Will The Image Of Caesar Abide In The Image Of God?

Now Herod, being very angry about the dispute of Tyre and Sidon, was approached by the delegation of Blastus to ask for peace, who was the king’s personal keeper, after being persuaded about the trade business which their district supplied for the king. Now, therefore, on an appointed day, Herod worked up his pride in the dress of his royal veneer and took his seat on the throne to dictate over against them. So the people continued to shout, “The voice of God and not a man!” Then immediately he was struck down by an angel of the Lord because he did not offer the glory to the living God when his [glory] was worm eaten to his death. But the Word of God was fruitful and multiplied. (MAST)

Luke continues this narrative in connection to the Peter’s prison release by the angle of the LORD. So we should play close attention to how he joins this perspective to the continuation of the Apostles’ work in the book of Acts and other epistles.

Now Herod, being very angry about the dispute of Tyre and Sidon, was approached by the delegation of Blastus to ask for peace, who was the king’s personal keeper, after being persuaded about the trade business which their district supplied for the king.

Now because the question is going to be asked why I changed the direction of the translation is because the the verb is passive in relation to the genitive adjective of the king’s ownership of the district. He is the passive recipient of the trade business (the supply). This wasn’t a handout of any sorts; it cost these people something to travel to Jerusalem and beyond to offer their trade skills. Therefore it was his (the king’s) responsibility to nurture them [in knowledge and wisdom] to be more effective in their trades. John MacArthur’s commentary points out that Solomon had sent them wages in the form of other products to pay for the labor skills that were performed by them in the kingdom (cf. 1 Kings 5:11; Ezra 3:7; Ezek. 27:17), but it is more likely, since Rome has taken over the whole country, that Herod is appointed by Caesar to be responsible to keep the previous [peace treaties] that were established. Josephus gives us a reliable, though not infallible nor inerrant, account in the generosity of [his frame of spirit], which was “veneered” by the pride of the Jewish religion. Josephus states:

“As for the walls of Jerusalem, that were adjoining to the new city [Bezetha], he repaired them at the expense of the public, and built them wider in breadth and higher in altitude; and he had made them too strong for all human power to demolish, unless Marcus, the then president of Syria, had by letter informed Claudius Caesar of what he was doing. And when Claudius had some suspicion of attempts for innovation, he sent to Agrippa to leave off the building of those walls presently. So he obeyed, as not thinking it proper to contradict Claudius.”

Josephus, F., & Whiston, W. (1987). The works of Josephus: complete and unabridged (p. 522). Peabody: Hendrickson.

I say that Josephus is reliable in that he records what he “hears” and sometimes sees (eye witness) regarding the historical works surrounding these Biblical events. However, in his corruption, he doesn’t express his worldview from the perspective of the wisdom of God but rather the natural wisdom of “an owl” and possibly even “an ass.” Out of self-preservation he covers the evil of these days to promote the pride of his own welfare, like a king riding in on “an elephant,” something the wisdom and nature of the cross of Christ cannot do. He further describes Herod, in contradiction to the frame (image) of the Holy Spirit, which hates the works of Herod’s person. He continues to bear false witness in this manner not regarding the historical accuracy but the motives of Herod’s person, by recording:

