Jesus was responding to herod's threat

JESUS WAS RESPONDING TO HEROD'S THREAT
EDITED BY GLENN PEASE
LUKE 13:31-3331 At that time some Phariseescame
to Jesus and said to him, “Leave this place and go
somewhere else. Herod wants to kill you.” 32 He
replied, “Go tell that fox, ‘I will keep on driving out
demons and healing peopletoday and tomorrow, and
on the third day I will reach my goal.’33 In any case, I
must press on today and tomorrow and the next day—
for surely no prophet can die outside Jerusalem!
BIBLEHUB RESOURCES
First And Last
Luke 13:30
W. Clarkson
There are many beside those to whom these words were first applied by Jesus
Christ to whom they are applicable enough. They were originally intended to
denote the positions of -

I. THE JEW AND THE GENTILE. The Jew, who prided himself on being the
first favourite of Heaven, was to become the very last in God's esteem;he was
to bear the penalty due to the guilty race that "knew not the day of its
visitation," but imbrued its hands in the blood of its own Messiah. The scenes
witnessedin the destruction of Jerusalemare commentary enough on these
words of Christ. But this truth has a far wider meaning; it is continually
receiving illumination and illustration. It applies to -
II. THE OUTWARDLY CORRECT AND THE ILL-BEHAVED. The
Pharisee ofevery age and land is first in his own esteem, but he stands, in
sullen refusal, far off the kingdom, while "the publican and the sinner" are
found at the feet of Christ, asking for the way of life, for the waters of
cleansing, for the mercy of God,
III. THE LEARNED AND THE IGNORANT;the astute and the simple-
minded. Still we ask, "Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the
disputer of this world?" Still may we, after the Masterhimself, give God
thanks that he has "hidden these things from the wise and prudent, and
revealedthem unto babes." Human learning, in its unholy and foolish pride,
still closesits ear to the voice that speaks fromheaven. Lowly minded
simplicity still listens to the truth and enters the open gate of the kingdom of
God.
IV. THE PRIVILEGED AND THE UNPRIVILEGED. The children of
privilege may be said to be among "the first." We congratulate them sincerely
and rightly enough; yet are they too often found among the lastto serve and to
shine. For they build upon their privileges, or they reckonconfidently on
turning them some day to account, and they fail to use them as they should;
and the end of their presumption is indifference, hardness of heart,
insensibility, death. The first has become the last, On the other hand, the ear
that never before heard "the music of the gospel" is ravished by the sound of

it; the heart that never knew of the grace of God in Jesus Christis touched by
the sweetstoryof a Saviour's dying love, and is won to penitence and faith
and purity; the last is first. Let presumption everywhere tremble; it stands on
perilous ground. Again and againis it made to humble itself in the dust, while
simplicity of spirit is lifted up by the hand of God. - C.
Biblical Illustrator
Go ye and tell that fox.
Luke 13:31, 32
"Thatfox
D. Fraser, D. D.
The attempt of the Pharisees to frighten Jesus Christ out of Perea drew from
Him a prompt and sharp rejoinder. The answerwas to the effectthat no such
threats could influence the purpose or in the leastdegree acceleratethe
movements of the Nazarene. His work was nearan end, but He would have no

