So if God is no longer in the punishment business, who killed Herod?

On the appointed day Herod, wearing his royal robes, sat on his throne and delivered a public address to the people. They shouted, “This is the voice of a god, not of a man.” Immediately, because Herod did not give praise to God, an angel of the Lord struck him down, and he was eaten by worms and died. (Acts 12:21-23)

If God is really done with sin, how do we explain this? Herod is a good test case for he is the only person in the New Testament who appears to have been struck or punished by God. Before the cross entire cities and nations were wiped out on account of sin. But after the cross, Herod is the only candidate. (If you’re wondering about Ananias and Sapphira in Acts 5 or Elymas the sorcerer, see my note in the comments below.) So who killed Herod? I’m going to present the evidence for and against five suspects, then you can decide for yourself. This is a little bit tongue-in-cheek, but I am going to make a serious point at the end.

1.    God killed Herod

To prove a crime you need to demonstrate means, motive, and opportunity. God certainly had the means and opportunity to strike Herod but He had no motive. “What about Herod’s sin of pride?” I hear you say with indignation. “He had it coming and deserved to get whacked!” Maybe he did, but God does not treat us as our sins deserve (Ps 103:10). The truth is we all had it coming, yet God gave His Son as the ultimate sin offering for the whole world. Through Christ He has reconciled the world to Himself and is no longer counting our sins against us (2 Cor 5:19). If God was counting Herod’s sin, it would be bad news indeed for it would mean that the cross was not the perfect remedy for sin that the Bible says it is (Heb 10:12).

“What about God’s righteous demands for justice?” These were fully satisfied on the cross. God is no longer obliged to punish sin because He already has (Is 53:5). “But Herod never repented.” God’s grace does not depend on man’s performance. He still wouldn’t punish him. Remember, the Son of Man came to see and save the lost (Lk 19:10). He came to die for unbelievers like Herod. If Herod went to his grave unrepentant, then, yes, there will be eternal consequences. But men are appointed to face judgment after they die, not before (Heb 9:27). In this post we are talking about Herod’s first death, not his second (Rev 21:8).

God is no respecter of persons (Acts 10:34). He had no more reason to strike Herod than He has to strike you. The fact that you’re still breathing despite all you’ve done is testimony to the grace of a good God. You are just one of six billion living witnesses of God’s mercy and grace. The grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men, including Herod. He doesn’t deserve grace any more than you do, but here we are.

Not only is there no motive, but God’s defense (as if He needed one) is supported by an outstanding character witness: Jesus. To interpret the heart of the Father we only need to look at the Son (Jn 14:9). Jesus met plenty of people who were proud like Herod. Some were so full of themselves that they warranted sober warnings: “Woe to you – how will you escape being condemned to hell?” (Mt 23). Yet every sinner that Jesus confronted walked away with the opportunity to repent. Jesus smote none of them and He died for all of them. Was God judging Herod? Jesus says no (Jn 5:22). Although many are quick to blame God for killing Herod, the facts are He had no motive and Jesus said He didn’t do it. Case dismissed.

2.    An angel killed Herod

Luke wrote that an “angel of the Lord” killed Herod. In the Hebrew Old Testament, the phrase “angel of the Lord” sometimes referred to the Lord Himself (Ex 3:2, Jdg 6:22). But there are plenty of places in the New Testament where it simply meant an angel from the Lord (Mt 28:2, Lk 2:9). So one possibility raised by my friend Simon Wilson, is that an angel struck Herod. This is not to say that it was the Lord’s will for Herod to be struck. But if saints can act independently of God’s will, why can’t angels? Angels aren’t robots.

Have you ever heard of a Christian acting rashly and doing something dumb for Jesus? How about Peter? In a moment of passion Peter tried to remove the head of the high priest’s servant (Jn 18:10). If Peter can swing a sword in a misguided attempt to defend the Lord’s name, why not an angel? I admit it’s hard to imagine, but as far as I can tell there’s nothing in scripture to rule out this possibility.