“Now, this king was by nature very beneficent, and liberal in his gifts, and very ambitious to oblige people with such large donations; and he made himself very illustrious by the many chargeable presents he made them. He took delight in giving, and rejoiced in living with good reputation. He was not at all like that Herod who reigned before him; for that Herod was ill-natured, and severe in his punishments, and had no mercy on them that he hated; and everyone perceived that he was more friendly to the Greeks than to the Jews; for he adorned foreign cities with large presents in money; with building them baths and theatres besides: nay, in some of those places, he erected temples, and porticoes in others; but he did not vouchsafe to raise one of the least edifices in any Jewish city, or make them any donation that was worth mentioning. But Agrippa’s temper was mild, and equally liberal to all men. He was humane to foreigners, and made them sensible of his liberality. He was in like manner rather of a gentle and compassionate temper. *Accordingly, he loved to live continually at Jerusalem, and was exactly careful in the observance of the laws of his country.* He therefore kept himself *entirely pure: nor did any day pass over his head without its appointed sacrifice.* However, there was a certain man of the Jewish nation at Jerusalem, *who appeared to be very accurate in the knowledge of the law.* His name was Simon. This man got together an assembly, while the king was absent at Cesarea, and had the insolence to accuse him as not living holy, and that he might justly be excluded out of the temple, since it belonged only to native Jews. But the general of Agrippa’s army informed him, that Simon had made such a speech to the people. So the king sent for him; and, as he was then sitting in the theatre, he bade him sit down by him, and said to him with **a low and gentle voice,—“What is there done in this place that is contrary to the law?”** But he had nothing to say for himself, but begged his pardon. So the king was more easily reconciled to him than one could have imagined, as esteeming mildness a better quality in a king than anger; and knowing that moderation is more becoming in great men than passion. So he made Simon a small present, and dismissed him. Now, as Agrippa was a great builder in many places, he paid a peculiar regard to the people of Berytus: for he erected a theatre for them, superior to many others of that sort, both in sumptuousness and elegance, as also an amphitheatre, built at vast expenses; and besides these, he built them baths and porticoes, and spared for no costs in any of his edifices, to render them both handsome and large. He also spent a great deal upon their dedication, and exhibited shows upon them, and brought thither musicians of all sorts, and such as made the most delightful music of the greatest variety. He also showed his magnificence upon the theatre, in his great number of gladiators; and there it was that he exhibited the several antagonists, in order to please the spectators; no fewer indeed than seven hundred men to fight with seven hundred other men;a and allotted all the malefactors he had for this exercise, that both the malefactors might receive their punishment, and that this operation of war might be a recreation in peace. And thus were these criminals all destroyed at once.”

Josephus, F., & Whiston, W. (1987). The works of Josephus: complete and unabridged (p. 522). Peabody: Hendrickson.

We find here, that the perspective of Scripture gives an entirely opposing view that paints Herod just as cruel as his predecessors, but with a twist of love for the glory of his fame, taking into account the witness of Josephus, to be observed as generous by the people. But was he truly generous in being the passive recipient, according to Scripture, of all the labors of these tax-payers? The following verses tell the story of how the Spirit of God hated “the glory” that he robs from these people to clothe himself in; the same glory that these people flatter him with to sell their souls for rotten bread. However, since we previously studied about how Simon (Peter) was delivered from the prison, we should consider [the possibility] that Josephus intends to be referring to our “Simon” who is accused of, from our perspective, which is the Scripture’s perspective, an accurate accusation of unholy living and misuse of the former Hebrew sacrificial system. Scripture, however, doesn’t record Peter requesting him to be “excommunicated” from the temple, so it’s possible that it’s merely a different Simon but unlikely, or Josephus is reporting only what he “heard” rather than what he fact checked. Either way we view Josephus, the historical background that Josephus provides is reliable regarding the form of trade that was taking place.

Now, therefore, on an appointed day, Herod worked up his pride in the dress of his royal veneer and took his seat on the throne to dictate over against them. (MAST)

We see that the project of rebuilding the walls of Jerusalem had been brought to a stand still in order to prioritize work in other places of Caesar’s empire. So the labor skills of the people of Tyre and Sidon, which were typically used for this purpose, were no longer employed at the temple; therefore “the king’s” so-called generosity, according to Josephus, was displayed, according to Scripture, to gratify the appetite of their sinful nature and ‘gently’ rock them asleep in the baby’s crib while he robs them blind of life, liberty and justice for all. Josephus claims that a festival was prepared to make vows for Herod’s safety in the place where shows were typically exhibited in honor Caesar. This was mostly likely the means offered [by the king’s keeper] to appease Herod’s wrath against the people’s complaint. Therefore it was on an “appointed day,” which Josephus calls the second day of the festival, that Herod glorified himself like the Caesar. Josephus describes the garb as such:

“On the second day of which shows he put on a garment made wholly of silver, and of a contexture truly wonderful, and came into the theatre early in the morning; at which time the silver of his garment being illuminated by the fresh reflection of the sun’s rays upon it, shone out after a surprising manner, and was so resplendent as to spread a horror over those that looked intently upon him; . . .”

