Politics and the Church

“There came certain Pharisees, saying to him, Get thee out, and go hence; for Herod would fain kill thee. And he said unto them, Go and say to that fox, Behold, I cast out demons and perform cures today and tomorrow, and the third day I am perfected” (Luke 13:31‑32 ASV).

— Kome Ajise

The leaven of Herod is not a common phrase compared to the more familiar leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees. In Matthew 16, our Lord warns to beware of the leaven of both the Pharisees and Sadducees. Only in the Mark account does he also specify to beware of the leaven of Herod. This is to be found in Mark 8:15 (NAS). “And He was giving orders to them, saying, “Watch out! Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, and the leaven of Herod.”

The Leaven a Symbol

Leaven is a fermenting agent that aids in the putrefaction or decomposition of a substance like dough. It is essentially a catalyst for decay. Therefore, it is little wonder that most scriptural references to leaven are negative and to be avoided. The nation of Israel was directed to entirely clean out leaven and therefore, eat only unleavened bread at Passover. This was used by the Apostle Paul in I Corinthians 5 as a metaphor for avoiding sin. Leaven is corrupting. Therefore, the phrase “leaven of the Pharisees” or “leaven of Herod” would suggest a more precise nature of their corrupting influence.

Thus, the leaven of Herod would refer to his corrupting political influence that was a threat to the Lord’s disciples then; a similar corrupting influence of the political class might still be a danger to us today. But let us first understand who Herod was and identify how his personality type or influence might be relevant all through the Gospel age to make our Lord’s warning timeless. Because there were several men in the New Testament referred to as Herod, we could assume that Jesus was not necessarily referring to any one particular Herod, but to the office or institution represented. To be clear, in Matthew 16:12 we learn that the mention of leaven in this context was not about bread but about the teachings of the Pharisees and Sadducees. It would follow then that the leaven of Herod would also be about the influence he would have on the people.

The Four Herods

We believe there were four Herods identified in the New Testament, and they all reigned as vassals and agents of the Roman authorities. Herod the Great reigned at the time of Jesus’ birth and ordered the killing of all the infant boys under two years old (Matthew 2). This occurred when Herod could not ascertain the whereabouts of the baby Jesus after the wise men left without reporting back to him as requested. Herod the Great divided up his kingdom between his sons; one of them, Herod Antipas (the Tetrarch), ruled over the fourth part of the kingdom that included Judea. He reigned at the time of our Lord’s ministry and was the one that had John the Baptist killed (Matthew 14).

The last two Herods, Agrippa I and Agrippa II, were grandson and great grandson respectively of Herod the Great. Herod Agrippa I was very opposed to the church in Jerusalem and even had the Apostle James (son of Zebedee) killed to the delight of the Jewish rulers. Their response motivated him to arrest the Apostle Peter and hold him in jail during Passover. His intention was to kill him after Passover, again to delight his constituents and further solidify his power (Acts 12). The Lord’s will, however, prevailed to a different outcome, which became a testimony for all time. Herod Agrippa II was reputed for allowing the Apostle Paul to exercise the privileges of his Roman citizenship to defend himself against the attacks of the Jewish power structure. Though this seems benevolent of Agrippa II, in the end it was mostly self‑serving.

Though they ruled over Jews, the Herodian dynasty were descendants of Edom, and derived their power entirely from the Roman authorities. They were opportunistic; though they appeared to care about what the people wanted, it was mostly self‑serving. In Matthew 14, we read that Herod the Tetrarch was concerned about John the Baptist for calling out his immorality in taking his brother’s wife (Herodias). The key here is that Herod really wanted John dead but was compelled to keep him alive because he was afraid of what the people would say, thus a powerful example of duplicity.

We should note that although Herod was recorded as being “extremely sorry” for having to execute John the Baptist in Mark 6:26, we can conclude it was not because he truly had any care for John. As this verse further suggests, we believe worse than any concern about what the people would say, he was even more concerned that his standing as king would be diminished if he did not live up the public oath he made to the daughter of Herodias. Thus, Herod was guided only by self interest in both the initial decision to keep John alive as well as the final decision to have him executed.

What then is the real lesson of the warning to beware of the leaven of Herod? The context of Mark 8:11‑13 shows our Lord had just had another encounter with the Pharisees who demanded a sign. This was just another attempt to tempt Jesus. Not wanting to engage with their hypocrisy, Jesus left them and chose to relocate far away. In Dalmanutha on the northwest shores of the Sea of Galilee, He got on a boat and sailed to the “other side,” which would be far away from those Pharisees.