hurry or panic. He would castout demons and perform cures to the lastday
that His predestined stayin Perea wouldpermit. If Herod wished to put a
hasty stop to such works, so much to the discredit of Herod. As for the menace
to His life, Jesus despisedit. He was going up to Jerusalem, knowing that He
would be killed. But Herod could not kill Him. At the outsetof His ministry an
angry crowd in Galilee had tried to make an end of Him, but they could not.
The Prophet could not die but at Jerusalem. The metaphor here was in the
opprobrious epithet applied to Herod Antipas — "that fox." Evidently it
expressed, and was meant to express, that the Lord Jesus saw through and
despisedthe cunning wiles of the Tetrarch. Many writers on the Gospels,both
in Germany and among ourselves, have been anxious to protect our Saviour
from the charge ofspeaking disrespectfully of a ruler, and have therefore
tried to show that this epithet was in reality hurled againstthe Pharisees,who
had affectedso much Solicitude for His life. In the present case, itis as plain
as words canmake it that Jesus stigmatizedHerod as "that fox." The man
was a selfishintriguer, neither goodnor strong, but cunning, subservient to
those above him, a sort of jackalto the imperial lion at Rome, but ruthless to
any who were beneath him and within his grasp. Probably it was this
metaphor that suggestedto Jesus that of the hen protecting her brood, which
immediately follows. He lookedon Herod and men of his stamp as devourers
of the people. As for Himself, He might seemto be weak and unable to save
Himself, but He was the best friend of the people; and if they would only
gather to Him, He would cover them with the wings of His protection, so that
no fox could do them hurt. But the Pharisees, andultimately the misguided
people too, took part with the fox againstHim. And why should it be thought
strange that Jesus couldentertain and express a feeling of scornfor what is
mean and wicked? Some of our moralists asserttoo roundly that mortal man
has no right to feel contempt. There is a contempt that is ignoble, and there is
a contempt that is noble. The ignoble is that which rests on mere
conventionalismand prejudice, as when one despises anotherfor being less
highly born or less richly provided than himself. It flourishes among
conventionalprofessors ofreligion who yet sing the praises of humility. Such
hauteur could not find place in the breastof our Saviour, and ought not to be
harboured by any Christian. Whereverit enters it hardens the heart, dries up
the sympathies, inflates the sense of self-importance, and induces a cold

indifference to the wants and woes ofothers. But there is a noble scornthat
may dwell in the heart along with tender compassionand fervent love. If there
be a genuine appreciation of what is goodand true, the obverse side of it must
be a healthy contempt for what is wickedand false.
(D. Fraser, D. D.)
Righteous reproach
J. Parker, D. D.
He does not hesitate to call Herod a fox — a mere cunning, designing man,
only courageouswhenthere is no dangerat hand; scheming and plotting in
his den, but having no true bravery of heart; an evil-minded person, whose
whole characteris summed up in the word "fox." What I did Jesus Christ,
then, callmen names? Not in the usual sense ofthat expression. Did He call
Herod a fox out of mere defiance or spite? He was incapable of doing anything
of the kind. When Jesus Christ spoke a severe word, the severity came out of
the truth of its application. Is it not a harsh thing to calla man a liar? Not if
he be false. Is it not very unsocialto describe any man as a hypocrite? Not if
he be untrue. Wherein, then, is this wickedness ofcalling men names? In the
misapplication of the epithets. It is wickedto calla man true, if we know him
to be untrue. There is an immoral courtesy;there is a righteous reproach. We
do not use harsh words when we tell men what they really are. On the other
hand, it is a matter of infinite delicacyto tell a man what he really is, because,
at best, we seldom see more than one aspectof a man's character. If we could
see more of the man, probably we should change our opinion of his spirit. In
the case ofJesus Christ, however, He saw the inner heart, the real and true
quality of the Tetrarch;and, therefore, when He describedHerod as a fox, He
spoke the word of righteousness and of truth. It was not an epithet; it was a
characterin a word; it was a man summed up in a syllable. Let us, therefore,
be very careful how we follow this example, because we ought to have equal
knowledge before we take an equal position in this respect. On the other hand,
let us beware of that simulation of courtesy, which is profoundly untrue,