3.    A believer killed Herod

To be correct, Luke wrote that an aggelos or angelos of the Lord struck Herod. A full definition of that word raises the possibility that it could’ve been an angel, a messenger, a pastor or an ordinary Christian. For instance, Luke uses the same word angelos when describing John the Baptist (Lk 7:27), John’s disciples (Lk 7:24), and Jesus’ disciples (Lk 9:52). An angelos is simply a messenger. So now we’re looking for a messenger with a motive. Hmm. Maybe it was Peter – he certainly had motive. Afterall, Herod had tried to kill him so maybe it was self-defense (Acts 12:3). Or maybe Peter got riled when Herod started strutting like a god and he went berserk with a sword again. (This one was rusty, hence the infection that followed.) This led to a huge scandal and so as not to embarrass Peter further, Luke disguised his identity when re-telling the story.

No, I don’t really think Peter did it.

4.    The devil killed Herod

I mention the devil simply because Jesus said he’s always a suspect whenever death and destruction are involved (Jn 10:10). Of course if it was the devil, then Luke, the author of Acts, missed the mark by saying it was an angel of the Lord. If Luke was ascribing to God something done by the devil, then he would be making a very Old Testamenty mistake (see Job). In olden times people used to attribute anything supernatural – good or bad – to God. If Satan did something bad, it was because God had allowed it to happen and therefore God was ultimately responsible. If Luke was thinking like this then he was making a huge mistake. But he wouldn’t be alone. To this day there are believers who claim that because God is sovereign everything that happens is His will. Jesus would strongly disagree.

A second way that Luke could’ve misread Herod’s death is by not fully understanding the significance of the cross. He may have been a little confused about what made the new covenant new. Perhaps he thought that God was still smiting people. If so, he wouldn’t be the only New Testament believer who was confused about the covenants. (Ananias, Paul’s healer, still thought you could wash your sins away with water (Acts 22:16)!)

5.    Sin killed Herod

I don’t blame the devil for everything that goes wrong in this world. The fact is that sin is probably a far greater killer (Gen 2:17, Rm 6:33). Sin has a single purpose and that is to open the door to death (Rm 5:12). Sin can kill you quick or it can kill you slow but we are naïve if we think of sin as a purposeless thing. Paul warned that if we let sin reign in our “mortal bodies” we will become its slaves and it will lead to death (Rms 6:12-16).

Those of us who have received the gift of righteousness having nothing to fear from either sin or death (1 Co 15:55), but Herod had no such assurance. As a slave to sin he was fair game (Rm 6:16). You might say that sin was crouching at his door desiring him as it did Cain (Gen 4:7). According to Josephus, Herod knew that he was dying on account of the praises of his flatterers. I don’t put a lot of stock in what Josephus says, but his account does accord with Paul’s warnings about sin. Maybe it was Herod’s sin that killed him.

So who killed Herod?

We don’t exactly know and it doesn’t really matter. I didn’t write this to blame Peter, some Rambo-angel or even the devil. I wrote it so people would stop blaming God. My punch-line is this: If God punished Herod by killing him, then Christ’s atoning work on the cross was not perfect and you’re in serious trouble.

But the good news is that He didn’t, it was, and you’re not!
___
Related posts:
- 1 Peter 4:17 – It’s judgment time!
- Seven signs that you might be living under law
- The Christchurch earthquake: Four questions Christians can answer

Here’s a passage that seems to come up whenever something bad happens to Christians. If a pastor stumbles in sin and his church splits, it’s God judging His house. If an earthquake wipes out a city and some of those who die happen to be Christians, it’s God judging His house. Some people seem to take perverse delight in threatening others with the sword of God’s judgment. They seem to forget Jesus’ warning in Matthew 26:52.

All of our sins were dealt with at the cross. We have been fully redeemed and sanctified by the blood of the Lamb. There is a day coming when Jesus will separate the sheep from the goats, but this is only bad news if you’re a goat! If you are a sheep it is a day to look forward to with eager anticipation and confidence. Where does this confidence come from? It comes from a revelation of the Father’s love as expressed in the Son’s perfect work on the cross.

