miracle may not be the fulfilment of Psa 132:5 , but it is the witness that He was there who could, and yet will, fulfil it. He is the Messiah, but the rejected Messiah, as ever in our Gospel. He satisfies His poor with bread, but it is in the wilderness, whither He had withdrawn apart from the unbelieving nation and the wilful apostate king.

But now a change opens on our view. For “straightway Jesus constrained His disciples to get into a ship and to go before Him unto the other side, while He sent the multitudes away. And when He had sent the multitudes away, He went up into a mountain apart to pray: and when the evening was come, He was there alone” (vers. 22, 23). The crown was not yet to flourish upon Himself. He must leave His ancient people because of their unbelief, and take a new position on high, and call out a remnant to another state of things also. Rejected as Messiah on earth, He would not be a king by the will of man to gratify the worldly lusts of any, but go above, and there exercise His priesthood before God. It is an exact picture of what the Lord has done. Meanwhile, if the masses of Israel (“the great congregation”) are dismissed, His elect are ushered into a scene of troubles in the absence of their Master during the night of man’s day. “The ship was now in the midst of the sea, tossed with waves; for the wind was contrary.”

Such were some of the consequences of Christ’s rejection. Apart on high, and not in the wilderness, He prays for His own; locally severed, and yet in truth far nearer, He prays for the disciples left alone, to outward appearance. They are “such as should be saved,” the chosen ones, companions of His own humiliation while the nation despised Him.

“And in the fourth watch of the night Jesus went unto them, walking on the sea. And when the disciples saw Him walking on the sea, they were troubled, saying, It is a spirit; and they cried out for fear. But straightway Jesus spake unto them, saying, Be of good cheer; it is I; be not afraid. And Peter answered Him and said, Lord, if it be Thou, bid me come unto Thee on the water. And He said, Come. And when Peter was come down out of the ship, he walked on the water to go to Jesus. But when he saw the wind boisterous, he was afraid; and beginning to sink, he cried, saying, Lord, save me. And immediately Jesus stretched forth His hand, and caught him, and said unto him, O thou of little faith, wherefore didst thou doubt?” (vers. 25-31.) Without dwelling now on the moral lesson, with which we are all more or less familiar, a few words on the typical instructions conveyed by the passage may be welcome.

He will leave His intercessional place above, and rejoin His disciples when their troubles and perplexity are deepest. The mountain, the sea, storm and calm, darkness and light, are all, as to security, alike to Christ; but His taking part in the distress is the terror of the natural mind. At first even the disciples “were troubled, saying, It is a spirit; and they cried out for fear,” only hushed by the sign of His speedy presence. This hardly goes beyond the circumstances and condition of the Jewish remnant. If there be any part which does, it is set forth in Peter, who, on the word of Jesus, quits the ship (which presents the ordinary state of the remnant), and goes to meet the Saviour outside all support of nature. It is our part to cross the world by divine power; for we walk by faith, and not by sight. The wind was not hushed, the waves as threatening as ever; but had not Peter heard that word “Come”; and was it not enough? It was ample as from the Lord and God of all. “And when Peter was come down out of the ship, he walked on the water, to go to Jesus.” As long as Jesus and His word were before his heart, there was no failure any more than danger. “But when he saw the wind boisterous, he was afraid; and beginning to sink, he cried, saying, Lord, save me.” Peter failed, as the Church has failed, to walk toward Christ and with Christ; but, as in his case so in ours, Christ has been faithful, and has delivered us from so great a death, and doth deliver; in “whom we trust that He will yet deliver.” “And when they were come into the ship, the wind ceased. Then they that were in the ship came and worshipped Him, saying, Of a truth Thou art the Son of God” (vers. 32, 33).

Jesus now rejoins the remnant, and calm immediately follows, and He is owned there as the Son of God. Nor this only, for “they came into the land of Gennesaret. And when the men of that place had knowledge of Him, they sent out into all that country round about, and brought unto Him all that were diseased, and besought Him that they might only touch the hem of His garment; and as .many as touched were made perfectly whole” (vers. 34-36). The Lord is now joyfully received in the very scene where before He had been rejected. It is the blessing and healing of a distressed and groaning world, consequent on His return in acknowledged power and glory.

Fuente: William Kelly Major Works (New Testament)

NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Mat 14:1-5

1At that time Herod the Tetrarch heard the news about Jesus, 2and said to his servants, “This is John the Baptist; he has risen from the dead, and that is why miraculous powers are at work in him.” 3For when Herod had John arrested, he bound him and put him in prison because of Herodias, the wife of his brother Philip. 4For John had been saying to him, “It is not lawful for you to have her.” 5Although Herod wanted to put him to death, he feared the crowd, because they regarded John as a prophet.

Mat 14:1 “At that time Herod the Tetrarch heard the news about Jesus” Matthew apparently inserted a parenthesis between Mat 14:1-2 and Mat 14:13 dealing with the earlier death of John the Baptist. (What Jesus heard in Mat 14:13 was not the death of John the Baptist but the report that Herod had heard about Him and thought that He was John the Baptist come back to life.)

Mat 14:2 “This is John the Baptist” See account in Luk 9:7-9.

“that is why miraculous powers are at work in him” Herod apparently was superstitious and this magnified his guilt over the beheading of John the Baptist. There are no historical records of John the Baptist ever performing any miracles.

Mat 14:3 “Herod had John arrested, he bound him and put him in prison” We learn from Josephus’Antiquities of the Jews 18.5.2 that this was the prison of Machaerus (cf. Mat 4:12; Mat 11:2). It was apparently a high, impregnable fortress to the southeast of the Dead Sea on the border of the Nabatean Empire. It is interesting to note that Herod’s first wife successfully defected to her father, Aretas (cf. 2Co 11:32), by requesting to come to this particular summer palace. Later, her father had a military clash with her former husband, Herod Antipas, and totally defeated him. Herod would have been removed from office then if the Roman authorities had not intervened.

“Herodias” The New Testament TransLine by Michal Magill has a good summary of her.

” She was the grand-daughter of Herod the Great, the daughter of Aristobulus, the sister of Agrippa I. See Mat 2:1. She married Herod Philip I, a paternal brother of her father. Later, she left him and married Herod Antipas, also a paternal brother of her father by a different wife. She chose to go into exile with Antipas when he was exiled in A.D. 39″ (p. 49).

Mat 14:4 “for John had been saying to him” The verb is imperfect tense which meant repeated action in past time. John had apparently made this accusation repeatedly. These charges were based either on Herod Antipas and Herodias (his niece) being too closely related to be married (cf. Lev 18:16), or more probably, because they were each had been illegally divorced (cf. Deu 24:1-4).

Mat 14:5 “Although Herod wanted to put him to death, he feared the crowd” This seems to be in direct contradiction to Mat 14:9. However, the schizophrenia of these eastern potentates was notorious. Apparently there was a fascination with John because Herod often called him to talk with him (cf. Mar 6:20), yet at the same time, there was great fear!

“because they regarded John as a prophet” Jesus said in Mat 11:7-11 that John was the last OT prophet and the greatest man ever born of woman under the old covenant. See SPECIAL TOPIC: NEW TESTAMENT PROPHECY at Mat 11:9.

Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley

At = In. Greek. en.

time = season.

Herod = Herod Antipas. Son of Herod the Great by Malthace. See App-109.

tetrarch. The Greek word transliterated = a governor over the fourth part of any region; but the word subsequently lost its strict etymological meaning, and came to denote any petty prince not ruling over an entire country. So called from tetartos = fourth.

heard of the fame. Figure of speech Polyptoton. Greek. ekousen. . akoen.

fame = hearing, or report.

of = concerning. Genitive (of Relation). App-17.

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

1-12.] HEROD HEARS OF THE FAME OF JESUS. PARENTHETICAL ACCOUNT OF THE DEATH OF JOHN THE BAPTIST. Mar 6:14-29. Luk 9:7-9, who does not relate the death of John.

Fuente: The Greek Testament

And at that time Herod the tetrarch heard of the fame of Jesus. And he said to his servants, This is John the Baptist; he’s risen from the dead; and therefore mighty works do show forth themselves in him. For Herod had laid hold on John, and bound him, and put him in prison for Herodias’ sake, his brother Philip’s wife. For John said unto him, It is not lawful for thee to have her. And when he would have put him to death, he feared the multitude, because they counted him as a prophet. But when Herod’s birthday was kept, and the daughter of Herodias danced before him, and pleased Herod. Whereupon he promised with an oath to give her whatsoever she would ask. And she, being before instructed of her mother, said, Give me here John the Baptist’s head in a charger. So the king was sorry: nevertheless for the oath’s sake, and them which sat with him at meat, he commanded that it be given to her. And he sent, and beheaded John in the prison. And his head was brought in a charger, and given to the damsel: and she brought it to her mother. And his disciples came, and took up the body, and buried it, and went and told Jesus ( Mat 14:1-12 ).

Here we have the story of Herod and the beheading of John the Baptist. He was called Herod Antipas; he was the son of Herod the Great. The word “tetrarch” means the ruler over a fourth part. When Herod the Great died, he had many sons, but three of them were given rule over part of the territory that Herod the Great once governed. Herod Antipas, the one who had beheaded John the Baptist, was married to the daughter of a Nabatean king, Areta.

And He went to Rome were he visited his brother Philip, Herod Philip, and there he fell in love with Philip’s wife. And he enticed her to leave his brother, and to return with him as his wife. But in order to do this he had to then divorce Areta, the daughter of the Nabatean king, which he did. And he took Herodias as his wife.

Now John the Baptist spoke out against that. John the Baptist was a straight shooter. And he said it isn’t lawful for you to do that. It wasn’t lawful for him to put away Areta without a cause. And of course it wasn’t lawful to marry his brother’s sister. So John the Baptist spoke out boldly against him, and he paid the price of incurring the displeasure of Herod, for Herod imprisoned him and would have put him to death, yet there was such a popular appeal that John had to the people. He was a little fearful of putting him to death. Josephus in his Antiquities, the historic account of the Jews, helps us in this a little bit. He said that Herod actually was desiring to put him to death, because of the tremendous popularity that John had among the people. And he was actually a little threatened by the popularity of John the Baptist.

Herodias ultimately, of course, was the downfall of Herod. She was a very cruel and cunning woman. She, of course, was upset because John had spoken out against the marriage, had a deep kind of desire for revenge. And so she allowed her daughter to dance for Herod on his birthday. Her daughter’s name was Salome. The dances were of those oriental-type, which were very suggestive, and sensuous. Salome was probably only sixteen or seventeen. And for her mother to allow her to do this, shows the fact that there was no real morality in the heart of Herodias at all, very immoral woman. And when Herod’s passions were aroused by the dance of Salome, in that moment of excitement and the applause for the dance and all, with the crowd around, he said, “ask whatever you want and I will give it to you” ( Mar 6:22 ). And her mother Herodias had already coached her in advance that she should ask for the head of John the Baptist on a charger. And when she made this request, of course Herod wanted to back down, but he had made the promise, and so he held to it.

Now later on when Caligula became the emperor of Rome there was another son of Herod, Agrippa that he sent to reign over some of the provinces of Israel, and he gave to Agrippa the title of king. And so you remember Paul addressing him King Agrippa.

Now Herodias said to her husband Herod Antipas, look, he has the title of king. You ought also to have the title of king, because she had this desire to be known as Queen Herodias, and so this real thing in her wanting to be known as queen. She put her husband up to going to Rome to talk to the Emperor Caligula that he would give to Antipas also the title of king.

However, Herod Agrippa heard of the plan, and so he sent messages ahead to Caligula and said, hey, Antipas is not to be trusted, he is very likely to rebel against you. He is looking for position and power. And so Caligula believed the report that he received from Agrippa. And when Antipas came requesting that he receive the title of king, instead of receiving it, he had taken a lot of money with him, and she said, what’s money, go and bribe him, Caligula, for this title of king. Caligula took the money, but he banished Antipas to Gaul.

And so that was the end of his ambition. And that was the end of Herod Antipas, he and Herodias. Caligula said, look, you can stay here if you want. But she said, no, I’ll be with my husband. That’s the only honorable thing she did. So she was banished with him to Gaul. The end of this man, who fought the prophet of God, because the prophet had enough courage to speak out against his sin, had him imprisoned.

And so we read of the death of the cousin of Jesus, John the Baptist. And when Herod heard of all that Jesus was doing, though he had put John the Baptist to death, his conscience was probably still troubling him. And he said, “this is John the Baptist, he’s raised from the dead, and that’s why he can do this marvelous works” ( Mat 14:2 ). He no doubt really believed that John the Baptist was indeed a true prophet.

So now in verse thirteen,

When Jesus heard of this [horrible atrocity against John. It no doubt shocked Him.], and he went by ship into a desert place apart ( Mat 14:13 ):

Desert, not meaning desert like the Mojave, or Sahara, but a deserted place, because there really isn’t any real desert around the Sea of Galilee, but there are places that are deserted, or uninhabited. And so He went to one of the uninhabited areas there across the Sea of Galilee, over on the opposite side of the sea, there were several sort of deserted areas.

So when the people had heard that he was leaving, they followed him on foot out of the cities. And when Jesus went foRuth ( Mat 14:13-14 ),

So He got around the other side, and here was a great multitude of people waiting for Him. Now the Sea of Galilee is only eight miles across. And from the area of Capernaum, if you cross over to the area there, Bethsaida there, it isn’t really that far, and you can watch a little boat go all the way across. So as they are taking off for Capernaum, it’s easy to tell which direction they are going. They just watch which direction they are going, and then the people run around the upper end of the lake, and then they’ll be there waiting of Him, when He got to the other side.

This must have been difficult. Here you’re troubled, because of this horrible atrocity, and you’re wanting to get alone for just a little bit, to sort of put things together, get things in perspective. And so you try to get off alone, and have just a little time to wait upon God, and to pray, and to sort of get yourself collected, and you get to the other side, and here is the whole multitude of people waiting there for you. Now it would have been very easy for Jesus to have been brusque and say, look I came over to get a rest, can’t you leave me alone? And I know so many people who have a great ministry today who might do just that.

But Jesus when he saw the great multitude, was moved with compassion toward them ( Mat 14:14 ),

Oh, God give us a heart for the ministry, like Jesus. That whenever we see the people, rather than feeling; oh, no, why did they have to come here? Don’t they know I want to be alone? That whenever we meet them, we are moved with compassion towards them. God give us a heart of compassion towards the needs of people.

And the needs of people always moved the heart of Jesus with compassion. He could not see a needy person without being moved with compassion towards them.

and he healed their sick ( Mat 14:14 ).

Now many of these people were not really seeking Him. All they were seeking was help, the healing of their sick. And it would be very easy to sort of jump on the crowd, and to needle them, and get after them. All you want is the benefits. You really don’t want to make the commitment. And that was so true. But Jesus never chided them. He never got on them. He just went ahead and ministered to them freely. And I love Him for that.

Now when it was evening, his disciples came to him, and they said, This is a deserted place, and the time is now past; you better send the multitude away, that they might go into the villages, and buy themselves some food. But Jesus said unto them, They don’t need to depart; give them to eat. And they said unto him, We only have five loaves, and two fish. And he said, Bring them to me. And he commanded the multitude to sit down on the grass, and he took the five loaves, and the two fishes, and looking up to heaven he blessed, and he broke, and he gave the loaves to His disciples, and the disciples to the multitude. And they did all eat, and were filled ( Mat 14:15-20 ):

The word “filled” in Greek is glutted, that would be a more appropriate translation. They all ate and were stuffed.

And they took up of the fragments that remained twelve baskets full. And they that had eaten were about five thousand men, beside the woman and children ( Mat 14:20-21 ).

So here is that recording of the marvelous multiplication of the loaves and the fishes to feed the five thousand. Now there are those who have difficulty with miracles, and so when they read this story they try to read into it, a plausible explanation to remove the miraculous from it.

We are told that these five loaves and two fish came from a little boy, who probably when he told his mother I want to go over and see Jesus, she packed him a lunch. And so when the multitude was there, they said, Lord, you better send them away, that they might buy food. And He said, no, they are hungry, they might faint in the way, let’s feed them. And they said, if we had several thousand dollars worth of bread we couldn’t feed this crowd. Jesus said, what do you have? And Andrew said there is a little kid over here with five loaves and two fish, but what’s that to a multitude like this? And so the little boy came, and gave his five loaves and his two fishes to Jesus and He then blessed them, and broke the bread, and distributed.

And there are those who explain, that in those days, they wore these long robes and they had sleeves that tied at the wrist. And quite often people carried bread and fish in their sleeves. And that when everybody was hungry, and they all knew when they were hungry, everybody was so selfish, none was willing to share their own little lunch that they had tied in their sleeves.

But when the little boy came forth, and offered to Jesus his five loaves and two fishes, everyone was so touched and moved, by the beautiful example of this little child. They all untied their sleeves, and shared with each other and there was really enough there, that they could gather twelve baskets full, after everybody had eaten. And so it was the touching example of a little child, that moved the multitude. And isn’t that a beautiful story. God has got a hot place for men who try to mess with the Word.

And immediately Jesus constrained the disciples to get into a ship, and go before him to the other side, while he sent the multitudes away ( Mat 14:22 ).

So He said to the disciples and all, go ahead, get in the boat and go over to the other side. I’ll send the multitude away.

And when he had sent the multitudes away, he went up into a mountain apart to pray: and when the evening was come He was there alone ( Mat 14:23 ).

Now notice this, I think this is important to know. It had been an extremely hard day. Jesus had received the news of horrible atrocity, His cousin John had been beheaded by Herod. And He felt it sort of imperative to just get alone for awhile. So He got into the ship with the disciples, and they headed over to the other side.

But the people seeing the direction that they were going, run around the upper part of the Galilee, and meet Him when the ship landed. And here was the multitude. And Jesus spends the day ministering to them. He is weary emotionally, because of what had happen to John. No doubt weary physically by ministering to these people, being pressed by them all the day long up until the evening. He feeds them and then He sends them away, as the disciples are heading back. Hard day, troubling news, physically exhausted, time to really flake out, but instead He went up into a mountain apart to pray. Oh, the importance that prayer had in the life of Jesus.

Now if He being the Son of God felt the necessity to be strengthened through prayer on these kinds of occasions, how much more we, weak, failing disciples or followers of Him need to spend time in prayer, to be strengthened by God. We would say, oh, it’s time to really get a rest. I really need to get a nap. I really need to get my strength. But instead He went up, and spends the evening, the night in prayer according to another gospel. But prayer was His place of strength. He discovered it to be a place of great strength. Even as you can discover that prayer is a place of great strength indeed.

And so when the evening was come He was there alone.

But the ship was now in the midst of the sea, and it was tossed by the waves: for the wind was contrary ( Mat 14:24 ).

Coming from the side of Gennesaret, back across the sea, there is that valley that comes into the Sea of Galilee, from the Mediterranean where, when they get these storms, it usually blows in through that Chinnereth Valley. And so in coming back, you’re coming against that wind that comes howling through that valley. And so the disciples were faced with this dismal prospect of trying to row against the wind and against the flow of the wind-whipped waves, because they were heading back towards the area of Capernaum. And so they were in the midst of the sea. And they were being tossed with the waves, for the wind was coming from that direction of the Mediterranean.

And in the fourth watch of the night Jesus went unto them, walking on the sea. [That is almost morning.] And when the disciples saw him walking on the sea, they were troubled, saying, It’s a spirit; and they cried out for fear. But immediately Jesus spoke unto them, saying, Be of good cheer; it is I, be not afraid. [An impulsive] Peter answered, Lord, if it is you, bid me to come to you on the water. And Jesus said, Come on. And when Peter was come down out of the ship, he walked on the water, to go to Jesus. But when he saw the wind boisterous, he was afraid; and he began to sink, and he cried, saying, Oh, Lord, save me. And immediately Jesus stretched forth His hand, and caught him, and said unto him, O thou of little faith, why did you doubt? ( Mat 14:25-31 )

Amazing story, isn’t it? How that Peter was able for a time to walk on the water, and it would appear that he could walk on the water, as long as he kept his eyes on Jesus. But suddenly, maybe a wave crashed, splashing his face and he looked around and, oh, what am I doing out here? And he started to sink. “Lord, save me.” I can hear Jesus chuckle, as He said, “oh, oh, you of little faith”. What happened to you? You started well, what happened to you Peter? “Oh ye of little faith.”

I think that the lesson is keeping our eyes upon the Lord. I think that is so important for us. It is so easy for us to get our eyes on our circumstances. And we start looking around and the boisterous waves; we start looking at our problems. We start looking at our situations and we begin to sink. Because every one of us are faced with daily situations that can really sink us, if we really get into it. We need to keep our eyes on the Lord, who is the Master over the sea, over the waves, over the winds. And looking at Jesus he was able to walk for a ways on the water. Getting his eyes off Jesus and on the waves, he began to sink. As long as we keep our eyes on Jesus we can walk on the water, so to speak.

Now to me it’s great that when Peter started to sink he knew where to call. “Lord, save me.” I’ve been in the same boat. Man, how many times I’ve cried, “Oh Lord, save me.” And the graciousness of Jesus. “Oh thou of little faith”. Why did you doubt Peter? You’re doing all right.

And when they had come into the ship, the wind ceased. Then they that were in the ship came and worshiped him, saying, Of a truth, thou art the Son of God ( Mat 14:32-33 ).

They just had seen such a tremendous demonstration of His divine powers.

And when they were gone over, they came to the land of Gennesaret. And when the men of that place had knowledge of him, they sent out unto all the country round about, and brought unto him all that were diseased ( Mat 14:34-35 );

And Gennesaret is there. It is Chinnereth, or Gennesaret. It’s the name of that valley coming from the area of the Mediterranean aqua area.

And they besought him that they might only touch the hem of his garment: and as many as touched were made perfectly whole ( Mat 14:36 ).

Now Jesus did not have some kind of magic garment that if you touch it, you would be healed. The healing took place in each case because of the faith of that person. And the touching of His garment was the point for them to release their faith. There is sort of a passive kind of faith, if such a thing can exist. A believing that God can do it, knowing that God can do it, being fully persuaded and assured that God can do it.

And I think that we all probably fit in that category who believe in God. We know that God can do anything. And I am faced with some malady or whatever, and someone says, “Well, God can heal you.” Yes, I know that is true, I don’t doubt that. I go to the hospital and I see these people in critical condition. The doctors have given them up, and I say, “Well, God can heal you,” and I believe that. I believe God can do anything. But there is something to activating that faith, to where it is not, I believe that can heal you, but that I believe that God will heal you now, that moment when faith is activated to receive that touch, or healing from God.

And I think that this touching of the hem of His garment created a point of contact for those people to release their faith. In other words, in their minds they were saying I know that the moment I touch the hem of His garment, I’ll be healed. And that was so in their minds, that the moment they were able to grab the hem of His garment, they released the faith, and it was no longer just a passive, I know God can, but I know that God is. And in that moment, release their faith to take then at that moment their healing, and the moment they activated, or released the faith, they were healed.

There were many things in the New Testament that formed points of contact for the releasing of faith. And Jesus actually established more or less points of contact on various occasions. When He put mud in the blind man’s eyes, and said, “Now go and wash up the mud, as soon as you wash it out, you can see” ( Joh 9:6-7 ). The man believed that the minute I can wash this mud out, I am gonna see. And it was a point of contact for the releasing of his faith.

In the Old Testament, when the prophet Elisha told Naaman to go dip in the River Jordan seven times, when you come up from the seventh time, you’re going to be healed, it was a point of contact for the releasing of faith ( 2Ki 5:10 ). In the Book of Acts they sent out from Paul handkerchiefs, or more literally sweatbands, and his aprons, and they would lay them on the sick, and the people would be healed. Peter, when he was walking down the street, they would set the sick in the way, so that his shadow would fall on them, and the shadow of Peter falling on them was a point of contact. People said, oh I know as soon as Peter’s shadow falls on me, oh I am gonna be healed. And they had that point of releasing faith ( Act 5:15 ).

And somehow we need be able to release the faith, so it will become activated. So I know that as soon as it will happen, and it’s a point of contact to release the faith, and there is a valuable lesson there.

“

Fuente: Through the Bible Commentary

Mat 14:1. , at that time) It was now about a year from the commencement of our Lords public ministry.-, heard) The ears and courts of kings resound with news; but spiritual matters, however widely published, scarcely ever arrive there.[654]

[654] And if they do reach them at all, they appear in an imperfect form and blended with what is false; nor are they easily turned to good purpose. Nevertheless, at times, a joyful exception to this is to be met with.-V. g.

Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament

Mat 14:1-12

12. JOHN THE BAPTIST BEHEADED

Mat 14:1-12

1, 2 At that season Herod the tetrarch heard the report.- “At that season” does not fix definitely the order of the events. Parallel records of this are found in Mar 6:14-16; Luk 4:7-9. Some place this at the time that the apostles were away on their limited commission. “Herod the tetrarch” is Herod Antipas. There are three men of this name, and four of the family mentioned in the New Testament. Herod had died (Mat 2:19), while Joseph and Mary, with the child Jesus, were in Egypt at his death Herod left his kingdom to be divided between his three sons. Archelaus received Judea, Idumea, and Samaria; Herod Philip received Batanea, Trachonitis, and Gallonitis; and Herod Antipas, the tetrarch, notorious for the murder of John the Baptist, received Galilee and Perea. He first married a daughter of Aretas, whom he dismissed for love of Herodias. He was banished by Caligula to Gaul, and the province given to Herod Agrippa. “Tetrarch” is a Greek word signifying a ruler of the fourth part of the kingdom. Under the order of the emperor of Rome, the kingdom of Herod the Great, father of Herod Antipas, was, upon his death, divided into three tetrarchies, and given to Herod’s sons. It is not clear why the kingdom was divided into three parts, but a ruler over one part called “tetrarch.”

Herod Antipas and Herod Philip were brothers, both being sons of Herod the Great; Herodias, Philip’s wife, was their niece, being a daughter of Aristobulus. Herod Philip was living in retirement in Rome when his brother Herod Antipas became his guest. While enjoying his hospitality there, the transfer of Philip’s wife Herodias to his brother, Herod Antipas, took place, and in a way which fastened crime upon both parties, and probably not least upon Herodias. Her greater guilt may account for her sharper resentment and more desperate revenge. There was no excuse for the crime, as Herod Antipas’ wife was still living, and Herodias’ husband still alive. The forsaken wife of Antipas was a daughter of Aretas, king of Arabia, who resented the insult to his family and throne, and marched upon Herod Antipas shortly after this murder of John the Baptist, and routed him with great slaughter.

When Herod “heard the report concerning Jesus,” he “said unto his servants, This is John the Baptist.” John had been beheaded before this and Herod thought that Jesus was John the Baptist “risen from the dead.” This is the reason assigned by Herod for the mighty works which Jesus was

dead; and therefore do these powers work in him. 3 For Herod had laid hold on John, and bound him, and put him in prison for the sake of Hero doing. We learn from Luk 8:3 that among those who administered to Jesus of their substance was Joanna, the wife of Chuzas, Herod’s steward. Again in Act 13:1 we have “Manaen the foster-brother of Herod the tetrarch” mentioned among other distinguished converts. So at a later period there were saints in Caesar’s household as there were believers in the household of Herod. We are not told why Herod thought that Jesus was John the Baptist rather than some other prophet; but the inference is clear that Herod was disturbed by his own guilty conscience, as he had slain John to please a lewd woman against his own convictions. From Mar 6:15 we learn that this fear had taken fast hold of Herod, and he would not believe those who offered other explanations of the miracles of Jesus; he could only see the consequence of his own crime hanging over him. Herod had heard of the great fame of Jesus and his haunted conscience made him yet more active in seeking an explanation for the miracles of Jesus; he saw John the Baptist whom he had murdered risen from the dead, and therefore clothed with power for such miracles.

3-5 For Herod had laid hold on John.-At this point Matthew goes back in time to the occasion and scenes of this murder and relates the details of it. We have no way to determine how long it has been since the crime was committed. Herod had put John in prison where he remained probably a year. John was imprisoned soon after Jesus began his public ministry; John’s ministry and Jesus’ ministry overlapped about six months. The cause of John’s imprisonment as recorded is that John had rebuked Herod and Herodias for their sinful life; he had said, “It is not lawful for thee to have her.” Herod claimed to be a believer in the law of Moses, and this law forbade such relations as Herod and Herodias had formed. (Lev 18:14-16; Lev 20:21.) Herod had heard John in his early ministry and may have committed himself to John’s preaching. Herodias seems to have been more revengeful than Herod; her husband was living at the time, as was Herod’s wife; so they were living in adultery, and as she was the wife of his half brother, it was also incest. It appears from Luk 3:19-20 that John had reproved Herod for other crimes. John was the true antitype of Elijah; as Elijah reproved Ahab and Jezebel, so John reproved Herod and Herodias. Herodias’ grudge against John was because of his condemnation of her marriage with Herod. (Mar 6:18-19.) Herod would have put John to death earlier, but “he feared the multitude, because they counted him as a prophet.” Herod was teased and urged by Herodias to put John to death, and would have yielded before he did had he not been afraid of the people, for they considered John a prophet.

6-12 But when Herod’s birthday came.-The ancients, both Jews and Gentiles, kept their birthdays with great rejoicings. (Gen 40:20.) Frequently there would be a number of festivities on such occasions. According to Mark, Herod’s birthday festivities were done with great magnificence, as he “made a supper to his lords, and the high captains, and the chief men of Galilee.” (Mar 6:21.) The nobility of Galilee must have come some distance for this occasion. At this time “the daughter of Herodias danced in the midst, and pleased Herod.” Female dancers in the east are still a customary part of great entertainments; on this occasion the dancer was of high birth, being no other than the princess Salome, daughter of Herodias. She was the daughter of Philip, Herod’s brother, and by his marriage to her mother, she was his step-daughter. Herodias, herself, was Herod’s niece. If this girl’s dancing partook of all the lascivious motions of the Greek dancers, she was a fit daughter of such parents. History reveals the corruption that was exhibited in eastern courts; dancers exhibited themselves in immodest attire and aped all of the emotions of sensual carnality. “And pleased Herod.” This shows the corruption of the court as such delighted Herod and his associates. He was so pleased that he made a rash promise. He may have been drunken as was the custom at such festivities. He “promised with an oath to give her whatsoever she should ask.” This was an extravagant and unguarded promise; it ill befitted a ruler of any people. He not only made the promise, but made it “with an oath.” This was a foolish and wicked oath for a ruler to make; the rashness and madness of it could be exceeded only by the horrible purpose to which it was perverted. It is unwise in parents to promise children “anything they want”; again, any one is very foolish to give that which is harmful because one has promised it. Herod promised this dancing girl all she could ask, which meant all that she would be expected to ask in return for such a feat of dancing. He should have refused her bloody request.

