From: andronicus451@gmail.com   
      
   Luke 9   
   7 Now Herod the tetrarch heard of all that was done by him: and he was   
   perplexed, because that it was said of some, that John was risen from the   
   dead; 8 And of some, that Elias had appeared; and of others, that one of the   
   old   
   prophets was risen again. 9 And Herod said, John have I beheaded: but who is   
   this, of whom I hear such things? And he desired to see him.   
      
   * * *   
      
   Judea in the time of Jesus Christ had an autonomous ruler - because   
   it made Roman occupation seem acceptable to the Jews, for it they   
   were directly subjected to the emperor by the divine right of Jupiter,   
   that would challenge their faith in One God and there would be a revolt   
   (which later indeed happened, culminating with the destruction of   
   Jerusalem and Temple around 70 AD).   
      
   But Herod had no real power, as to choose allied countries or make   
   an independent political decision, rather to eat, drink and merry, and   
   have whatever woman he wanted, even if it is his brother's wife:   
   it was irrelevant to Rome. He was free to deal with his internal enemies   
   any way he wanted as long as he guaranteed unconditional obedience and   
   material gain through taxes to then world order - Rome.   
      
   Likewise he beheaded John the Baptist, because John realised that   
   having a political leader openly transgress the Law will be a bad   
   example and influence, corrupting the majority.   
      
   It is then interesting to see what comes next.   
      
   Why the scribes and the Pharisees, who only had the access to the   
   Law of Moses and the Prophets, were the least to accept salvation   
   in Christ?   
      
   First, it would cost them their position: their position is no longer   
   guaranteed if a leper, blind man or a prostitute could replace them,   
   and everybody would know the holy Scriptures by heart.   
      
   Already hated and despised, tax collectors and prostitutes had nothing   
   to lose, so they went to John and were baptised, confessing their sins   
   (Mark 1:5).   
      
   Second, it would move them out of their zone of comfort - confessing   
   their sins in public and being baptised by John who simply came out of   
   nowhere and never went to a Pharisee or scribe school ... "No, we don't   
   think so ... we will rather that people think we are holy, saintly and   
   never committed sin, so we have the divine right to teach the nation   
   as the disciples of Moses" (John 9:28).   
      
   Third, they envied Jesus. Pontius Pilate was a Roman politician,   
   so he knew all about schemes, plots, assassinations and envy.   
   He realised that the Pharisees envied Jesus and wanted him   
   to be crucified because of that only reason, so he tried to release him   
   (Mark 15:10).   
      
   He realised that he is dealing with an innocent man, and wanted not   
   to have anything to do with his crucifixion, also being warned by his   
   wife's dream (Matthew 27:19). He tried to release him again and again,   
   but Jews used blackmailing, accusing him that he was not the friend   
   of the Emperor (John 19:12). Now, this was a serious charge that could   
   endanger the pontifex himself: in Rome, such a slander could have had   
   serious consequences or cause a political murder or assassination,   
   for even the emperors of Rome were assassinated like Julius Cezar himself.   
   Nobody's head was secure and no protection was rock solid for Pilate.   
      
   He sent him to Herod, but Herod did not want to do anything with his   
   death either. Notice that Herod admitted beheading John and sort of   
   took responsibility rather than seeking excuses or blaming others.   
   Though he actually used the butchers as a proxy in the murder,   
   he admitted as committing this murder of John himself. This might   
   mean that his conscience was troubling him, or even a sing of repentance.   
      
   As his last bet, Pilates offered the crowds who were restored from   
   blindness, paralysis and leprosy or raised from death to choose   
   to release Jesus of Nazareth, and who praised the new Messiah just   
   a week ago ... but the Jews kept shouting louder and louder: "Crucify!"   
   (Mark 15:14).   
      
   Fourth, status quo. The Pharisees wanted to maintain a status quo,   
   even if it meant Roman occupation and no freedom, any Roman soldier   
   being allowed to order any Jew to carry his military gears for one mile.   
   But they wanted their position that guaranteed them their financial stability,   
   rather than the spiritual examination of all teachings of Moses and the   
   Prophets.   
      
   If the new teaching prevailed, Romans would come and take the   
   Temple and the nation from them (John 11:48).   
      
   Fifth, the exclusivity complex: the Pharisees believed that they are   
   the only valid representatives of God, in a God-chosen nation,   
   even if someone came and raised the dead, making an obvious sign   
   (Acts 4:16). The fact that Jesus made more convincing miracles   
   did not make them suspect that he is really coming from God, but   
   that he was a greater danger to their status.   
      
   The Pharisees diluted the wine with water, and made it like water,   
   because having most of the people obedient and manageable   
   was preferred by them to a radical change, where nobody's position   
   would be safe.   
      
   The fact that unlearned carpenter could come and take their position,   
   which came from schooling, generational heritage and political protection   
   meant that anybody could. The greater loss would be the financial gain   
   they had and their status.   
      
   On the other hand, they thought that they could kill a man for the greater   
   good and celebrate Passover undefiled, while merely entering the room to   
   speak with Pontius Pilate would defile them (John 18:28).   
   They did not think that a mounted trial, false accusations, slander and envy   
   would defile them.   
      
   As a conclusion, what could be concluded about Herod the Tetrarch   
   and the Pharisees?   
      
   Though Tetrarch meant "quadruple reign of power", Herod was a   
   mock-puppet of then World Order, the Emperor of Rome.   
   But he was free to remove any internal threat to his authority as long as   
   he guaranteed unconditional obedience to Rome and paying taxes.   
   (Today it would be payment of external debt.)   
   The Pharisees, on the other hand, had autonomy in religious teaching,   
   to the point where Romans realised that they can make Jews pay   
   taxes, but they will have to deal with revolts if they try to change their   
   religion and their tradition.   
      
   But over time, unlike the generation that marveled at the wise answers   
   of child Jesus, they stopped spiritual search and examination of faith,   
   so the new movement got them unprepared and they perceived it   
   as a threat, rather than a path to salvation from their slavery to their hidden   
   sins.   
      
   Hiding sins instead of confessing them with John the Baptist was   
   more comfortable than humbling themselves before the entire   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)