So what is Peter talking about when he says it’s time for judgment to begin with the house of God? I’m going to give you two interpretations. The first interpretation emphasizes things we must do while the second emphasizes things Christ has already done. However, I will first give you the scripture in context:

Dear friends, do not be surprised at the painful trial you are suffering, as though something strange were happening to you.
But rejoice that you participate in the sufferings of Christ, so that you may be overjoyed when his glory is revealed.
If you are insulted because of the name of Christ, you are blessed, for the Spirit of glory and of God rests on you.
If you suffer, it should not be as a murderer or thief or any other kind of criminal, or even as a meddler.
However, if you suffer as a Christian, do not be ashamed, but praise God that you bear that name.
For it is time for judgment to begin with the house of God; and if it begins with us, what will the outcome be for those who do not obey the gospel of God?
And, “If it is hard for the righteous to be saved, what will become of the ungodly and the sinner?”
So then, those who suffer according to God’s will should commit themselves to their faithful Creator and continue to do good. (1 Pet 4:12-19)

Interpretation #1: Work harder

There are only two kinds of religion in the world – religion based on our works or religion based on His blood. Someone whose faith rests in human works will interpret the judgment of 1 Peter 4:17 as punishment for Christians. Of course they won’t come right out and say it. They will use words like purification and discipline but what they really mean is condemnation and wrath. They will refer to patterns of judgment in the Old Testament but make no mention of the cross. They may talk about Ananias and Sapphira but ignore Jesus. Strip away the jargon and their message will be this: “Bad things are going to happen to you. God is behind these bad things, but don’t worry because far worse things are going to happen to sinners.” They may try and pass this off as “good news” by saying it’s better to suffer a little wrath now than hellfire later. What should we do in response to such a message? More works of course! We should try harder to be better Christians. We should repent more, confess more, and generally straighten up and fly right.

There’s no way around it. If you interpret 1 Peter 4:17 through the lens of works you will end up with a condemning message. “God loves you and because He loves you He’s going to give you a whipping. It’s for your own good.” How is it, then, that in the five verses immediately preceding, Peter uses words and phrases like “rejoice,” “be overjoyed,” “you are blessed” and “praise God that you bear His name”? How in the name of all that is sensible are we supposed to get joyful over a divine whipping? Either Peter has lost touch with reality, or he has something completely different in mind.

Interpretation #2: Make up your mind

The key to understanding 1 Peter 4:17 is the word “judgment.” In the original Greek this word is krima which means “decision” or “decree.” It is closely related to the word krino which means “to distinguish or decide.” The appropriate image is of a judge deciding a case. A judge’s decision is called a judgment. If you have been raised with a legal mindset, it is natural to assume that all judgments are bad. When a cop waves you over, you automatically think the worst. But a judgment is not inherently bad; it’s just a decision. When Paul says in 1 Corinthians 11:13 “judge (krino) for yourselves whether a woman should pray with her head uncovered,” he is saying “you decide.”

When Peter says it’s time for judgment, he is literally saying it’s decision time. Who is making the decision and what is the decision being made? From most translations we get the impression that God is judging or deciding things about the church. But a literal translation of this verse, such as is found in the Literal Translation and Young’s Literal Translation of the Bible, reveals that Peter is seeking a judgment, or decision, from the house of God. It is those in the house of God who are deciding. What is the decision that Peter has in mind? Judging by what he says in the next verse, it seems to be the decision that separates the righteous from the ungodly. Peter reminds us that the decision to put one’s faith in Jesus is the most important decision there is:

“…if it begins with us, what will be the end of those who do not respect or believe or obey the good news (the Gospel) of God?” (1 Pet 4:17 AMP)

Some context will help. Peter was writing during a time of great persecution. Because of Nero – not God – Christians were being tortured and killed for their faith in Christ. Paul was probably dead and Peter himself would soon be crucified. If you were a follower of Christ, martyrdom was a very real prospect. In view of this, Peter says three things: (1) Don’t be surprised that you are suffering for the gospel (4:12). If they persecuted Jesus they will persecute you. (2) Even though persecution is painful, rejoice on account of the coming glory (4:13). It hurts now, but justice is coming. (3) If this suffering is causing you to be in two minds about being identified as a follower of Christ, then make up your mind and decide (4:17). Better to suffer with Jesus now than to be found without him later.

Is Peter saying Christians can lose their salvation?

