The Herod mentioned in Acts 12 as a persecutor of the apostles was Herod Agrippa I (10 B.C.- A.D. 44). He was the grandson of Herod the Great and was educated in Rome. He was a friend of the imperial family but supported Caligula as the successor to Tiberius and was imprisoned. When Caligula became emperor, Agrippa was released and was given the title of King and the territories formerly held by Herod Philip and Lysanias, and later the territory given to Herod Antipas. Agrippa was a key figure in persuading Caligula to rescind his order to place an image of himself in the Temple (JW 2.206-13, Antiq. 19:236-47).
We are not told why Herod persecuted the church in Jerusalem, although it may be that he was, in some respects, interested in his “Jewish roots.” This piety was demonstrated upon his return to Judea. He donated a golden chain, given to him by Caligula when he was freed from his imprisonment, to the Temple. In addition, he sponsored a large number of Nazarite vows in the temple (Antiq., 12.6.1, Schürer 2:155).
During a Sabbath year, Agrippa read from the book of Deuteronomy and was moved to tears when he read the words of Deuteronomy 17:15, forbidding the appointment of a stranger over the “brothers” (i.e., a non-Israelite over Israel.) The crowd which witnesses this responded, “Thou art our brother!” (See m.Sota 7.8). According to Josephus:
“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.” Antiq. 19.7.3
Schürer argues that Agrippa was favorable to the Pharisees and even, to some extent, a Jewish nationalism (2:159). This may be plausible given his zealous persecution of the Jewish Christians in Acts 12.
James’ death occurs about eleven years after Stephen’s stoning (Acts 7), probably around A.D. 41-42. Agrippa may have been motivated toward this persecution by zealous Pharisees (like Paul) who sought to suppress Jews who taught that Jesus was resurrected from the dead. It even appears that the people of Jerusalem no longer support Jewish Christians. Witherington makes this point: the city of Jerusalem has “turned against” the Jewish church (Acts, 386 ).
A further motivation for James’s summary execution may be the apostles’ messianic claims. If Caligula was inclined to demand his image be honored in the Temple, then perhaps messianic fervor among the Christians was high. Jesus himself predicted an “abomination which causes desolation” similar to the offenses of Antiochus IV Epiphanes (Dan 9:25-27, Mark 13:14, and parallels).
Agrippa is, therefore, acting like a pious devotee of the Jewish faith by pursuing the leaders of the Christian community who promote the teaching that Jesus is the Messiah. If this is true, how does it play out in the overall themes we have been seeing in Luke? Is Herod the “ultimate fringe” of what it means to be Jewish?
Bibliography: David C. Braund, “Agrippa” ABD 1:98-99; Schürer , 2:150-159.
I believe that the post alludes to some very important facts about the killing of James and the parallels of Stephen’s death. This is because as the post says, “Agrippa may have been motivated toward this persecution by the zealous Pharisees (Paul).” The word zealous as we mentioned in class can be related to killing in the Bible because when people were described as zealous it was typically associated with killing. This opinion in the post implies that the Pharisees were so enraged by James and the followers of Christ they wanted to put an ultimate stop to the message of Christ. Agrippa’s persecution towards the Christians, in particular James, I think parallels the aggression from the Sanhedrin’s towards Stephen. This is because similar to James, the most likely assumption was that he and the Christians enraged the Pharisees, as did Stephen. In the case of Stephen, it was further detailed why the Pharisees were so upset with him, because they could not silence him and the message of Christ. This leads me to believe that Agrippa persecuted James because the Pharisees were so enraged by James and the message of Christ because they felt the power of Christ and the influence, and could not counter it so they turned to killing Christ’s messenger. The Pharisees in this day had a major social clout and could influence the decisions of Agrippa, which is what most likely happened because Agrippa wanted to please the religious leaders (Acts 12:3). I believe that we can infer that the killing of James was not motivated solely on Agrippa’s decision but instead Agrippa chose to murder James in order to maintain support from the Jews and use the persecution of Christians as a positive political pawn for him. This is because persecuting Christians would have been seen as favorable in the eyes of the Jews, in the same way as being pro-life is favorable in the eyes of most conservative west Michigan republicans.