The girl was encouraged by her mother to ask for the head of John the Baptist on a platter. Herod was grieved when she made this request, “but for the sake of his oaths, and of them that sat at meat with him, he commanded it to be given.” “A platter” is a large deep plate or basin, and is frequently used on such occasions the Greek word signifies “a flat board,” used for any purpose, as for a “writing table or tablet”; it may mean a large dish in which meat or other food is carved or served. It seems that there was no delay and that the plot was doubtless previously laid by Herodias, and that she was just waiting for this occasion. It was customary for kings to grant any petition presented on a festal occasion of this sort. In the east as soon as any one is condemned to death, an officer is called and immediately takes the warrant of death to the person who is to die, lets him read it, puts him to death with the bowstring, cuts off his head, and brings it back to the monarch as a proof that he has done his will. Herodias could not be satisfied until she had seen the ghastly head of her enemy; hence, Salome requested that John the Baptist’s head be brought in on a platter as evidence that the execution had taken place.

And he sent and beheaded John in the prison.-He had been urged to do this by Herodias previous to this. He made a rash promise, sealed it with oaths in the presence of his company; and now for the sake of his oath, goaded by the friends who sat with him at the feast, and persistently urged by Herodias, John was beheaded. Herod knew that John had done nothing worthy of death; he knew that John was a righteous man, yet through the conspiracy of circumstances he is forced to have him put to death. Herod was afraid to stand by his convictions; afraid to do that which is right marks a man a coward, especially when man knows what is right. It is worthy to note how calmly Matthew relates this event, without one word of anger or resentment; he narrates the story just as it hapepned. His narration gives us confidence in the truthfulness of the historian, who manifests such a regard for truth. The head was brought “on a platter, and given to the damsel,” and “she brought it to her mother.” John died as a martyr for the truth and exchanged his dungeon for a world where the wicked cease from troubling and the weary are at rest-a world in whose light his rejoicing soul could discover the ways of God. He had finished his work; the speedy end of his ministry served to give glory to God and opportunity for Jesus to finish his work. There was no further work for John to do; he had been in prison for about a year and was sacrificed, it seems, by wicked men. The wrath of man is made to work out the design of God as well as his glory. It is related of Salome that she met a tragic death by her head being severed from her body. We rejoice that John’s disciples “came, and took up the corpse, and buried him.” It is probable that John’s body was cast over the walls of the prison. The Jews paid great respect to the bodies of their deceased friends, and so did the early Christians. (Joh 19:38-42; Act 8:2.) The disciples of John were taught by him to look unto Jesus as his superior, and now in their bereavement and sorrow they naturally report to Jesus what had been done to John and would receive sympathy and counsel. Doubtless Jesus knew the whole story before they came to tell him.

Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary

The presence and activity of the true King filled the false ruler with alarm. Herod sacrificed John to his lust. Once Herod had heard John, and the remembrance of former conviction was still with him, but the grip of sensual intoxication was greater than the voice of conscience. Yet in the sight of heaven it was Herod who perished, not the prophet. “When Jesus heard of it” (verse Mat 14:13), that is, of Herod’s surmise, He went to the desert. The crowds followed Him. “He healed their sick,” and with five loaves and two fishes fed 5,000 men, besides women and children.

Twas springtime when He blessed the bread,

‘Twas harvest when He brake.

The Master Himself felt the need of getting away at times from the multitudes into places of loneliness and prayer. Familiarity with the crowd only produces hardening. Familiarity with God issues in a perpetual resensitizing of the heart, which prevents hardening.

The familiar story of the storm on the lake is full of exquisite beauty. The Master in His place of quiet retirement has not forgotten His disciples, and in the moment of their need comes to them strong to deliver, mighty to save. This story is daily repeated in the life of some storm-tossed soul. At the first we often fail to recognize Him as He approaches through the wind and over the sea. Wait patiently, and over the howling of the storm will sound the infinite music of His voice: “Be of good cheer. It is I. Be not afraid.”

Fuente: An Exposition on the Whole Bible

(M) 14:1 At that time Herod the tetrarch heard the report concerning Jesus.] Mk. has: And the king, Herod, heard; for His name became notorious. In Mk. the reference in seems to be to the mission of the Twelve which Mk. has just recorded: They went out and preached, and cast out many demons, etc. And Herod heard; for His name became notorious. Mt., by altering the order, has separated this incident of Herod from the charge to the Twelve, and, moreover, had omitted altogether the express statement that they went forth on their mission. He therefore introduces the section with a loose formula, ; cf. 11:25, 12:1. For he substitutes the more precisely accurate , which Lk. also has, and omits the surmises of the people. For , cf. 4:24.

(M) 2. And he said to his servants, This is John the Baptist; he is risen from the dead; and therefore the powers are active in him.] Mk. has: And he said (, A C L S1) that John the Baptizer has risen from the dead, and therefore the powers are active in him. But others were saying that it is Elijah. And others were saying that he is a prophet as one of the prophets. But Herod heard, and said, John whom I beheaded, he is risen. Mt. seems to have had in 14.-] for , cf. the same change in 3:1. Mt. abbreviates Mk.s double statement of Herods opinion and the surmises of other people.- ] elsewhere in this Gospel means miraculous actions. Here, as in Mar_14, it seems to denote the supernatural powers who operated through the risen Baptist.

(M) 3. For Herod seized John, and bound him, and threw him into prison on account of Herodias, the wife of Philip his brother.] Mk. has: For he, Herod, had sent and seized John, and bound him in prison on account of Herodias, the wife of Philip his brother. Because he had married her.-] The aorists throughout the section are borrowed from Mk. They are practically equivalent to the English pluperfect.- ] i.e. Machrus, Josephus, Ant. xviii. 119.-] not the tetrarch, but a son of Herod the Great and Mariamne. Josephus, Ant. xviii. 136, calls him Herod.

(M) 4. For John said to him, It is not lawful for thee to have her.]-] Mk. has: . Mt. as often omits Mk.s .-] Mk. has: . For Mt.s avoidance of Mk.s iteration of a phrase, see on 4:18, and Introduction, p. xxiv.

(M) 5. And wishing to kill him, he feared the multitude, because they held him as a prophet.] Mk. has a different account: And Herodias set herself against him, and wished to kill him, and could not. For Herod was fearing John, knowing him to be a man just and holy. And he was keeping him in prison; and having heard him, he was much perplexed, and was hearing him gladly. Mt., in summarising Mk., seems to be influenced by another form of the story.

(M) 6. And on the birthday of Herod, the daughter of Herodias danced in the midst, and pleased Herod.] Mt. summarises Mk vv. 21 and 22.- ] For the dative, cf. Blass, p. 120, n. 3. The dative seems to be due to a fusion of Mk.s with his preceding . is used in the later Greek as equivalent to , a birthday; cf. Faym Towns, 11420, 1158, 11930.

(M) 7. Whence with an oath he promised to give to her whatever she should ask.] Mt. summarises Mk 23-24. For , see on 11:29.-] Mk. has and , but in v. 25. For the middle as the stronger word, see Moulton, p. 160. For the juxtaposition of both voices, see Mar 10:35, Mar 10:38.

(M) 8. And she, being put forward by her mother, Give me, she says, here upon a dish the head of John the Baptist.] Mt. summarises Mk 24-25. In abbreviating, he shortens the narrative so far as to make it almost unintelligible. The reader must suppose that Herodias and Herod were living together, which Mk. has stated in v. 17 , from the fact that the daughter of Herodias danced before Herod. He has also to infer that this took place at a public festivity from of the next verse.

(M) 9. And being grieved, the king, because of his oaths, and because of those who sat with him, commanded (it) to be given.] Mk.s creeps in here, in spite of in v. 1. The is a hint that Mt. has omitted much that precedes in Mk. The editor summarises Mk vv. 26, 27.

(M) 10. And he sent, and beheaded John in the prison.]

(M) 11. And his head was brought upon a dish, and given to the girl, and she brought it to her mother.] For the passives, see on 4:1, and Introduction, p. xxiii.

(M) 12. And his disciples came, and took up the corpse, and buried him.] Mk. has: And His disciples heard it, and came () and took up his corpse and placed it in a sepulchre. For as characteristic of Mt., see on 4:3.

(M) And came and brought word to Jesus.] Mk. has: And the Apostles gather together to Jesus, and brought Him word, all things that they had done, and that they had taught. And He saith to them, Come ye yourselves privately into a desert place, and rest a little: for those who were coming and going were many, and they had no opportunity to eat. In Mk. the execution of John is introduced parenthetically. The disciples go forth on their mission, 6:12. (As a result) Herod hears of the fame of Christ. He expresses his belief that John has risen. This gives occasion to the Evangelist to introduce the story of Johns execution. In Mt. the sequence of events is distorted. He has omitted the statement of the Apostolic Mission, and is obliged to introduce Herods belief that Jesus was the risen John, with a vague reference of time: At that time. But since he must have been aware that the story of Johns execution is introduced parenthetically to explain the superstition of Herod, it is very surprising to find him treating it as though it were recorded here in its proper chronological sequence: His disciples came-and buried him, and came and told Jesus. And Jesus having heard, departed. That is to say, the Evangelist treats Johns execution as though it happened historically before the events of Mar 6:30-44, and actually alters Mk vv. 30-31 to suit this artificial sequence. The reason for this goes back to ch. 10. The editor has there constructed a charge to the disciples which is quite unsuitable for the temporary Galilean missionary expedition described by Mk. He therefore omits the short description of this mission given by Mk. (6:12, 13). When, therefore, he comes to the statement of Mk. that the Apostles returned to Christ and brought news of their doings on this mission, the editor is compelled to omit this also. He therefore summarises Mk 30-31 into the sentence: And coming, they reported to Jesus; but has done so in words which it is impossible to avoid connecting with the preceding: And his disciples came -and buried him. That he intended this is shown by his insertion of: And Jesus having heard, and by his change of Mk.s into . In Mk. the subject of is Christ and the returned Apostles. But in Mt. the comers are Johns disciples. Since they would improbably have accompanied Christ, the editor is obliged to alter the verb into the singular. This treatment of Mk.s narrative is not more artificial than the editors rearrangement of Mk. in 8:1-9:34, but is less justifiable, because even though Mk vv. 30-31 had to be omitted in pursuance of previous changes, it was not necessary to supply another motive for Christs retirement into the desert.

(M) 13. And Jesus heard it, and withdrew thence in a boat to a desert place privately; and the multitudes heard it, and followed Him on foot from the cities.- ] both favourite words of Mt.; see on 2:12 and 4:21. The last place mentioned was Nazareth, 13:54.- , …] Mk. has: And many saw them going, and recognised (them), and ran together there on foot from all the cities, and went before them. Mt. summarises.

(M) 14. And going forth, He saw a great multitude, and had compassion on them, and healed their sick.] Mk. has: And going forth, He saw a great multitude, and had compassion on them, because they were as sheep not having a shepherd: and He began to teach them much.-] in Mk. almost certainly means having disembarked. That is to say, the multitude reached the landing-place before the boat. This is probably the meaning also in Mt. For , see on 9:36. Mt. has already inserted the analogy of the sheep in 9:36.-] Mt. substitutes healing for teaching in 19:2 and 21:14 = Mar 10:1, Mar 10:11:17, Mar 10:18.

(M) 15. And when it was evening, the disciples came to Him, saying, The place is desolate, and the hour is already a late one; send away the multitudes, that they may go away into the villages, and buy food for themselves.] Mk. has: And already, it being a late hour ( ), His disciples came to Him, and were saying that, The place is desolate, and already it is a late hour ( ). Send them away, that they may go away into the neighbouring hamlets and villages, and buy something for themselves to eat.- ] Mt. avoids Mk.s iterated .-] on the aor. in a, see Blass, p. 45.-] Mt. as usual omits Mk.s .-] For of time, cf. 1 P 4:3. The meaning here seems to be, the hour (for the customary meal) is already passed.- ] The editor, who in v. 14 copied Mk.s , slips back here into his customary plural. For the omission of Mk.s , see on 8:33.

(M) 16. And Jesus said to them, They need not go away; give ye to them to eat.]

(M) 17. And they say to Him, We have not here save five loaves, and two fishes.]

(M) 18. And He said, Bring them hither to Me.] Mk. has: And He answered and said to them, Give ye to them to eat. And they say to Him, Are we to go away and buy two hundred pennyworth of bread, and give them to eat? And He saith to them, How many loaves have ye? go, see. And having ascertained, they say, Five, and two fishes. Mt. summarises.- ] The editor avoids the half-sarcastic question of the disciples.- ] for Mk.s , as often. Mt. also avoids the question in the mouth of the Lord; see on 8:29, 16:9-10, 17:11, 14, 17, 18:1, 19:7, 26:18 and Introduction, p. xxxii.

(M) 19. And He commanded the multitudes to sit down upon the grass.] Mt. summarises Mk 39.

And took the five loaves, and the two fishes, and looked up into heaven, and blessed, and brake, and gave to the disciples the loaves, and the disciples to the multitudes.] The editor slightly alters Mk.-] For Mk.s , see Introduction, p. xx.- ] see Introduction, p. xxviii.

(M) 20. And they all ate, and were filled; and they took up the remain der of the fragments twelve baskets full.] For , see on 5:6.

] for Mk.s harsher . Mk. adds .

(M) 21. And they who ate were about five thousand men, besides women and children.]- ] as often for Mk.s . The editor adds ; cf. the similar insertion in 15:38.

12-21. There are a few verbal agreements between Mt. and Lk. as against Mk.; e.g.: Mat_13 = Luk_10 ; Mat_13 = Luk_11 – ; Mat_14 = Luk_11 ; Mat_15 = Luk_12 ; Mat_17, Luk_18 for Mk.s ; Mat_17 = Luk_13 ; Mat_15 = Luk_13 ; Mat_21 = Luk_17 . Both omit Mk v. 31. And both avoid the questions in Mk 37, 38. It is not, however, probable that they had a second source besides Mk. See Introduction, p. xxxix.

(M) 22. And straightway He compelled the disciples to embark into a boat, and to go before Him to the other side, until1 He had sent away the multitudes.] Mk. has , and after adds , and then has . The occurrence of Bethsaida gives rise to difficulties, because if the miracle took place on the north-eastern shore of the lake, Bethsaida (see on 11:21) lay close at hand, and would hardly be called on the other side. Moreover, as a matter of fact, nothing is said of an arrival at Bethsaida, but of a disembarkation at Gennesareth, Mk 53. Of course, Mk. may have meant that they proposed to cross obliquely the north-east corner of the lake towards Bethsaida. They may have arrived at this place and embarked again, or may have been driven away from Bethsaida to the western side of the lake. In either case the mention of Bethsaida in Mk 45 seemed to Mt. unnecessary, as finding no further mention in the narrative.- ] as usual for Mk.s .

(M) 23. And having sent away the multitudes, He went up into the mountain privately to pray.]- ] Mk. has the ambiguous , for , and omits .

(M) 23, 24. And when it was evening He was there alone, and the boat was already in the midst of the lake.] Mk. has: And when it was evening the boat was in the midst of the lake, and He Himself was alone upon the land.

Tossed by the waves, for the wind was contrary.] Mk. has: And seeing them tossed in their rowing; for the wind was contrary to them.- ] for Mk.s , see Introduction, p. xx.-] has occurred in 8:6 of a patient suffering from paralysis, in 8:29 = Mar 5:7 of the demons. Here Mk. uses it of the rowers exhausted by their efforts. Mt. transfers it to the boat buffeted by the waves.- ] So C E F al latt. D has . B 13 124 238 346 S1 S2 have .

(M) 25. And at the fourth watch of the night He came to them, walking over the sea.] Mk. has: About the fourth watch of the night He cometh to them, walking on the sea ( ), and wished to pass by them. for Mk.s historic present , as often. For the omission of Mk.s last clause, see Introduction, p. xxxi. Mt. has for Mk.s . Cf. 13:2 for Mk.s ; 15:35 for Mk.s ; and Introduction, p. xxix.

(M) 26. And the disciples seeing Him walking on the sea, were troubled, saying that it is a phantasm; and they cried out from fear.] Mk. has: And seeing Him walking on the sea, they thought that it is a phantasm; and they cried out (). For all saw Him and were troubled. Mt. slips here into Mk.s genitive, . See Gould on Mar 6:48.

(M) 27. And straightway Jesus spake to them, saying, Be of good cheer; it is I; be not afraid.] Mk. has: . Mt. alters, as often, into -. Cf. on 8:3.

28-31. The editor here inserts four verses from tradition:

(P) And Peter answered Him and said, Lord, if it be Thou, bid me come to Thee over the waters. And He said, Come. And Peter descended from the boat, and walked over the waters to come to Jesus. And seeing the wind to be strong, he feared; and, beginning to be immersed, he cried, saying, Lord, save me. And immediately Jesus stretched out His hand, and took hold of him, and saith to him, O thou of little faith, Why didst thou doubt?]- ] B2 C D al S1 S2 latt add ; omit B.-] occurs again in 18:6.-] occurs again in 28:17.-] See on 6:30. Here the object of seems to be not so much the providence of God as the power of Christ and His good will.

(M) 32. And when they had gone up into the boat, the wind ceased.] Mk. has: And He went up to them into the boat. And the wind ceased.

(M) 33. And they in the boat worshipped Him, saying, Truly, Thou art Gods Son.] Mk. has: And they marvelled exceedingly in themselves. For they understood not about the loaves; but their heart was hardened. For the omission of this statement, see Introduction, p. xxxiii.

For as characteristic of Mt., see on 2:2.

(M) 34. And having crossed over, they came to the land into Gennesaret.] Mk. has: And having crossed over to the land, they came into Gennesaret; and came to moorings.-] called in 1 Mac 11:67, in Josephus, and in the Talmud Gennesar. For a description of the plain, see G. Adam Smiths Hist. Geog. 443, n. 1.

(M) 35. And the men of that place recognised Him, and sent into all the surrounding district, and brought to Him all who were in evil plight.] Mk. has: And when they had gone forth from the boat, straightway recognising Him, they ran about all that country and began to bring () on beds those who were in evil plight, where they were hearing that He is. And wheresoever He entered into villages, or into cities, or into hamlets, they placed the infirm in the market-places. Mt. summarises, and gives the impression that he understood Gennesaret to be not, as in Mk., a district, but a town. For Mk.s , see on 8:33. For Mt.s , cf. 4:24, 8:16, 12:15.

(M) 36. And were beseeching Him that they might only touch the tassel of His garment; and as many as touched were completely cured.]- ] Mk. has . For a similar change, see 9:21. For , see on 9:20.-] Mk. has . Mt.s is a stronger word, were (not were being) thoroughly, completely cured.

M the Second Gospel.

L the Matthan Logia.

S Syriac version: Sinaitic MS.

1 for Mk.s . See on 26:36.

E editorial passages.

al i.e. with other uncial MSS.

S Syriac version: Curetonian.

P Palestinian traditions.

B. Babylonian Talmud.

Fuente: International Critical Commentary New Testament

for Righteousness Sake

Mat 14:1-12

In the terror arising from his stricken conscience, Herod made confidants of his slaves, overleaping the barriers of position in his need of some ears into which to pour his fears. He had not finished with John. There is a resurrection of deeds as well as of bodies. The only way to have done with a sinful deed is to confess it and make reparation.

What true nobility John displayed in summoning the king to the bar of eternal justice! He might have said, It isnt seemly, or, It isnt politic; but he puts it on more unassailable ground, which Herods conscience endorsed: It is not lawful.Herod was luxurious, sensual, superstitious and weak. He was easily entrapped by the beautiful fiend. To tamper with conscience is like killing the watch-dog while the burglar is breaking in.

How splendid the action of Johns disciples! Reverent love and grief made them brave the kings hatred. In hours of lonely bereavement, the best policy is to go and tell Jesus.

Fuente: F.B. Meyer’s Through the Bible Commentary

The first part of the present section is devoted to the pathetic account of the martyrdom of John the Baptist, but the balance of the chapter tells us of two miracles, both of which demonstrate the power of the Lord Jesus over nature: His multiplication of the loaves, and His walking on the water and controlling the elements.

Herod, who was somewhat interested at first in John the Baptist and his proclamation of the nearness of the kingdom of heaven, became indignant when his own vices were denounced by the fearless desert preacher, and so sought to silence him by shutting him up in prison and eventually by an act of judicial murder. When he heard of the fame of Jesus, his uneasy conscience suggested that He must be John risen from the dead, but there was no sign of self-judgment or confession of his horrid iniquity. Jesus continued His wondrous ministry, and everywhere His messiahship was attested by marvelous signs, which must have convinced any honest seeker after the truth that He was all He professed to be. But the religious leaders stood coldly aloof or came out in positive opposition because of their unwillingness to humble themselves before God. It was the poor of the flock (Zec 11:11) who heard Jesus with gladness and were blessed by His gracious ministrations. These glorified the God of Israel for sending His Anointed One into their midst.

At that time Herod the tetrarch heard of the fame of Jesus, and said unto his servants, This is John the Baptist; he is risen from the dead; and therefore mighty works do show forth themselves in him. For Herod had laid hold on John, and bound him, and put him in prison for Herodias sake, his brother Philips wife. For John said unto him. It is not lawful for thee to have her. And when he would have put him to death, he feared the multitude, because they counted him as a prophet. But when Herods birthday was kept, the daughter of Herodias danced before them, and pleased Herod. Whereupon he promised with an oath to give her whatsoever she would ask. And she, being before instructed of her mother, said, Give me here John Baptists head in a charger. And the king was sorry: nevertheless for the oaths sake, and them which sat with him at meat, he commanded it to be given her. And he sent, and beheaded John in the prison. And his head was brought in a charger, and given to the damsel: and she brought it to her mother. And his disciples came, and took up the body, and buried it, and went and told Jesus. When Jesus heard of it, he departed thence by ship into a desert place apart: and when the people had heard thereof, they followed him on foot out of the cities. And Jesus went forth, and saw a great multitude, and was moved with compassion toward them, and he healed their sick. (vv. 1-14)

Herod the tetrarch heard of the fame of Jesus. This Herod was as corrupt as any of his ancestors-a monster of iniquity living in unblushing adultery with one who was lawfully the wife of his own brother. To the ears of this vile and licentious ruler came tidings of the wonder-working power of Jesus, filling him with terror.

This is John the Baptist; he is risen from the dead. Superstitious, as most immoral creatures are, Herod was sure that the stern prophet of the wilderness, whom he had delivered over to an undeserved death, must have come back from the grave.

Put him in prison for Herodias sake. A wicked woman was the direct cause of the death of John. Her hatred of the man who dared to condemn openly the grossness of her sins could be satisfied only with the execution of her accuser.

It is not lawful for thee to have her. It took courage indeed for John thus to point out Herods wickedness. Like another, Nathan (2Sa 12:7), he drove home the kings guilt, but in so doing he forfeited his life, for Herod, unlike David, refused to repent of his iniquity.

The multitude counted him as a prophet. Herod would have no hesitation about immediately destroying John because of his faithfulness, but he was afraid that he might incur the enmity of the people generally, who looked upon John as the successor to the prophets of old. Instead of immediately executing John, therefore, Herod shut him up in prison.

When Herods birthday was celebrated, the shameless daughter of the infamous Herodias came in before the king and his attendants and pleased them by what was evidently a lascivious dance. The old tyrant was so delighted with this that, in his enthusiasm, he promised with an oath to give the dancer whatever she might ask. After conferring with her wicked mother she came boldly into the presence of the king with the request that he give her John Baptists head in a charger. Corrupt as he was, Herod was sorry, for he realized that John had done nothing worthy of death, and, doubtless, his initial anger had cooled to some extent by this time. But having declared on oath that he would grant the girls request, and this before all his courtiers, he had not the hardihood to acknowledge his folly. He commanded, therefore, that John should be beheaded. The gruesome evidence that the execution had been carried out was brought in on a great platter and given to the damsel, we are told, who presented it to her mother. One can imagine how Herodias gloated as she looked upon the severed head of the man whom she considered her enemy, because he had been bold enough to tell her the truth and to charge her with the infamy for which she would yet have to give an account unto God.

The incestuous relations of these two godless rulers had become a public scandal. It needed a man with the boldness of John the Baptist to say, It is not lawful for thee to have her. He was martyred because of his faithfulness, but his reward is sure. Herod went from bad to worse until he died in his sins, a wretched victim of his own vices. Herodias, vain, willful, and unclean, died as she had lived, unrepentant and wicked to the last. They stand out as warnings to all who would tamper with impurity. After Johns death, Jesus did not travel about in Herods tetrarchy but remained in that of Philip.

To the brokenhearted disciples of John this was indeed a terrible tragedy. They took up the body of their master and reverently buried it. And then we read that they went and told Jesus. There is something very precious about these last words. They went to Jesus in their trouble and distress, assured of His deep understanding and loving sympathy.

Upon hearing of the death of His predecessor, the Lord took ship and went to a desert place apart, we are told. And a great multitude, out of the various cities near the northern end of the lake, followed Him. The Lord Jesus, beholding them, was moved with compassion toward them and manifested His kingly power by healing those who were sick.

And when it was evening, his disciples came to him, saying, This is a desert place, and the time is now past; send the multitude away, that they may go into the villages, and buy themselves victuals. But Jesus said unto them, They need not depart; give ye them to eat. And they say unto Him, We have here but five loaves, and two fishes. He said, Bring them hither to me. And he commanded the multitude to sit down on the grass, and took the five loaves, and the two fishes, and looking up to heaven, he blessed, and brake, and gave the loaves to his disciples, and the disciples to the multitude. And they did all eat, and were filled: and they took up of the fragments that remained twelve baskets full. And they that had eaten were about five thousand men, beside women and children, (vv. 15-21)

This is the only miracle performed by the Lord before His crucifixion, which is given in all four Gospels. It is very evident that there is some special lesson in it which God would have us learn. The hungry multitude, the perplexed disciples, and the grace of Christ are vividly portrayed. In Psa 132:1-5 we hear Messiah speaking by the Spirit, saying, I will satisfy her poor with bread. So Gods Anointed One took the five loaves and two fishes and so multiplied them that abundant provision was made for five thousand men, besides women and children.

We can understand the concern of the disciples who came to Jesus as the evening drew on, beseeching Him to send the multitude away before the darkness fell in order that they might go into the villages and buy themselves food.

This was not what the Lord had in mind, however. He said, They need not depart; give ye them to eat. To the Twelve, this was a most amazing commission. With what were they to feed so many? After looking about, they explained that they had found but five loaves and two fishes. These, we are told elsewhere, were provided by a lad who had brought them with him, doubtless as his lunch. Jesus said, Bring them hither to me. When the small provision was placed in His hands, He commanded the multitude to sit down on the grass, and, looking up to heaven, He blessed the food and broke it. He then distributed it to His disciples, and they passed it on to the multitude. All were fed and satisfied. After the repast, twelve baskets of fragments remained. We might say there was one basket for each of the apostles after all the rest had received what they desired. It was but a picture, however, of what the Lord Jesus is doing constantly, for it is He who multiplies the seeds sown in all the cornfields on earth, so that as a result of the small amount placed in the ground abundance is provided to satisfy the throngs who are dependent upon bread for their food.

The next miracle demonstrates the Lords power over the elements in a somewhat different way to that which we have seen recorded in a previous chapter in which He stilled the storm.

And straightway Jesus constrained his disciples to get into a ship, and to go before him unto the other side, while He sent the multitudes away. And when he had sent the multitudes away, he went up into a mountain apart to pray: and when the evening was come, he was there alone. But the ship was now in the midst of the sea, tossed with waves: for the wind was contrary. And in the fourth watch of the night Jesus went unto them, walking on the sea. And when the disciples saw him walking on the sea, they were troubled, saying, It is a spirit; and they cried out for fear. But straightway Jesus spake unto them, saying, Be of good cheer; it is I; be not afraid. And Peter answered him and said, Lord, if it be thou, bid me come unto thee on the water. And he said, Come. And when Peter was come down out of the ship, he walked on the water, to go to Jesus. But when he saw the wind boisterous, he was afraid; and beginning to sink, he cried, saying, Lord, save me. And immediately Jesus stretched forth his hand, and caught him, and said unto him, O thou of little faith, wherefore didst thou doubt? And when they were come into the ship, the wind ceased. Then they that were in the ship came and worshipped him, saying, Of a truth thou art the Son of God. (vv. 22-33)

This is a beautiful dispensational picture. In verse 22 we read how Jesus constrained His disciples to get into a ship and to go before Him back to the other side of the lake, while He dismissed the multitudes. The disciples in the ship without the personal presence of Jesus set forth, dispensationally, the circumstances in which the church of God was to be found after the death and resurrection of our Lord Jesus. He who had been with His disciples during the days of His flesh would no longer be manifestly present among them, but they would be left to make their way alone, as it were, across the troubled sea of earthly circumstances, looking forward to the time when they would again behold their Savior.

He Himself went up into a mountain apart to pray. This suggests His present ministry on behalf of His own people-He has gone up on high where He ever lives to make intercession for us.

While He prayed on the mountaintop, those in the ship were in real trouble, for their little vessel was passing through a severe storm and was tossed with the waves, and as far as its occupants could see it was likely to be lost. The people of God have been frequently placed in such circumstances during the time that the Lord has been ministering on high in the presence of the Father, and Gods dear people have often thought themselves forsaken and forgotten, but His eye has ever been upon them.

In the fourth watch of the night, when the darkness was still great and the wind contrary, He looked down from the heights and saw them in their distress. To their amazement, He came walking upon the sea to give them the assistance they needed. As they beheld Him, they were distressed rather than comforted, and they cried out in fear, It is a spirit-that is, a ghost. But in response to their startled cry came the voice they knew so well, the voice of Jesus Himself, saying, Be of good cheer; it is I; be not afraid.

Ever impetuous but devoted to his Lord, Peter cried out, Lord, if it be thou, bid me come unto thee on the water. In response Jesus said, Come. Without a moments hesitation Peter went down over the side of the ship, and doubtless to his own amazement-if he thought of anything at the moment save Christ who was before him-he found himself actually walking upon the water as though upon firm ground. All was well as long as he kept his eyes fixed on Jesus, but when he turned to behold the boisterous waves, fear filled his heart, and he began to sink at once. As the waters were rising above him, he cried out, Lord, save me. And immediately Jesus stretched forth His hand, and caught him, and said unto him, O thou of little faith, wherefore didst thou doubt? What Peter should have remembered was that he could no more walk on smooth water than on rough waves, except as sustained by the power of the Lord Himself, and that power is just as great in the storm as in the calm. Jesus and Peter entered the little boat, and immediately the wind ceased. The disciples had witnessed such a display of omnipotent power that all of them fell down before the Lord and worshiped Him, saying, Of a truth thou art the Son of God.

When Jesus returned to the land of Gennesaret, which was east of Capernaum and north of the lake, word that He was again in that country quickly spread abroad, and a great multitude came to Him, bringing with them many that were diseased that He might heal them.