No he is not. There are two issues here. One is security and the other is fruitfulness. In the last verse in the passage he encourages the believers to commit themselves “to their faithful Creator and continue to do good.” Who is faithful? God is! You may be worried about persecution but you do not need to worry about God letting you go. In the words of Spurgeon, if He has loved you once He will love you forever. The concern is not that Christians could lose their salvation, but that they might be driven underground in fear (3:6,14). This is why Peter urges them to continue doing good (4:17), even in the face of persecution. Peter knew from personal experience what it was like to run from Jesus in fear and he didn’t want his readers doing that. The good news of God’s grace will not be heard unless its preachers are bold.

A final word on judgment

Jesus said two things about judgment that are relevant here:

“For God sent not the Son into the world to judge (krino) the world…” (Jn 3:17a, ASV)

“For judgment (krima) I have come into this world…” (Jn 9:39)

Jesus did not come to judge the world, yet the world will be judged on account of Jesus. Remember that another word for judgment is decision. Now if Jesus said He is not the one doing the deciding (krino), but that decisions (krima) will be made on account of Him, then who is making these decisions? We are! Every single one of us will either decide to put our faith in Jesus or we won’t. Those who put their faith in Christ are made into a new creation and given His Spirit as a deposit guaranteeing what is to come (2 Cor 5:5,17). Those who refuse to decide are left unchanged. You could say that we are all born goats but some of us choose to become sheep. When Jesus returns in glory He will not judge anyone. He will simply separate those who have chosen to become sheep from those who have chosen to remain goats. The Grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men, but not all men will put their faith in Him.

Let me finish with three questions for those who still think God is judging/punishing the church or Christchurch or the West.

1. Those who are in Christ are complete (Col 2:10) and perfect forever (He 10:14). If Jesus said He would not judge even the lost (Jn 12:47), why would He judge those He has redeemed and are now reckoned perfect?
2. Peter said “Christ died for sins once for all” (1 Pet 3:18). If my sins have been removed and God is now “done with sin” (1 Pet 4:1), then what is left to punish?
3. Finally, if the punishment that brought us peace was placed on Christ (Is 53:5), how can God now punish us? Would He not be unjust if He punished twice for the same offence?

Just something to think about.
___
Related posts:
- Whose medicine are you taking?
- Does God give and take away?
- Incomplete deeds: The zombie church of Sardis (Rev 3:1-6)

But think, for a moment, about all those who have expressed negative opinions about James. Did any of those people have an encounter with the risen Lord like James did? Were any of them personal friends with Paul, the apostle of grace? Did any of them hear the gospel of grace preached straight from Paul’s mouth? Were any of them martyred for their faith and, if so, did they forgive their killers with their dying breath as James reportedly did?

There is much we don’t know about James. In Part 1 of this study I examined the popular view that James didn’t get grace, at least not initially. But in Part 2, I gave six good reasons why he probably did. Contrary to what you’ve heard, my strong view is that James was Paul’s equal when it came to understanding grace.

How, then, are we to account for his behavior in Acts 15 where he appears to lay law on the Gentile believers?

The Jerusalem Council

Is it a stretch to say that Acts 15 contains the minutes of the most important committee meeting in history? At first glance, this was a meeting about whether the Gentiles needed to be circumcised. But the real issues were much larger. This was the first time the old covenant banged heads with the new in the New Testament church. It was a contest of covenants – law versus grace. Happily, grace won!

Here’s the back-story: Certain men went from Judea to Antioch preaching mixture (“snip the tip”) and the result was a full-blown blarney with Paul and Barnabas. The relevant parties all ended up back in Jerusalem to settle the issue. Those preaching mixture said “the Gentiles must be circumcised and required to obey the law of Moses” (v.5). But Peter stood up and said:

“No! We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are.” (v11)

There is a danger here of missing the Big Point. The small point was this: should the Gentiles be circumcised? But the big point was this: on what basis are all of us – Jews and Gentiles – actually saved? For hundreds of years Jews had been drawing a big fat line between themselves and everybody else. They were separate. They were special. If the Gentiles wanted to join their club, they had to follow their rules. But Peter recognized that God was doing a new thing:

“God, who knows the heart, showed that he accepted them by giving the Holy Spirit to them, just as he did to us. He made no distinction between us and them, for he purified their hearts by faith.” (v8-9)

No longer would God relate exclusively to the law-abiding Jews, for Jesus had died for all men. And if Christ had died for the circumcised along with the uncircumcised, what did circumcision matter? As Paul would later write, “in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has any value” (Gal 5:6). There was no distinction, said Peter. God, who knows the heart, was already accepting Gentiles without any reference to the law.

