Acts 12

The connection to Luke 22-23

It is interesting to note the connection between the persecutions. But I also see something in there with Peter. Peter is the story before in Luke, denying Jesus. It makes me wonder if there is a connection between James being killed and Peter being saved to show that there is no earning of God’s favor. Back to the suffering piece, prayer matters, obedience to Jesus matters but there is a piece of sovereignty over that.

- Bring in the question of suffering?

- Giive some connection of Herod Agrippa I

As the gospel has moved out from Jerusalem, Luke has been keen to highlight the links with that church and its leadership, particularly with the apostle Peter. Thus, in Acts 12, as Luke prepares to show how the gospel spread among Gentiles, ‘he reinforces the continuing role of Jewish individuals and especially of the messianic Jewish community in this process’. Luke presents his readers with a significant challenge at this point, as he brings together the themes of persecution, prayer, divine deliverance, and gospel advance. This challenge is set within the context of a deteriorating situation for the church in Jerusalem. Prior to the ministry of Stephen, despite the opposition of their leaders, the people of Jerusalem continued to be sympathetic to the apostles and their message (2:47; 4:21; 5:13, 26). However, Stephen’s enemies aroused the people against him (6:12; cf. 12:4 note), and the great persecution against ‘all except the apostles’ followed (8:1). Before Luke focuses on the mission to the Gentiles and the suffering endured by gospel messengers in that context, he brings us up to date on the struggle experienced by Christians in Jerusalem. Readers can assume that hostility to Christians in Jerusalem continued, even as converts in distant places began to experience opposition from ‘the Jews’ as well (e.g., 13:45, 50; 14:1–5, 19; 17:4–5, 13).[1]

The chief threat to James, Peter, and the Jerusalem church was now Herod Agrippa I rather than the high priest and temple authorities, though their continuing involvement is suggested by Herod’s seeking approval for his actions ‘among the Jews’ (v. 3). Additionally, several details in 12:1–5 recall previous occasions of opposition from evil rulers, ‘helping the skilled imagination to construct the layers of background that give this episode its deeper meaning’.[2]

- Tannehill 1990, 152. Tannehill notes verbal links between Luke’s description of Peter’s arrest (syllabein, Acts 12:3) and Jesus’ arrest (Lk. 22:54; Acts 1:16) at Passover time (‘during the Feast of Unleavened Bread’, Acts 12:3; ‘after the Passover’, 12:4; cf. Lk. 22:1–7). Other verbal links with the arrest of Jesus and threats to apostles and others in Acts are noted in my comments on the relevant verses[3]

King Herod in this context means Herod Agrippa I (reigned ad41–44), who was son of Aristobulus and grandson of Herod the Great (reigned 37 bc–4 bc). The emperor Caligula gave him the tetrarchies formerly held by Philip and Lysanias (cf. Lk. 3:1) and allowed him to be called king. Claudius, the next emperor, then added Judea and Samaria to his kingdom, allowing him to rule over the area formerly governed by his grandfather. ‘Herod did his best to win the favour of the Jews and especially cultivated the Pharisees.’ The threat to Peter and the church is highlighted by Luke’s description of him as Herod rather than as Agrippa.9This, together with mention of his use of the sword against James, particularly associates him with Herod the Tetrach of Galilee (reigned 4 bc–ad39), who arrested John the Baptist (Lk. 3:19–20) and had him beheaded (Lk. 9:7–9). That same Herod was one of those who conspired to have Jesus killed (Lk. 13:31; 23:6–12; Acts 4:27–28). As in previous persecution episodes, Luke establishes an interlock between Jesus and his disciples.[4]

- Despite his Roman and Greek interests, Herod sought to live as a faithful Jew (cf. m. Soṭah 7.7; Josephus, Ant. 19.292–94, 331), and so he might naturally be concerned to put down an heretical sect. However, use of the sword, rather than any other means of execution, suggests that Herod may have seen the Christian movement as being also a political threat to his regime.[5]

- Clear connection of Herod wanting to bring Peter out before the people for a trial and that it was during the feast of unleavened bread. All the same with Jesus.

o Back to suffering – “Without explanation, one apostle is executed but another is rescued, teaching the church to live with the mystery of God’s providence and to rely afresh in each situation on the mercy and continuing care of God.”