And when they were gone over, they came into the land of Gennesaret. And when the men of that place had knowledge of him, they sent out into all that country round about, and brought unto him all that were diseased; and besought him that they might only touch the hem of his garment: and as many as touched were made perfectly whole, (vv. 34-36)

It is very evident that the testimony and the works of Jesus had impressed the people of Gennesaret with His grace and ability to deliver them from their distressing ailments, and they came from all the country round about in order to lay their sick ones at His feet. Like the poor woman of whom we have read, they felt that if these troubled ones could only touch the hem of His garment they would be healed. We are told that it was indeed true for as many as touched His garment were made perfectly whole. The blue border speaks of Him as the Holy One of God, the heavenly One, who had come down to earth for mans redemption. To contact Him meant life and health.

Fuente: Commentaries on the New Testament and Prophets

Mat 14:9-10

It is quite clear that, in spite of his promise, Herod had no right to behead John the Baptist. He had no right to make such a promise, to begin with; and when he had made it, he was for that reason bound to break it. Nor is it difficult to define the principle which governs all these cases. If a man has no right to do a thing, his promising to do it does not give him the right. Such a promise is void, to begin with.

I. Conflicts of duty are, no doubt, sometimes quite real, and even a very good man does not see clearly which of the lines to follow. But far, far more common are the conflicts of duty in which right is all on one side, and only the appearance of right on the other. What, for instance, can be commoner than the false law of fellowship, which makes any one who has joined in wrong unwilling to do right, because it would seem like deserting his companions? While he is putting off amendment for his companions’ sake, he could not do them a greater service than to commence at once, and give them courage to do what they are longing to do, but dare not. But he does not see this, and he will not be allowed to see it; and so he puts this imaginary barrier between himself and his duty, and has a sort of sense that his conscience is in doubt, and that if he is not doing one duty he is doing another.

II. As a rule, these perplexities only beset those who begin by wrongdoing. All wrongdoing has a tendency to call for other wrongdoing, either as its natural and proper sequel, or as its only protection. Herod would most certainly not have had to choose between breaking his word and putting John the Baptist to death, if he had not begun by illegally putting the prophet in prison. The conflict, in fact, is one of the sequels of previous faults, and one of the severest punishments. And if we would avoid the temptation of such a conflict, we must watch our steps.

Bishop Temple, Rugby Sermons, 2nd series, p. 282.

References: Mat 14:1, Mat 14:2.-Preacher’s Monthly, vol. iii., p. 335. Mat 14:1-14.-Parker, Inner Life of Christ, vol. ii., p. 296. Mat 14:2.-T. Kelly, Pulpit Trees, p. 133.

Mat 14:10-12

I. If you consider the manner of John the Baptist’s death, as Scripture brings it before us, I cannot help thinking that at first sight it will seem to you rather disappointing. The death of John the Baptist is as nearly as possible what we should have expected it not to be; he becomes a martyr, but without any of the glories which light up a martyr’s death; he is shut up by Herod in a castle; there he lingers on month by month, until at length a wicked woman asks for his head, and Herod sends an executioner to murder him in prison.

II. At the time of John’s death he had finished his work. His work was not to preach the Gospel, but to point to, and prepare the way for, Him who did preach it; and if Christ was now come, what more need of John? You may say, perhaps, that it was but a poor reward for John the Baptist, that after he had laboured earnestly as the messenger of Christ, he should be shut up in prison, and allowed to drag on a weary existence there, and at last lose his life to please Herodias. This is perfectly true, if you look at the matter from a merely human point of view. But the question is, not whether a man thinks it time to leave this world, but whether he has done God’s work in it. The lesson He would teach us is, that we should give to Him the prime of our faculties, and consecrate to His service our health and strength, and then leave it to Him, without a murmur or a sigh, to determine, as seems best to Him, how we shall leave this world when our work is done.

III. St. John was the forerunner of Christ; so far, we cannot be exactly like him. But in what spirit did he go before Christ? This is really the question of questions. The spirit in which he went before Christ was that of simple obedience and bold determination to do God’s will. He has taught us that we are to do our duty simply, boldly, and sincerely, as in the fear of God. We are to act as believing that God’s eye is upon us; that He knows our acts, our words, our thoughts; that we are His and not our own; that we have a great work to do for Him, and a short day in which to do it, and a long night before us in which no work can be done.

Bishop Harvey Goodwin, Parish Sermons, 5th series, p. 248.

Reference: Mat 14:10.-Preacher’s Monthly, vol. vii., p. 45.

Mat 14:12

(with Mat 28:8)

The grave of the dead John, and the grave of the living Jesus. The grave of John was the end of a “school.” The grave of Jesus was the beginning of a Church. Why? The only answer is the message which the women brought back from the empty sepulchre on that Easter Day: “The Lord is risen.” The whole history of the Christian Church, and even its very existence, is unintelligible, except on the supposition of the resurrection. But for that the fate of John’s disciples would have been the fate of Christ; they would have melted away into the mass of the nation, and at most there would have been one more petty Galilean sect, that would have lived on for a generation, and died out when the last of his companions died.

I. The first point to be considered is that the conduct of Christ’s disciples after His death was exactly the opposite of what might have been expected. (1) They held together. The natural thing for them to do would have been to disband; for the one bond was gone. (2) Their conceptions of Jesus underwent a remarkable change on His death. The death that should have cast a deeper shadow of incomprehensibleness over His strange and lofty claims poured a new light upon them, which made them all plain and clear. (3) Another equally unlikely sequel of the death of Jesus is the unmistakable moral transformation effected on the disciples. Timorous and tremulous before, something or other touched them into altogether new boldness and self-possession.

II. The disciples’ immediate belief in the resurrection furnishes a reasonable, and the only reasonable, explanation of the facts. There is no better historical evidence of a fact than the existence of an institution built upon it-coeval with it.

III. Such a belief could not have originated or maintained itself unless it had been true.

IV. The message of Easter is a message to us as truly as it was to the heavy-hearted unbelieving men that first received it. The one proof of a life beyond the grave is the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Therefore let us be glad with the gladness of men plucked from a dark abyss of doubt and uncertainty, and planted on the rock of solid certainty.

A. Maclaren, The Secret of Power, p. 159.

I. Our text tells of a death. It was a sudden and violent death. It was a solitary death. No congenial spirit was with the departing, to cheer him with a thought of hope or with a breath of prayer. The life itself went out in inactivity. It might seem, man might call it, a failure. Its latest days were its least brilliant.

II. His disciples came and took up the body and buried it. They who might not minister to the life shall minister to the death. No jealousy, no tyranny, survives death; so now the disciples are free to come and take the body. There is scarcely one tie in life stronger or more indestructible than that which binds the scholar to his master, if each be what he ought to be. If indeed the relation has been at once paternal and brotherly and ministerial, cemented by mutual love, and consecrated by a common love for One in whom each has his being, then the co-existence is delightful beyond words, and the separation in death bitter-only not to despair. How much more then this discipleship to one actually sent of God-to one who was the kinsman, the friend, the harbinger of Jesus. Scarcely any funeral was ever like that one,-the surprise, the shock, the anguish, the indignation, yet also, let us believe, the thanksgiving of heart and soul which accompanied the laying of that still young life to its latest and only satisfying rest in the enjoyment of a world where doubt is not, where God is. When we think of it we can almost place ourselves beside that tomb, and then go straight with these mourners and tell Jesus.

III. Unhappy that sorrow which cannot tell itself to Jesus. There are such sorrows. The burning fever of passion, whether in the form of baffled lust or dissatisfied ambition or self-defeated speculation, will not, scarcely can, go, quite as it is, to tell Jesus. And yet if it would, it would not be cast out, Little do we know, the best of us, of the largeness of that heart. We, who feel ourselves grieved and wearied, we scarce know why, by the search for something which never comes, by the perpetual baffling of hope undefined and effort misdirected, we are the men sought. Part with the dead lord, with the usurper of the heart’s heart, bury him out of thy sight, and come and tell Jesus.

C. J. Vaughan, Words of Hope, p. 233.

References: Mat 14:12.-Preacher’s Monthly, vol. viii., p, 41. Mat 14:13, Mat 14:14.-A. Scott, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xxii., p. 266. Mat 14:13-21.-A. B. Bruce, The Training of the Twelve, p. 120; Preachers Monthly, vol. iii., p. 291.

Mat 14:14

A Great Multitude a Sad Sight.

I. The Redeemer’s reason for compassionating the great multitude is a reason of universal application. It was a reason for feeling compassion for that assemblage that day in Palestine; it is a reason for feeling compassion for any assemblage whatever. Christ’s pity was not moved by any of those accidental and temporary causes which exist at some times and in some places, and not elsewhere. Sinfulness and the need of a Saviour are things which press, whether felt or not, upon all human beings. That spiritual malady of sin from which the Great Physician alone can save us is one that is wide as the human race. He sees in it the weightiest reason for compassionating any mortal, through every stage of his existence-from the first quiet slumber in the cradle to the rigid silence in the shroud.

II. The Redeemer’s reason for feeling compassion toward the multitude was the strongest reason for doing so. When we think what sin is and what sin tends to, we cannot but feel how rightly the Saviour judged. For sin is indeed man’s sorest disease and man’s greatest unhappiness. And sin, if unpardoned, leads to death-death spiritual and eternal. A sinful soul is a soul stricken with the worst of diseases, leading to the most awful of deaths. It was because Christ looked on into the unseen world, and discerned the wrath in which sin unpardoned would land the soul, that He felt so deep a compassion as He looked on the great multitude gathered in the Eastern desert.

III. If Jesus thought the sight of a great multitude a sad sight, if He could not look upon the multitude but with compassion, it must have been because He could not look but with compassion on each individual soul in the multitude. And as that multitude was a fair sample of the human race, it follows that Christ feels that there is something for Him to pity as He looks on each of us-on each separate human being. Let us be clothed with humility. It is the right frame of spirit for beings such as you and me. Let us go humbly to the foot of the Cross, and, feeling our helplessness, let us patiently wait till the kind Saviour shall look upon us with compassion and take away our sins.

A. K. H. B., The Graver Thoughts of a Country Parson, 1st series, p. 142.

Mat 14:15-21

Jesus and His Bounty.

I. The problem of the disciples. The desert place, the night, and the multitude without food, presented a problem that might well constitute reason for anxiety to any that were of a sympathetic nature. The disciples were prepared for the desert themselves, with or without food; but to be there with five thousand men, besides women and children, and all hungering, was a very different matter. There was no provision in their faith for so unexpected an event. Their advice was to send the multitude away to provide for themselves. There is an easy way out of present difficulties which, if taken, may lead to difficulties in the future which may be of a more unyielding kind than any which beset the present. Great confusion might ensue by sending the multitude hungering away. The disciples seem to have forgotten (1) that the people had followed their Master, not them; (2) that the Master knew as much and more of the multitude than they did; (3) that the Master was moved with compassion towards the people.

II. The solution of the Master. “Give ye them to eat,” said the Master. The command seemed extravagant; but they knew that it had not been His habit to gather in where He had not scattered abroad. It made them feel how inadequate they were, with the little they had, to obey it. They had only five loaves and two fishes, do as they would, and with a multitude to feed. The loaves were, however, just what the people needed. We have all some little which, if wisely used, may be of benefit to our fellows. Whatever of good and holy things we have should be holily and usefully employed. The two talents are as valuable within their sphere as five are within theirs. The Master took the five loaves and two fishes from the disciples, and manifested His great power through that which they gave Him. He brought them into the fellowship of His mystery. Our first condition of usefulness is to take the little we have to Christ, if only we have the little. And we shall find that if we have taken whatever of thought and feeling and opportunity we have, and if all have been blessed by Him, that that which is blessed by Him is equal to all that life’s occasion demands; but without being blessed our loaves remain five, and the people, however frantic our effort, continue hungering.

J. O. Davies, Sunrise on the Soul, p. 321.

References: Mat 14:15-21.-Parker, Inner Life of Christ, vol. ii., p. 304; T. Birkett Dover, The Ministry of Mercy, p. 109. Mat 14:17, Mat 14:18.-Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. viii., No. 453. Mat 14:19.-Preacher’s Monthly, vol. viii., p. 139. Mat 14:19, Mat 14:20.-J. Shaw, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xx., p. 76; W. Gresley, Parochial Sermons, p. 209. Mat 14:22-26.-Parker, Inner Life of Christ, vol. ii., p. 312. Mat 14:22-33.-A. B. Bruce, The Training of the Twelve, p. 128; J. Hawker, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xvii., p. 168. Mat 14:23.-Homiletic Magazine, vol. vi., p. 327; Parker, Hidden Springs, p. 326.

Mat 14:24

I. Very evidently the first thing here suggested is that the way of duty is not always easy. In saying that I do not allude to the inner difficulties which we have frequently to overcome before we enter upon the path of obedience, but rather to those hindrances which come upon us from without, while we are honestly trying to go forward in the course which, believing it to be commanded us by God, we have begun. Let any one set out to do anything positive or aggressive for Christ, and all experience declares that before he has gone far he will have to face a contrary wind.

II. Now, what shall we say to sustain ourselves amid an experience like this? (1) This, at least, we may take to ourselves for comfort-namely, that we are not responsible for the wind. That is a matter outside of us and beyond our control, and for all such things we are not to be blamed. The contrary wind is in God’s providence, and is to be made the best of; nay, so soon as we recognize that it is in God’s providence, we will make the best of it. (2) The attention required for bearing up against the contrary wind may take us, for the time being, out of the way of some subtle temptation. In general, all such adverse providences have operated in keeping us nearer the mercy-seat, and in leading us to depend more implicitly-or, as the hymn has put it, to “lean” more “hardly”-on the support of the Lord. (3) There may be much in contending with a contrary wind to prepare us for higher service in the cause of Christ. Our Lord withdrew to the mountain to give the disciples a foretaste of what should come when He went up to heaven; and I have a firm conviction that much of that persistence of the apostles in the face of persecution, which so strongly impresses us as we read the early chapters of the Acts of the Apostles, had its root in the remembrance of what they had learned in this night’s contending with adverse winds on the Galilean lake. This was one of their first experiments in walking alone, and it helped to steady them afterwards. (4) As we bend to our oars while the wind is contrary, we may take to ourselves the comfort that the Lord Jesus is closely watching us.

W. M. Taylor, Contrary Winds and other Sermons, p. 7.

References: Mat 14:24.-T. Birkett Dover, The Ministry of Mercy, p. 116. Mat 14:26.-Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xvi., No. 957. Mat 14:27.-W. F. Hook, Sermons on the Miracles, vol. ii., p. 1; J. Hiles Hitchens, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xiii., p. 203; J. E. Vaux, Sermon Notes, 4th series, p. 86; J. C. Jones, Studies in St. Matthew, p. 215. Mat 14:28.-Spurgeon, Three Hundred Outlines on the New Testament, p. 22. Mat 14:28, Mat 14:29.-Preacher’s Monthly, vol. vii., p. 95; J. Keble, Sermons for the Christian Year, vol. iii., p. 221; J. M. Neale, Occasional Sermons, p. 144.

Mat 14:30

There are three conditions of soul: some think they are sinking and are not; some are sinking and do not know; some are sinking and do know it-know it truly and miserably.

I. Let me gather up the steps towards the sinking. An emotional state, with abrupt and strong reactions; a self-exaltation; a breaking out under a good and religious aspect of an old infirmity and sin; a disproportion between the act and the frame of mind in which the act was done; neglect of ordinary means with not sufficient calculation of difficulties; a devious eye; a want of concentration; a regard to circumstances more than to the Power which wields them; a certain inward separation from God; a human measurement; a descent to a fear-unnecessary, dishonouring fear; depression; a sense of perishing; beginning to sink.

II. Let us see the escape. In his humiliation and fear and emptiness, the eye of St. Peter, which had wandered in the pride of his first confident marching, went back to Christ. It was the mark that he was a child of God still. It was the mark in the judgment-hall; it was the mark now; it is the mark everywhere. You who feel that you have sunk and are sinking, go back again, and let Jesus be to you, and you be to Jesus, as it once was. Those declining steps and sinking affections want the Saviour more than ever, and He is the Saviour still. The same eye is towards you, as loving, as gentle, as affectionate and kind. Return-away from every wind that blows and every wave that beats-away from the gulfs that yawn, and the depths that will swallow you up-away from your own guilty self-look to Jesus.

J. Vaughan, Fifty Sermons, 9th series, p. 154.

References: Mat 14:30.-Spurgeon, Evening by Evening, p. 14. Mat 14:31.-Ibid., vol. v., No. 246, vol. xxxi., No. 1,856; A. P. Peabody, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xii., p. 174; Spurgeon, My Sermon Notes: Gospels and Acts, p. 41. Mat 14:36.-J. Keble, Sermons for Saints’ Days, p. 382.

Fuente: The Sermon Bible

2. John’s Martyrdom.

The Fourfold Attitude of the Rejected King.

CHAPTER 14

1. John’s Martyrdom. (Mat 14:1-11.)

2. The Disciples of John with the Lord Jesus. (Mat 14:12.)

3. Feeding the Five Thousand. (Mat 14:13-21.)

4. Praying on the Mountain-top. (Mat 14:22-23.)

5. Walking on the Sea; Coming to His Disciples. (Mat 14:24-36.)

The fourteenth chapter contains the record of events put together so as to harmonize with the purpose of this Gospel. The Lord had revealed the mysteries of the kingdom of the heavens, mysteries, as we have seen, repeated by the Lord in His seven messages to the churches in Rev 2:1-29; Rev 3:1-22. At the end of the previous chapter we learned once more of His rejection. They were offended at Him. In the chapter before us He appears as the rejected One. The right key to understand the events described here, is to look upon all dispensationally. We have in them a description of what takes place while the King is absent and rejected by His own people. At the end of this chapter He comes in the fourth watch, and with His coming brings the calm for the troubled sea and His troubled disciples.

The first incident we find is the martyrdom of John the Baptist. Herod stands with his kingdom and abomination for the world, the prince of this age, and his persecutions. The record is put in here to show that during the absence of the King, the world will hate and persecute those who are of the Truth, but it carries us on to the end likewise, when a false king will rule once more — the Antichrist; typified by Herod.

The second incident is the miraculous feeding of the five thousand men, besides women and children. He had gone to a desert place, but the crowds followed Him, and He supplies their need in His own miraculous way. The keeping of His people is here demonstrated, while on the other hand, we find spiritual lessons, which lead us deeper, especially if we compare this section with the record in the Gospel of John.

The third incident is the storm on the sea, lasting a whole night, during which the Lord is absent. He went into the mountain apart to pray, which is a picture of His presence with the Father during this age. This section is especially rich in dispensational lessons. We learn from this short outline of the fourteenth chapter, that it forms a kind of birds-eye view of the age, which follows the rejection of our Lord.

At that time Herod, the tetrarch, heard of the fame of Jesus, and said to his servants, This is John the Baptist; he is risen from the dead, and because of this, these works of power display their force in him (Mat 14:1-2).

The Herod mentioned here is not the Herod in the second chapter of the Gospel. The Herod under which the children of Bethlehem were slain was Herod the Great, an Idumean who had been proclaimed king of the Jews by Rome and exercised his evil reign under the protection of Rome. After his death Archelaus became tetrarch of Judea, Samaria and Idumea, Philip of Trachonitis and Herod Antipas of Galilee and Peraea, who also had the title of tetrarch. It is this Herod who is before us in this chapter He was married to a daughter of King Aretas of Arabia. He lived, however, in open adultery with Herodias, the wife of his brother Philip. Like his father, Herod the Great, he was a wicked man, the murderer of John the Baptist. He was followed by Herod Agrippa, under whose regime the persecution of the Christians broke out in Jerusalem.

The dreadful end of this wicked king is described in Act 12:1-25. He was smitten by an angel of God and eaten by worms. His son, named likewise Herod Agrippa, took his place.

These Herods — who ruled under Rome over Immanuels land and were such bloody men, false kings upon a throne, which was not theirs — are all types of Antichrist, that false king, who comes in his own name and will be received by the Jews.

During this entire age the mystery of iniquity already works, and in the end of it that wicked one will be revealed. Satan rules over the world now, and by and by, his power will have full sway for a little while, and then through the revived Roman Empire, the beast out of the sea, a false king, the great final Herod, will rule and reign, as well as the beast out of the earth.

These dispensational facts make it clear why the story of Johns martyrdom is introduced now in this Gospel. It is brought forth here to show that alongside of the kingdom of the heavens in its mysteries, there is the kingdom of the world culminating in a wicked leader, the man of sin and son of perdition.

The incident itself comes in at the time when our Lord sent out His disciples. In the fourth chapter we heard that John was delivered up (Mat 4:12). In the eleventh he sent his disciples from the prison to the Lord, and now his fate is made known after the Lord had revealed the secret things.

On account of the report concerning Jesus, Herod is troubled, like his father before him was troubled, when the wise men from the east came to Jerusalem. Conscience speaks with a loud voice, and though Herod was neither a Pharisee nor a Sadducee, he is superstitious and looks upon Jesus as John the Baptist risen from the dead. It is still so; where there is no faith, superstitions hold sway. And why was he troubled and uneasy? Why did his conscience speak? For Herod had seized John, and had bound him and put him in prison on account of Herodias, the wife of his brother Philip. For John had said to him, It is not lawful for thee to have her. And while desiring to kill him, he feared the crowd, because they held him for a prophet. But when Herods birthday was celebrated, the daughter of Herodias danced before them, and pleased Herod; whereupon he promised with oath to give her whatsoever she should ask. But she, being set on by her mother, says, Give me here upon a dish the head of John the Baptist. And the king was grieved; but on account of the oaths, and those lying at table with him, he commanded it to be given. And he sent and beheaded John in the prison; and his head was brought upon a dish, and was given to the damsel, and she carried it to her mother. And his disciples came and took the body and buried it and came and told Jesus. And Jesus having heard it, went away thence by ship to a desert place apart (Mat 14:3-13).

What a scene of wickedness and crime, lust and blood shed is here revealed! It is the true picture of the world, the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes and the pride of life. And this world, this age is unchanged. It is not improved and gradually subdued. This evil world is not getting better. It is not giving up its lust and pride, its hatred and persecution under the civilizing influence of Christendom as it is claimed. The things manifested here by the Spirit of God, as they transpired at the merry feast of Herod are the same today. The hatred of the Truth and the servant of the Lord is the same. The lust of the flesh and the eyes and the pride of life have not changed a particle. All is present with all its disgusting features in the midst of the boasted civilizing influences of Christendom.

John had been faithful in discharging his God-given ministry. Openly he had confronted the despot with his evil doing and a dungeon becomes his lot. How often it has been repeated throughout the age. How many faithful servants have been hated and persecuted thus. The world receives not the truth, but hates it. Having rejected the Lord and hated Him, the world rejects and hates Him who is of the truth. How sad to look upon that which professes to be the church, that which professes to be Christian and to see it in friendship with the world! At last professing and apostate Christendom will form that great world center, and center of abomination and wickedness, Babylon the Great, and in her will be found the blood of prophets and saints, and of all the slain upon the earth (Rev 18:24).

Oh, let us herald it forth, separation from the world! Adulteresses, know ye not that friendship with the world is enmity with God? Whoever, therefore, is minded to be the friend of the world is the constituted enemy of God (Jam 4:4). May it reach our conscience that we may live indeed as such who are in the world but not of the world, not conformed to this world, but transformed by the renewing of our mind. Like John the Baptist, let us be faithful in our testimony, no matter what the consequences may be.

John represents here also him who is one of the two witnesses. Elijah will come once more, not now, but at the Jewish end of the age; not in this country, but in Israel s land. As a witness, with his companion, he will witness against the beast, and will be slain by it, as John was slain by Herod.

We pass over the details of that libertine feast, the dance, unquestionably indecent, the beastly mother, with her awful request. Of Herod we read, he was grieved on account of the request. He feared the crowd on the one hand, and on the other he feared those who lay at table with him. He wanted to appear religious. If he made an oath and it was heard by those with him, and he did not keep it, they would surely tell it abroad. If his religiousness led him to commit a murder it is a small matter. How often it has been repeated! Under the garb of religiousness crimes upon crimes have been committed, and the end is not yet.

What a moment it must have been when the messenger entered the dungeon of John and his life is taken. And he sent and beheaded John in prison. This is all the Spirit of God tells us of it. No doubt John met the messenger in the triumph of faith.

Johns disciples came and took the headless body and buried it and then they came and told Jesus.

There they found the comfort and the hope of resurrection and life. What words of cheer He may have given to them we do not read here, but we are sure they came not in vain to Him. And shall we come in vain to Him with our cares and griefs, trials and losses? Go and tell Jesus Christ your Lord!

Such then is the world in its hatred and such what the servants of Christ may expect from the world.

Our Lord having heard the report went away to a desert place apart. He knew that it was only a little while longer and He would be rejected, condemned and crucified. But His time had not yet come. He would not hasten matters, however, even if then Herod would have attempted to do anything to him he would have not succeeded. How the Spotless and Holy One must have felt in that hour, when wickedness had reached such a climax! Yet He is silent No word comes from His lips. No word of disapproval no word of judgment or wrath. Thus He is silent throughout this present evil age until that day comes, His own day, when He will keep silent no longer.

And now as He goes away by ship into a desert place apart, truly as the Rejected One. The multitudes hearing of it follow Him on foot from the cities. They seek Him in the wilderness, in the place of rejection. In the Gospel of John, chapter 6, we have the full record of what follows and likewise the condition of the people. Here we have only a brief description. And going out He saw a great multitude, and was moved with compassion about them, and healed their infirm (Mat 14:14). A few words only, but how His grace shines in them. Though He knew their hearts, which were far from seeking Him, yet was He moved with compassion. This is the second time we read of His compassion for the people. Not alone did He pity them but He healed their infirm. It must have kept Him busy as He moved among them, touching the sick and healing their diseases. But when even was come, His disciples came to Him saying: The place is desert and much of the daytime already gone by; dismiss the crowds that they may go in the villages and buy food for themselves (Mat 14:15). What a contrast between the compassionate Lord and His disciples! How little they had learned of Him and of His gracious ways. Most likely while He was still occupied with the people and still stretching forth His hands with healing power, they interrupted Him in His blessed work, reminding Him of the physical needs of the multitudes. As if He knew not Himself what they needed, as if He cared not for them and their welfare! It was unbelief which manifested itself thus. They even ask the Lord to dismiss the multitudes, to send them away. Heartless, they would have let them find their way back to their villages to satisfy their wants. Instead of looking to the Lord they looked to circumstances, to the numbers of the people. They did not reckon with Him and His power, who fed Israel for forty years in the wilderness, who sent the ravens to Elijah. Such is unbelief. How calm and sublime is the Lords answer. No word of reproof falls from His blessed lips. But Jesus said to them, They have no need to go; give ye them to eat. There was surely no need to go away empty from Him, no need to go elsewhere and seek what He so plentifully can give and does give to all who trust Him. They have no need to go. In this word He reveals Himself once more as the omnipotent Lord. A desert place, and He declares a crowd of five thousand men, besides women and children, have no need to go, to leave Him, to find bread to satisfy their hunger. But still more, He tells His disciples, give ye them to eat. This they could not understand. They had very little to minister to the great needs of such a company. That the Lord could feed them they had not considered, and that they, in giving them to eat, could count on His power to minister to their need was far from their thoughts. Yet this is the lesson which the Lord wanted to teach them and us likewise. He is the All-sufficient One. He has all power, and there is no need for anyone to go away empty from Him. He wishes to minister to the needs of His people, through His own. Give ye them to eat is still His loving word, and He backs it up with all His grace and riches in glory. We mean, of course, all this of a ministry in spiritual things.

Let us think of this as we minister the things of God, whether it be the Gospel or the ministry of His Word, for the edification of believers. All is entrusted to us by the Head of the Body. He Himself will minister through our ministry if the heart rests believingly in Him and faith looks away from circumstances and difficulties to a rich and gracious Lord in Glory. He knows the needs of all. He is still the compassionate One, and as Lord in glory tells His servants: Give ye them to eat. Oh for faith to count on Him and His gracious power.

And now they speak, But they say to Him, We have not here save five loaves and two fishes (Mat 14:17). From the Gospel of John we learn that the Lord said to Philip, Whence shall we buy loaves that these may eat? But this He said trying him, for He knew what He was going to do. Philip answered Him, Loaves for two hundred denarii are not sufficient for them, that each may have some little portion. One of His disciples, Andrew, Simon Peters brother, says to Him, There is a little boy here who has five barley loaves and two small fishes; but this, what is it for so many? (Joh 6:5-9). They even had not the small supply themselves, but it was in the hands of a little boy. How suggestive! It was little, very little they possessed, and it was in the hands of a little boy, one who was weak. It is so with ourselves and the little we have. Blessed are we indeed if we do know how little it is which is in our hands and how much is lacking. But let it not be in unbelief, thinking it is such a little bit, which cannot be used. Nothing is too small, nothing too little, if it is brought to Him; yea, He has chosen the weak things. Bring them here to Me is His command. What condescension, He does not despise the little we have, He does not set it aside in manifesting His power. How easy it would have been for Him to speak only a word in that desert place and bread would have fallen again upon the ground, for the crowds to gather and take with them. He wishes to use the little, the weak things, to show forth His power. It is the way He works throughout this age, in which He is the Rejected One.

Bring them here to Me, and do we bring what we have to Him always? Is every service first brought to Him for blessing? Is the little put into His hands first for blessing? Are all our undertakings really brought to Him; our little, our all, put at His disposal? If we bring it to Him He will bless it and with His blessing we can go forth to minister to others. There can be and will be no lack in such ministry in dependence upon Him.

This is true ministry. How far Christendom has drifted away from it, and how short we come of it, with our unbelieving hearts. We ever reckon with circumstances and difficulties and not with the loving, gracious and all sufficient Lord in glory! May we learn and profit by His Word.

And having commanded the multitudes to recline upon the grass, having taken the five loaves and two fishes, He looked up to heaven and blessed; and having broken the loaves He gave them to the disciples, and the disciples gave them to the multitudes (Mat 14:18-19). He blessed and broke the bread, and the broken bread is first put into the hands of the disciples, and after they received they gave it to the people. This is the divine order of ministry. The little handed over to Him, He blesses and we receive first of Him, and what we receive from His hands we can pass on to others. (In the Gospel of John He Himself feeds with His own hands the crowds. The ministry of the disciples is not mentioned there, because in John He is described as the Divine One.)

What a scene it must have been! Five thousand men besides women and children crowding about Him, and at His loving command they lay down upon the grass and after they found rest He feeds them with His bread. In looking upon that blessed picture we think of Him as Jehovah-Roi, the Lord, my Shepherd. The Lord is my Shepherd; I shall not want. He maketh me to lie down in green pastures. It is fulfilled here. Jehovah, the Shepherd, is present with His people. Jehovah, the Shepherd, gives them rest and then in the green pastures He refreshes them. Thus He acts still. Rest and food in Him and through Him are still His precious gifts to all who put their trust in Him. He Himself is our Rest and our Bread. He satisfies the poor with bread. It is prophetic. He will yet be the great Shepherd of Israel and gather His people, His scattered sheep, and supply their wants. We read of it in that restoration Psalm, the one hundred and thirty-second: For the Lord hath chosen Zion ; He hath desired it for His habitation. This is my rest forever; here will I dwell; for I have desired it. I will abundantly bless her provision; I will satisfy her poor with bread.