Josephus, F., & Whiston, W. (1987). The works of Josephus: complete and unabridged (p. 523). Peabody: Hendrickson.

From the perspective of Scripture, Herod’s motive was to come onto this stage and receive the pomp of the people, but Josephus begs the reader of history to show Herod mercy. The Spirit of God, however, which was not in Josephus to record the witness of Heaven, commands us to show him no mercy! This man was a self-exalted king of the Jews by the grace of the Caesar, and he comes and sits on this throne to show himself on both sides of the wall of separation as a righteous peacemaker. He makes vows and sacrifices to the God of the Jews while at the same time declaring himself above God and that not of a man in the glory and likeness of the Caesars. We must ask ourselves why the true and living God would permit the Caesars to array themselves which such pomp but strike this hypocrite dead when he imitates them?

So the people continued to shout, “The voice of God and not a man!” (MAST)

Josephus gives us the motive of the Jews, which was most likely the wisdom of the king’s keeper and chamberlain, who was the delegate of the people. Josephus states:

“. . . and presently his flatterers cried out, one from one place, and another from another (though not for his good), that he was a god; and they added, “Be thou merciful to us; for although we have hitherto reverenced thee only as a man, yet shall we henceforth own thee as superior to mortal nature.”

Josephus, F., & Whiston, W. (1987). The works of Josephus: complete and unabridged (p. 523). Peabody: Hendrickson.

I believe the Jews understood exactly what Herod was, and they only used his position to manipulate him towards their own cause. They cared nothing for the people of Tyre and Sidon, and so encouraged them to worship Herod as though he were God, in the sense of the Caesars, in order to keep the peace and feed their own bellies with the scraps of Caesar’s unjust table. Therefore, we find Josephus recording what he is “told” with a measure of truth to paint themselves as a righteous and just people, but all of this being done without the Spirit and holiness of God unto which they sought to discredit “Simon” who represented the Word of God. These people were willing to sell their souls, by which I believe was the instruction of the Jewish council [the so-called owl], with this false worship for a morsel of bread at the hand of Herod’s worm eaten corruption.

“Upon this the king did neither rebuke them, nor reject their impious flattery. But, as he presently afterwards looked up, he saw an owl sitting on a certain rope over his head, and immediately understood that this bird was the messenger of ill tidings, as it had once been the messenger of good tidings to him; and fell into the deepest sorrow. A severe pain also arose in his belly, and began in a most violent manner.”

Josephus, F., & Whiston, W. (1987). The works of Josephus: complete and unabridged (p. 523). Peabody: Hendrickson.

Then immediately he was struck down by an angel of the Lord because he did not offer the glory to the living God when his [glory] was worm eaten to his death. (MAST)

“He therefore looked upon his friends, and said, “I whom you call a god, am commanded presently to depart this life; while Providence thus reproves the lying words you just now said to me; and I, who was by you called immortal, am immediately to be hurried away by death. But I am bound to accept of what Providence allots as it pleases God; for we have by no means lived ill, but in a splendid and happy manner.” When he said this, his pain was become violent. Accordingly he was carried into the palace; and the rumor went abroad everywhere, that he would certainly die in a little time. But the multitude presently sat in sackcloth, with their wives and children, **after the law of their country,** and besought God for the king’s recovery. All places were also full of mourning and lamentation. **(I want to chime in, here, and say, “baloney”)** Now the king rested in a high chamber, and as he saw them below lying prostrate on the ground, he could not himself forbear weeping. And when he had been quite worn out by the pain in his belly for five days, he departed this life, being in the fifty-fourth year of his age, and in the seventh year of his reign; for he reigned four years under Caius Caesar, three of them were over Philip’s tetrarchy only, and on the fourth he had that of Herod added to it; and he reigned besides those, three years under the reign of Claudius Caesar: in which time he reigned over the forementioned countries, and also had Judea added to them, as also Samaria and Cesarea. The revenues that he received out of them were very great, no less than twelve millions of drachmae. Yet did he borrow great sums from others; for he was so very liberal, that his expenses exceeded his incomes; and his generosity was boundless. But before the multitude were made acquainted with Agrippa’s being expired, Herod the king of Chalcis, and Helcias the master of his horse, and the king’s friend, sent Aristo, one of the king’s most faithful servants, and slew Silas, who had been their enemy, as if it had been done by the king’s own command.”