Frustrated in His Spirit

Though the same event is recorded in Matthew 16, the Mark 8 account offers some unique perspectives on the events surrounding this important warning. The Mark account does not mention the Sadducees but instead mentions Herod (or Herodians), which is an interesting difference. Mark 8:12 also gives us a bit more insight into our Lord’s state of mind by recording that he “sighed deeply.” The Greek word translated “sighed deeply” (Strong’s G389, anastenazo), is used only this one time in the New Testament. It reflects a deep frustration with the Pharisees. Others may not have noticed his frustration because the account says it was “in his spirit.” This might explain his need to get away from them, which further highlights the importance of the admonition, or charge, to beware of the leaven or corrupting influence of the Herodians (Mark 8:15).

The charge (Strong’s G1291, diastello) is translated as an “order” in the NASB, and the gravity of the order is expressed in the first two words, saying “Observe! Beware” (Diaglott). To observe means to pay close attention, to be aware and be perceptive. “Beware” further heightens the need for critical discernment of the deceitful capacity, not only of the Pharisees, but also of Herod. There are two considerations to offer for the grave concern expressed by our Lord with respect to the Herodians.

First, they were interlopers pretending to be custodians of the Jewish heritage. This might be further confirmed because the Sadducees, who were the elite custodians of the temple, were also close to the Herodians. This gave the Herodians more credibility in having the Jewish interest at heart. Second, history records that Herod the Great was responsible for a wholesale reconstruction of the City of Jerusalem and especially rebuilding the (Second) Temple with a larger footprint, providing more space for people. These considerations combined to project both civil and religious authority on the Herods. In Acts 26, Paul, in his defense before the Roman Governor Festus and King Herod Agrippa, felt fortunate to have Agrippa present in addition to the Roman Governor. In verse 3 he said, “especially because you (Agrippa) are an expert in all customs and questions among the Jews” (NASB).

According to Josephus,¹ Agrippa petitioned Caesar and received “authority over the temple, and the money of the sacred treasure, and the choice of the high priest.” This confirms Paul’s statement of Herod Agrippa’s Jewish authority, and King Agrippa agreed that Paul was innocent of the charges against him. However, Agrippa still did not do the right thing. He could have freed Paul, being the Jewish authority that Festus needed to have concur. Yet, he hid behind a technicality and sent Paul to Rome, according to Paul’s prior request. Herod Agrippa’s ruling was made mainly to not anger the Jews who wanted Paul killed.

The Spirit of Herod

For us today, the leaven of Herod is real, as our Lord’s charge remains timeless. All through the Gospel Age, Christians have had to contend with civil rulers co-opting religious authority to serve their need to keep power. A classic case would be the Emperor Constantine and the Catholic Church, which centuries later led to the dreaded papal power. The leaven of Herod is around us when we hear some political leaders use the Bible to support their policy cases and as a basis for laws passed, while others react by vilifying the Bible. Christians may be quick to be sympathetic and become part of these subtle movements because these policies seem consistent with our beliefs. But these authorities are not of our Lord’s kingdom, and we are not of this world as He is not of this world. We are made separate from these by the word of truth (John 17:16‑17).

We learn from the charge and warning of Mark 8:15 that our Lord was deeply troubled and wanted to be distant from these agents of the adversary. This is likely because most were skilled manipulative characters who knew better but were deceitful in the use of their knowledge. Herod Agrippa knew Paul was innocent but would rather have him sent to Rome than confront the Jews with the truth. We must immediately become concerned when the rulers of this present evil world begin to sound favorable to us. Our Lord’s warning to “Observe and Beware” should come to mind.²

We know there will never be a truly righteous earthly rulership until our Lord’s kingdom is established. The leaven of Herod is the highly corrupting influence of the political class that seduces Christians into thinking our kingdom ideals can be met by anyone in authority, however consistent they may seem with our beliefs. Like all the Herods, the political class only serves their own needs to be in power and gain even more power. They are agents of the ruler of this present evil world, who masquerades as an angel of light. We should truly beware!

(1) The Works of Josephus (Translated by William Whiston), Book 20, Chapter 1, Paragraph 3

(2) One editor’s note: It is not clear that Jesus’ warning pertained to Herod Agrippa. Paul was glad he was before Agrippa, and God used that for His purpose of getting Paul to Rome. This editor is also inclined to view concerns about politics of today differently. Public endorsement of ungodly principles, positions, and conduct, immoral by Biblical standards, is increasing among public figures. For other public figures to call attention to this, supporting standards once common in Christian culture, is a good thing. We need not assume a corrupt purpose for presenting a good standard.