And all ate and were filled, and they took up what was over and above of fragments twelve hand baskets full. But those that had eaten were about five thousand men besides women and children (Mat 14:20-21). Here is the miracle. The little was not only sufficient for all, but more was left over at the end than they had in the beginning. His blessing was not only upon the little for all, but He blessed it in such a manner that from it came an abundant increase. It is not different now in the ministry of spiritual things. The more we give out, having received from Him, the greater the increase and possession for us in the end.

In the Gospel of John the definite teachings of our Lord concerning life through Him and in Him the true bread come down from heaven, and the sustenance of that life, are connected with this episode. Johns Gospel is the place for that. In the feeding of the people as recorded in Matthew and the applications we have made of it, we have brought out the character of the age, the age in which Israel has rejected her King. Let us notice that the feeding of the multitude closes abruptly. In Joh 6:15 we read they would make Him king. But the attempt was carnal. No faith in Him, no devotion to His person was behind it, and the Searcher of hearts had to declare unto them when the crowds sought Him again: Verily, verily I say unto you, ye seek Me, not because ye saw the miracles, but because ye did eat of the loaves and were filled (Joh 6:20). In Matthews Gospel the whole scene closes without any record about the behaviour of the multitudes. Significantly we read at once: And immediately He compelled the disciples to go on board the ship, and to go before Him to the other side until He should have dismissed the multitudes. And having dismissed the multitudes, He went up into the mountain apart to pray.

Every word here is pregnant with meaning. He compelled the disciples to go on board ship. A change is to take place by His own arrangement and the people are dismissed by Himself. All this indicates the setting aside of Israel, their rejection, though never complete nor final. He Himself goes up into the mountain apart to pray. The whole night is spent by Him there in the presence of the Father. He is absent, both from the crowds and from His disciples, and while the multitudes He had fed scatter, His disciples are tossed upon the sea. In the prophet Hosea we read that Jehovah saith I will go and return to My place (Hos 5:15). His going upon the mountain speaks of His withdrawal and the place which He occupies in the presence of the Father, as intercessor and advocate. The third incident recorded, the stormy night, the storm-tossed disciples, the coming Lord in the fourth watch, Peters separation to meet him, the morning which brings peace and the renewed healing by the returned Lord, all is full of meaning and rich in typical application.

The night is a picture of the time during which He is absent, this present evil age in which we live. His return from the mountain in the morning foreshadows His second coming and the beginning of a new age.

And now we read what happens in that night during His absence. But the ship was now in the midst of the sea, distressed by the waves for the wind was contrary (Mat 14:24). While He is away night and storm reign and His own are in distress, the wind is contrary. Could we find a better description of the present age than a stormy sea, a contrary wind and a dark night? Surely the age is perfectly portrayed by these. It is an age of storm, peril and night. How strange that with the most emphatic as well as plain statements of holy writ concerning the characteristics of this age, the greater part of the professing church can teach precisely the opposite and speak of it as an age of peace, light and progress. Surely Scripture is very definite that Satan is the god of this age, and night increases under his rule; peace is impossible. We find in the very short description of that night in which the Lord was absent, a description of the age. It is true still and the one who believes otherwise and expects peace and calm now will be sadly disappointed.

But if the night, the rising waves, the contrary wind, are pictures of the age, what can the little ship mean, which sails across the storm sea? The applications which are made of the ship are manifold. A favored one is to use it as a type of the church and speak of the disciples as believers who are in the church and who have their fears and doubts, who tremble in view of the towering waves and the contrary wind. But such an application cannot be made to correspond with the teaching of the Word concerning the true church. The true church is above the waters, above the storms, in union with Himself who is in the presence of God. The frightened disciples, full of fears and expecting every moment the deep to swallow them up, could hardly be taken as types of the true believer, who knows his position in Christ. He, too, is above the storm, and though he may be storm-tossed, as much as this little ship upon the sea, though Satans power may ever play about him and the wind be contrary, yet through it all does he not fear, but sings the song which is heard above the howling wind, For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

What does the ship mean? It may be taken in a general way to be a type of the Jewish people. The Lord absent from those who are in a sense His own to whom He came, and who rejected Him, who refused Him, are upon the sea. The sea represents the nations; the waves and the wind, the persecutions and the distress which come upon them. It is an excellent portrayal of the history of Gods ancient people from the time they refused their King until He returns to be received by them. This ship with fluttering sails, broken masts, tossed like a ball from wave to wave, blown hither and thither, uncontrollable and yet controlled, ever in danger and never in danger of going down — this ship is the type of the Jewish ship, the Jewish nation. It is still upon the sea. It is still the same old storm-tossed vessel. The winds more than ever contrary. It seeks an harbor now, trying to cast anchor on the shore of their own land, but a boisterous wind is coming and while the ship is miraculously kept, there will be no haven, no peace, till He comes again who is their King, the Son of David.

But this application, correct as it is, is too general. We have spoken of the ship and not of the disciples. The disciples must be taken as the type of the Jewish remnant. We saw from the tenth chapter that the disciples sent forth then were representing the Jewish remnant. When the Lord Jesus Christ left the earth and went to the Fathers house to prepare a place, He did not leave a church behind. There was no church on the earth when our Lord ascended upon high, and when He comes back to earth again He will not find the church on the earth, but He will come back to be received by the remnant of His earthly people. It is in this light the incident has to be interpreted, which however does not forbid applications in other directions.

And in the fourth watch of the night He went toward them, walking upon the sea. But when the disciples saw Him walking upon the sea, they were troubled, saying, It is an apparition; and they cried out for fear (Mat 14:25-26).

He had left His place on the mountain and returned. His return was in the fourth watch of the night, right before the dawning of the morning. And as He left that place on the mountain when He was here in the earth, so will He arise and leave the place on His Fathers throne and come back to earth, to the very land where He was once rejected. First, He will leave His place and descend from heaven with a shout and come into the air, where we shall meet Him. The fourth watch is the time when He leaves His place and comes. The fourth watch is now. The gradual approaching of the Lord, His person seen dimly in the distance, the fear of the disciples who cry out for terror, instead of shouting for joy that He is coming, all finds its proper application. How many there are in Christendom, for whom the coming of the Lord and the events connected with it have no joy, but bring fear and terror to the heart. And these days, the days of the fourth watch, are filled with signs which herald His coming. The true believer, however, knows no fear in the fourth watch, for he waits and watches for His coming, and if it were possible to get a glimpse of the Coming One leaving His Fathers throne, descending into the air, the believing heart would rejoice. We love His appearing, and the fact that He is coming but intensifies the longing of the heart to see Him as He is. The believer knows no such fear as the Jewish disciples had, when they saw Him walking on the water. Had they known, it is the Lord, and that He comes to bring peace and safety, we doubt not their cries would have ceased. All has a meaning for the Jewish remnant, which will be on the scene when our glorious hope has been realized.

But immediately Jesus spake unto them saying, Be of good courage: it is I; be not afraid (Mat 14:27). These precious, comforting words were heard above the roaring of the hurricane and the noise of many waters. May we hear them continually in the midst of increasing difficulties, in the hour of test and trial, in affliction, in the dark valley of suffering and in the experiences we call disappointments. Blessed are we if we do. The darkest place, even if it is the dungeon, will become illuminated and resound with joyous praise. Surely Paul in Rome must have heard these precious words, Be of good courage — it is I — be not afraid! May we take all from His hands by believing we are in His hands and thus face every trial, every tempest, with the assurance that there is nothing to be feared.

But in the ship, in that company is one who recognizes the voice, one who recognizes Him through the mist of the storm and the vanishing shadows of the night. And Peter answered and said: Lord, if it be Thou, bid me to come to Thee upon the waters. And He said, Come. And Peter having descended from the ship, walked on the waters to go to Jesus. Here another significant type is before us. We shall soon learn from this Gospel that the Lord announces the building of His church. In the sixteenth chapter we find the words, Upon this rock I will build My church. We learn that it was Peter who said, Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God, and upon this rock, Christ in resurrection, the Lord announces His church will be built. To Peter also the keys of the kingdom were committed, and how he could use them we find in the book of Acts. Now church means out-calling, not only an out-calling from the nations, but an out-calling from that which is passed, the Jewish things. Peter, so prominent in this incident, in his act of faith in leaving the ship, turning his back upon his frightened kinsmen, stepping on the waters, going to Jesus to meet Him, stands as a type for the church. It is true all the truth concerning the church was revealed through Paul, the Apostle to the Gentiles. It is true, through Paul the company was led forth out of the ship to go forth to meet the Coming One, but Peter also stands in his action typically for these truths, which we have later so fully revealed in the Pauline epistles.

It is separation, and this separation was an act of faith which we see here. It is the true position of the church, as well as the individual believer. The old Jewish ship is to be left behind. The path for the church is the path of faith. The object before the church is the coming Lord. The word from Him is, Come. The walk to be like His walk. He has triumphed over sin and death, the world and Satan; the waves and storms cannot harm nor hinder Him. And we are associated with Him. He wants us to walk on the water. This is the calling of the church. Separation first unto Him. Obedience to His Word and then walking on the water to meet Him.

Alas! where is it now, this church separated, gone out to meet the Bridegroom? That which calls itself church is a miserable ship, worse than the Jewish ship after which the modern church is only too often modeled. As individual believers, however, separation is possible. You, dear reader, in the midst of all the confusion and failure, in this fourth watch, you may hear His voice, Come. He is coming. He wants you to take the path of faith, the path He walked Himself. Behold the Bridegroom! Go ye out to meet Him! Have you gone out to meet Him?

But seeing the wind boisterous, He was afraid; and beginning to sink he cried out, saying, Lord save me. And immediately Jesus stretched out His hand and took hold of him, and said unto him, O thou of little faith, wherefore didst thou doubt?

All is again pregnant with meaning.

What made Peter sink after he stepped out so boldly and walked on the stormy waves to meet his Lord? It was a boisterous wind; and Peter, instead of looking to Jesus only, was frightened by that boisterous wind and began to sink. Has this not been repeated in our own experience? We heard His voice, we separated ourselves, we followed Him, and then the enemy raised some boisterous wind. He always does when we desire to follow the Lord in all things. Oh, how often we made the same mistake which Peter made! Looking away from the Coming One, the One who is able to save to the uttermost, our feet began to sink and to slip back. But could Peter ever have sunk down? Never! Nor can the believer ever perish. But Jesus lifted Peter up, and he stood again on the waves, triumphing now through His power over the boisterous wind, and then he walked not towards Jesus, but he walked with Jesus. Even so He deals with us in His great mercy, never leaving nor forsaking us, saving us out of the tempestuous sea.

How beautifully this fits into the dispensational picture we have already given. There is a time coming when Satan will bring on a very boisterous wind. It is called the hour of temptation in Revelation. That old serpent is even now getting ready for it. But the Lord will never let His own sink. Jesus stretched forth His hand and caught Peter. He takes him by the hand, and both go now to the ship. So will He catch up His waiting church, and will return with His saints to bring peace.

And as they came into the ship the wind ceased. Satans power was at an end as soon as Jesus was in the ship. When He comes back to earth again there will be peace, and not before. The great need of the world is to have the King back. What a glorious picture that must have been — Jesus and Peter coming to the ship! The sun was now shedding the first rays over the sea, the dark night was over, the anxiety of the little flock was turned into joy and laughter, while the raging sea became as calm and smooth as if there had never been a storm. How much grander it will be when the Lord comes back with His saints, and the sun of righteousness will rise with healing in his wings!

Then they that were in the ship came and worshipped Him, saying: Truly, Thou art the Son of God.

It seems they had never believed this. The great stumbling block with the Jew is yet, He made Himself God. Again and again we are being asked by them, Can God have a Son? Many of the Jews acknowledge Jesus today as a reformer and a good man, but never as Son of God. They will know Him when He comes, and the nation will fall at His pierced feet and worship Him as the King and Son of the Living God.

The closing verses of the fourteenth chapter of Matthew speak of Jesus going to the opposite shore, where He healed the diseased. And when they had crossed over, they came to the land of Gennesaret. And when the men of that place had recognized Him, they sent in all that region round about, and they brought unto Him all that were sick. And they besought Him that they might only touch the hem of His garment; and as many as touched were made perfectly whole. It happened in the place where they had rejected Him. This may be taken as a true type of the blessed work of redemption, salvation and restoration which will take place during the millennium.

Fuente: Gaebelein’s Annotated Bible (Commentary)

Chapter 33

The Baptist Beheaded

At that time Herod the tetrarch heard of the fame of Jesus, And said unto his servants, This is John the Baptist; he is risen from the dead; and therefore mighty works do shew forth themselves in him. For Herod had laid hold on John, and bound him, and put him in prison for Herodias sake, his brother Philips wife. For John said unto him, It is not lawful for thee to have her. And when he would have put him to death, he feared the multitude, because they counted him as a prophet. But when Herods birthday was kept, the daughter of Herodias danced before them, and pleased Herod. Whereupon he promised with an oath to give her whatsoever she would ask. And she, being before instructed of her mother, said, Give me here John Baptists head in a charger. And the king was sorry: nevertheless for the oaths sake, and them which sat with him at meat, he commanded it to be given her. And he sent, and beheaded John in the prison. And his head was brought in a charger, and given to the damsel: and she brought it to her mother. And his disciples came, and took up the body, and buried it, and went and told Jesus.

(Mat 14:1-12)

What thoughts arise from this short narrative of the death of John the Baptist! The cruelty and implacable hatred of Herodias toward that faithful prophet, the savagery of Herod, his guests, and his family are as disgusting as they are inexcusable. Yet, by the order of divine providence, they were but the executioners of Gods appointed means of bringing one of his elect home to heaven.

It is written, Precious in the sight of the Lord is the death of his saints (Psa 116:15). It matters not where they die, by what means they die, or when they die, Precious in the sight of the Lord is the death of his saints. Here we are told about the death of one of his saints. John the Baptist was brutally beheaded by Herod. Why? He was beheaded for faithfully serving God and for being faithful to Herod as Gods messenger. The things we have before us in these twelve verses are written for our learning. May God the Holy Spirit, whose Word this is, write its lessons upon our hearts.

Herod

First, Herod stands before us as a glaring example of human depravity. He was the vile son of a vile man. Faith and godliness are never passed from father to son. Only God can give a man faith. And only God can make men righteous. But ungodliness and wickedness fathers do pass on to their sons generation after generation.

The Herod mentioned in Matthew 14 was Herod the tetrarch, also known as Herod Antipas. He was the son of Herod the Great, a Gentile, a descendant of Esau. Herod the Great was infamous for his cold-blooded atrocities. He murdered the entire Jewish Sanhedrin because they dared challenge his authority. He murdered one of his wives on a whim. He murdered two of his sons for fear that they might take his throne. And he had all the male children in Bethlehem slaughtered in a vain attempt to destroy the Lord Jesus in his infancy. Herod the Great was a vile, detested man.

His sons were just like him. After Herods death, the Roman government divided his province into three parts, giving three of Herods many sons authority. Archelaus was given the southern province of Judea and Samaria (Mat 2:22). Philip was given the northern provinces of Trachonitis and Ituraea. And Herod Antipas was given the area that included Galilee and Porea. This Herod the tetrarch, Antipas, was a ruthless, shameless, henpecked, lustful man, given to every imaginable evil. He was no less beastly than his vile father, only less defiant and courageous.

While visiting Rome with his half-brother Philip and his wife Herodias, Herod and Herodias became involved in a sordid, promiscuous affair. When Herod returned to his province, he was married to Herodias. In order to have her, he betrayed his brother and divorced his wife, and almost lost his kingdom. His enraged father-in-law, King Artes, would have killed him had not the Roman army intervened.

Let us ever beware of our behavior in our homes. Our sons and daughters will most likely imitate us in our most unbecoming traits. Godliness does not breed godliness. But wickedness does breed wickedness.

Shocking as it is to read of the brutality of Herod, Herodias, and her daughter, they stand before us as glaring examples of the depths of that depravity to which all Adams race has been reduced by the fall. That which one person is capable of doing, all are capable of doing. If you and I do not act out the depravity of our hearts as fully as these did, it is only because of Gods restraint. Robert Hawker wrote

The seeds of every sin are in every heart, the same by the fall. Reader! do you believe this? Yes! if God the Holy Ghost hath convinced you of sin. And until this is feelingly known in the heart, never will the infinitely precious redemption by the Lord Jesus Christ be understood or valued. Oh! how precious to them that believe is Jesus! 1Pe 2:7. Hence a child of God reads this account of Herod, therefrom to abhor himself, and to love Jesus! 1Co 4:7.

Herods Marriage

Second, adultery is a crime against God and man. Herods adulterous marriage to his brothers wife was a matter of public scandal and wickedness that had to be reproved. The gospel writers do not tell us how or where John and Herod were brought together. It is possible, if not likely, that Herod summoned John to come into his court that he might hear him preach, or see him perform some miracle. Kings and rulers often summon religious leaders.

Being summoned to preach to the king, had John not rebuked him for his publicly known snub of Gods law and demanded repentance of him, had he not demanded that Herod bow to the throne of God, acknowledging his sin and seeking Gods mercy through Christ, the Lamb of God, he would not have been faithful to God or to Herod. Whatever the occasion, John said to Herod, It is not lawful for you to have your brothers wife. Although Herodias had been divorced from Philip for a number of years, in so far as Roman law was concerned, she was Herods wife. But John did not recognize Roman law when it contradicted Gods law. He refused to recognize the marriage. Though she was sleeping with Herod, Herodias was Philips wife.

I would not be faithful to the Word of God and to you who read these lines if I did not reprove the same behavior today. I am compelled to clearly state some things taught in the Word of God about marriage. They are not popular; but they are clearly revealed in Holy Scripture. The Word of God does not change because men do not receive it and bow to it. Marriage is for life. The marriage bond can only be broken by three things: (1.) Death (Rom 7:1-4), (2.) Adultery/Fornication (Mat 19:9), and (3.) Abandonment (1Co 7:15).

I realize that some who read these lines have experienced things in the past that greatly disturb them. Some are divorced. Some are divorced and remarried. You may have brought yourself into such circumstances by your own, willful rebellion against God and are now greatly disturbed by what you have done. As a pastor, I am often asked, by believing men and women who are divorced and remarried, What can I do? My answer is (And I believe it to be the only reasonable and the only right answer.), Forget the past. God has.

It is the responsibility and the privilege of other believers to also forget the past with regard to their brothers and sisters in Christ, no matter what they have done, each esteeming his brother and his sister in Christ better than himself. Let every saved sinner rejoice to know that our sins are under the blood (all our sins: past, present, and future before conversion and since conversion). If God has forgiven us, we are to reckon ourselves forgiven (Rom 6:11). If God has forgiven our brother or sister (and he has), we are to look upon them as, and treat them as forgiven, just like we are, and accepted, justified, and righteous in Christ. Forgetting those things which are behind (with regard to ourselves and to one another), and reaching forth unto those things which are before, let us press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus (Php 3:13-14).

John the Baptist

Third, John the Baptist stands before us as a faithful servant of God. The first Baptist preacher in history was John the Baptist. And he was a faithful servant of God. He set the standard and laid down the example for all who would come after him to follow. His message was repentance toward God, calling upon all who heard him to Behold the Lamb of God.

His ministry was a ministry of preaching. Not counseling, but preaching. Not education, but preaching. Not building shelters for the homeless and hospitals for the sick, but preaching. If there is anything this generation needs to learn about the work of the ministry, it is this. Those who are called of God to the work of the ministry are called to preach, only to preach, and to preach the gospel of Christ, only to preach the gospel of Christ.

Let all who are called like John, like him be faithful (1Co 4:1-2). He was faithful even unto death. He was neither a compromiser nor a diplomat. He was a faithful gospel preacher. He was no more reluctant to confront Herod and Herodias with the claims of God than he was the scribes and Pharisees. Gods servant is Gods servant everywhere. He does not consider the costs or the consequences of delivering Gods message. Being Gods servant, John the Baptist feared nothing and no one but God.

We must never look for reward or recognition in this world. If ever there was a case of godliness and faithfulness unrecognized and unrewarded by men, it was that of John the Baptist. But John was content to serve his generation by the will of God without recognition, and in the face of constant ridicule and scorn. Let us follow his example. There is a day of judgment appointed by God. In that great day God will set the record straight (1Co 4:3). And that great day will more than make amends for all these lesser days (Rom 8:17; 2Co 4:17).

Johns Message

Fourth, Johns message to Herod exemplifies the necessity of repentance. John the Baptist was the forerunner of the Lord Jesus Christ. As such, his ministry was, in some ways, typical of the work of God the Holy Spirit in preparing the hearts of chosen, redeemed sinners to bow down to the claims of Christ Jesus and receive him as Lord and Master, and as Savior of their lives and of their souls.

John the Baptist faithfully kept sinners feet to the fire, telling them that God demands and will settle for nothing less than all-out, unconditional surrender to the claims of Christ; and that only those who bow to the scepter of King Jesus can know him in the pardon of their sins, and what we call salvation.

Herod knew that John the Baptist was a faithful prophet, a just man and an holy. As such, he respected him; but he was also afraid of him, and observed him. He did many things because of him, and heard him gladly (Mar 6:20).

Johns message cost him his head. A. T. Robertson observed, It cost him his head; but it is better to have a head like John the Baptist and lose it than to have an ordinary head and keep it! His message to Herod was a sermon about the demands of a holy God. It is a sermon on the character of God. John stood before Herod as Gods mouthpiece. Here is a preacher, called John the Baptist, facing the king of Judea with his ungodly wife, her ungodly daughter, and all the courtiers that stand about the court. When this old king hears from God through the lips of Gods preacher and Gods prophet that it is not lawful for him to have his brothers wife, that sermon, that faithfulness, that truth, cost John the Baptist his head. But it cost Herod his immortal soul, because he refused to hear it and bow before the throne of God.

John the Baptist linked the Old Testament with the New. Just as the Old Testament prophets from Genesis to Malachi demanded repentance toward God, from the beginning of John the Baptists ministry, throughout the New Testament, and throughout this gospel age, repentance has been and is the demand of the gospel. Every prophet, the Lord Jesus Christ himself in his prophetic ministry, all the apostles, and every faithful gospel preacher through the ages declare that God is a holy God, that his demands have not been lessened, and that everywhere men are still called upon to repent toward God and believe on the Lord Jesus Christ.

In the Old Testament Gods prophets constantly called the people they served to repent. When John the Baptist came as the forerunner of Christ, preparing the peoples hearts to receive the Christ, he called all who heard him to repentance. Repent ye, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand (Mat 3:2). The first sermon the Lord Jesus ever preached on this earth was a call to repentance (Mat 4:17). The message has not been changed. God commandeth all men everywhere to repent (Act 17:30).

Repentance is Gods command. And back of Gods command is God himself. Repentance, turning to and coming to God by faith in Christ, is nothing less than the utter surrender of our lives to Christ the King. It is rebels throwing up the white flag of surrender, stacking arms before him by whom they have been conquered, willingly resigned to the will of the sovereign Christ. Repentance (faith in Christ) involves taking up your cross and following Christ. It is not an act performed, but a life surrendered (Luk 14:25-33). Except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish (Luk 13:3).

It was the preaching of repentance that cost John the Baptist his head. Like the rich young ruler, when Herod heard of John and his message, he did many things and heard him gladly. Yet, he lacked one thing. He lacked repentance. He refused to bow to Christ as God his Savior and King. But John knew exactly where his point of rebellion was, and deliberately, boldly, and unmistakably put his finger on the spot. Herod betrayed his brother Philip and took his wife. The faithful Baptist told Herod that relationship with his brother Philips wife openly displayed his hatred and defiance of God. He said to the king (and said it publicly), It is not lawful for thee to have her. Herod was willing to do many things. And he was happy to listen to good preaching, even the good preaching of a faithful man, so long as it cost him nothing. But when John stuck his finger in that reprobate kings heart, and told him that God demands surrender, before he would bow, that old rebel had John the Baptist beheaded and his head brought to him on a charger!

Repentance (faith in Christ) is the willful, deliberate surrender of my life to the sovereign Christ. The Lord Jesus says, Whosoever will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me. For whosoever will save his life shall lose it; but whosoever shall lose his life for my sake and the gospels, the same shall save it (Mar 8:34-35). Repentance is loosing your life to Christ.

Have you repented? Have you willingly put your life into the hands of the Son of God? Have you utterly turned yourself over to his rule as your Lord? Have you renounced all hope of life and salvation in yourself, trusting Christ alone as your Savior? If you have, your repentance toward God and faith in Christ are the fruit of his mighty and gracious work in you and for you (Act 5:31). Your repentance (faith) is his gift and his operation (Rom 6:23; Eph 2:8-9; Php 1:29; Col 2:12). And he who began his work of grace in you will continue it and complete it (Php 1:6).

Conscience

Fifth, Herod shows us that the conscience of a man is a powerful thing. It had been more than a year since Herod had John beheaded and his head brought to Salome in a charger. But his conscience never let him forget John or his words. When he heard about the Lord Jesus, he thought John the Baptist had come back from the dead to get revenge (Mat 14:1-2).

God has given us all a conscience. Your conscience will always either accuse you or excuse you (Rom 2:15). God gives some over to a reprobate mind and a seared conscience, judicially hardening their hearts because of their willful rebellion and unbelief (Rom 1:28). Someone said, The conscience is the voice of God in a mans soul. I do not know whether that is true or not; but I do know that God has put a conscience in every person which either accuses or excuses him in all his actions.

Conscience is that voice inside us that we simply cannot silence. We can muffle the voice. We can sear the conscience. But we cannot silence it. Conscience is that faculty of the mind, which God has put in us all, by which we judge the moral character of human conduct, our own and others. It is an inborn sense of right and wrong.

The conscience is the law of God written on the heart (Rom 2:14-15). All men have a sense of right and wrong which, to a greater or lesser degree, reflects the law of God written upon the heart in creation. You cannot find a society anywhere in history which has not demonstrated this fact, no matter how barbaric. Even today, perverse as things are, men cannot escape this fact.

The conscience of a man often produces a sense of guilt, legal fear, which many mistake for Holy Spirit conviction (Joh 8:9). The conviction of sin is more than a sense of guilt and just condemnation (Joh 16:8-11). The conviction of sin arises from the revelation of Christ in the heart (Zec 12:10), and is accompanied by a conviction of righteousness and of judgment. Holy Spirit conviction is that gracious work of God the Holy Spirit by which he effectually applies the gospel to the hearts of chosen, redeemed sinners, causing them to see that Christ alone is and must be the object of faith. He convinces all who are called by his effectual grace of sin, because they believe not on Christ. He convinces them that righteousness has been established by the obedience of the God-man. Of righteousness, because I go to my Father. And he convinces them that justice has been satisfied by the sin-atoning blood of Christ. Of judgment, because the prince of this world is judged.

It was their conscience that caused Adam and Eve to hide from God after the fall. It was their conscience that made them know their nakedness and filled them with shame. And the fact that they could, to some degree, appease their consciences with fig leaf garments, made by their own hands, shows that the conscience of fallen man is, like every faculty of human nature, utterly perverted and depraved.

Knowing these things, we must not trust our consciences. The conscience cannot be trusted any more than the thoughts of the depraved mind or the emotions of the depraved heart can be trusted. Let us ever be careful not to violate our consciences, not for anyone. But do not trust your conscience. He who trusts his own conscience, like he who trusts his own heart, trusts both a fool and a devil. Our guide in all things must be the Word of God alone! Not our feelings! Not our desires! Not the opinions of others! The Word of God alone! The total depravity of our nature has made us perverse in all our faculties, so perverse that even the conscience of fallen man is corrupt.

A Good Conscience

The Scriptures tell us plainly that the conscience of fallen man is an evil conscience, from which we must be cleansed by the blood of Christ (Heb 10:22). The consciences of lost religious men are defiled (Tit 1:15), so defiled that they may, in a sense, have a good conscience while performing abominable things (Joh 16:2; Act 23:1; Act 26:9; Rom 9:1). The Apostle Paul, writing by divine inspiration, tells us that when he was persecuting the church, wishing himself accursed from Christ, his conscience was bearing him witness. He was fully convinced that he was doing the right thing. Some are so hardened by free will, works religion or by ungodly behavior, often by both, that they live with a seared conscience (1Ti 4:1-2).

Some men and women, and even children have consciences which are so cauterized and hardened that they are past feeling. They have no regard for the rightness or wrongness of what they say or do. They have no conscience of anything. Under a cloak of sanctity they commit the most shocking impieties (John Gill). If a person works at it, if he holds down the truth of God (Rom 1:18) long enough and persistently enough, he can cauterize his conscience. You can so sear your conscience, so harden yourself, that your conscience will excuse your wickedness.

Still, everyone wants to have a good conscience, a quiet, peaceful conscience. What would you not give to have a good conscience? A conscience which would let you sleep at night? A conscience that would enable you draw near to God with full assurance? A conscience which would give you ease, real ease and peace of heart and mind in the prospect of death, judgment, and eternity?

All the religion and religious practices, ceremonies, and sacrifices in the world cannot obtain a good conscience. All the gifts and works of charity and philanthropy imaginable cannot buy a good conscience. Good works of moral reformation and religious devotion, no matter how earnest and sincere, can never earn you a good conscience.

Our consciences demand what we cannot give. Your conscience and mine demands and can only be satisfied with perfection. The conscience echoes Gods holy law. Echoing the law, the conscience demands the same thing Gods law demands. The conscience demands perfection. It demands and will only accept perfect atonement for sin. It demands and will only accept perfect righteousness. That perfect atonement and perfect righteousness is found only in Christs obedience and death as our Substitute (Heb 10:1-22).

Horatius Bonar was exactly right when he wrote, In anothers righteousness we stand, and by anothers righteousness we are justified. All accusations against us, founded upon our unrighteousness, we answer by pointing to the perfection of the righteousness which covers us from head to foot, in virtue of which we are unassailable by law as well as shielded from wrath.

Thy work alone, O Christ, can ease this weight of sin;

Thy blood alone, O Lamb of God, can give me peace within.

Thy love to me, O God, not mine, O Lord, to Thee,

Can rid me of this dark unrest, and set my spirit free.