The command to get up quickly and leave by night is the first hint of a parallel with the escape of the Israelites from Egypt on that first Passover night (cf. Ex. 12:11). Obedience is made possible because the chains fell off Peter’s wrists. Barrett rightly observes that ‘everything turns upon God’s gracious initiative, exercised through an angel. Peter is fast asleep, and contributes nothing more than sheer incomprehension and incredulity’.[6]

- Lots of connections to the Exodus narrative

Peter declares that ‘the Lord has sent his angel and rescued me’, recalling Nebuchadnezzar’s words about the deliverance of the three Hebrews from the fiery furnace (Dn. 3:28).[7]

- Question becomes where are we in this story, maybe?

Josephus piece is incredible

21–22 On the day appointed for this audience with representatives from Tyre and Sidon, Herod put on his royal robes, sat on his throne and delivered a public address to the people. Other important people were clearly present, while Herod was arrogantly asserting his majesty and importance in the city where Caesar was the real political power. Josephus similarly records that on the second day of the festival Agrippa entered the theatre at daybreak, ‘clad in a robe made altogether of silver, of quite wonderful weaving’ (Ant. 19.344). Luke says that the crowd shouted, ‘This is the voice of a god, not of a mere mortal’. Josephus notes that the king’s flatterers were astonished at the radiance of his silver robe when it was touched by the first rays of the rising sun and addressed him as a god, crying out, ‘Be gracious to us! Hitherto we have reverenced you as a human being, but henceforth we confess you to be of more than mortal nature.’

23 Luke then records God’s response to this whole situation. Immediately, because Herod did not give praise to God, an angel of the Lord struck him down.Adulation of kings was common in the ancient world, but no faithful Jew could accept divine honours in this way. Herod refused to give God the praise (doxa, ‘glory, praise’; cf. Rom. 1:21) which was due to him and had improperly allowed it to be ascribed to himself (cf. the charge against the Prince of Tyre in Ezk. 28:1–10 and contrast Paul and Barnabas in Acts 14:14–18). Josephus similarly notes that Agrippa would not repudiate the adoration of the crowd and its flattery. In his account, the king was seized with violent internal pains, was carried home, and died five days later. In Luke’s account, an angel of the Lord is responsible for having struck him down. We are not necessarily meant to think of an angelic appearance, as in vv. 7–11, but rather that the affliction was sent by God as a punishment. The particular manner of his death (he was eaten by worms and died) is frequently mentioned by ancient writers, ‘especially as having been endured by people who were considered to have richly deserved it’. Luke gives no indication of the length of time the illness was experienced but simply records that it led to his death. For the date of Herod’s death see 12:19 note. From this time on, Judea reverted to government by Roman procurators.[8]

On the closing verse of chapter 12

The famine relief visit is recorded out of order at the end of the section about the foundation of the church in Antioch (11:27–30) because it represents a grateful response from that church for the ministry received from Jerusalem. The story of Peter’s imprisonment and the death of Herod is then recorded to mark the end of a major section of the narrative in which Jerusalem and Peter are central. Luke arranged his material in this way to convey the message that the church in Antioch had developed in such a way that it was ‘now ready to move out into new fields and establish new churches dependent on itself’. The next main division of Acts will focus on Paul and his ministry among the Gentiles. Jerusalem is left behind until it emerges again in the narrative concerning the council in Acts 15. We are meant to conclude that gospel growth continued there, despite opposition of various kinds (cf. 21:20 for the next estimate of the number of disciples in Jerusalem). ‘Luke’s belief in the victory of the gospel is thoroughly realistic and recognizes that though the word of God is not fettered, its servants may well have to suffer and be bound (2 Tim. 2:9).’[9]