which is despicablyimmoral — the kind of thing which sets itself to catchthe
favour and the flattery of the passing moment.
(J. Parker, D. D.)
Christ's work cannot be stopped
J. Parker, D. D.
We thought that Jesus Christ's labour would be cut short by this message
from Herod. Jesus Christ must finish what He has begun. But is it not in the
powerof the greatand the mighty to sayto Christ, "You must stop at this
point"? It is in their power, truly, to sayit, and when they have said it they
may have relieved their own feelings:but the great, the beneficent, the
redeeming work of the Sonof God proceeds as if not a word to the contrary
had been said. The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers took
counseltogetheragainstthe Lord, and againstHis anointed; and behold their
rage came to nothing, and their fury recoiledupon themselves!"He that
sitteth in the heavens shall laugh; the Holy one shall have them in derision."
Are we opposing Jesus Christ? Are we in any way setting ourselves againstthe
advancementof His kingdom? It will be an impotent rage. Go and strike the
rocks with your fist- perhaps you may batter down the granite with your poor
bones. Try! Go and tell the sea that it shall not come beyond a certain line,
and perhaps the hoary billows will hear you, and run awayand say they be
afraid of such mighty men. Try! You have nothing else to do, you may as well
try. But as for keeping back this kingdom of God, this holy and beneficent
kingdom of truth — no man can keepit back, and even the gates of hell shall
not prevail againstit. Men may rage;men do rage. Other men adopt another
policy; insteadof rage and fury and greatexcitement, they set themselves
againstthe kingdom of God in an indirect and remote way. But both policies
come to the same thing. The raging man who pulls down the woodencross and
tramples it underfoot, and the man who offers a passive resistance to the
progress ofthe kingdom of heaven, come to the same fate. The light shines on,
noontide comes, and God gets His own way in His own universe.

(J. Parker, D. D.)
Perseverance in the path of duty
An example of the marvellous power to be found in the motive of duty is
afforded in the sevenyears' march of David Livingstone from the coastof
Zanzibar toward the courses ofthe Nile. What else, indeed, could have so well
sustainedhim in his trials with savages, andnoxious insects, and nearly
impassable jungles, and starvation, and prostrating disease, andprospective
death? "In this journey," he writes, in the calmeststyle of self-examination, "I
have endeavouredto follow with unswerving fidelity the path of duty The
prospectof death in pursuing what I knew to be right did not make me veer to
one side or the other." And so this sublime hero struggled on until, while
apparently engagedin the actof prayer, he passedfrom a kneeling posture on
earth to an enthroned position in heaven.
COMMENTARIES
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers
(31) Herod will kill thee.—This is the only intimation of such a purpose, and it
is, of course, a question whether the Pharisees reportedwhat they actually
knew, out of feelings more or less friendly to our Lord, or invented a false tale
in order that they might getrid of His presence among them, or were sent by
Herod to announce his purpose as a threat that he might be rid of it. Our
Lord’s answer, “Go tellthat fox . . .,” points to the last of these views as the
most probable. It is true that in Luke 23:8, we are told that Herod “had
desired to see Him of a long season;” but oscillations ofvague curiosity and
vague fears were quite in keeping with the Tetrarch’s character. Accepting
the conclusionsuggestedin the Note on Luke 13:22, that we have here a
record of our Lord’s Peræanministry, we may probably connectthe message

with the factthat His journeys had brought Him near Machærus, where John
had been imprisoned, and in which was one of Herod’s most statelypalaces
(Jos. Wars, vii. 6). Thence the Phariseesmay have come with a threat, in
which we may possibly trace the hand of Herodias, and which, at least,
reminds us of the messagesentby Jezebelto Elijah (1Kings 19:2). St. Luke’s
knowledge ofthe incident may have been derived from Manaen; or, as
Machærus was famous for hot medicinal springs, and for herbs that had a
widespreadfame for specialvirtues (Josephus, as above), it may have been
one of the places to which he was attractedby his pursuits as a physician. (See
Introduction.)
BensonCommentary
Luke 13:31-32. The same day there came certain of the Pharisees — Who
pretended friendship, and a greatconcernfor his safety;saying, Getthee out
and depart hence — Withdraw from this country into the territories of some
other prince; for Herod — In whose dominions thou now art; will kill thee —
Greek, θελει σε αποκτειναι, intends, or rather, is determined to kill thee. The
term will, in our translation of this clause, is a mere sign of the future time,
and declares no more than that the event spokenof would take place. But this
is not what is declaredby the evangelist. His expressiondenotes that, at that
very time, it was Herod’s purpose to kill him. It is much to be doubted
whether these Pharisees hadany ground at all for making this declaration
respecting Herod’s resolution. From the knowndisposition of the Pharisees,
who were always Christ’s enemies, it seems not improbable that their concern
for his safetywas reigned, and that their real design was to intimidate him,
and make him flee into Judea, not doubting that the haughty priests at
Jerusalemwould fall upon some method of putting him to death. Herod, too,
might possibly be in the plot, for it seems he now began to take umbrage at
Christ’s fame and authority, fearing that they might occasionhim some
embarrassment, either with his people or with the Romans. But he dreaded to
make an attempt on his life, remembering the agonies ofmind he had suffered
on accountof the Baptist’s murder. He therefore, probably, sent the Pharisees
to him with the messageabove mentioned. In this view there was a peculiar
propriety in our Lord’s calling him a fox, rather than a lion, wolf, or bear; to
which savage beasts the prophets had sometimes, with a plainness becoming