The only way for a sinner to have a peaceful conscience before God is by faith in Christ (Heb 9:14). Pastor Mark Daniel wrote

Peter speaks of some who have a guilt-free conscience, not only before men, but toward God Himself! How is that? Its not that they have no reason to have a bad conscience. No, quite the contrary. They view everything they do as offensive to God! But, with just one recollection, all the black stains of sin are completely cleared from their conscience – by the resurrection of Jesus Christ! That single glorious act is all the proof they need that their sins are gone, completely hidden from the all-seeing eye of God, under the blood of their successful Savior. Now, thats a good conscience!

Go Tell Jesus

Sixth, Johns disciples show us by their example where we must go and what we must do in times of trouble, sorrow, heartache, and need. We read in Mat 14:12, His disciples came and took up the body, and buried it, and went and told Jesus. Notice the words with which Matthew was inspired to describe this. His disciples came and took up the body, and buried it. They took up the body, not the man, but the body, and buried it. They buried it in hope of the resurrection. Then, with heavy, heavy hearts, they went and told Jesus (Heb 4:16).

Elisha Hoffman wrote of visiting with one of Gods troubled saints, a visit that inspired him to write one of our great hymns. There was a woman to whom God had permitted many visitations of sorrow and affliction. Coming to her home one day, I found her much discouraged. She unburdened her heart, concluding with the question, Brother Hoffman, what shall I do? I quoted from the Word, then added, You cannot do better than to take all of your sorrows to Jesus. You must tell Jesus.

For a moment she seemed lost in meditation. Then her eyes lighted as she exclaimed, Yes, I must tell Jesus. As I left her home I had a vision of that joy-illuminated face. And I heard all along my pathway the echo, I must tell Jesus. I must tell Jesus. Hoffman wrote this great hymn when he got home.

I must tell Jesus all of my trials; I cannot bear these burdens alone;

In my distress He kindly will help me; He ever loves and cares for His own.

I must tell Jesus all of my troubles; He is a kind, compassionate friend;

If I but ask Him, He will deliver, make of my troubles quickly an end.

Tempted and tried, I need a great Savior; One Who can help my burdens to bear;

I must tell Jesus, I must tell Jesus; He all my cares and sorrows will share.

O how the world to evil allures me! O how my heart is tempted to sin!

I must tell Jesus, and He will help me over the world the victory to win.

I must tell Jesus! I must tell Jesus! I cannot bear my burdens alone;

I must tell Jesus! I must tell Jesus! Jesus can help me, Jesus alone.

Fuente: Discovering Christ In Selected Books of the Bible

The King’s Herald slain

AT that time Herod the tetrarch heard of the fame of Jesus, and said unto his servants, This is John the Baptist; he is risen from the dead; and therefore mighty ivories do shew forth themselves in him.

When the whole country was moved, “at that time Herod the tetrarch heard of the fame of Jesus.” Then, but not till then, the fame of Jesus reached this wretched princelet, who was too absorbed in self and lust to hear much about spiritual matters. The peasant heard of Jesus before the prince. The Word of God may enter the palace, but it forces its way slowly. Herod spoke to his servants about this famous person, for he was so alarmed that he could not conceal his fears. A guilty conscience is haunted by a misdeed. “John” was written on the tyrant’s memory; and now that he is startled by a rumour of wonders being done, he cries out, “This is John the Baptist; he is risen from the dead.” Herod was a Sadducee by profession, but his terror made his sceptical creed crumble to dust. For John at least ho believes that there is a resurrection. Great superstition often underlies a surface of avowed unbelief. Herod Antipas had a quarter of his father’s kingdom, and less than a quarter of his ability; but in selfish cruelty he was a true cub of the old wolf. He had enough conscience to scare him, though not enough to change him. Note how he believed in the power of a risen man: “Therefore mighty works do shew forth themselves in him.” If from mere hearsay Herod attributed such power to our Lord on earth, shall we not believe in the Almighty power of our risen Lord upon his throne in glory?

Mat 14:3-4. For Herod had laid hold on John, and bound him, and put him in prison for Herodias’ sake, his brother Philip’s wife. For John said unto him, It is not lawful for thee to have her.

Of course it was not lawful for him to take to himself his brother Philip’s wife while Philip was yet living, and while his own wife was living also. While he was the guest of Philip at Borne, he became ensnared by Herodias; and the guilty pair, who in addition to their being already wedded, were by birth too near of kin for lawful marriage, came back to Galilee as if they were man and wife. It was bravely spoken of the Baptist when he bluntly said, “It is not lawful for thee to have her “; but the sentence cost him dear. Herod Antipas could bear to do the deed, but he could not bear to be told that he had committed an unlawful act. John did not mince matters, or leave the question alone. What was a king to him if that king dared to trample on the law of God? He spoke out pointedly, and Herod knew that he did so. Herod laid hold on John, because John’s word had laid hold on Herod.

The power of evil love comes out in the words, “for Herodias’ sake” This fierce woman would brook no rebuke of her licentiousness. She was a very Jezebel in her pride and cruelty; and Herod was as a puppet in her hands.

Mat 14:5. And when he would have put him to death, he feared the multitude, because they counted him as a prophet.

Neither he nor his paramour could bear such plain dealing, and so he would have silenced for ever the rebuking tongue if he had not been restrained by a salutary dread of the populace. Herod was already a murderer in intent; but fear stayed his cruel hand. The people held John in high esteem as a servant of God, and the tyrant dared not incur the wrath of the multitude. “What slaves to fear bad princes may become. It is well they should be so; for thus a temporary check is put upon their tyranny. Alas! it is not often a restraint for long, for they soon break loose again; and for a favourite’s sake risk the anger of the nation.

Mat 14:6. But when Herod’s birthday was kept, the daughter of Herodias danced before them, and pleased Herod.

There is no harm in keeping birthdays, but 1 here is great harm in lewd dances, or in any other sports which suggest evil. Salome was a true “daughter of Herodias” She forgot her rank, and danced before the court after the lascivious fashion of the ago, so as to gratify a probably drunken monarch. She “pleased Herod,” her mother’s paramour; and we can readily guess the kind of dancing which would please him.

In these days mothers too often encourage their daughters in dress which is scarcely decent, and introduce them to dances which are not commendable for purity. No good can come of this; it may please the Herods, but it displeases God. In this case dancing led to a cruel crime; and it is to be feared that in many instances gross immoralities have taken their rise in dances which suggested uncleanness.

Mat 14:7. Whereupon he promised with an oath to give her whatsoever she would ask.

A foolish promise, and a wicked oath. Men of Herod’s order are always free with oaths. Men should know what they are at when they promise, and never set their signature to a blank which another may fill up; for they may thus sign away their all. Besides, a mere piece of immodest posturing could never deserve so large a recompense. Herod was surely, as much fool as knave. Had wine and lust taken away his heart?

Mat 14:8. And she, being before instructed of her mother, said, Give me here John Baptist’s head in a charger.

The whole thing was planned between this shameless mother and daughter, who both knew Herod’s weak points and how to handle him. The mother set her daughter dancing, and then put the request into her mouth: she was of her mother’s nature, and readily carried out that wicked woman’s instructions. No doubt Herodias was more incensed than Herod at what the Baptist had dared to say; for it is usually the case that the female offender is most angered by a rebuke of such sin. Sad that from noble Maccabean blood such a female monster should have sprung! She must have John Baptist’s head upon a dish. The mention of the details shows the cold-blooded character of the demand. As if it were a dainty dish for her tooth, the prophet’s head must be served up in a charger.

Mat 14:9. And the king was sorry: nevertheless for the oath’s sake, and them which sat with him at meat, he commanded it to be given her.

Pretty sorrow! A crocodile is said to shed tears over those it snaps in two. “The king” was afraid of the consequences. Poor king! He may have felt a dying struggle of conscience, for Herod had some sort of reverence for John; yet his grief could not have been very deep, for he had already willed to kill him. The king feared that his courtiers and comrades at the drinking bout would think him weak, and perhaps jeer at him for being too religious to touch a prophet. Such fear of being thought weak proved that he was weak indeed. In addition to this, Herodias would consider him to be by no means so fond of her as he had professed to be, and how could he endure her passionate grief? Moreover, he was “a man of honour”, and for the oath’s sake he must not run back. With the regret which a wolf feels because he must eat the lamb, he gave orders for the murder of John, and the handing of his head to the young girl. Rash promises, and even oaths, are no excuse for doing wrong. The promise was in itself null and void, because no man has a right to promise to do wrong. Wicked oaths ought to be repented of, and not acted out; but this cruel tyrant commanded the murder, and so went through with his horrible promise.

Mat 14:10. And he sent, and beheaded John in the prison.

Herod sent, and beheaded John. By a word a precious life is ended. How lightly tyrants think of murder! No miracle was wrought for John’s deliverance. Why should there be? It was well for the Baptist to go to his reward, for his work was done. He was not left to pine in solitude: the man of God left his prison for Paradise by one sudden stroke of the sword. It was a foul murder, but to the Baptist it was a happy release. He was no longer in the power of Herod or Herodias: he received his crown in heaven though he had lost his head on earth.

Herod is said to have “beheaded John “; for what he ordered to be done is set to his account, and in his conscience he knew it. We do ourselves what we do by others. Men may sin by proxy, but they will be guilty in person.

Mat 14:11. And his head was brought in a charger, and given to the damsel: and she brought it to her mother.

What a present for a young lady! It was given to the damsel! The girl is not ashamed to lift the dainty dish, and bear it to her fiendish mother, that she may glut her malice by the sight of the head of her faithful reprover. What a mother and daughter! Two bad women can do a world of mischief. What a fate for such a head! Did it even from the charger charge the foul adulteress with her crime?

Mat 14:12. And his disciples came, and took up the body, and buried it, and went and told Jesus.

The good man’s followers did not desert their murdered leader: “his disciples came.” The mangled corpse was surrendered to them; they reverently took up the body, and buried it. They were his disciples still, and his death was not the death of their faith. They did the only act of kindness then in their power to him whom they had followed. They regarded the headless trunk as being the last relic of John, and so they gathered about it, and gave it honourable burial. But it is not said by the Evangelist that they buried John, but “they took up his body, and buried it”, not him. The real John no man could bury, and Herod soon found that, being dead, he yet spake.

What remained for John’s disciples but to go to their leader’s Friend and Master, and tell him all the circumstances, and wait further orders? John had taught them well, since they went at once to Jesus when their teacher was dead.

When we are in a great trouble, we shall be wise to do our best, and at the same time tell the Lord Jesus all about it, that he may direct us further as to what we are to do. What a relief to tell Jesus! It was a painful story for him to hear; but he would be sure to impart consolation to these mourners; and in our case also he will send comfort.

Fuente: Spurgeon’s The Gospel of the Kingdom

Herod

Called Antipas; son of Herod the Great, (See Scofield “Mat 2:1”) and Malthace, a Samaritan woman; brother of Archelaus, see margin, See Scofield “Mat 2:22” a daughter of King Aretas; Herodias, wife of his half-brother, Philip.

Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes

Herod: This was Herod Antipas, the son of Herod the Great, by Malthace, and tetrarch of Galilee and Perea, which produced a revenue of 200 talents a year. He married the daughter of Aretas, king of Arabia, whom he divorced in order to marry Herodias, the wife of his brother Philip, who was still living. Aretas, to revenge the affront which Herod had offered his daughter, declared war against him, and vanquished him after an obstinate engagement. This defeat, Josephus assures us, the Jews considered as a punishment for the death of John the Baptist. Having gone to Rome to solicit the title of king, he was accused by Agrippa of carrying on a correspondence with Artabanus king of Parthia, against the Romans, and was banished by the emperor Caius to Lyons, and thence to Spain, where he and Herodias died in exile. Mar 6:14-16, Mar 8:15, Luk 9:7-9, Luk 13:31, Luk 13:32, Luk 23:8-12, Luk 23:15, Act 4:27

Tetrarch: Luk 3:1

Reciprocal: Jos 6:27 – his fame Mat 4:24 – his fame Mat 9:26 – the fame hereof Mat 14:9 – the king Mat 14:13 – General Act 13:1 – Herod

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

AT THAT TIME, says the opening verse, Herod heard of the fame of Jesus. Just when He had no fame at Nazareth His fame reached the ears of that godless man, and as it appears, touched his hardened conscience. It is remarkable that he should have thought it was John risen from the dead, since to a later Herod we have Paul saying, Why should it be thought a thing incredible with you, that God should raise the dead? (Act 26:8). That which they could not believe when it had happened was conjured up by a guilty conscience.

This leads Matthew to tell us the story of Johns martyrdom, which had happened not long before. Johns faithful witness had stirred up the anger of Herod and the revenge of Herodias, and the Lords forerunner died as the result of a godless oath. Herod outraged the law of God in order to preserve the credit of his own word. Such was the man that ruled many of the Jews-a chastisement surely for their abounding sin.

Now John had always faithfully pointed to Jesus, and the people acknowledged that though he did no miracle, all things that John spake of this Man were true (Joh 10:41). As the fruit of Johns happy fidelity to Jesus, his disciples knew what to do, when he was so suddenly removed. They were granted his body, so having buried it, they went and told Jesus. John was the burning and shining lamp whereas Jesus was the light, that coming into the world, shines for all men. The lamp was extinguished, so they turned to the great light, and found consolation there.

Hearing it, Jesus departed to a desert place. Mark shows us that just at this time His disciples had returned to Him from their mission. A period of solitude and quiet was suitable at this juncture for the Master, for His disciples, and for Johns sad followers; if, as is likely, they accompanied Him.

The multitudes however still went after Him, and He met their needs. As ever He was moved with compassion. The indifference of Nazareth and the wickedness of Herod produced no change in Him. Let us meditate long and deeply on the unchanging compassions of the heart of Christ. Blessed be His Name!

It was not the Lord but His disciples, who suggested that the crowds should be dismissed to fend for themselves. It was His compassion that detained them and bade His disciples give them to eat. This tested the disciples, and brought to light how little they realized the power of their Master. They had to discover that His way was to use the tiny resources that were already in their hands, and multiply them until they were more than sufficient. The prophet indicated that Jehovah would find His rest in Zion, and that then His word would be, I will abundantly bless her provision: I will satisfy her poor with bread (Psa 132:15). Jehovah was now amongst His people in the person of Jesus, and though there was no rest for Him in Zion at that time, yet He proved what He could do with these five thousand men, beside women and children. He was dispensing the bounty of heaven, hence He looked up to heaven as He blessed.

At this point let us recall the situation, as presented in this Gospel. He had been definitely rejected by the nation, their leaders going so far as to commit the unpardonable sin in attributing His works of power to the devil. Consequently He had symbolically broken His links with them. This we saw in Mat 11:1-30 and Mat 12:1-50. Then in Mat 13:1-58 He spoke the parables which reveal new developments as to the kingdom of heaven; and at the end of that chapter we find that the people of His own country saw nothing in Him beyond the son of the carpenter. We opened chapter 14 to find Herod slaying His forerunner, so that His refusal on all hands could hardly be more complete. Yet before we close the chapter we see a display of two great facts: first, He is more than sufficient when in the presence of human need, whether the wants of the multitude or the weakness of the disciples. Second, He is more than supreme when confronted with powers wielded by the adversary. He not only walked Himself upon the stormy waters, but He enabled a feeble disciple to do the same.

During the night He had been in prayer upon the mountain, and the disciples had been toiling against contrary circumstances. Towards morning He drew near to them, walking upon the waves. In the earlier episode on the lake (Mat 8:1-34) He had shown Himself able to quell the storm, since His power was above all the power of the devil. Now He shows Himself in absolute supremacy. The storm was simply nothing to Him. It was distressing to the disciples, but here was the One of whom it had been said, Thy way is in the sea, and Thy path in the great waters, and Thy footsteps are not known (Psa 77:19). His presence brought good cheer to them even while the storm still raged; and when He joined the boat the wind ceased.

But the Lord brought with Him more than good cheer, and Peter it was who discovered it: He can conform others to Himself. It involved for Peter stepping out of the ship, and this could only be done when he had the authoritative word, Come, which authenticated the fact that it was the Lord Himself who drew near. Assured that it was Himself, on the strength of His word, Peter stepped forth and walked on the sea. We may see here an allegory of what was shortly to come to pass. The Jewish system, which consisted so largely of the law of commandments contained in ordinances, (Eph 2:15), was like a ship, quite suited to men who are after the flesh. As the result of His coming, the disciples were to step out of that ship into a path of pure faith. Hence when Paul bade farewell to the Ephesian elders, he did not commend them to a code of laws nor to an institution or organization, but to God and the word of His grace. Hence too the call to go outside the camp in Heb 13:1-25. Peter was out of the ship, with Christ as his Object and His word as his authority. The Christian position is outside the camp with God and the word of His grace.

Yet Peters faith was small, and, his mind turning from his Master to the violent wind, he was afraid and he began to sink. But still, he had faith, for in the emergency he at once called upon his Lord, and so was sustained, and by both together the ship was reached, when at once the wind ceased, and the land was reached, as Johns Gospel shows us. Peter was quite illogical in his fears, for it is no more possible for us to walk on smooth water than on rough, but we are all like him when little faith possesses our hearts. Faith which is fully centred in Christ is strong, whilst that which is occupied with circumstances is weak.

We sometimes hear rather too much of Peters failure, and not enough of what the power of Christ enabled him to do, though his faith was small. After all, he did not sink. He only began to sink and then, sustained by a power not his own, he reached his Lord and returned with Him to the boat. No other man has done a thing like that, and his momentary failure only made it so manifest that the power that sustained him was that of his Lord that all the rest worshipped Him as the Son of God. They got a great glimpse of His glory, and when arrived at the land of Gennesaret tribute was paid by the people to His grace as well as His power. The diseased flocked to His presence, and their faith was not misplaced, for as many as touched Him were made perfectly whole. True Divine healing means 100 percent cure in 100 percent of the cases! A perfectly wonderful state of things!

Fuente: F. B. Hole’s Old and New Testaments Commentary

14:1

The Herodian family was a prominent one in the days of Christ and the early years of the church. Its head was Herod the Great who had several sons by a number of wives. The name “Herod” became a family title and the various members had personal names that made distinctions between them. The different members of the Herodian family held offices of greater or lesser importance in Palestine and figured largely in the affairs of the church as well as the nation. The one in this verse was Herod Anti-pas, son of Herod the Great. Tetrarch originally meant “ruler of a fourth part of some territory,” but finally came to mean one who had the ruler-ship over a small part of any district to which he might be assigned.

Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary

Mat 14:1. At that season. Quite indefinite (see above).

Herod the tetrarch. Herod Antipas (a son of Herod the Great) now ruler in Galilee; a light-minded, prodigal, and luxurious prince, superstitious and cunning (Mar 8:15; Luk 13:32). He was at Jerusalem when our Lord suffered, and showed utter heartlessness on that occasion. He died in Spain, a defeated and banished man (see on Mat 14:3). Tetrarch; strictly speaking, the ruler of the fourth part of a country, but here used less exactly.

Heard the report concerning Jesus. Probably at Machrus (where John had been imprisoned), which was remote from the scene of our Lords ministry. He first heard of Him now, through the more extended labors of the Twelve.

Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament

FIRST MINISTRY TO THE GENTILES

Jesus has come. He has proclaimed the nearness of the Kingdom, revealed its code or principles, presented His credentials, and sent forth His heralds. But He has been antagonized and practically rejected by the nation. Then comes the turning point, when He ceases to proclaim the nearness of the Kingdom, and discourses of it in mystery. In seven parables he outlines how it will fare among the nations in the absence of the King.

One might suppose that the teachings and the doings of our Lord to follow, would assume a different complexion from any thing before. As a matter of fact such is the case in the judgment of those keen in dispensational discernment. But for the purpose before us it is undesirable to strain after such interpretations, and except where they are very clear, we shall content ourselves with the more practical line of comment.

At the close of the chapter 13 (Mat 13:53-58), they were offended in Him; less and less is the nation disposed to receive him as its Messiah, and because of the suspicions of Herod (Mat 14:1-2), He deems it prudent to withdraw Himself once more (Mat 14:13-14). The events that follow in the chapter are the feeding of the five thousand, the walking upon the sea, the quieting of the storm, and the healing of the sick. All these are additional evidences of the grace and power of Jesus, leading to the conviction Of a truth thou art the Son of God (Mat 14:33).

At chapter 15 the Pharisees once more seek occasion against him (Mat 15:1-2), but His disciples have broken no divine law, but only disregarded one of their traditions. The charge is not that their hands are soiled, but only ceremonially unclean (Mar 7:1-4). Christ takes the indirect method of reply by attacking the traditions (Mat 15:3-6). The fifth commandment is plain enough but the Pharisees had supplemented it with interpretations, making it so burdensome, that devices had to be invented to neutralize them. But in neutralizing the traditions they had done away with the original law. A man to honor his parents must do so and so for them, they said, i.e., more than the commandment contemplated. But if so and so became irksome in any case, it was only necessary to affirm that the money it involved had been pledged as a gift to the altar, and then it need not be given to the parents. Thus the latter failed to be honored at all.

The boldness of Christ is marked in this instance (Mat 15:10-11), giving further offence to His enemies (Mat 15:12), His words calling for an explanation even to His disciples (Mat 15:15-20).

There is a dispensational color in the transaction following (Mat 15:21-28), which is the first recorded ministry of Christ to a Gentile and in a Gentile country. It comes close upon the aversion to Him of His own nation, and points prophetically to that turning to the Gentiles which marks the present age. The significance here is found in the womans first appeal to Him as the Son of David (Mat 15:22), to which as a Gentile, she has no right (Mat 15:24); but when, dropping that, she throws herself upon His uncovenanted mercies so to speak, addressing Him only as Lord, the plea is at once granted.

QUESTIONS

1. What may be assumed as to the teachings of this Gospel following the turning point of chapter 13?

2. Name the leading facts of chapter 14.

3. To what conviction do they lead?

4. Explain in your own words Mat 15:1-6.

5. What gives a dispensational color to the story of the Syrophoenician woman?

6. What is its prophetic application?

Fuente: James Gray’s Concise Bible Commentary

Observe here, 1. How strange it was the Herod should not hear of the fame of Jesus till now; all the country and adjoining regions had rung of his fame, only Herod’s court hears nothing. Miserable is that greatness which keeps princes from the knowledge of Jesus Christ. How plain is it from hence that our Saviour came not to court? He once sent indeed a message to that fox (Herod) whose den he would not approach; teaching us by his example, not to affect, but to avoid, outward pomp and glory. The courts to thrive in.

Observe, 2. The misconstruction of Herod, when he heard of our Saviour’s fame: this, says he, is John the Baptist, whom I beheaded. His conscience told him he had offered an unjust violence to an innocent man; and now he is afraid that he is come again to be revenged on him for his head. A wicked man needs no worse tormentor than his own mind. O the terrors and tortures of a guilty conscience! How great are the anxieties of guilt, and the fears of divine displeasure, than which nothing is more stinging and perpetually tormenting.

Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament

Mat 14:1-2. Now at that time When our Lord had spent about a year in his public ministry, and had sent out his disciples to preach the gospel, to cast out devils, and to heal diseases, and they, by virtue of his name, had been successful in that work; Mar 6:12-14; Luk 9:6-7; Herod the tetrarch King of Galilee and Pera, the fourth part of his fathers dominions; (see note on Mat 2:1;) heard of the fame of Jesus Now everywhere spread abroad, in consequence of the marvellous works done by him and his apostles; and said, This is John the Baptist: he is risen from the dead Herod was a Sadducee; and the Sadducees denied the resurrection of the dead: but Sadducism staggers when conscience awakes. See the note on Mar 6:14-28.

Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

LXII.

HEROD ANTIPAS SUPPOSES JESUS TO BE JOHN.

aMATT. XIV. 1-12; bMARK VI. 14-29; cLUKE IX. 7-9.

b14 And c7 Now a1 At that season bKing Herod [Herod Antipas, son of Herod the Great. See Mat 10:41), but there was a prevalent idea among the ancients that departed spirits were endowed with superhuman powers, and Herod therefore supposed that the risen John had brought these powers with him from the spirit world.] cAnd he sought to see him. [Jesus purposely kept out of the reach of Herod, knowing the treacherous cunning of his nature ( Luk 13:32), and Herod’s curiosity was not gratified until the day of Christ’s crucifixion ( Luk 23:8-12), and then its gratification was without sanctification.] b15 But others said, It is Elijah. And others said, It is a prophet, even as one of the prophets. 16 But Herod, when he heard thereof, said, John, whom I beheaded, he is risen. [Some thought that Elijah might have returned, as the Scripture declared, or that Jesus might be a prophet just like the great prophets of old. Matthew, by introducing what follows with the word “for,” gives us the reason why Herod clung to this singular opinion of Jesus. He did so because this opinion was begotten in the morbid musings of a conscience stained with the blood of John.] 17 For Herod himself had sent forth [370] and laid hold upon John, aand bound him, and put him in prison the sake of Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. bfor he had married her. [Herodias was the daughter of Aristobulus, who was the half-brother of Herod Philip I. and Herod Antipas, and these two last were in turn half-brothers to each other. Herodias, therefore, had married her uncle Herod Philip I, who was disinherited by Herod the Great, and who lived as a private citizen in Rome. When Herod Antipas went to Rome about the affairs of his tetrarchy, he became the guest of his brother Herod Philip I., and repaid the hospitality which he received by carrying off the wife of his host.] 18 For John said unto Herod, It is not lawful for thee to have thy brother’s wife. [The marriage was unlawful of three reasons: 1. The husband of Herodias was still living; 2. The lawful wife of Antipas (the daughter of Aretas, king or emir of Arabia) was still living; 3. Antipas and Herodias, being nephew and niece, were related to each other within the forbidden degrees of consanguinity.] 19 And Herodias set herself against him, and desired to kill him; but she could not: 20 for Herod feared John, knowing that he was a righteous and holy man, and kept him safe. And when he heard him, he was much perplexed, and he heard him gladly. a5 And when he would have put him to death, he feared the multitude, because they counted him as a prophet. [Herod feared both John and his influence. His fear of the man as a prophet caused him to shelter John against any attempts which his angry wife might make to put him to death, and led him to listen to John with enough respect to become perplexed as to whether it were better to continue in his course or repent. At other times, when the influence of Herodias moved him most strongly, and he forgot his personal fear of John, he was yet restrained by fear of John’s influence over the people.] 6 But when Herod’s birthday came, b21 And when a convenient day was come [A day suited to the purposes of Herodias. The phrase refers to Mar 6:19], that Herod on his birthday made a supper to his lords, and the high captains, and [371] the chief men of Galilee; 22 and when the daughter of Herodias herself [the language seems to indicate that others had first come in and danced] came in and danced, ain the midst, bshe pleased Herod and them that sat at meat with him [This dancer was Salome, daughter of Herod Philip and niece of Herod Antipas. The dancing of the East was then, as now, voluptuous and indecent, and nothing but utter shamelessness or inveterate malice could have induced a princess to thus make a public show of herself at such a carousal]; a7 Whereupon he promised with an oath to give her whatsoever she should ask. band 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. [The rashness of the king’s promise is characteristic of the folly of sin. Riches, honors, kingdoms, souls are given for a bauble in the devil’s market.] 24 And she went out, and said unto her mother, What shall I ask? [She may have known beforehand what to ask. If so, she retired and asked her mother that the brunt of the king’s displeasure might fall upon her mother.] And she said, The head of John the Baptist. a8 And she, being put forward by her mother, bcame in straightway with haste unto the king [she wished to make her request known before the king had time to put limitations upon her asking], and asked, saying, {asaith} bI will that thou forthwith give me ahere on a platter the head of John the Baptist. [She asked for the prophet’s head that she and her mother might have the witness of their own eyes to the fact that he was dead, and that they might not be deceived about it.] 9 And the king was grieved; bwas exceeding sorry [because the deed went against his conscience and his sense of policy as above stated]; but for the sake of his oaths, and of them that {awhich} sat at meat, bhe would not reject her. ahe commanded it to be given [The oath alone would not have constrained Herod to grant Salome’s request, for if left alone [372] he would rightly have construed the request as not coming within the scope of the oath. The terms of his oath looked to and anticipated a pecuniary present, and not the commission of a crime. But Herod’s companions, being evil men, joined with the evil women against the man of God, and shamed Herod into an act which committed him forever to a course of guilt. Thus, a bad man’s impulses are constantly broken down by his evil companions]; b27 And straightway the king forth a soldier of his guard, aand beheaded John in the prison. band commanded to bring his head: and he went and beheaded him in the prison, 28 and brought his head {ahis head was brought} bon a platter, and gave it {aand given} bto the damsel: and the damsel abrought it bgave it to her mother. [To the anxious, unrestful soul of Herodias this seemed a great gift, since it assured her that the voice of her most dangerous enemy was now silent. But as Herod was soon filled with superstitious fears that John had risen in the person of Christ, her sense of security was very short-lived. The crime stamped Herod and Herodias with greater infamy than that for which John had rebuked them.] 29 And when his disciples heard thereof, they came and took up his {athe} corpse, band laid it in a tomb. aand buried him; and went and told Jesus. [Herod had feared that the death of John would bring about a popular uprising, and his fears were not mistaken. As soon as they had decently buried the body of the great preacher, John’s disciples go to Jesus, expecting to find in him a leader to redress the Baptist’s wrongs. They knew the friendship of John for Jesus, and, knowing that the latter intended to set up a kingdom, they believed that this would involve the overthrow of Herod’s power. They were ready now to revolt and make Jesus a king. See Mat 12:13, Joh 6:1, Joh 6:2, Joh 6:15. But Jesus would not aid them to seek the bitter fruits of revenge, nor did he intend to set up such a kingdom as they imagined.]

[FFG 369-373]

Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)

Matthew Chapter 14

Our Gospel resumes the historical course of these revelations, but in such a manner as to exhibit the spirit by which the people were animated. Herod (loving his earthly power and his own glory more than submission to the testimony of God, and more bound by a false human idea than by his conscience, although in many things he appears to have owned the power of the truth) had cut off the head of the forerunner of the Messiah, John the Baptist; whom he had already imprisoned, in order to remove out of the sight of his wife the faithful reprover of the sin in which she lived.

Jesus is sensible of the import of this, which is reported to Him. Accomplishing in lowly service (however personally exalted above him), together with John, the testimony of God in the congregation, He felt Himself united in heart and in His work to him; for faithfulness in the midst of all evil binds hearts very closely together; and Jesus had condescended to take a place in which faithfulness was concerned (see Psa 40:9-10). On hearing therefore of Johns death He retires into a desert place. But while departing from the multitude who thus began to act openly in the rejection of the testimony of God, He does not cease to be the supplier of all their wants, and to testify thus that He who could divinely minister to all their need was amongst them. For the multitude, who felt these wants and who, if they had not faith, yet admired the power of Jesus, follow Him into the desert place; and Jesus, moved with compassion, heals all their sick. In the evening His disciples beg Him to send the multitude away that they may procure food. He refuses and bears a remarkable testimony to the presence, in His own Person, of Him who was to satisfy the poor of His people with bread (Psa 132:1-18). Jehovah, the Lord, who established the throne of David, was there in the Person of Him who should inherit that throne. I doubt not the twelve baskets of fragments refer to the number which, in scripture, always designates the perfection of administrative power in man.