I’m flattered, but not so sure about your 3 pillars there…
After reading Acts 12 and the actions that Herod took in persecuting the church, I would say that Herod was probably both on the fringes of Judaism and also motivated by the Jew’s reaction to James’ death as Scott says. I think it is important to note that Herod had already started persecuting the church and had already killed James when the Jews ‘were pleased’ with Herod’s actions. Verse 3 says, “when he saw that this pleased the Jews, he proceeded to seize Peter also.” So it seems to me that he was first motivated by his own beliefs in persecuting the church and killing James, and then was motivated even further when he saw the Jews’ reaction. So I would say that he was extremely devoted to Judaism.
The theme we have seen in Acts is the movement of the Christianity outward from Jerusalem, and also theologically through the Holy Spirit. As Luke’s theology expands to where the Holy Spirit is given to Gentiles, Jewish Christians are becoming more and more of a target. Jewish Christians are now doing things and associating with Gentiles which would not be acceptable for devout Jews like Herod. So as the Jewish Christians theology is developing, the more they are being persecuted and being separated from the Pharisees which is seen in Acts 12.
I think another possible reason for Herod Agrippa’s persecution of the Jews and executing James is that he was afraid of losing his throne. This would not be unlike the concerns the Herod the Great had back when Jesus was born. (Matthew 2) With the Jewish church claiming that Jesus was the Messiah and that he was alive and coming back soon could have caused Herod Agrippa to worry that Christ was going to come back and take his throne. Or perhaps he was concerned that the Jewish church was going to revolt like many of the zealous Jewish groups of that time period. Killing James could have been an attempted to stop either of those scenarios.
I like what Jake said about Herod wanting the approval of the Jews. It sounds like he is really very moved by the Scriptures and he follows the law, but he is still an outsider to the people he is ruling over. He has already done so many things to try to get people to like him it seems. When he sees the way the Jews come together and support him, he probably feels pretty good about this. Also, if he was listening to the Pharisees talk about these Jesus followers so negatively all the time, I am sure it began to wear into him, kind of like watching fox news.
Dr. Long–Why was a replacement not made for James like for Judas?
I think that that by this point the Jerusalem community looked to James, the Lord’s brother as the “leader” of their community, not the twelve. There is a hint at this shift in 12:17, Peter tells the people who had been praying for him to “tell James what happened,” and then Peter “left for another place.” Jerusalem reformed itself with a council of elders and a single leader, James. This is not unlike Moses in Exodus, or (I tentatively suggest) the high priest and the Sanhedrin, or the Teacher of Righteousness at Qumran. The time of the Twelve Apostles was coming to an end, perhaps the death of James as an ultimate witness to the gospel is a patter for the rest, who (at least in tradition), followed him by giving up his life as a witness to the gospel.
Are you familiar with the Desire of Ages? And The Great Controversy?
Yes, I am.
I have a question. When Herod Agrippa beheaded James and imprisoned Peter, where was John? I cannot find anything in the scriptures.
That is a very good question. Luke does not tell us, and I do not know of any tradition explaining his non-arrest. You would think all the disciples would have been in Jerusalem for the Passover, but it is at least eleven years after the resurrection, so some could have moved to new areas for ministry or some may have died already.
Perhaps (and this is highly speculative), John’s ministry took him out of Jerusalem so he was not around to be arrested. On the one hand, there is a strong suspicion John did some evangelism among the Samaritans so it is possible he was there when his brother was arrested. On the other hand, Samaria is not all that far from Jerusalem, so he could have attended Passover. But if he was living with the Samaritans for a time, it is possible he would have been considered unclean, or to have defected from proper Jewish practice by his mission among the Samaritans. In fact, if this Samaritan mission true, then going to the Jewish Passover might have been offensive to the Samaritans he was trying to reach and he simply did not participate anymore. But as I say this is speculation and only that.
We do not know. Some people think John did some ministry in Samaria, so maybe that is where he was.