Josephus, F., & Whiston, W. (1987). The works of Josephus: complete and unabridged (pp. 523–524). Peabody: Hendrickson.

What we find here is the fabrication of the story, maybe not at the direct intent of Josephus himself, for this may have been the story “he was told to report,” but nevertheless the Scripture is clearly standing up in witness against the false witness of both the Jews and the Greeks. Luke wants us to see clearly the motive of their story is to suppress the witness of the Christians with their unrighteousness and cunning attempts to preserve the traditions that were unable to bear fruit to God in light of His glory and grace. Josephus writes this in a way that exalts the Jews above the testimony of the Christian church, therefore it’s unlikely that he is unwillingly ignorant of this evil motive to be purposely careless to “check-the-facts.”

Therefore, Luke describes those who manipulated the ignorance of this event as worms who ate the glory of Herod’s flesh in his death, specifically the worm (singular [ σκωληκόβρωτος ]) who was the king’s chamberlain that set up this event, who the Jews collectively worked through to make the king appear generous but was clearly bankrupt by their own account. In other words, they robbed the king, and thus the people, blind! They cared nothing for his soul and hated him to his death glorifying there own wisdom (that wretched owl), as if God’s favor was upon them in their form of worship. This is not the wisdom of Christ’s cross in the face of death.

Josephus claims these are the words of Herod, “I whom you call a god, am commanded presently to depart this life; while Providence thus reproves the lying words you just now said to me; and I, who was by you called immortal, am immediately to be hurried away by death. But I am bound to accept of what Providence allots as it pleases God; for we have by no means lived ill, but in a splendid and happy manner,” but this is clearly not words of a ruthless king who bound Peter and murdered his own hired guards for derelict of duty. In no way did Herod ever fear the Providence of God, and yet even the Providence of God, in this, deceived the Jews into believing the favor of the LORD was upon them. They took advantage of this opportunity to further manipulate the Roman authorities to continue throwing their leftovers to them in order to continue in their “traditions,” yes, their own image, which they too love to their own death.

Luke also is making it clear that with the definite article, “the,” which is excluded from the false worship given to Herod by the people, is why Herod’s life was immediately taken from him. The true and living God is to be worshipped with “the” glory that only belongs to Him. Herod possessed a glory that is “of the flesh,” but it is this glory (the glory of Christ) which was denied to put on the glory of God (Caesar). That’s the error, here. While Josephus covers this error in his account to sound gracious and righteous, the infallible, inerrant Scripture exposes the pride and arrogance of Herod’s “acceptance” of this form of worship.

The Scriptures command that this sword of Truth be thrust the whole way through to the division of soul and Spirit, bone and marrow into the darkness and abyss of the human frame of the soul. The emptiness of this pride must be poured out in death before the divine nature of God’s love can be poured into it. “The glory” which is to be revealed in the saints of God can only be known through the submission of “the” only Mediator between God and man: the Man Jesus Christ. The divine nature is not purchased by the cunning of these fools nor the wisdom of an owl to encourage such idolatry by flattery and then flip the cloak to another color to cover this evil with the fabrication of best wishes and high hopes of self-certainty in the universalism of the “Jewish” [what is now called the American] dream.

Luke purposes this word, “because” [ ἀνθʼ ], to illustrate for us that Herod’s death was signification of Peter’s justice by the glory that is Christ alone. This Greek word means, in place of; or, on behalf of, like a “substitute” for Peter’s release. God had given Peter a specific work to perform, and until it was accomplished God was going to substitute death upon the one who seeks his life, as a continuing witness of Peter’s message, which was Christ and him crucified.

But the Word of God was fruitful and multiplied. (MAST)

Therefore, Peter’s witness was magnified above the actions of the both the Jewish authorities and any Roman opposition. The point is clear! We are to “offer” God what is only God’s to receive, and to “give” what is Caesar’s to Caesar to squander as he pleases, for the wages of his sin is death.

​​SMLXL