Remark also here, that the Lord expects to find His twelve disciples capable of being the instruments of His acts of blessing and power, administering according to His own power the blessings of the kingdom. Give ye them, said He, to eat. This applies to the blessing of the Lords kingdom, and to the disciples of Jesus, the twelve, as being its ministers; but it is likewise an all-important principle with regard to the effect of faith in every intervention of God in grace. Faith should be able to use the power that acts in such intervention, to produce the works which are proper to that power, according to the order of the dispensation and the intelligence it has respecting it. We shall find this principle again elsewhere more fully developed.

The disciples wished to send the multitude away, not knowing how to use the power of Christ. They should have been able to avail themselves of it in Israels behalf, according to the glory of Him who was among them.

If now the Lord demonstrated with perfect patience by His actions that He who could thus bless Israel was in the midst of His people, He does not the less bear testimony to His separation from that people in consequence of their unbelief. He makes His disciples get into a ship to cross the sea alone; and, dismissing the multitude Himself, He goes up into a mountain apart to pray; while the ship that contained the disciples was tossing on the waves of the sea with a contrary wind: a living picture of that which has taken place. God has indeed sent forth His people to cross the stormy sea of the world alone, meeting with an opposition against which it is hard to strive. Meanwhile Jesus prays alone on high. He has sent away the Jewish people, who had surrounded Him during the period of His presence here below. The departure of the disciples, besides its general character, sets before us peculiarly the Jewish remnant. Peter individually, in coming out of the ship, goes in figure beyond the position of this remnant. He represents that faith which, forsaking the earthly accommodation of the ship, goes out to meet Jesus who has revealed Himself to it, and walks upon the sea-a bold undertaking, but based on the word of Jesus, Come. Yet remark here that this walk has no other foundation than, If it be Thou, that is to say, Jesus Himself. There is no support, no possibility of walking, if Christ be lost sight of. All depends on Him. There is a known means in the ship; there is nothing but faith, which looks to Jesus, for walking on the water. Man, as mere man, sinks by the very fact of being there. Nothing can sustain itself except that faith which draws from Jesus the strength that is in Him, and which therefore imitates Him. But it is sweet to imitate Him; and one is then nearer to Him, more like Him. This is the true position of the church, in contrast with the remnant in their ordinary character. Jesus walks on the water as on the solid ground. He who created the elements as they are could well dispose of their qualities at His pleasure. He permits storms to arise for the trial of our faith. He walks on the stormy wave as well as on the calm. Moreover the storm makes no difference. He who sinks in the waters does so in the calm as well as in the storm, and he who can walk upon them will do so in the storm as well as in the calm-that is to say, unless circumstances are looked to and so faith fail, and the Lord is forgotten. For often circumstances make us forget Him where faith ought to enable us to overcome circumstances through our walking by faith in Him who is above them all. Nevertheless, blessed be God! He who walks in His own power upon the water is there to sustain the faith and the wavering steps of the poor disciple; and at any rate that faith had brought Peter so near to Jesus that His outstretched hand could sustain him. Peters fault was that he looked at the waves, at the storm (which, after all, had nothing to do with it), instead of looking at Jesus, who was unchanged, and who was walking on those very waves, as his faith should have observed. Still the cry of his distress brought the power of Jesus into action, as his faith ought to have done; only it was now to his shame, instead of being in the enjoyment of communion and walking like the Lord.

Jesus having entered the ship, the wind ceases. Even so it will be when Jesus returns to the remnant of His people in this world. Then also will He be worshipped as the Son of God by all that are in the ship, with the remnant of Israel. In Gennesaret Jesus again exercises the power which shall here after drive out from the earth all the evil that Satan has brought in. For when He returns, the world will recognise Him. It is a fine picture of the result of Christs rejection, which this Gospel has already made known to us as taking place in the midst of the Jewish nation.

Fuente: John Darby’s Synopsis of the New Testament

Mat 14:2. This is John the baptist: he is risen from the dead. Mark indicates that Herod was a sadducee by those words of Christ, Beware of the leaven of the sadducees beware of the leaven of Herod. But how is this reconciled with Luk 9:9, where Herod desired to see Christ? Perhaps, like our Harry, he often changed his faith. Perhaps he doubted sometimes whether the Pythagorean doctrine of metempsychosis, or the transmigration of souls into new bodies, might not be true. The cabalists among the jews favoured that notion, which our Saviour condemns in Joh 9:3. The king had heard John preach, as in Mar 6:20, and was delighted with his discourse: yet he beheaded him. Oh heart, oh heart of man!

Mat 14:3. Herod had laid hold on John and bound him. John must have admonished the king before his courtiers, as Elijah rebuked Ahab in the vineyard of Naboth. This raised a storm which menaced John with immediate execution. The popular opinion running in favour of the prophet, stemmed the torrent of royal indignation; and the calm voice of the nation should ever have weight in the cabinet of a king. The people, falsely informed, may be wrong for the moment, but they are never ultimately in error.

Mat 14:4. John said to him, it is not lawful for thee to have thy brother Philips wife. Lev 18:6; Lev 20:21. Philip was then living, and lived to the eighteenth year of Tiberius, as Josephus states; he also intimates that Herod never prospered after the death of John; for Aretas, the father of Herods repudiated wife, destroyed his army in a pitched battle, which many of the jews regarded as a visitation for the murder of John. Antiq. book 17. chap. 7.

Mat 14:6. Herods birth-day, that is, Herod Antipater. It is thought that the custom of observing birth-days originated with those who studied judaical astrology. It was deemed an ill omen to shed blood on days of joy. 1Sa 11:13. This narrative of Johns decapitation is more copiously related in the sixth chapter of Mark, where the reflections will be found.

Mat 14:7. He promised her with an oath. Saul made the like rash oath, and the army forced him to break Matthew 2 :1Sa 14:24.

Mat 14:10. He sent and beheaded John in prison, in the castle of Macherus, in Perea beyond the Jordan. As the head of this martyr could not be brought for some days, on account of the distance, Herod might have repented, had he not been drunk and infatuated.

Mat 14:19. He blessed, and brake: , he blessed the food and sanctified it. Why be afraid of popery, to insinuate that he blessed and praised God? Samuel blessed the sacrifice. 1Sa 9:13.

Mat 14:22. Jesus constrained his disciples to get into a ship. They were safer on the waves than among the multitude, who, dazzled with miracles, were clamorous to make him king: and the disciples themselves seemed in nowise averse to the elevation of their Master to regal dignity.

Mat 14:25. In the fourth watch of the night, reckoned from the time of the cock crowing.

Mat 14:26. It is a spirit. , phantasma, a phantom, spectre, apparition.

REFLECTIONS.

When Herods wrath was as the roaring of a lion, and when the court had assented, by their presence at least, to the death of John, Jesus retired a few days, or weeks, to feed his flock in the desert; for we must never fly in the face of the civil power, unless conscience compel us so to do: it is always better to die than to sin. No matter; Herods wrath could never stop the Saviours work. Whether in the desert, or in the city, his congregation was great; for he is always great in Zion, and should be great in every heart. Nor would he suffer the multitude to labour so far without conferring upon them special favours. When the lions roar against the flock, the good shepherd takes them in his arms. He healed all the sick; if they came weary and limping, they went away leaping and rejoicing. Their cure was without cost, without pain, and without delay. All physicians must yield the palm to this physician, whose cures were all figurative of the moral diseases which grace removes from the heart.

But what availed it to cure them of disease, and then kill them with hunger? The glory of his ministry had so far attracted and detained them, that they had eaten little for three days; and had they fainted on their return, surely the enemy would have said, for mischief did he bring them up to slay them in the wilderness. Therefore the king for once would feast his friends. The stock of provision was indeed small, but a little with the blessing of God is more than enough. He who multiplies a handful of corn to a harvest, blessed and multiplied the bread; and the people, being seated in fifties on the grass, were abundantly served; and each of the twelve apostles had a basket to spare. Oh what a day of glory to the flock. Their eyes had feasted on miracles, their minds had feasted on truth, and now their bodies feasted on corruptible bread.

Nor is the age of glory past. Jesus still heals and feeds the flock in little companies. Perhaps that lad yonder, that stripling in the ministry, though his stock be small, and his word somewhat coarse, has wholesome food, and plenty too for the whole multitude. In prayer he shall be enlarged, and lead all his audience into full and open intercourse with heaven. His ministry shall open with a thousand images of grace and justice. The kingdom of heaven shall burst and enlarge on his views, enabling him to speak with a godlike pathos and unction. His doctrine shall drop as the rain, his speech shall distil as the dew, and as the small rain upon the tender herb. It shall refresh and gladden the heritage of God. The people are all beguiled, like the flock allured into the desert: they forget their food, not recollecting the hour till the preachers strength is exhausted. But alas, as this multitude forgot themselves in attempting to make Jesus king, so our congregations go away, and forget what manner of persons they were.

Our Lords conduct in separating his disciples from the multitude may be designed to teach us a lesson of moderation and forbearance towards civil rulers and governors. If kings err, there is one in heaven able to call them to account. The chastisement of princes is not the work of saints; our duty is to rush into the waves, sooner than join in cabals, and to pray for kings and governors, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty.

We also learn from this history, that whenever we have trifled with religion, we may expect some cross to bring us back to recollection, and to a sense of duty. Darkness and tempest overtook the disciples, and they had no master near to save them. They were menaced with a watery grave; and the public unable to decypher providence, might think that they were infatuated to their destruction. Their faith was weak, and their fears were many: all their faults came to their recollection. Lord, make me holy; and let me never go forth without thy presence, that if death should overtake me, I may be calm and confident in thy favour and love.

The Lord we see will never forsake his servants in the dark and cloudy day. Jesus came in the morning watch, walking on the boisterous waves, as once he came on the wings of the wind, to save his people at the Red sea. He appeased the tumult of their fears at his presence by a cheering voice: It is I, be not afraid. No matter then about the tempest, if the Saviour be there. The floods cannot drown, the fire cannot burn, and enemies cannot harm when God arises to cheer his chosen friends.

From Peters essay to walk on the sea, like his Master, we learn that it is the disciples chief delight to follow and imitate his Lord. Peter walked well while he looked at the promise, but on looking at the waves he sunk through the weakness of his faith. So it is with my poor fainting mind. While I look at men, and high towering professors, I sink into discouragements. While I also look at troubles, the billows go over my head; but when I look at the promises, the charms of religion are all divine, and heaven presents a smiling, and not a distant shore.

The man who distrusts the care of providence deserves rebuke. Oh thou of little faith, wherefore didst thou doubt? Did God ever fail one way or other to save or defend his people? Were they ever confounded who trusted in the Lord? Is there any ground to distrust his power and love? I blush for my unbelieving fears: do thou Lord encrease my faith. Thus it is that men are variously led. Weak faith will indeed save the soul, but not so comfortably as that which is strong.

Fuente: Sutcliffe’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

Mat 14:1-12. Herod and Jesus. The End of John the Baptist (Mar 6:14-29*, Luk 9:7-9, cf. Luk 3:18-20).Mt.s narrative is much briefer than Mk.s, and he goes astray. Thus in Mat 14:5 he makes Herod himself (rather than Herodias) wish to kill John, though in Mat 14:9 he is grieved at it. But he adds the information that the disciples of John told Jesus of their masters fate. He makes this the reason of Jesus retirement, which in Mk. is due to the disciples need of rest after their tour. Mt. is wrong, for the death of John had happened some time earlier, yet there is underlying truth, for Jesus Himself feared Herod. Mat 14:5 (see above) may indeed originally have referred to Jesus (cf. Luk 13:31); it does not go well with Mat 14:6-10.

Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible

Now authority in high places is seen to reject Him too, by the deliberate rejection of His forerunner and servant John the Baptist. When King Herod hears of His fame, his conscience is troubled, fearing that Christ is John risen from the dead. Yet John had done no miracle. His moral and spiritual power had however left a solemn impression on Herod. Again, it was common knowledge that John and the Lord Jesus had been contemporaries, the Lord having been baptized by John (Mat 3:13-17); but ignorant of this, the gnawing discomfort of Herod’s conscience gave him no little misery!

The history of his having murdered John is now recounted. He had first imprisoned him because John had faithfully told him it was unlawful for him to have taken his brother’s wife. Clearly, it was she who was applying the pressure while Herod’s fear of the people (not of God) delayed him from putting John to death. Mark tells us also that he feared John, and when hearing him “did many things, and heard him gladly” (Mar 6:20). Apparently John’s, stirring ministry prompted him to do good things by which to solve his conscience.

Herodias only needed an occasion to appeal to the pleasure and pride of Herod In order to accomplish her purpose of murdering John the Baptist. Herod’s birthday furnished this, the daughter of Herodias dancing for his amusement. Before his guests he made a foolish oath to give the girl whatever she wanted. Through her mother’s coaching, the girl asked for the head of John. Though the king was sorry, yet the pride of keeping his word outweighed the moral outrage of his conscience in murdering the servant of God. In fact, he could have easily spared John without breaking his oath, by acknowledging honestly that John’s life was not his to give, but he chose to ignore his responsibility to God.

The foul deed being done, it is appalling to think of the girl carrying John’s head in a dish to her mother. Certainly the sight of that head would so burn into their consciences that the torment of this, no less than in the case of Herod, would continue through their miserable lives. What can be worse than the insistent torment of an accusing conscience ?

John’s disciples are however allowed to take his body and bury it. The faithful ministry of this man of God was short-lived indeed; but he had done the work for which God had sent him. His disciples then bring the news to the Lord Jesus. But just as the Lord had accepted rejection by His own city, so He quietly accepts this cruel injustice and rejection by the ruler of the land. He left by boat to go to a deserted place apart from the crowds. This took place at the same time that the apostles gathered to tell the Lord of their labours in the cities of Israel. For both of these reasons, the quietness of the presence of God was necessary, both for Himself and for them. Compare Mar 6:29-32.

Yet the interlude was brief, for the crowds followed Him out of their cities. Still, having been In quietness before God, He was moved with compassion toward the people, and healed those who were sick. For it is beautifully precious that the day of His rejection is the day of His grace: rather then being discouraged by the world’s refusal, He will virtually increase the efforts of pure grace in desire for the true blessing of mankind.

The beauty of this expands into a lovely picture of the abundant grace of the present dispensation, grace available for all., and denied to none who will receive it. The disciples urged the Lord to send the crowd away, so as to find provision for themselves. How little do our hearts enter into the sufficiency of the grace that is in the heart of the Lord Jesus! Where shall men find satisfactory bread if they are sent away from Him? In fact, He tells them, “Give ye them to eat.” This is what the Lord is telling us today. He has supplied us with His grace, and He Himself is in glory: therefore it is our privilege to dispense that which He supplies and blesses.

They feel (and so should we) the poverty of their resources for such a crowd, only five loaves and two fishes. But we look in the wrong direction. If we look to Him we are lightened and our faces are not ashamed (Psa 34:5). Though we feel how little we have, yet having Christ, in Him there is more than sufficient for all mankind. The loaves speak of Him as the bread of life, the way it is made implying suffering and death in various ways; the grain of wheat falling into the ground and dying, growing up, then cut down, threshed, then ground in the mill, mixed with other ingredients, kneaded, and finally exposed to the heat of the fire. The fishes too speak of Him as the 0ne who has passed through the waters of judgment for us. When these are brought to Him and He blesses them, their sufficiency is miraculously abundant. The crowd simply sits down in the attitude of receiving: nothing must infer their work.

The disciples had the privilege of taking the loaves and fishes from the hand of the Lord Jesus to dispense them to the crowd, a function that has Its counterpart today in believers dispensing to others the spiritual food that they themselves receive from the Lord. When all five thousand, plus women and children, had eaten their fill, the remainder was greater than the original amount. For the abundant grace of God in the present day will issue in a full supply (twelve baskets) remaining for the blessing of the twelve tribes of Israel after the church is raptured to heaven.

Jesus then instructed His disciples to go by boat to the other side of Galilee, while He sent the crowds away, and went up into a mountain to pray. The typical picture here is simple to understand. Following the dispensing of grace in His coming into the world, the Lord has returned to the high elevation of heaven itself, there interceding for His people.

The boat in the midst of a turbulent sea however carries us on (in type) to the time of great tribulation, when the little remnant of the Jewish nation will be tossed on the sea of the Gentiles, in imminent fear of being overwhelmed. The fourth watch of the night is the morning watch, when the day breaks. Luk 12:35-38 refer to the Lord’s coming for the church, and suggests only that He may come “in the second watch or come in the third watch.” The second is the midnight watch, the third the cock crowing (Mar 13:35). The midnight watch is past now, therefore it appears clear that the Lord’s coming for the church will be in the third watch, then of course His coming to Israel will be in the fourth watch.

In this watch therefore Jesus walked on the sea to meet His disciples. The sight was of course astounding, and they cried out for fear, thinking Him to be a spirit. The miraculous character of this is intended to impress us with the greatness of His power over the Gentile sea Of nations, He being in sovereign control even while they are still raging, and eventually subduing all under Him, as Son of Man. For He is Man, not a spirit, and His voice calms their troubled hearts.

Peter was in fact emboldened to request that the Lord should invite him to walk on the water to meet his Lord. In response to the Lord’s “Come” he does walk on the water toward Him. No doubt we are intended to observe that the Lord is said to walk on the sea, all of it being under His dominion, while Peter is said to walk on the water, only a trifling part of the sea. Of course, it is by the power of his Lord that he is sustained, but Peter’s eyes were turned from the Lord to the boisterous wind and waves, and of course he was afraid. It was not his fear that caused him to begin to sink: this was caused by his eyes being turned from the Lord; and his fear was caused by his eyes being on the troubled waves. If the sea had been perfectly calm, and Peter not afraid at all, he would still have begun to sink if his eyes had turned from the Lord. In this case he would likely have been so impressed with his being able to walk on the water that he would have looked around him with enthusiastic self-satisfaction, with the same result.

He did not cry out to the other disciples in the boat, but to the Lord, “Lord, save me.” He was a swimmer (Joh 21:7), but the rough sea was too much for him: he needed the Lord. His right hand of power was immediately extended to lift Peter up, and together they entered the boat, the wind ceasing at this moment.

Peter provides a graphic picture of the faith of some godly Israelites when the security of the nation (the boat) is threatened by the raging of the Gentile nations. Some will realize that their safety is not dependent on the nation, but on their Messiah alone. Faith. depending on Him, will be sustained in spite of its weakness. He will bring them through, as He will bring the nation through.

The faith of the godly in Israel (typified by Peter’s walking on the water to meet the Lord) reminds us that this is the very character of the present-day church of God. She is not given a vessel in which to surmount the waves, but is called upon to go forth to her Lord, who sustains her without the help of an organization like that of Israel. Sad to say, many have felt insecure with only the Lord to depend upon, and have for this reason formed organizations that they think are necessary to sustain a testimony for God. Why is our confidence not simply in the Lord alone?

Verse 32 however is typical of the hope of Israel being realized, the Lord’s presence calming all the waves of adversity, and giving peace. This draws forth the clear confession of the disciples that He is truly the Son of God, just as Israel will fully confess when He is revealed to them in power and glory. Coming into the land of Gennesaret (which means “harp”) He is welcomed, and the pleasant music of great blessing breaks forth, a picture of the precious work of the healing hand of the Lord in His introducing the peace and prosperity of the age to come, the millennium. From all the country around large numbers are brought to be healed, many only touching the hem of His garment and being perfectly restored. So all the world will share in the blessing of that glorious dispensation.

Fuente: Grant’s Commentary on the Bible

Verse 1

Herod the tetrarch; son of Herod the Great, the old king who reigned at the time of our Savior’s birth. Upon his death, his kingdom was divided among his sons. Herod Antipas, here referred to, ruled over Galilee.

Matthew 14:3,4. Herod had enticed away his brother Phillip’s wife, and married her, while her lawful husband was still living. He was not of so cruel and bloodthirsty a disposition as his father, but it required great moral courage in John, to reprove any member of the Herod family for such a crime.

Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament

CHAPTER 14

The first eleven verses of this chapter relate to the decollation of John the Baptist, of which I have spoken at length on the sixth chapter of S. Mark.

His Body: Syriac, sclado, i.e., a trunk without a head; because, as Nicephorus says (l. 1, c. 19), “Herodias was afraid of John’s reproof even after his head was cut off, and feared its being united to the rest of his body; therefore she took it away with her, and buried it without witnesses in a remote part of the kingdom. Bede and Ruffinus assert the same thing. Observe in this the terrors of a guilty conscience. Herodias was afraid that if the head of John were re-united to his body, he would rise again, and again denounce her incestuous marriage with Herod. Thus, Herod thought John had risen again in Christ. Thus, the Baptist’s head, even when it was cut off, was a source of terror to Herodias.

Came and told Jesus: for John, before his death, had commanded his disciples that, when he was dead, they should transfer themselves to Jesus, as indeed some of them had done whilst he was yet alive.

When Jesus heard, &c. Herod, in the meanwhile, had been occupied with a war against Aretas, king of Arabia, and had not attended to the words and deeds of Jesus. But now that the fame of His many miracles was constantly increasing, he began to turn his attention to them, as Matthew relates in the beginning of this chapter; and was led to suspect that Jesus was John who had risen from the dead. This was why Jesus retired into the desert; 1, and primarily, that He may avoid Herod’s fury, who (as he had beheaded John) would seek to behead him again, in the person of Jesus, especially since it might easily occur to him, or be suggested to him by the Pharisees, that this was the Messiah, the King promised to the Jews, and expected for so many ages. Wherefore, fearing to be deprived of his kingdom, he would have cut Him off, as his father sought to destroy Christ when he cut off the infants at Bethlehem. 2. He retired in order that He might refresh, by a season of quiet, His Apostles, who were now returning from their preaching, and were wearied with their many labours.

In a ship: that by it He might go across the Sea of Galilee, or Tiberias, as appears from Joh 6:1. For this is the same history which S. John relates at greater length in his sixth chapter. Hence, it is plain that this took place about the Passover.

A desert place-Luke adds (Luk 9:10), which belonged to Bethsaida. Adrichomius (in his description of the Holy Land), Jansen, and others think that this desert in which Christ fed the five thousand was called Bethsaida, not because it was close to that city, but on the opposite shore, across the sea of Galilee, between Julias and Dalmanutha. They attempt to prove this, because S. John says Christ went away across the sea of Galilee, and Matthew (Mat 14:34) that He passed over the sea.

But I say this desert was near Bethsaida, on the same shore, and so between Bethsaida and Tiberias. This is proved, 1, because Luke says expressly (Luk 9:10), He departed by Himself into a desert place, which is Bethsaida. The Arabic has, into a desert place near Ale city, which is called Bethsaida.

2. Burchard testifies the same thing-viz., that this place was near Tiberias, and is called Mensa (a table).

3. Because Nicephorus (l 8, c. 3) writes that S. Helena built a church of twelve thrones in the place in which Christ fed the five thousand.

4. Because after Christ had made this multiplication of the loaves, when He fled from the multitude (who wished to make Him a king), He commanded His disciples to sail to Bethsaida, as though it had been nigh at hand. Again, John says (Joh 6:23): “There came other ships from Tiberias nigh unto the place where they had eaten bread, after that the Lord had given thanks.” This place, therefore, was near Tiberias, i.e., between it and Bethsaida. And when they did not find Him there, they went across the sea, where they found Him, as S. John subjoins.

To the argument that Christ is said to have crossed over the sea, I reply: He did not sail over to the opposite shore, but went from one part of the same shore to another place by sea, from one bay of the lake to another, or from one side of a bay to the other side, by a straight course across, instead of going round by the land and following the windings of the shore. So Francis Lucas, Maldonatus, and others. The mountain to which Jesus retired, and from which He came down to the crowds who followed Him (John vi. 3) seems to have formed this bay. Lastly, across means the same thing as beyond.

And when the multitudes heard, &c. You will ask, How could people on foot follow Christ going across the sea in a ship? I answer, that when Christ went into the ship, the multitudes spread abroad His fame through the neighbourhood in all directions. Many, therefore, were stirred up to follow Christ going in a straight course in a ship, by passing round the sea of Galilee, until they came to Bethsaida, and from thence to Capernaum, where they found Christ, as S. John relates (Joh 6:24-25).

And going forth, from His retirement in the desert of Bethsaida, He saw, &c. They were as sheep not having a shepherd, says Mark (vi. 34). Learn hence from Christ, to prefer the care and convenience of others to your own ease and prayers

When evening was come, &c.-the time of dinner, ie., of taking food.

But Jesus said, &c. Christ is preparing the way for the miracle of the multiplication of the bread. Therefore He detained the multitude until the evening, that His disciples might ask Him to dismiss them; whereupon He bids them to give them food, that thereby the miracle might be better attested and the benefit be more grateful, inasmuch as they saw themselves devoid of all means of supplying such vast numbers of people with bread in the desert. S. John adds: “He saith unto Philip, Whence shall we buy bread, that these may eat? And this He said to prove him: for He Himself knew what He would do. Philip answered Him, Two hundred pennyworth of bread is not sufficient for them, that every one of them may take a little.”

Christ asked Philip rather than the others because he was more candid and docile than the rest, but not so quick-witted, and was accustomed to ask many things that were sufficiently plain-as (in Joh 14:8) he asked Christ, saying, “Lord, show us the Father, and it sufficeth us.” Thus S. Chrysostom, Theophylact, and S. Cyril.

Two hundred pence would amount to about £20, which would nearly suffice to purchase bread for 2000 persons. But here there were 5000 men, besides women and children. Many were also hungry from long fasting. Truly, therefore said Philip that two hundred pennyworth would not suffice for feeding so great a multitude.

They answered Him, &c. These fishes were already cooked, so that they might be immediately distributed by the Apostles, when Christ bade them. S. John explains this verse (Joh 6:8-9): “One of His disciples, Andrew, Simon Peter’s brother, said unto Him, There is a lad here, with five barley-loaves and two small fishes: but what are they among so many?”

He said, &c. That He might multiply them by His benediction. The Apostles obeyed and brought them. And this their prompt obedience and faith, together with their charity and desire to relieve the hunger of so many thousand people elicited this miracle from Christ.

And when He had commanded, &c. S. Mark relates the first part of this verse more at length: and commanded them, to make them all sit down by companies upon the green grass. These companies were the several gatherings of people collected together to dine. Whence Luke (ix. 14) calls them feasts (convivia, Vulg.) i.e., companies of guests, in which for the sake of propriety, the men lay down with the men, and the women by themselves with their children, as Matthew here intimates. For formerly people did not sit at tables upon benches, but reclined upon couches, which were drawn close to the tables. Here the grass supplied the place of couches. Christ commanded them to lie down in companies, that no one should be passed over without receiving his portion of bread and fish.

Looking up, &c. S. John has, Jesus took the loaves, and when He had given thanks, He distributed to those who were set down. Wherefore the heretics explain the word blessed, by He gave thanks: but wrongly. For Christ, according to His manner, gave thanks to the Father first, then blessed the loaves. For Mark says, looking up to Heaven he blessed and brake the loaves. And Luke, He looked up to Heaven, and blessed them, viz., the loaves, and brake and distributed them. Christ therefore here blessed both God by praising Him and giving Him thanks, and also the loaves themselves. This He did in order that He might draw down Divine grace upon them, by means of which they might be multiplied, and acquire strength and efficacy to nourish, strengthen, and exhilarate so great a multitude, just as much as though they had been fed upon a rich feast of flesh and wine. Christ by this benediction endued these loaves with some, not physical, but moral virtue; that is to say, He ordained and appointed them for miraculous multiplication, whereby He placed His hand, as it were, i.e., His own Divine virtue upon the loaves, that they should straightway be really multiplied. And this indeed He did by converting the neighbouring atmosphere, or some other material gradually, but without being perceived, into bread. For God creates nothing de novo out of nothing, but produces and transforms all things from the matter which was created at the beginning of the world. In a similar manner He multiplied the meal and the oil of the widow of Sarepta, for the sake of Elias. That these loaves were most excellent and endued with vast nutritive virtue is plain from this, that they were Divine loaves, produced by Christ by a miracle. For all God’s works are perfect. So God, when at the beginning of the world He blessed all the various species of created things, by this blessing endued them with these very powers of generating, propagating, and multiplying themselves: for He said, increase and multiply. Thus Christ instituting the Eucharist at the last Supper, blessed the bread and transformed it into His own body. And this multiplication of the loaves by means of Christ’s benediction was a kind of type of the transmutation in the Eucharist; for shortly afterwards He uttered His long discourse upon the Eucharist which S. John gives in his sixth chapter, when he compares the Eucharist to manna. “Not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead, whoso eateth this bread shall live for ever.” S. Augustine gives the reason (Tract. 24. in John.) “From whence God multiplies the crops of corn from a few grains, from thence He multiplied the loaves in His own hands. For the power was in the hands of Christ. For those five loaves were, as it were seed, not indeed committed to the earth, but multiplied by Him Who made the earth.” Whence S. Chrysostom says, “Those five loaves were multiplied in the hands of the disciples, and diffused abroad after the manner of a fountain.” As S. Hilary says, “Fragments succeed fragments, and that which was broken off continually escapes from Him who breaks it.” As S. Jerome says, “Whilst they break there was a sowing of food.”

Tropologically: Christ here teaches by this action, that bread and riches, corporeal as well as spiritual, are not diminished by being given in alms, but are multiplied a hundred and a thousandfold. Thus S. John, Patriarch of Alexandria, called on account of his liberality, the Almoner, was wont to say that he learnt by daily experience, that the more he gave to the poor, the more he received from God. He used to say, “I shall see, 0 Lord who will leave oft first, Thou in giving to me, or I in distributing to the poor.” So Leontius in his Life. Pope Adrian II. succeeded Nicolas I. A.D. 914.-this Adrian, says Platina was a friend of Pope Sergius, from whom he once received forty denarii as a gift. He went home and gave them to his steward, to distribute them amongst the pilgrims and beggars who were standing in the vestibule of his house. When he attempted to fulfill his master’s behest he found that it would be impossible with so small a sum to satisfy so vast a number as required assistance. He returned to Adrian, and explained how the matter stood. Then Adrian took the money, and came to the poor himself, and gave three denarii to everyone of them, reserving as many for his own household expenses. The steward marvelled at the miracle. Adrian said to him, do you see how kind and liberal the Lord is, especially to those who are liberal and bountiful to the poor?

S. Lydwin of Holland, a singular mirror of patience and charity, although she was poor herself was wont diligently to succour the poor. She had a few small coins in a purse: these she was always giving away, when others were supplied from heaven in their place, so that they never failed, but ever increased, and thus her purse came to be called the Jesu purse. Read her Life in Surius. See 2Co 9:6. seq., “He that soweth sparingly, shall reap also sparingly: and he that soweth in blessings, (Vulg.) i.e. many benefits, shall reap in blessings, i.e. many benefits.” Wherefore when you give a loaf, or a coin to a poor man, you do not lose it, but you sow it; for as from one grain of seed many grains grow, so it is likewise with loaves and money.