What a wonderful summary! This will greatly help me with my Sunday School class! Thank you for making it so plain for me!
Keep your good work up
The interesting thing is that, although scripture gives us what we need, it doesn’t necessarily give us ALL the facts. Actually, Herod Agrippa wasn’t “King since 10 B.C.” … he was born in 10 B.C. (His life story is quite interesting.) He wasn’t given the title ‘King’ and the whole of Judea to rule until 41 AD – just 3 years before this time. Sometime in that period, he moved to Jerusalem and lived there exclusively. Also becoming quite the pious Jew.
Let’s think a moment … he suddenly has the title ‘King of the Jews’ and essentially rules all of Judea (slightly more than even Herod the Great) and even intercedes for the Jews to Caesar. The ever-watchful Romans also noticed how much authority he seemed to be taking on: he placed sanctions on 2 cities outside his jurisdiction without Rome’s approval, was getting quite ‘friendly’ with other neighbors of Judea, and was even told to stop repairs on fortifications of the capital.
Why would he want to stop the message of the Messiah? Hmmmm … is it possible he saw himself as a new messiah for the Jews? After all, he was loved by the people, had Ceasar’s ear, was devout, and even held the title “King of the Jews”. Maybe he thought he really had a chance to totally liberate ‘his people’ from the Romans. Kind of hard for HIM to do that as a messiah, though, when others are preaching that the Messiah has already come!
“It may be that the Pharisees were putting pressure on Herod to persecute the church, or it may be the Herod was trying to gain favor in the eyes of the Jewish people.”
Why would they suddenly do this after 10+ years, with no indication there had been any trouble with them in the years just previous to this? No motive. Herod could very possibly have had one. Trying to gain favor in the eyes of the people? I don’t think this was his original plan. Sounds like the execution of James was quite sudden, and the people approved. Once he saw the people approved of what he did, THEN he had Peter arrested, intending to make a big, public affair out of it this time around.
Most scholars place the beheading of James and imprisonment of Peter in the spring of 44 AD … with Agrippa’s death soon after.
Although I would agree with you there is no evidence Pharisees motivated Herod Agrippa, I will point out the Pharisees (or people like them) seem to be active in Paul’s churches encouraging faithfulness to the Torah in 49-50, leading to the book of Galatians and the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15 mentions Pharisees in particular). By the time Paul returns in Jerusalem in Acts 22, there are many zealous Jews, including priests who now support the messianic movement. I do not think non-Christian Pharisees had much influence on Herod, as I state above he was motivated by his own feelings of Jewish nationalism.
I would also point out the nature of his death in Acts 12 probably implies he thought if himself more as a Roman elite, a god like Caligula or Claudius.
As for Herod’s dates, my original post gives his birth/death not his reign, so (10 B.C.- A.D. 44) is accurate, and you are correct he reigned A.D. 41-44. The previous comment introduced the error by assuming that was his reign in his comment.
It seems the Jewish people themselves might imagine Herod Agrippa IS the Messiah. He personally works to politically overthrow the regions Rome appointed to his uncle’s Herod Phillip and Herod Antipas’s, he pals around with Caligula, noted for his delusional bloodthirsty insanity. In this light, Herod Agrippa can be viewed as a counterpart to Caligula, having instead, been joined in a populist imagining of himself, being the “actual” King of the Jews”. with Role of King of the Jews. In the decades following the political and religious event of the crucifiction of Jesus, confusion is rife among the Jewish people. Big ideas and events capture the imagination. I think the Book of Acts is unique for the plain view of, not just words “about” the effect of the Heavenly realm of Powers and Principalities and the reality of spiritual warfare, mankind’s redemption involves. When the power of the Holy Spirit is unleased, it seems reasonable to reckon that the dark forces be stirred up, which looks like confusion and delusion. Herod Agrippa is a historical figure around which the secular world frames a collectively agreed upon version of history. The secular world of Roman power at that time, fed on the blood of one’s own family. The death of Jesus needs to be understood within that context as well.