their character, comparedwickedprinces. And he said, Go ye, and tell that
fox, &c. — That crafty, wicked, and murderous prince; behold, I castout
devils and do cures — In thy dominions. With what majestydoes he speak to
his enemies!With what tenderness to his friends! to-day and to-morrow —
And carry on my work a little while longer; and the third day I shall be
perfected— Forthe appointed time will quickly come when I shall have
finished my course, and have done all that I intend to do here. It is probable
our Lord is not to be understood here as speaking exactlyof three days, but of
a short period of time: for in many places of the Old Testamentsimilar
expressions, suchas yesterday, and the third day, signify lately, or a little
while ago;and, on this interpretation, the word τελειουμαι, Ishall be
perfected, may refer to his finishing the work of redemption, and being by
death consecratedto his office, as the greatHigh-Priest and Captain of our
salvation, as the same word is used Hebrews 2:10; Hebrews 5:9; Hebrews
7:28. It is proper to observe here, with regard to our Lord’s terming Herod a
fox, that we must carefully distinguish betweenthose things wherein Christ is
our pattern, and those which were peculiar to his office. His extraordinary
office justified him in using that severity of language, when speaking of
wickedprinces and corrupt teachers, to which we have no call: and by which
we should only bring scandalon religion, and ruin on ourselves, while we
irritated, rather than convinced or reformed, those whom we so indecently
rebuked.
Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary
13:31-35 Christ, in calling Herod a fox, gave him his true character. The
greatestofmen were accountable to God, therefore it became him to call this
proud king by his own name; but it is not an example for us. I know, said our
Lord, that I must die very shortly; when I die, I shall be perfected, I shall have
completed my undertaking. It is goodfor us to look upon the time we have
before us as but little, that we may thereby be quickenedto do the work of the
day in its day. The wickedness ofpersons and places which more than others
profess religion and relation to God, especiallydispleasesand grieves the Lord
Jesus. The judgment of the greatday will convince unbelievers; but let us
learn thankfully to welcome, and to profit by all who come in the name of the
Lord, to call us to partake of his greatsalvation.