They all ate. There was a vast multitude of women and little ones besides the five thousand men. For the women were more devoted and more curious to behold Christ the new Prophet, than the men were.

And were filled. You will say, there is no mention here of wine. How then were they filled, if they drank nothing; for a dinner without anything to drink is a dog-banquet. I answer, Christ did not give them wine, because there were streams of water at hand, of which they might drink.

For to drink water is natural and wholesome, and sufficient for nature. Christ did not wish to excite their throats with wine. God gives food for necessity, not for luxury and gluttony. Thus, an angel brought to Elias in the desert bread and a cruse of water, but no wine. So a raven, by God’s command, brought daily half a loaf to S. Paul, the first hermit; but he used to quench his thirst at a neighbouring fountain. God did the same to other saints. Indeed, from Adam until the Deluge-a space of sixteen hundred years, to the time of Noah, who first planted a vineyard-religious men neither ate flesh, nor drank wine; but their food was fruit, and their beverage water. Yet they lived to be nine hundred years old. Abstinence, therefore, is the mother of health, as well as of wisdom and holiness.

And took up, &c. They brought back, therefore, more bread than they had brought to Christ at first. For the twelve baskets would contain not five, but thirty or more loaves. It is probable Christ first broke the five loaves with His own hands, and in breaking multiplied them, and placed them in these baskets for distribution. These were afterwards, by His command, distributed by the Apostles to the different companies, and were gradually more and more multiplied; by which means they brought back to Christ as many baskets of fragments as they had received baskets of loaves from Him at the beginning. Cedrenus (Compend. Histor.) relates that these twelve baskets were carefully preserved in the Church of the Twelve Apostles, which Constantine the Great built at Constantinople.

In the Greek, these baskets are called cophini. They were much used by the Jews. This appears from a line in Juvenal:

“The Jews have cophini and hay for furniture”

And straightway Jesus constrained, &c. Christ did this-first, because He wished to go apart, that He might pray more quietly and instantly, alone; as is plain from the following verse. 2. That He might in this way more easily escape from the crowd, who He knew would wish to make Him a king because He had multiplied the loaves, as S. John teaches (Joh 6:15). 3. That He might give an occasion for the miracle which followed-His assuaging the tempest in the sea.

And sending away the multitude-i.e. with His blessing, and prayers for their welfare. Christ prays alone, to show believers that they should avoid a crowd and noise in prayer, and pray to God in secret and silence, with collected minds.

But the ship was tossed, &c. Gr. , i.e., was vexed, tormented. The Syriac is, when it was now distant many stadia from all land, it was greatly agitated.

At the fourth watch, &c. Gr. , i.e., guard. The Romans changed guard every three hours of the night. These were their watches both in cities and armies. They changed thus frequently, lest a longer watch should give occasion to sleep, as well as to prevent guile and treachery. If the night were short, they divided it into three watches; if long, into four. The fourth watch, therefore, commenced about the tenth hour of the night, and lasted until the end of the twelfth. The time here spoken of-being immediately after the multiplication of the loaves-was about the Feast of the Passover, as we have already seen. Hence, you may gather that this tempest took place about the vernal equinox, when the day is equal to the night, each lasting about twelve hours. This tempest, then, lasted for nine hours; that is to say, during the three first vigils (or watches) of the night, until the fourth watch, when Christ came to His storm-tossed disciples. “That the Lord came to them in the fourth watch, shews they had been in peril all through the night,” says S. Chrysostom. And they, having rowed for nine hours, had not made more way than about twenty-five or thirty stadia (as S. John says), or about three Italian miles. Thus, during nine hours’ rowing, the Apostles had scarcely got half-way across the Sea of Galilee; for its breadth is about six miles, and its length sixteen (See Josephus, Bell. Jud. 3, 18.) He says it is forty stadia in breadth, and one hundred in length. Adrichomius, Jansen, and others think that the Apostles rowed across the entire breadth of the sea. But others think they sailed in an oblique direction, traversing a portion of its length. For the desert was situated between Bethsaida and Tiberias, as I have shown on the thirteenth verse of this chapter.

Christ permitted His disciples to be tossed for so many hours by a tempest. 1. that He might accustom them to endure hardness. 2. that they might more ardently pray for God’s help. 3. that the calming of so fearful a tempest which Christ was about to afford might be more pleasant to them.

Hear Lactantius, (lib. 4. de vera Sapient. c. 15.) “But when the disciples of Christ were now about the middle of the sea; then He entered the sea on foot, and followed after them, as though he were walking upon solid ground: not as the poets fable Orion walking in the sea, who bore the waters on His shoulders, a portion of His body being immersed.” Afterwards he quotes the Sibylline verses, in which it was foretold that Christ would calm the winds and raging sea, would cure diseases, and would raise the dead. Hear also S. Augustine (Serm. 14. de verb. Dom. secundum Matth.) “The fourth watch of the night is the last part of the night, when the night is well nigh finished. Thus Christ will come at the end of the world, when the night of iniquity is over, to judge the quick and the dead.”

Walking upon the sea, by the divine virtue, which He had as God, and by the gift of agility, which as man, he assumed in time, says Joannes Major, on this passage.

And when they saw him-saying, It is a spirit. Syriac, a lying vision, i.e., a spectre: both because such things are wont to walk by night and in the dark, and to appear to and terrify men, as Delrio shows by many instances (in Magico), as well as because, on account of the darkness, they did not recognise that it was Jesus who was walking in this manner, especially as Mark adds, He would have passed by them, as though he did not care for them, and had nothing to do with them, whence it follows:

And they cried out: This confused clamour was elicited by fear, such as is wont to be with sailors when they fall into peril of ship-wreck, and despair of life. The disciples had a twofold cause of fear. To the fear of being buried by the waves was added the fear of the spirit, lest he should sink the ship.

And straightway-be of good cheer. Gr. , i.e., resume your failing courage, be brave and confident. Arabic, be strong. I am, your Master, whom ye know, whose beneficence and omnipotence ye have experienced in so many miracles which I have wrought. Surely I would not make sport of you, like a phantom; but I intend to deliver you from the tempest, and from your fear. By this voice of Christ sounding outwardly in their ears, and inwardly in their minds, Christ took away their fear, and filled them with serenity, security, and joy.

Learn from this passage the difference between a good and an evil spirit, that the good spirit may terrify at first, but by and bye gives consolation and joy, as Christ did in this instance; but a bad spirit gives sensual joy in the beginning, but presently causes sorrow, anguish and despair.

Peter answered Him, &c. Calvin accuses Peter of rashness and folly. For Peter was in doubt, he says, whether the appearance were Christ, or the spectre of a demon. For the demon might have pretended that he was Christ, and have bid Peter come to him, and so have drowned him in the sea, as Delrio relates many spectres have done. The Fathers give a twofold answer: 1. Peter knew by His voice, gesture, dress, and much more by an interior recognition, that this was not a demon, but very Christ; when therefore Peter says, if it be Thou, it is not the voice of doubt, but of one exulting with joy, and desiring to come quickly to Christ, that he might be near to Him whom he loved above all things. So S. Hilary and S. Chrysostom, “do you perceive with what ardour Peter was burning? Do you see how great his faith was even then? No one loved Jesus so much as he did. Not only did he manifest love, but faith also. He believed not only that Christ was walking upon the sea, but that He was able to give the same power to others. He dared to ask for this power, in order that he might more quickly be with Jesus.”

2. If you take the words, if it be thou, as certainly words of doubt, then it must be said that by the expression bid me come unto Thee upon the water, Peter asked that that command should not be given him merely, but that it should be given with power, in such manner, indeed, that together with the command He should infuse such boldness and confidence, that he should not doubt that he would walk safely upon the waves, since Christ bade him. Wherefore as soon as he felt the water beneath his feet, straightway he perceived that it did not yield to him, but that he could walk upon it. Thus Jansen: for God alone is able to glide into the mind, and to give it sure tokens of His presence, even though unknown to us, or unknown save to one who has experienced them, by which He makes the soul certain that it is He Himself who is speaking inwardly, and neither an angel, nor a demon. Such tokens the Prophets had when God revealed to them things to come. For otherwise they would have exposed both God and themselves to ridicule had they declared as God’s revelation, something about to happen, unless they had been certain that it was revealed to them by God, and not by the devil assuming the appearance of God. In this way, it happened to Peter. He asked of Christ both internal and external tokens of security, which should exclude all doubt from his soul, and Christ gave him those tokens, when he said, Come. By these tokens was Peter sure that it was the voice of Christ, and not of a phantom or a demon.

If it be Thou, &c. Very beautifully does S. Augustine put the following words into Peter’s mouth: “If it be Thou, I do not wonder, that Thou dost balance a solid body upon the liquid waves. Why should it be wonderful that the creature should serve its Creator? This I do not wonder at. Do something that I may wonder at. Let Peter walk. Make me to wonder. Bid me come to Thee upon the waves. For how should there not be for me a way on the sea, if Thou shalt give the command, since Thou for us wast made the Way.”

Peter came down, &c. This was done in one of three ways. Either Christ, by His Divine power, kept up Peter, that he should not sink, as the angel kept up Habacuc by the hair of his head, and carried him to Babylon. Or else He did not allow Peter’s body to be sufficiently heavy to sink in the waves. Or else He made the waters to be firm and solid beneath Peter’s feet, like ice or crystal.

But when he saw the wind, &c. The strength of the wind caused Peter to fear: fear caused doubt: doubt gave rise to danger. Him whom faith bore upon the waves, doubt caused to sink. The cause was Peter’s little faith, as Christ tells him. He was afraid lest Christ should allow him to be drowned by the boisterous wind and the tempestuous waves. He had not as yet received the might of faith and love which he afterwards received from the Holy Ghost at Pentecost.

Christ permitted this, that Peter might recognise his own weakness, and might humble himself, and ask Christ to increase his faith, that he might become the rock of the Faith, according to the words, “Thou art Peter, and upon this rock will I build My Church.”

So S. Jerome, Theophylact, and others. “Peter,” says S. Chrysostom (Hom. 51), “did what was greater, for he magnanimously went down from the ship into the sea. But from the violence of the winds and the waves he was afraid, and failed in that which was less. For it is natural to man sometimes to overcome in things that are more difficult, and succumb in those that are less.” Lastly S. Augustine says, “in Peter walking upon the waters are figured those who are strong in faith, but in Peter doubting, those who are weak in faith.”

Lord save me. From hence it is clear that Peter did not doubt that He who appeared was Christ. For otherwise he would not have called upon Him in his great peril, but upon God, as shipwrecked sailors are wont to do. His only doubt was whether Christ would allow him to be buried in the waves. Well says S. Augustine (Serm. 14. de verb. Dom.) “That shaking, brethren, was as it were the death of faith. But when he cried out, faith rose again. He could not have walked unless he had believed, neither could he have begun to sink unless he had doubted. In Peter therefore we must regard the common condition of us all, that if in any temptation the wind is about to sink us in the waves, we should cry aloud to Christ.”

And straightway-wherefore didst thou doubt! Gr. , i.e., why didst thou divide thy mind in two? For two things were here presented to Peter, that is to say, the strength of the wind making him afraid of being drowned, and the voice of Christ instilling confidence and security. But the strength of the wind was more obvious, and therefore more powerful than the voice of Christ. Thus its effect was in this instance to cause Peter’s faith to fail; but he rose again after his lapse.

Almost every temptation arises from distrust of God, because a man either trusts to himself, or to human aid, and does not immediately betake himself to God by prayer. Hence then let him who is tempted learn to turn away his mind from the thing which suggests the temptation, and turn it wholly to God, and fix it upon Him, and humbly implore his help. Very beautifully says S. Chrysostom, “Like as a young bird which, before it is able to fly, falls out of its nest upon the ground, whose mother quickly restores it to the nest so also at this time did Christ to Peter.” Therefore let him who is tempted, invoke Christ; so shall he resist the temptation, and overcome it. For if Peter had believed the word of Christ, he would not have doubted, nor have begun to sink.

And when they had gone up, &c. S. John says (Joh 6:21) “They wished to receive Him into the ship.” This means, say Jansen and others, that they recognised Christ by His voice, and being certain that it was not a phantom, they wished, i.e., they invited Christ to come into the ship; and Christ complied with their invitation. They thought that when Christ was present in the ship, they would sail very rapidly, as they were accustomed to do. And this actually happened, as soon as Christ was in the ship. For as St. John subjoins, and immediately the shib was at the land, whither they were going, namely, Bethsaida. This was a new miracle of Christ, that from the middle of the Sea of Galilee, a distance of three miles, they suddenly, and as it were in a moment, arrived at the shore. There were therefore here four miracles of Christ. The first: that He walked upon the waters. The second, that He raised up Peter, when he was afraid, and beginning to sink. The third, that He came into the ship, and stilled the tempest. The fourth, that He immediately brought the ship from the midst of the sea to the shore. Thus, speaking mystically, does Christ by His grace make us to trample upon the loftiness of the world, thus does he make temptations cease, and bring us to the port of eternal bliss.

A1legorically and tropologically. S. Augustine: Let us think of the ship as the Church and the faithful soul. The sea is this world. The wind and the waves are persecutions. When the wind arises, the ship is tossed: but because Christ is there, it cannot sink. But in these temptations let the yard-arm be raised, that, suspended to the mast it may make the figure of the cross. To this yard-arm-that is, to the Cross of Christ-let a sincere conversation and a pure confession, like spotless sails, be attached. Let our sails be washed by the waves; let our garments be stretched out, that they may be found without spot or wrinkle. Lastly: after this ship has been built in Jerusalem, and has been sent forth into the midst of this roaring sea, the billows of the tempestuous waves, and the blasts of the raging winds-whilst they carry her about hither and thither-have borne her to the shores of every nation, and she has taken in a cargo of all the foreign merchandise which she has found.”

They came to the land of Genesar (Vulg.): Mark has, of Gennesaret. S. Chrysostom and Lyra are of opinion this was the land of the Gergesenes, whose inhabitants wished Christ to depart from them, on account of their swine which He drowned in the lake. But that Gerasa, spoken of in Matthew viii., is a different place from Genesar, the place spoken of here. Gerasa, or Gergesa, was on the eastern side of the sea of Galilee; but Gennesaret was on the western side, in the direction of Capernaum and Bethsaida. For after Christ had fed the five thousand men in the desert of Bethsaida, and they wished to make Him a king, Christ, I say, fleeing from them commanded His disciples to pass over to the hither side of the bay, or the mountain of Bethsaida. This was the land of Gennesaret. In other words, they returned to Bethsaida and Capernaum. Hence Mark says (Mar 6:45.) “He constrained His disciples to go into a ship, that they should go before Him across the strait to Bethsaida.” S. John (Joh 6:24), says that the disciples also came to Capernaum, which was a city on the same bank. Thus everything becomes harmonious.

The name Gennesaret signifies, flourishing valley. This city was formerly called Chinneroth, and from it the whole district derived its name, Cenerel, or Cenneroth. This by a trifling inflection became Genesar and Gennesaret. Hence the name of the adjacent Sea of Galilee, or lake of Genesaret. The Chaldee turns Ceneret into Genesar. Listen to Josephus (lib. 3, de bello. c. 18). “The country of Genesar extends as far as the lake of the same name. Admirable both for its natural condition and its beauty. In addition to the pleasantness of the climate, it is watered by a most fruitful spring, called by the inhabitants Capharnaum.” Adrichomius and S. Jerome fancied Ceneret or Genesaret were the same as the City of Tiberias. But they were mistaken. Besides Tiberias was a considerable distance from Capernaum and Bethsaida. Lastly, Ceneret was in the tribe of Naphtali, as appears from Jos 19:35. Tiberias was in the tribe of Zabulon. And Ceneret was near Capernaum.

And when they knew Him, &c. Instead of hem of His garment, the Syriac has wing, the Arabic, extremity of his garment. The flesh of Christ was so efficacious and health-giving as to communicate its virtue to the garment by which it was covered. From hence S. Chrysostom reasons, that if those who only touched the hem or fringe of Christ’s garment were healed, how much more those who touch whole Christ, yea feed upon Him in the Eucharist. What medicine can be more healing than the flesh and Deity of Christ. S. Gregory Nazianzen relates that his sister Gorgonia was healed of a mortal disease by touching the Eucharist. (Orat. 11).

Lastly Christ took occasion from this multiplication of the loaves to utter His discourse upon the spiritual and Eucharistic Bread, which S. John gives at length in the sixth chapter of his Gospel.

In this chapter is finished the relation of the Acts of Christ from His second Passover to His third. That is of the second year of His preaching. This may be gathered from Joh 6:4, where it is said these things were done about the time of the Passover. This was the third Passover of Christ’s preaching. For the First Passover is spoken of in Joh 2:13: the second in v. 1.; and the third, as I have just said, in vi. 4.

There remains therefore the third and last year of Christ’s preaching, that is to say, His acts from His third, until His fourth and last Passover, when He suffered upon the Cross.

Fuente: Cornelius Lapide Commentary

14:1 {1} At that time Herod the tetrarch heard of the fame of Jesus,

(1) Here is in John, an example of an invincible courage, which all faithful ministers of God’s word ought to follow: in Herod, an example of tyrannous vanity, pride, and cruelty, and in short, of a refined conscience, and of their miserable slavery, who have given themselves over to pleasure: in Herodias and her daughter, an example of whore-like licentious women, and womanly cruelty.

Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes

The opposition of Herod and his friends 14:1-12 (cf. Mar 6:14-29; Luk 9:7-9)

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

"At that time" is again a loose connective not intended to communicate chronological sequence necessarily. Herod Antipas lived primarily at Tiberias on the west shore of Lake Galilee. [Note: Carson, "Matthew," p. 337.] However if all the events described in this story happened on one day, as seems likely, they must have taken place at Herod’s residence at the Machaerus fortress, in southern Perea east of the Jordan River. [Note: See Harold W. Hoehner, Herod Antipas, pp. 146-48.] Antipas ruled over Galilee and Perea from 4 B.C. to A.D. 39, namely, during Jesus’ entire earthly life. Word about Jesus’ ministry reached him easily there (cf. Luk 8:3). Herod had previously beheaded John for criticizing his morality (Mat 14:3-12). Herod could do this because John had ministered within Herod’s jurisdiction of Perea (Joh 1:28). Public opinion evidently encouraged Herod to conclude that Jesus was John who had come back to life (cf. Mar 6:14; Luk 9:7). He attributed Jesus’ miracles to the supposedly resurrected John.

"The idea of a ghostly or even physical return of someone who has had a special influence, especially if that influence has been prematurely cut off by violent death, is found in various cultures (think of Elijah, Nero, King Arthur, Elvis)." [Note: France, The Gospel . . ., p. 553.]

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

Chapter 12

The Crisis in Galilee

Mat 14:1-36 – Mat 15:1-39 – Mat 16:1-12.

THE lives of John and of Jesus, lived so far apart, and with so little intercommunication, have yet been interwoven in a remarkable way, the connection only appearing at the most critical times in the life of our Lord. This interweaving, strikingly anticipated in the incidents of the nativity as recorded by St. Luke, appears, not only at the time of our Saviours baptism and first introduction to His Messianic work, but again at the beginning of His Galilean ministry, which dates from the time when John was cast into prison, and once again as the stern prophet of the desert finishes his course; for his martyrdom precipitates a crisis, to which events for some time have been tending.

The period of crisis, embracing the facts recorded in the two chapters following and in part of the sixteenth, is marked by events of thrilling interest. The shadow of the cross falls so very darkly now upon the Saviours path, that we may look for some more striking effects of light and shade, – Rembrandt-like touches, if with reverence we may so put it, – in the Evangelists picture. Many impressive contrasts will arrest our attention as we proceed to touch briefly on the story of the time.

I-THE BANQUET OF HEROD AND THE FEAST OF CHRIST Mat 14:1-21

“Among them that are born of woman there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist.” Such was the Saviours testimony to His forerunner in the hour of his weakness; and the sequel fully justified it. The answer which came to Johns inquiry brought him no outward relief. His prison bolts were as firmly fastened as before, Herod was as inexorable, the prospect before Him as dark as ever; but he had the assurance that Jesus was the Christ, and that His blessed work of healing the sick and preaching the gospel to the poor was going on; and that was enough for him. So he was quite content to languish on, resting in the Lord and waiting patiently for Him. We learn from St. Mark that Herod was in the habit of sending for him at times, evidently interested in the strange man, probably to some extent fascinated by him, and possibly not without some lingering hope that there might be some way of reconciling the preacher of righteousness and securing the blessing of so well-accredited a messenger of Heaven. There is little doubt that at these times the way was open for John to be restored to liberty, if only he had been willing to lower his testimony against Herods sin, or consent to say no more about it; but no such thought ever crossed his noble soul. He had said, “It is not lawful for thee to have her”; and not even in the hour of deepest depression and darkest doubt did he for a moment relax the rigour of his requirements as a preacher of righteousness.

As he had lived, so he died. We shall not dwell on the details of the revolting story. It is quite realistic enough in the simple recital of the Evangelist. One cannot help recalling in this connection four hideous pictures of Salome with the head of John the Baptist recently displayed, all on the line, in the Salon at Paris. Of what possible use are such representations? To what sort of taste do they minister? There was no picture of John looking with flashing eyes at the guilty monarch as he said, “It is not lawful for thee to have her.” That is the scene which is worthy of remembrance: let it abide in the memory and heart; let the tragic end serve only as a dark background to make the central figure luminous, “a burning and a shining light.”

The time of Herods merciful visitation is over. So long as he kept the Baptist safe {Mar 6:19-20} from the machinations of Herodias, he retained one link with better things. The stern prisoner was to him like a second conscience; and so long as he was there within easy reach, and Herod continued from time to time to see him and hear what he had to say, there remained some hope of repentance and reformation. Had he only yielded to the promptings of his better nature, and obeyed the prophet, the way of the Lord would have been prepared, the preacher of righteousness would have been followed by the Prince of Peace; and the gospel of Jesus, with all its unspeakable blessing, would have had free course in his court and throughout his realm. But the sacrifice of the prophet to the cruelty of Herodias and the folly and wickedness of his vow put an end to such prospects; and the fame of Christs deeds of mercy, when at last it reached his ears, instead of stirring in him a living hope, aroused the demon of guilty conscience, which could not rid itself of the superstitious fear that it was John the Baptist risen from the dead. Thus passed away for ever the great opportunity of Herod Antipas.

The disciples of John withdrew in sorrow, but not in despair. They had evidently caught the spirit of their master; for as soon as they had reverently and lovingly taken up the mortal remains and buried them, they came and told Jesus.

It must have been a terrible blow to Him, – perhaps even more than it was to them, for they had Him to go to; while He had none on earth to take counsel with: He must carry the heavy burden of responsibility all alone; for even the most advanced of the Twelve could not enter into any of His thoughts and purposes; and certainly not one of them, we might indeed say not all of them together, had at this time anything like the strength and steadfastness of the great man who had just been taken away. We learn from the other accounts that at the same time the Twelve returned from their first missionary journey; so that the question would immediately come up, What was to be done? It was a critical time. Should they stir up the people to avenge the death of their prophet? This would have been after the manner of men, but not according to the counsel of God. Long ago the Saviour had set aside, as quite apart from His way of working, all appeals to force; His kingdom must be a kingdom of the truth, and on the truth He will rely, with nothing else to trust to than the power of patient love. So He takes His disciples away to the other side of the lake, outside the jurisdiction of Herod, with the thoughtful invitation: “Come ye yourselves apart into a desert place, and rest awhile.”

What are the prospects of the kingdom now? Sin and righteousness have long been at strife in the court of Galilee; now sin has conquered and has the field. The great preacher of righteousness is dead; and the Christ, to Whom he bore such faithful witness, has gone to the desert. Again the sad prophecy is fulfilled: “He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief.” That little boat crossing from the populous shores of Gennesaret to the desert land on the other side-what does it mean? Defeat? A lost cause? Is this the end of the mission in Galilee, begun to the music of that majestic prophecy which spoke of it as daybreak on the hills and shores of Naphtali and Zebulun, Gennesaret and Jordan? Is this the outcome of two mighty movements so full of promise and hope? Did not all Jerusalem and Judea go after John, confessing their sins and accepting his baptism? And has not all Galilee thronged after Jesus, bringing their sick to be healed, and listening, at least with outward respect and often expressed astonishment, to His words of truth and hope? Now John is dead, and Jesus is crossing with His own disciples and those of John in a boat-one boat enough to hold them all-to mourn together in a desert place apart. Suppose we had been sitting on the shore that day, and had watched it getting ever smaller as it crossed the sea, what should we have thought of the prospects? Should we have found it easy to believe in Christ that day? Verily “the kingdom of God cometh not with observation.”

The multitudes will not believe on Him; yet they will not let Him rest. They have rejected the kingdom; but they would fain get as much as they can of those earthly blessings which have been scattered so freely as its signs. So the people, noticing the direction the boat has taken, throng after Him, running on foot round the northern shore. When Jesus sees them, sad and weary as He is, He cannot turn away. He knows too well that it is with no pure and lofty devotion that they follow Him; but He cannot see a multitude of people without having His heart moved with a great longing to bless them. So He “went forth, and healed their sick.”

He continued His loving work, lavishing His sympathy on those who had no sympathy with Him, tilt evening fell, and the disciples suggested that it was time to send the people away, especially as they were beginning to suffer from want of food. “But Jesus said unto them, They need not depart: give ye them to eat. And they say unto Him, We have here but five loaves, and two fishes. He said, Bring them hither to Me.”

The miracle which follows is of very special significance. Many things point to this.

(1) It is the one miracle which all the four Evangelists record.

(2) It occurs at a critical time in our Lords history. There has been discouragement after discouragement, repulse after repulse, despite and rejection by the leaders, obstinate unbelief and impenitence on the part of the people, the good seed finding almost everywhere hard or shallow or thorny soil, with little or no promise of the longed-for harvest. And now a crowning disaster has come in the death of John. Can we wonder that Christ received the tidings of it as a premonition of His own? Can we wonder that henceforth He should give less attention to public preaching, and more to the training of the little band of faithful disciples who must be prepared for days of darkness coming on apace-prepared for the cross, manifestly now the only way to the crown?

(3) There is the significant remark {Joh 6:4} that “the Passover was nigh.” This was the last Passover but one of our Saviours life. The next was to be marked by the sacrifice of Himself as “the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world.” Another year, and He will have fulfilled His course, as John has fulfilled His. Was it not, then, most natural that His mind should be full, not only of thoughts of the approaching Passover, but also of what the next one must bring. This is no mere conjecture; for it plainly appears in the long and most suggestive discourse St. John reports as following immediately upon the miracle and designed for its application.

The feeding of the five thousand is indeed a sign of the kingdom, like those grouped together in the earlier part of the Gospel (Mat 8:1-34, Mat 1:1-25). It showed the compassion of the Lord upon the hungry multitude, and His readiness to supply their wants. It showed the Lordship of Christ over nature, and served as a representation in miniature of what the God of nature is doing every year, when, by agencies as far beyond our ken as those by which His Son multiplied the loaves that day, He transmutes the handful of seed-corn into the rich harvests of grain which feed the multitudes of men. It taught also, by implication, that the same God Who feeds the bodies of men with the rich abundance of the year is able and willing to satisfy all their spiritual wants. But there is something more than all this, as we might gather from the very way it is told: “And He commanded the multitude to sit down on the grass, and took the five loaves, and looking up to heaven, He blessed, and brake, and gave the loaves to the disciples, and the disciples to the multitude.” Can we read these words without thinking of what our Saviour did just a year later, when He took bread and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples and said, “Take, eat, this is My body?” {Mat 26:26} He is not, indeed, instituting the Supper now; but it is very plain that the same thoughts are in His mind as when, a year later, He did so. And what might be inferred from the recital of what He did becomes still more evident when we are told what afterwards He said-especially such utterances as these: “I am the bread of life; The bread which I will give you is My flesh, which I will give for the life of the world; Verily I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink His blood, ye have no life in you.”

We have, then, here, not a sign of the kingdom only, but a parable of life eternal, life to be bestowed in no other way than by the death to be accomplished at Jerusalem at the next passover, life for thousands, life ministered through the disciples to the multitudes, and not diminished in the ministering, but growing and multiplying in their hands, so that after all are fed there remain “twelve baskets full,”-far more than at the first: a beautiful hint of the abundance that will remain for the Gentile nations of the earth. That passover parable comes out of the anguish of the great Redeemers heart. Already, as He breaks that bread and gives it to the people, He is enduring the cross and despising the shame of it, for the joy set before Him of giving the bread of life to a hungry world.

One can scarcely fail at this point to contrast the feast in honour of Herods birthday with the feast which symbolised the Saviours death. “When a convenient day was come, Herod on his birthday made a supper to his lords, high captains, and chief estates of Galilee; and “the rest is well known, -the feasting, mirth, and revelry, ending in the dark tragedy, followed by the remorse of a guilty conscience, the gnawing of the worm that dieth not, the burning of the fire that is not quenched. Then think of that other feast on the green grass in the pure air of the fresh and breezy hillside-the hungry multitudes, the homely fare, the few barley loaves and the two small fishes; yet by the blessing of the Lord Jesus there was provided a repast far more enjoyable to these keen appetites than all the delicacies of the banquet to the lords of Galilee-a feast pointing indeed to a death, but a death which was to bring life and peace and joy to thousands, with abundance over for all who will receive it. The one is the feast to which the world invites; the other is the least which Christ provides for all who are willing to “labour not for the meat that perisheth, but for that which endureth unto eternal life.”

II-CALM ON THE MOUNTAIN AND TROUBLE ON THE SEA.

We learn from the fourth Gospel that the immediate result of the impression made by our Lords miraculous feeding of the five thousand was an attempt on the part of the people to take Him by force and make Him a king. Thus, as always, their minds would run on political change, and the hope of bettering their circumstances thereby; while they refuse to allow themselves to think of that spiritual change which must begin with themselves, and show itself in that repentance and hunger and thirst after righteousness, which He so longed to see in them. Even His disciples, as we know, were not now, nor for a long time subsequent to this, altogether free from the same spirit of earthliness; and it is quite likely that the general enthusiasm would excite them not a little, and perhaps lead them to raise the question, as they were often fain to do, whether the time had not at last come for their Master to declare Himself openly, put Himself at the head of these thousands, take advantage of the widespread feeling of irritation and discontent awakened by the murder of John the Baptist, whom all men counted for a prophet, {Mar 11:32} hurl Herod Antipas from the high position he disgraced, and, with all Galilee under His control and full of enthusiasm for His cause, march southward on Jerusalem. This was no doubt the course of action they for the most part expected and wished; and, with One at their head Who could do such wonders, what was there to hinder complete success?