I highly recommend reading the studies of Daniel Unterbrink on Judas the Galilean. According to Josephus, Paul had a bloody hand in persecuting and plundering James and his Jesus movements, so Paul wrote Acts after his enemies were dead, to whitewash his role in their betrayal. “Judas Iscariot” is a stand-in for Paul’s own betrayal. The name gives it away. Judas was Jesus’ real name. Iscariot is an anagram of sicarii, the name the later Jesus movement (the zealots) gave its assassin faction, led by Judas’ grandson, Menachem.
Please a question do we have two James one killed by Herod the king. And another James stoned to death in Spain.?R
Until just now, I was unaware of the tradition that John the son of Zebedee did ministry in Spain. Although it’s probably not the best resource, I scanned through the Wikipedia article which contains references too late legendary material placing James in Spain between 40 and 44.
As far as the Bible is concerned, James stayed in Jerusalem and was killed by Herod Agrippa.
Thank you Nick for elaborating this topic. It really sink in to my mind.. I habe now better understanding who killed ans why James was killed. Very well explain..
In the themes in Luke, this tension between Judaism and Christianity is a significant factor. Luke portrays Jesus as the fulfillment of Jewish prophecy and the continuation of Jewish tradition, but also emphasizes that his message and teachings extend beyond the boundaries of Judaism. Luke’s gospel emphasizes the Jesus’ message and the inclusion of all people, regardless of their religious background. In this sense, Herod represents some of Judaism that is in opposition to the message of Jesus and the expansion of his teachings beyond the boundaries of Judaism. However, it’s important to note that not all Jews were opposed to Jesus and his message, and Luke’s gospel emphasizes the diversity of perspectives within the Jewish community. Luke’s gospel portrays the tension between Judaism and Christianity as a significant theme, but also emphasizes the importance of Jesus’ message and the inclusion of all people, regardless of their religious background. Herod represents a faction of Judaism that is resistant to this message, but not necessarily the ultimate fringe of what it means to be Jewish.I believe Herod was trying to gain favor with the jewish religious leaders which is why he persecuted Christian believers.
Although Herod Agrippa seemed to do all the righteous requirements of the Law, he did not seem to hold a lot of fear or respect of Yahweh. I say this simply because he decided to put a picture or image of himself in the Jewish Temple. This seems to stand in direct contrast to what God says in Leviticus 26:1 which says, “Do not make idols or set up statues”. Therefore, if Agrippa truly wanted to be the model Jew, he would not have done this. This article also argues that the religious Jews sided with Agrippa. This could be for many reasons as Long lists. For example, it could be that Agrippa was also Jewish so he could be considered a brother, or he had sponsored many Nazarites, or that he participated in sacrificial offerings at the Temple, or he had admiral zeal against Jesus’ message. Whatever the reason, Agrippa had the support of some Jews because he had been a backbone for them. Therefore, when the Christian persecution occurred, Agrippa was supported, and many followed him instead of the early church. Because of Agrippa’s persecution, the church experienced many setbacks and trails due to his leadership as James was murdered and severe persecution broke out.
In the blog post, Long describes Herod Agrippa I as a strong opponent of the Jewish faith. Herod Agrippa persecutes the Jewish Christians for their beliefs. Agrippa does this “by pursuing the leaders of the Christian community who promote the teaching that Jesus is the Messiah” (Long). I do believe that Agrippa can be seen as the “ultimate fringe” of what it means to be Jewish. Agrippa took extreme actions to suppress the teachings of Jesus and the spread of Christianity. Agrippa took whatever means necessary to make sure that Jewish law and tradition were enforced. Along with all of that, Agrippa went on to persecute Jewish Christians to make sure that nothing threatened the purity of the Jewish faith. Many Jews, at the time, were open to the teachings of Jesus and became followers of Christianity. Nonetheless, Herod Agrippa I’s actions against the Jewish Christians make him the “ultimate fringe” of what it means to be Jewish.