And now to James…

After hearing both sides of the argument, James, the leader of the Jerusalem church, announced his decision:

“It is my judgment, therefore, that we should not make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God.” (v19)

James realized that God was doing something among the Gentiles and that his best course of action was to stay out of God’s way. He understood that circumcision and the laws of Moses were an obstacle to receiving the grace of God. In case we should be in any doubt about where he stood, James does five things to show he was 100% with those in the grace group:

(1)    he acknowledges Peter’s testimony of God accepting the uncircumcised and law-less Gentiles (v14)
(2)    he connects the current move of God with Amos’s prophecy describing the new covenant as one relevant to all Gentiles, i.e., those apart from the law (v16-18)
(3)    he rejects the call for circumcision and, by association, the requirement to obey the law of Moses (v19)
(4)    he co-authors a letter to the Gentiles distancing himself from those unauthorized men who had gone out and troubled them by what they said (v24)
(5)    lest his words be lost in translation, James chose to send his letter with “our dear friends Barnabas and Paul” (v25)

This was a devastating blow for those in the circumcision group! They were left with nothing. They had asked for the Gentiles to be circumcised but were now being told that their own circumcision counted for naught. They had asked that the Gentiles be held to the law of Moses, but were now being told that salvation was by grace alone. You can just imagine Paul and Peter high-fiving. Game over. Grace had won!

But what about the three requirements?

Having declared his position on the issue of grace versus law, James makes three requests which are subsequently added to the letter sent to the Gentiles:

“It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us not to burden you with anything beyond the following requirements: You are to abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality. You will do well to avoid these things. Farewell.” (v28-29)

It is astonishing to me that people have used this one verse to infer that James was preaching law. He had just indicated in five separate ways that he is on the side of grace. How more clear could he have been? Yet because of the three small requirements listed at the end of this letter, some have concluded that James was confused about the basis of our salvation.

So what was James thinking? Didn’t he know that 21st century Christians would get confused? We will let James speak for himself:

“Instead we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood. For Moses has been preached in every city from the earliest times and is read in the synagogues on every Sabbath.” (v20-21)

James was not laying law on the Gentiles; he was showing grace to Jews.

James knew that there would be a synagogue in every Gentile city. For the sake of the Jews, James asked the Gentiles to be sensitive to these well-known aspects of the law, namely food and sex. Paul was of the same mind. He wrote an entire chapter advising the Corinthians not to eat food sacrificed to idols. Paul wasn’t preaching law to the Corinthians; he was trying to win those who had weak consciences:

“We are no worse if we do not eat, and no better if we do. Be careful, however, that the exercise of your freedom does not become a stumbling block to the weak.” (1 Cor 8:8-9)

James said the Gentiles should avoid sexual immorality. So did Paul (Rms 13:13, Col 3:5) and he got very agitated when they didn’t (1 Cor 5:1). It is a bad witness indeed when believers fool around with sex. It shows that we are still enslaved to our sinful natures and no different from those who live in darkness (Gal 5:19, Col 3:5). Jesus died to make us holy, so live holy.

Finally, we should note that James’ letter to the Gentiles was not actually penned by James, but by the “apostles and elders” (v23). It is as much Peter and Paul’s letter as it is James’s. So if James is preaching law, then so are Peter and Paul. But he’s not and back then no one thought he was. When the letter was read out in the church at Antioch, the people were “glad for its encouraging message” (v30). The grace of God, revealed through James, Peter and Paul, is still encouraging us today.

In Part 4 of this study, we will look at some of the strange things James seems to say in Acts 21.
___
Related posts:
- Did James understand grace? 6 reasons to say ‘yes!’
- James: Preacher of grace
- The gospel comes to Laodicea