May we not also with reverence suppose that this was one of the occasions on which Satan renewed those assaults which he began in the wilderness of Judea? A little later, when Peter was trying to turn Him aside from the path of the Cross, Jesus recognised it, not merely as a suggestion of the disciple, but as a renewed temptation of the great adversary. We may well suppose, then, that at this crisis the old temptation to bestow on Him the kingdoms of the world and the glory of them-not for their own sake, of course (there could have been no temptation in that direction), but for the sake of the advancement of the interests of the heavenly kingdom by the use of worldly methods of policy and force-was presented to Him with peculiar strength.

However. this may have been, the circumstances required prompt action of some kind. It was necessary that the disciples should be got out of reach of temptation as soon as possible; so He constrained them to enter into a boat, and go before Him to the other side, while He dispersed the multitude. And need we wonder that in the circumstances He should wish to be entirely alone? He could not consult with those He trusted most, for they were quite in the dark, and anything they were at all likely to say would only increase the pressure put upon Him by the people. He had only One for His Counsellor and Comforter, His Father in heaven, Whose will He had come to do; so He must be alone with Him. He must have been in a state of great physical exhaustion after all the fatigue of the day, for though He had come for rest He had found none; but the brave, strong spirit conquers the weary flesh, and instead of going to sleep He ascends the neighbouring height to spend the night in prayer.

It is interesting to remember that it was after this night spent in prayer that He delivered the remarkable discourse recorded in the sixth chapter of St. John, in which He speaks so plainly about giving His flesh for the life of the world. It is evident, then, that, if any question had arisen in His mind as to the path of duty, when He was suddenly confronted with the enthusiastic desire of the multitudes to crown Him at once, it was speedily set at rest: He now plainly saw that it was not the will of His Father in heaven that He should take advantage of any such stirring of worldly desire, that Be must give no encouragement to any, except those who were hungering and thirsting after righteousness, to range themselves upon His side. Hence, no doubt, the sifting nature of the discourse He delivered the following day. He is eager to gather the multitudes to Himself; but He cannot allow them to come under any false assumption; -He must have spiritually-minded disciples, or none at all: accordingly He makes His discourse so strongly spiritual, directs their attention so far away from earthly issues to the issues of eternity (“I will raise him up at the last day” is the promise He gives over and over again, whereas they wanted to be raised up then and there to high places in the world), that not only did the multitude lose all their enthusiasm, but “from that time many of His disciples went back, and walked no more with Him,” while even the Twelve themselves were shaken in their allegiance, as seems evident from the sorrowful question with which He turned to them: “Will ye also go away?” We may reverently suppose, then, that our Lord was occupied, during the early part of the night, with thoughts like these-in preparation, as it were, for the faithful words He will speak and the sad duty He will discharge on the morrow.

Meantime a storm has arisen on the lake-one of those sudden and often terrible squalls to which inland waters everywhere are subject, but which are greatly aggravated here by the contrast between the tropical climate of the lake, 620 feet below the level of the Mediterranean, and the cool air on the heights which surround it. The storm becomes fiercer as the night advances. The Saviour has been much absorbed, but He cannot fail to notice how angry the lake is becoming, and to what peril His loved disciples are exposed. As the Passover was nigh, the moon would be nearly full, and there would be frequent opportunities, between the passing of the clouds, to watch the little boat. As long as there seems any prospect of their weathering the storm by their own exertions He leaves them to themselves; but when it appears that they are making no progress, though it is evident that they are “toiling in rowing,” He sets out at once to their relief.

The rescue which follows recalls a former incident on the same lake. {Mat 8:23-27} But the points of difference are both important and instructive. Then He was with His disciples in the ship, though asleep; in their extremity they had only to rouse Him with the cry, “Save, Lord, or we perish!” to secure immediate calm and safety. Now He was not with them; He was out of sight, and beyond the reach even of the most piercing cries. It was therefore a much severer trial than the last, and remembering the special significance of the miracle of the loaves, we can scarcely fail to notice a corresponding suggestiveness in this one. That one had dimly foreshadowed His death; did not this, in the same way, foreshadow the relations He would sustain to His disciples after His death? May we not look upon His ascent of this mountain as a picture of His ascension into heaven-His betaking Himself to His Father now as a shadow of His going to the Father then-His prayer on the mount as a shadow of His heavenly intercession? It was to pray that He ascended; and though He, no doubt, needed, at that trying time, to pray for Himself, His heart would be poured out in pleading for His disciples too, especially when the storm came on. And these disciples constrained to go off in a boat by themselves, -are they not a picture of the Church after Christ had gone to His Father, launched on the stormy sea of the world? What will they do without Him? What will they do when the winds rise and the waves roar in the dark night? Oh! if only He were here, Who was sleeping in the boat that day, and only needed to be roused to sympathise and save! Where is He now? There on the hilltop, interceding, looking down with tenderest compassion, watching every effort of the toiling rowers. Nay, He is nearer still! See that Form upon the waves! “It is a spirit,” they cry; and are afraid, very much as, a little more than a year afterward, when He came suddenly into the midst of them with His “Peace be unto you,” they were terrified and affrighted, and supposed that they had seen a spirit. {Luk 24:37} But presently they hear the familiar voice: “Be of good cheer: it is I; be not afraid.” There can be no doubt that the remembrance of that night on the lake of Galilee would be a wondrous consolation to these disciples during the storms of persecution through which they had to pass after their Master had ascended up to heaven; and their faith in the presence of His Spirit, and His constant readiness to help and save, would be greatly strengthened by the memory of that apparently spectral Form they had seen coming across the troubled sea to their relief. Have we not some reason, then, for saying that here, too, we have not only another of the many signs of the kingdom showing our Lords power over nature and constant readiness to help His people in time of need, but a parable of the future, most appropriately following that parable of life through death set forth in the feeding of the thousands on the day before?

There seems, in fact, a strange prophetic element running all through the scenes of that wondrous time. We have already referred to the disposition on the part even of the Twelve, as manifested next day at the close of the discourse on the “bread of life,” to desert Him-to show the same spirit which afterward, when the crisis reached its height, so demoralised them that “they all forsook Him, and fled”; and have we not, in the closing incident, in which Peter figures so conspicuously, a mild foreshadowing of his terrible fall, when the storm of human passion was raging as fiercely in Jerusalem as did the winds and waves on the lake of Galilee that night? There is the same self-confidence: “Lord, if it be Thou, bid me come unto Thee on the water”; the same alarm when he was brought face to face with the danger the thought of which he had braved; then the sinking, sinking as if about to perish, yet not hopelessly (for the Master had prayed for him that his faith should not fail); then the humble prayer, “Lord, save me”; and the gracious hand immediately stretched out to save. Had the adventurous disciple learnt his lesson well that day, what it would have saved him! May we not say that there is never a great and terrible fall, however sudden it seems, which has not been preceded by warnings, even long before, which, if heeded, would have certainly averted it? How much need have the disciples of Christ to learn thoroughly the lessons their Lord teaches them in His gentler dealings, so that when darker days and heavier trials come they may be ready, having taken unto themselves the whole armour of God to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand.

There are many other important lessons which might be learnt from this incident, but we may not dwell on them; a mere enumeration of some of them may, however, he attempted. It was faith, in part at least, which led the apostle to make this venture; and this is, no doubt, the reason why the Lord did not forbid it. Faith is too precious to be repressed; but the faith of Peter on this occasion is anything but simple, clear, and strong: there is a large measure of self-will in it, of impulsiveness, of self-confidence, perhaps of love of display. A confused and encumbered faith of this kind is sure to lead into mischief, -to set on foot rash enterprises, which show great enthusiasm, and perhaps seem to rebuke the caution of the less confident for the time, but which come to grief, and in the end bring no credit to the cause of Christ. The rash disciples enterprise is not, however, an entire failure: he does succeed so far; but presently the weakness of his faith betrays itself. As long as the impulse lasted, and his eye was fixed on his Master, all went well; but when the first burst of enthusiasm was spent, and he had time to look round upon the waves, he began to sink. But how encouraging it is to observe that, when put to extremity, that which is genuine in the man carries it over all the rest!-the faith which had been encumbered extricates itself, and becomes simple, clear, and strong; the last atom of self-confidence is gone, and with it all thought of display; nothing but simple faith is left in that strong cry of his, “Lord, save me!”

Nothing could be imagined better suited than this incident to discriminate between self-confidence and faith. Peter enters on this experience with the two well mixed together, -so well mixed that neither he himself nor his fellow-disciples could distinguish them; but the testing process precipitates one and clarifies the other, -lets the self-confidence all go and brings out the faith pure and strong. Immediately, therefore, his Lord is at his side, and he is safe; -a great lesson this on faith, especially in revealing its simplicity. Peter tried to make a grand thing of it: he had to come back to the simple, humble cry, and the grasping of his Saviours outstretched hand.

The same lesson is taught on a larger scale in the brief account of the cures the Master wrought when they reached the other side, where all that was asked was the privilege of touching His garments hem, “and as many as touched were made perfectly whole”; not the great ones, not the strong ones, but “as many as touched.” Only let us keep in touch with Him, and all will assuredly be well with us both in time and in eternity.

III-ISRAEL AFTER THE FLESH AND ISRAEL AFTER THE SPIRIT. {Mat 15:1-39}

Issue is now joined with the ecclesiastical leaders at Jerusalem, who send a deputation to make a formal complaint. When Jerusalem was last mentioned in our Gospel it was in connection with a movement of quite a different character. The fame of the Saviours deeds of mercy in Galilee had then just reached the capital, the result being that many set out at once to find out what new thing this might be: “There followed Him great multitudes of people from Galilee, and from Decapolis, and from Jerusalem, and from Judea, and from beyond Jordan.” {Mat 4:25} That wave of interest in the south had now died down; and instead of eager multitudes there is a small sinister band of cold, keen-witted, hard-hearted critics. It was a sad change, and must have brought new distress to the Saviours troubled heart; but He is none the less ready to face the trial with His wonted courage and unfailing readiness of resource.

Their complaint is trivial enough. It is to be remembered, of course, that it was not a question of cleanliness, but of ritual; not even of ritual appointed by Moses, but only of that prescribed by certain traditions of their fathers which they held in superstitious veneration. These traditions, by a multitude of minute regulations and restrictions, imposed an intolerable burden on those, who thought it their duty to observe them; while the magnifying of trifles had the natural effect of keeping out of sight the weightier matters of the law. Not only so, but the most trivial regulations were sometimes so managed as to furnish an excuse for neglect of the plainest duties. Our Lord could not therefore miss the opportunity of denouncing this evil, and accordingly He exposes it in the plainest and strongest language.

The question with which He opens His attack is most incisive. It is as if He said, “I am accused of transgressing your tradition. What is your tradition? It is itself transgression of the law of God.” Then follows the striking illustration, showing how by their rules of tradition they put it within the power of any heartless son to escape entirely the obligation of providing even for his aged father or mother-an illustration, be it remembered, which brought out more than a breach of the fifth commandment; for by what means was it that the ungrateful son escaped his obligation? By taking the name of the Lord in vain; for surely there could be no greater dishonour to the name of God than meanly to mark as dedicated to Him (“Corban”) what ought to have been devoted to the discharge of an imperative filial duty. Besides, it was not at all necessary that the money or property should be actually dedicated to sacred uses; it was only necessary to say that it was, only necessary to pronounce over it that magic word Corban, and then the mean hypocrite could use it for the most selfish purposes-for any purpose, in fact, he chose, except that purpose for which it was his duty to use it. It is really difficult to conceive such iniquity wrapped up in a cloak of so-called religion. No wonder our Lord was moved to indignation, and applied to His critics the strong language of the prophet: “Ye hypocrites, well did Isaiah prophesy of you, saying, This people honoureth Me with their lips; but their heart is far from Me, teaching as their doctrines the precepts of men” (R.V). No wonder that He turned away from men who were so deeply committed to a system so vile, and that He explained, not to His questioners, but to the multitude who had gathered round, the principle on which He acted.

There seems, however, to have been more of sorrow than of anger in His tone and manner. How else could the disciples have asked Him such a question as that which follows: “Knowest Thou that the Pharisees were offended, after they heard this saying?” Of course the Pharisees were offended. They had most excellent reason. And the disciples would have known that He had no intention of sparing them in the least, and no concern whether they took offence or not, if His. tone had been such as an ordinary person would naturally have put into such an invective. It is probable that He said it all calmly, earnestly, tenderly, without the slightest trace of passion; from which it would not be at all unnatural for the disciples to infer that He had not fully realised how strong His language had been, and into what serious collision He had brought Himself with the leaders in Jerusalem. Hence their gentle remonstrance, the expression of those feelings of dismay with which they saw their Master break with one party after another, as if determined to wreck His mission altogether. Was it not bad policy to give serious offence to persons of such importance at so critical a time?

The Saviours answer is just what was to be expected. Policy had no place in His plan. His kingdom was of the truth; and whatever was not of truth must go, be the consequences what they might. That system of traditionalism had its roots deeply and firmly fastened in the Jewish soil; its fibres were through it all; and to disturb it was to go against a feeling that was nothing less than national in its extent. But no matter: firmly, deeply, widely rooted though it was, it was not of Gods planting, and therefore it cannot be let alone: “Every plant, which My heavenly Father hath not planted, shall be rooted up.” It is for all ritualists, ancient and modern, all who teach for doctrines what are only commandments of men, seriously to ponder this most radical utterance by One Whose right it is to speak with an authority from which there is no appeal.

Having thus condemned the ritualistic teaching of the day, He disposes next of the false teachers. This He does in a way which ought to have been a warning to those persecutors and heresy-hunters who, by their unwise use of force and law, have given only larger currency to the evil doctrines they have tried to suppress. He simply says “Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.” Expose their error by all means; root it out if possible; but as for the men themselves, “let them alone.”

The principle He sets forth as underlying the whole subject is the same as that which underlies His teaching in the Sermon on the Mount-viz., that “out of the heart are the issues of life.” The ritualist lays stress on that which enters into the man-the kind of food which enters his mouth, the objects which meet his eye, the incense which enters his nostril; Christ sets all this aside as of no consequence in comparison with the state of the heart (Mat 15:16-20). Such teaching as this was not only irreconcilable with that of the scribes and Pharisees from Jerusalem, but it lay at the very opposite pole.

Was it on this account that after this interview Jesus withdrew as far as possible from Jerusalem? He is limited, indeed, in His range to the Holy Land, as He indicates in His conversation with the woman of Canaan; but just as after the death of John He had withdrawn out of the jurisdiction of Herod to the east, so now, after this collision with the deputation from Jerusalem, He withdraws to the far north, to the borders of Tyre and Sidon. And was it only a coincidence that, just as Jerusalem had furnished such sorry specimens of dead formalism, the distant borders of heathen Tyre and Sidon should immediately thereafter furnish one of the very noblest examples of living faith? The coincidence is certainly very striking and most instructive. The leaders from Jerusalem had been dismissed with the condemnation of their own prophet: “This people honoureth Me with their lips, but their heart is far from Me”; while out of far-away heathendom there comes one whose whole heart is poured out to Him in earnest, persevering, prevailing prayer. It is one of those contrasts with which this portion of our Lords history abounds, the force of which will appear more clearly as we proceed.

The suppliant was “a woman of Canaan,” or, as she is described more definitely elsewhere, a Syro-Phoenician woman. Yet she has learned of Jesus-knows Him as the Christ, for she calls Him “Son of David”-knows Him as a Saviour, for she comes to ask that her daughter may be healed. Her application must have been a great solace to His wounded heart. He always loved to be asked for such blessings; and, rejected as He had been by His countrymen, it must have been a special encouragement to be approached in this way by a stranger. That it was so may be inferred from what He said on similar occasions. When the Roman centurion came to have his servant healed, Jesus commended his wonderful faith, and then added: “I say unto you, That many shall come from the east and west, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven.” So, too, when it was announced to Him that some Greeks desired to see Him, the first effect was to sharpen the agony of His rejection by His own countrymen; but immediately He recovers Himself, looks beyond the cross and the shame to the glory that shall follow, and exclaims, “I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto Me.” There can be no doubt that at this time of rejection in Galilee it must have been a similar consolation to receive this visit from the woman of Canaan.

How, then, can we explain His treatment of her? First, He answered her not a word. Then He reminded her that she did not belong to Israel, as if she therefore could have no claim on Him. And when she still urged her suit, in a manner that might have appealed to the hardest heart, He-gave her an answer which seems so incredibly harsh, that it is with a feeling of pain one hears it repeated after eighteen hundred years. What does all this mean? It means “praise and honour and glory” for the poor woman; for the disciples, and for all disciples, a lesson never to be forgotten. He Who knew what was in man, knew what was in this noble womans heart, and He wished to bring it out-to bring it out so that the disciples should see it, so that other disciples should see it, so that generation after generation and century after century should see it, and admire it, and learn its lesson. It cost her some minutes pain: Him also, – how it must have wrung His heart to treat her in a way so foreign to every fibre of His soul! But had He not so dealt with her, what a loss to her, to the disciples, to countless multitudes! He very much needs a shining example of living faith to set over against the dead formalism of these traditionalists; and here it is: He must bring it out of its obscurity, and set it as a star in the firmament of His gospel, to shine for ever and ever. He tested her to the uttermost, because He knew that at the end of all He could say: “O woman, great is thy faith: be it unto thee even as thou wilt.” The heart of the Saviour was never filled with a deeper tenderness or a wiser and more far-seeing love than when He repulsed this woman again and again, and treated her with what seemed at the moment most inexcusable and unaccountable harshness.

The lessons which shine out in the simple story of this woman can only be touched in the slightest manner. We have already referred to the contrast between the great men of Jerusalem and this poor woman of Canaan; observe now how strikingly is suggested the distinction between Israel according to the flesh and Israel according to the spirit. The current idea of the time was that lineal descent from Abraham determined who belonged to the house of Israel and who did not. The Saviour strikes at the root of this error. He does not indeed attack it directly. For this the time has not yet come: the veil of the Temple has not yet been rent in twain. But He draws aside the veil a little, so as to give a glimpse of the truth and prepare the way for its full revealing when the time shall come. He does not broadly say, “This woman of Canaan is as good an Israelite as any of you”; but He says, “I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the horse of Israel”-and heals her daughter notwithstanding. Was it not, then, evident that this poor woman after all did in some sense belong to the lost sheep of the house of Israel whom Jesus came to save?

The house of Israel?-what does Israel mean? Learn at Peniel. See Jacob in sore distress at the brook Jabbok. A man is wrestling with him, -wrestling with him all the night, until the break of day. It is no mere man, for Jacob finds before all is over that he has been face to face with God. The man who wrestled with him indeed was the same as He Who wrestled with this woman of Canaan. The Divine Man struggles to get away without blessing the patriarch. Jacob cries, in the very desperation of his faith, “I will not let Thee go, except Thou bless me!” The victory is won. The blessing is granted, and these words are added: “What is thy name? Jacob.” “Thy name shall be called no more Jacob, but Israel” (i.e., prince with God): “for as a prince hast thou power with God and with men, and hast prevailed.” Was this woman, then, or was she not, “a prince” with God? Did she, or did she not, belong to the true house of Israel? Let us now look back to vv. 8 and 9 {Mat 15:8-9}: “This people” (i.e.) the children of Israel according to the flesh “honoureth Me with their lips: but their heart is far from Me. But in vain do they worship Me.” In vain do they worship: are they, then, princes with God? Nay, verily; they are only actors before Him, as the Saviour plainly says. Truly they are not all Israel who are of Israel; and just as truly they are not the only Israel who are of Israel, for here is this woman of Canaan who earns the name of Israel by as hard a contest and as great a victory as that of Jacob at the brook Jabbok, when first the name was given.

Another instructive contrast is inevitably suggested between the foremost of the apostles and this nameless woman of Canaan. The last illustration of faith was Peters venture on the water. What a difference between the strong man and the weak woman! To the strong, brave man the Master had to say “O thou of little faith! wherefore didst thou doubt?” To the weak woman, “O woman, great is thy faith.” What an encouragement here to the little ones, the obscure, unnoticed disciples! “Many that are first shall be last, and the last first.”

The encouragement to persevering prayer, especially to parents anxious for their children, is so obvious that it need only be named. That silence first, and then these apparent refusals, are trials of faith, to which many earnest hearts have not been strangers. To all such the example of this woman of Canaan is of great value. Her earnestness in making the case of her daughter her own (she does not say, “Have mercy on my daughter”; but, “Have mercy on me”; and again, “Lord, help me”), and her unconquerable perseverance till the answer came, have been an inspiration ever since, and will be to the end of the world.

The lesson taught by our Lords dealing with the woman of Canaan is conveyed again on a larger scale by what happened in the region of Decapolis, east of the Sea of Galilee; for it was in that region, as we learn from the more detailed account in the second Gospel, that the events which follow came to pass.

The distance from the one place to the other is considerable, and the route our Lord took was by no means direct. His object at this time seems to have been to court retirement as much as possible, that He might give Himself to the preparation of His disciples-and we may with reverence add, His own preparation also-for the sad journey southward to Jerusalem and Calvary. Besides, His work in the north is done: no more circuits in Galilee now; so He keeps on the far outskirts of the land, passing through Sidon, across the southern ridge of Lebanon, past the base of mighty Hermon, then southward to Decapolis-all the way on border territory, where the people were more heathen than Jewish in race and religion. We can imagine Him on this long and toilsome journey, looking in both directions with strange emotion-away out to the Gentile nations with love and longing; and (with what mingled feelings of pain and eagerness who can tell?) to that Jerusalem, where soon He must offer up the awful sacrifice. When, after the long journey, He came nigh to the Sea of Galilee, He sought seclusion by going up into a mountain. But even in this borderland He cannot be hid; and when the sick and needy throng around Him, He cannot turn away from them. He still keeps within the limits of His. commission, as set forth in His reply to the woman of Canaan; but, though He does not go to seek out those beyond the pale, when they seek Him, He cannot send them away; accordingly, in these heathen or semi-heathen regions, we have another set of cures and another feeding of the hungry multitude.

We need not dwell on these incidents, as they are a repetition, with variations, of what He had done at the conclusion of His work in Galilee. As to the repetition, -strange to say, there are those who cavil, whenever similar events appear successively in the story of the life and work of Christ. As if it were possible that a work like His could be free from repetition! How often does a physician repeat himself in the course of his practice? Christ is always repeating Himself. Every time a sinner comes to Him for salvation, He repeats Himself, with variations; and when need arose in Decapolis-like that which had previously arisen at Bethsaida, only more urgent, for the multitude in the present case had been three days from home, and were ready to faint with hunger-must their wants go unrelieved merely to avoid repetition? As to the telling of it-for this of course might have been avoided, on the ground that a similar event had been related before-was there not most excellent reason for it, in the fact that these people were not of the house of Israel in the literal sense? To have omitted the record of these deeds of mercy would have been to leave out the evidence they afforded that the love of Christ went out not to Jews only, but to all sick and hungry ones.

Sick and hungry-these words suggest the two great needs of humanity. Christ comes to heal disease, to Satisfy hunger; in particular, to heal the root disease of sin, and satisfy the deep hunger of the soul for God and life in Him. And when we read how He healed all manner of disease among the multitudes in Decapolis, and thereafter fed them abundantly when they were ready to faint with hunger, we see how He is set forth as a Saviour from sin and Revealer of God beyond the borders of the land of Israel.

It is worth noticing how well this general record follows the story of the woman of Canaan. Just as she-though not of Israel after the flesh-proved herself to be of Israel after the spirit, so these heathen or semi-heathen people of Decapolis forsake their paganism when they see the Christ; for of no heathen deity do they speak: they “glorified the God of Israel.” {Mat 15:31} Thus we have a contrast similar to that which we recognised in the case of the woman of Canaan, between those scribes and Pharisees of Jerusalem-who drew near to the God of Israel with their lips while the heart was far away-and these people of Decapolis, who, though “afar off” in the estimation of these dignitaries of Jerusalem, are in truth “nigh” to the God of Israel. Is there not in the events of the chapter a wondrous light cast on the true meaning of the name Israel, as not according to the flesh, but according to the spirit?

IV-THE CULMINATION OF THE CRISIS.- {Mat 16:1-12}

All this time Jesus has been keeping as much out of the way of His ungrateful countrymen as the limits of His commission would permit, hovering, as it were, around the northern outskirts of the land. But when in the course of this largest circuit of all His northern journeys, He reaches Decapolis, He is so near home that He cannot but cross the lake and revisit the familiar scenes. How is He received? Do the people flock around Him as they did before? If it had been so, we should no doubt have been told. There seems to have been not a single word of welcome. Of all the multitudes He had healed and blessed, there is no one to cry, “Hosanna to the Son of David!”

His friends, if He has any, have gone back, and walk no more with Him; but His old enemies the Pharisees do not fail Him; and they are not alone now, nor, as before, in alliance only with those naturally in sympathy with them, but have actually made a league with their great opponents, the two rival parties of Pharisee and Sadducee finding in their common hatred of the Christ of God a sinister bond of union.

This is the first time the Sadducees are mentioned in this Gospel as coming in contact with Jesus. Some of them had come to the baptism of John, to his great astonishment; but, beyond this, they have as yet put in no appearance. They were the aristocracy of the land, and held the most important offices of Church and State in the capital. It is therefore the less to be wondered at that up to this time the Carpenter of Nazareth should have been beneath their notice. Now, however, the news of His great doings in the north has at last compelled attention; the result is this combination with the Pharisees, who have already been for some time engaged in the attempt to put Him down. There is indication elsewhere {Mar 8:15} that the Herodians had also united with them; so we may look upon this as the culmination of the crisis in Galilee, when all the forces of the country have been roused to active and bitter hostility.

The Pharisees and Sadducees, as is well known, were at opposite poles of thought; the one being the traditionalists, the other the sceptics, of the time, so that it was quite remarkable that they should unite in anything. They did, however, unite in this demand for a sign from heaven. Neither of them could deny that signs had been given, -that the blind had received sight, lepers had been cleansed, the lame healed, and deeds of mercy done on every side. But neither party was satisfied with this. Each was wedded to a system of thought according to which signs on earth were of no evidential value. A sign from heaven was what they needed to convince them. The demand was practically the same as that which the Pharisees and scribes had made before, {Mat 12:38} though it is put more specifically here as a sign from heaven. The reason why the Pharisees adopted the same method of attack as before is not far to seek. Their object was not to obtain satisfaction as to His claims, but to find the easiest way of discrediting them; and, knowing as they did from their past experience that the demand of a special sign would be refused, they counted on the refusal beforehand, to be Used by their new allies as well as themselves as a weapon against Him. They were not disappointed, for our Lord was no respecter of persons; therefore He spoke just as plainly and sternly when the haughty Sadducees were present as He had done before they made their appearance.

The words are stern and strong; but here again it is “more in sorrow than in anger” that He speaks. We learn from St. Mark that, as He gave His answers, “He sighed deeply in His spirit.” There had been so many signs, and they were so plain and clear-signs which spoke for themselves, signs which so plainly spelt out the words, “The kingdom of heaven is among you”-that it was unspeakably sad to think that they should be blind to them all, and find it in their heart to ask for something else, which in its nature would be no sign at all, but only a portent, a barren miracle.

We can see in this how determined our Lord was not to minister to the craving for the merely miraculous. He would work no miracle for the mere purpose of exciting astonishment or even of producing conviction, when there was quite enough for all who were at all willing to receive it, in the regular, natural, and necessary development of His work as the Healer of the sick, the Shepherd of the people, the Refuge of the troubled and distressed. Had there been no signs of the times, there might have been some reason for signs in the heavens; but when there were signs in abundance of the kind to appeal to all that was best in the minds and hearts of men, why should these be discredited by resorting to another kind of sign much inferior and far less adapted to the securing of the special object for which the King of heaven had come into the world? The signs of the times were after all far more easily discerned than those signs in the heavens by which they were accustomed to anticipate both fine and stormy weather. There were signs of blessing enough to convince any doubter that the summer of heaven was easily within His reach; on the other hand, in the state of the nation, and the rapidly developing circumstances which were hastening on the fulfilment of the most terrible of the prophecies concerning it, there were signs enough to give far more certain indication of approaching judgment, than when the red and lowering morning gave token of the coming thunderstorm (Mat 16:2-3). So He tells them, convicting them of wilful blindness; and then repeats in almost identical terms the refusal He had given to the scribes and Pharisees before: “A wicked and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given unto it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas.” {see Mat 12:39, and remarks on it}

“And He left them, and departed.” How sad for Him; how awful for them! Had there been in their hearts one single aspiration for the true and good, He would not have left them so. Where are these Pharisees and Sadducees now? What do they now think of the work of that day?

“He left them, and again entering into the boat departed to the other side.” {Mar 8:13} Did He ever cross the lake again? If He did, there is no record of it. He passed in sight of it in that sorrowful southward journey to Jerusalem which He must presently commence; and He will visit the same shore again after His resurrection to cheer the apostles at their toil; but this seems to have been the last crossing. What a sad one it must have been!-after a beginning so bright that it was heralded as daybreak on Gennesarets shore, after all His self-denying toil, after all the words of wisdom He has spoken and the deeds of mercy He has done upon these shores, to leave them, as He does now, rejected and despised, an outcast, to all outward appearance a failure. No wonder He is silent in that crossing of the lake; no wonder He is lost in saddest thought, turning over and over in His mind the signs of the times forced so painfully on His attention!

The disciples with Him in the boat had no share in these sad thoughts. Their minds, as it would seem, were occupied for the most part with the mistake they had made in provisioning the boat. Accordingly, when at last He broke silence, He found them quite out of touch with Him. He had been thinking of the sad unbelief of these Pharisees and Sadducees, and of the awful danger of allowing the spirit which was in them to dominate the life; hence the solemn caution: “Take heed, and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.” The disciples meantime had been counting their loaves, or rather, looking sadly on the one loaf which, on searching their baskets, they found to be all they had; and when the word leaven caught their ear, coupled with a caution as to a particular kind of it, they said one to another, “It is because we have taken no bread!” Another cause of sadness to the Master. He had been mourning over the blindness of Pharisees and Sadducees; He must now mourn over the blindness of His own disciples; and not blindness only, but also forgetfulness of a thrice-taught lesson: for why should the mere supply of bread be any cause of anxiety to them, after what they had seen once and again in these very regions to which they were going?

But these hearts were not shut against Him; theirs was not the blindness of those that will not see; accordingly, the result is very different. He did not leave them and depart; nor, on the other hand, did He explain in so many words what He meant. It was far better that they should find out for themselves. The riddles of nature and of life are not furnished with keys. They must be discerned by thoughtful attention; so, instead of providing them a key to His little parable, He puts them in the way of finding it for themselves by asking them a series of questions which convinced them of their thoughtlessness and faithlessness, and led them to recognise His true meaning (Mat 16:8-12).

Fuente: Expositors Bible Commentary