thats right, I asked God why Paul was executed, He replied, ”political correctness ” so then I searched
the internet for confirmation to make sure I was hearing right. [found your reply] Nero executed the christians with Paul and Peter
because it pleased the people of Rome and Nero to blame christians for the fire. it was in the face of letters written by the governor who sent him to Rome professing his innocence
After reading the book of Act 12, I think James had been arrested before the days of the unleavened bread because Verse 3″ indicated that Peter arrest was during the days of unleavened bread meanwhile passover preceeded the days of unleavened bread, which I think means that James would have being arrested before the passover, and there was a custom then where one prisoner would be released yearly according to people’s choice. May be James was brought out during the passover and people requested for his death and Aggrippa killed him and a prisoner was released at the request of people, and having seen that suit the people the king decided to arrest Peter too. Just an opinion.
I followed you until you compared killing Christians to saving infants. ( Republicans in Michigan)I don’t understand your comparison. Could you please explain further what you mean by this comparison.
I have no idea what you mean…did I mention infants?
Why did Herod kill James? There appears to be both political and personal motivation in the martyrdom of James. The political aspect of this comes in the form of approval from the Jews in Acts 12:3. There seems to be a desire in Herod to please the Jews and garner their favor. Keener (2013) writes how this group of Jewish Christians could have posed a possible threat to his power but that this is unlikely as all persecution prior to this lacked government backing (King Herod Agrippa I section). It is more likely that he simply desired Jewish commitment, a practice he had implemented while still in Rome when he aimed to gain popularity with the Roman elites (Keener, 2013, King Herod Agrippa I section). Persecution of Christians would have given him this Jewish favor.
Herod also appears to be motivated personally. This blog posts highlights the personal attachment that Herod had with the Jewish faith. His persecution of Christians would have made sense as he would have desired to silence any voice that would have spoken against Judaism. Keener (2013) argues that Herod could have likely been targeting those that were known as leaders within the Christian movement as Herod wasn’t targeting James but Peter as well, making sure to wait until after the days of Unleavened Bread to take Peter’s life (King Herod Agrippa I section). This demonstrates Herod’s willingness and desire to cooperate and keep the Jewish Law as best he can. In the end, James’s martyrdom points to Herod’s desire to curry popularity with the Jews and even show his approval of and appreciation for their religion.
In Acts 12, we are shown Herrod Agrippa as a ruler who purposely opposes the Christian movement. He instead actively defends Judaism. His persecution of the church and the imprisonment of Peter appears to align him with Jewish authorities. They resisted the early Christian proclamation that Jesus is and was the Messiah. Herod’s role is complex. He is not just a devout Jewish leader but also a political figure who is also navigating power, popularity, and divine opposition. In acts 12:1-5, Herod persecutes Christians and seems to be motivated by a desire to appease the Jewish leaders. By doing this, he would ultimately maintain his political favor. Acts 12:3 specifically states that his execution of James “pleased the Jews”. This implies that his actions were politically motivated rather than just religious. He may have presented himself as a defender of Jewish traditions, but his actions are more about keeping his power. In Luke-Acts, Jewish “piety” means obedience to God’s will and recognition of Jesus as the fulfillment of God’s promises. Figures such as Simeon (Luke 2:25-32) or even Paul after his conversion embody this kind of faith. Herod, on the other hand, positions himself against God’s work by persecuting the church. When doing this, he ultimately places himself in the same category as the religious leaders who opposed Jesus. Polhill states “His ‘Jewishness’, however, seems to have been largely a face he put on when at home. When away, he lived in a thoroughly Roman fashion.” (Polhill, 1992). So although he publicly followed Jewish customs and gained favor with the Jewish people, he was still deeply rooted with Roman power. This places him at the “fringe” of Jewish identity. This is because he is claiming Jewish “piety” all while using his power in a manner that mirrors Roman rulers.
Why does Peter tell the others to tell James something in Acts 12 when James is already dead?
The James who was killed in 12:1-2 is James the apostle, the brother of John.
The James in Acts 12:17 is James, the Lord’s brother (he will be a significant character in Acts 15 and Acts 21:17–26. James (the Lord’s brother) is the author of the book of James in the NT.
https://readingacts.com/2019/02/21/acts-1217-where-does-peter-go/