Second Commentary

Herod Agrippa I tried to curry favour with the Jews by executing James and attempting to execute Peter. Luke’s narrative shows how Herod’s plan was thwarted by the direct intervention of God. God acted, however, in response to the prayers of the church, although when Peter was released from the condemned cell, the church could scarcely believe that its prayers had been effective. If the story underlines the relationship between prayer and the action of God, it also shows how God acts to bring retribution upon those who oppose his work and exalt themselves; those who set themselves up against God ultimately perish.[10]

From Luke’s point of view the emphasis would appear to be on the triumphant progress of the gospel (12:24) which is not hindered by the death of one apostle or the imprisonment of another. When the church prays, the cause of God will go forward, and his enemies will come to naught, even if this does not exempt the church from suffering and martyrdom; Luke’s belief in the victory of the gospel is thoroughly realistic and recognizes that though the word of God is not fettered, its servants may well have to suffer and be bound (2 Tim. 2:9).[11]

Herod in this context is Herod Agrippa I, a grandson of Herod the Great, who after a somewhat tempestuous youth was granted ever-increasing areas to rule by the Emperors Gaius and Claudius; by ad 41 he had acceded to a kingdom of similar extent to that of his grandfather. He did his best to win the favour of the Jews and especially cultivated the Pharisees.[12]

It was fervent prayer which was offered, like that offered by Jesus in Gethsemane (Luke 22:44), expressive of the church’s concern for Peter rather than of a feeling that, if God is to answer prayer, he must be pressed and persuaded by spectacular feats of devotion. At the same time, if the church knew how its Lord himself had prayed, it would have had to pray: ‘Nevertheless, not our will, but yours, be done’ (cf. Luke 22:42).[13]

The Jewish historian Josephus records how Herod celebrated games in Caesarea in honour of the Emperor, which were attended by the leading men of the kingdom. When Herod entered the theatre, clad in a glittering silver garment, his flatterers addressed him as a god: ‘May you be propitious to us, and if we have hitherto feared you as a man, yet henceforth we agree that you are more than mortal in your being.’ The king accepted their flattery. Then looking upward he saw an owl perched on a rope and took it as a symbol of ill fortune. At the same time he was seized by violent internal pains and was carried into his palace where he died after five days of illness (Jos., Ant.19:343–350)[14]

[1]Peterson, D. G. (2009). The Acts of the Apostles(pp. 359–360). Grand Rapids, MI; Nottingham, England: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. [2]Peterson, D. G. (2009). The Acts of the Apostles (p. 360). Grand Rapids, MI; Nottingham, England: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. [3]Peterson, D. G. (2009). The Acts of the Apostles. Grand Rapids, MI; Nottingham, England: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. [4]Peterson, D. G. (2009). The Acts of the Apostles (pp. 360–361). Grand Rapids, MI; Nottingham, England: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. [5]Peterson, D. G. (2009). The Acts of the Apostles (p. 361). Grand Rapids, MI; Nottingham, England: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. [6]Peterson, D. G. (2009). The Acts of the Apostles (p. 364). Grand Rapids, MI; Nottingham, England: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. [7]Peterson, D. G. (2009). The Acts of the Apostles (p. 364). Grand Rapids, MI; Nottingham, England: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. [8]Peterson, D. G. (2009). The Acts of the Apostles (pp. 369–370). Grand Rapids, MI; Nottingham, England: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. [9]Peterson, D. G. (2009). The Acts of the Apostles (p. 371). Grand Rapids, MI; Nottingham, England: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. [10]Marshall, I. H. (1980). Acts: an introduction and commentary (Vol. 5, p. 218). Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press. [11]Marshall, I. H. (1980). Acts: an introduction and commentary (Vol. 5, p. 219). Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press. [12]Marshall, I. H. (1980). Acts: an introduction and commentary (Vol. 5, p. 219). Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press. [13]Marshall, I. H. (1980). Acts: an introduction and commentary (Vol. 5, pp. 220–221). Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press. [14]Marshall, I. H. (1980). Acts: an introduction and commentary (Vol. 5, p. 224). Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.