Barnes'Notes on the Bible
Came certain of thee Pharisees -Their coming to him in this manner would
have the appearance offriendship, as if they had conjecturedor secretly
learned that it was Herod's intention to kill him. Their suggestionhad much
appearance ofprobability. Herod had killed John. He knew that Jesus made
many disciples, and was drawing awaymany of the people. He was a wicked
man, and he might be supposed to fear the presence of one who had so strong
a resemblance to John, whom he had slain. It might seemprobable, therefore,
that he intended to take the life of Jesus, and this might appearas a friendly
hint to escape him. Yet it is more than possible that Herod might have sent
these Pharisees to Jesus. Jesuswas eminently popular, and Herod might not
dare openly to put him to death; yet he desired his removal, and for this
purpose he sent these people, as if in a friendly way, to advise him to retire.
This was probably the reasonwhy Jesus calledhim a fox.
Herod - Herod Antipas, a sonof Herod the Great. He ruled over Galilee and
Perea, and wishedJesus to retire beyond these regions. See the notes at Luke
3:1.
Jamieson-Fausset-BrownBible Commentary
Lu 13:31-35. Message to Herod.
31. and depart hence—and"go forward," push on. He was on His way out of
Perea, eastofJordan, and in Herod's dominions, "journeying towards
Jerusalem" (Lu 13:22). Haunted by guilty fears, probably, Herod wanted to
get rid of Him (see on [1664]Mr6:14), and seems, from our Lord's answer, to
have sent these Pharisees,under pretense of a friendly hint, to persuade Him
that the soonerHe got beyond Herod's jurisdiction the better it would be for
His own safety. Our Lord saw through both of them, and sends the cunning
ruler a messagecouchedin dignified and befitting irony.
Matthew Poole's Commentary

Ver. 31-33. It is plain from this text, that our Saviour was at this time in
Galilee, for that was the tetrarchy or province of Herod Antipas, who is the
Herod here mentioned. Whether these Pharisees came oftheir own heads, or
as sent by Herod, is not so plain, nor so well agreedby interpreters. If they
came of their own heads, it is certain they came not out of kindness, for the
whole history of the gospellets us know, that the Phariseeshad no kindness
for Christ, but were his most implacable enemies, and continually consulting
how to destroy him; but they either came to scare him out of Galilee, whose
repute was so great, and who did them so much mischief there, or to drive him
into the trap which they had laid for him in Judea. But it is most probable
that they came as secretlysent by Herod, who though of himself he be
reported to be of no bloody disposition, yet upon the Pharisees’continual
solicitations might be persuadedto send them on this errand, choosing rather
cunningly to scare him out of his province, than by violence to fall upon him.
This opinion looks more probable, because, Luke 13:32, our Saviour sends
them back with a messageto Herod, Go ye, and tell that fox. Herod had
gained himself no reputation amongst the Jews, by his murdering John the
Baptist, whom the Jews generallyvalued as a prophet; and probably seeing
our Saviour exceeding him in popular applause, he was not willing to augment
the odium which already lay upon him for that fact; yet, to gratify the
Pharisees,(many of which were in his province), he was willing, if he could
effectit cleverly, and without noise, to he quit of Christ, especiallyconsidering
(as we before heard) he had an opinion that he was Johnthe Baptist risen
from the dead, or the soul of John the Baptist in another body; and possibly:
he could not tell what might be the effectof his ghostso haunting his province.
It is certain, that either he, or the Pharisees, orboth, had a mind to have him
gone some where else, to which purpose this message is brought to him. Our
Saviour, either discerning Herod’s craft in this thing, or having observed the
craft he used in the whole managementof his government, that he might keep
favour both with the Roman emperor and with the Jews, bids them, Go and
tell that fox. I do not much value their critical observation, who observe that it
is not alwpekieceinh, but, tauth, that is, this fox; from whence they would
observe that our Saviour might mean the Pharisees, notHerod; nor is there
any need of it to excuse our Saviour from the violation of that law of God,
Exodus 22:28, Thou shalt not revile the gods, nor curse the ruler of thy

people; which law Paul reflectedon, Acts 23:5, and pleads ignorance for his
calling Ananias a whited wall. For we shall observe that the prophets all along
(being immediately sent from God) took a further liberty than any others, in
severelyreproving kings and princes. Elijah tells Ahab it was he that troubled
Israel; the prophets call the rulers of the Jews, rulers of Sodom, and princes of
Gomorrah, &c. But Christ may be alloweda liberty neither lawful nor decent
for other persons, not though they were prophets. But what is the message
which Christ sends by these Pharisees?
Behold, I castout devils, and I do cures today and tomorrow, and the third
day I shall be perfected. Tell him, saith he, what I am doing; I am freeing his
subjects from molestations by evil spirits, and the encumbrances of many
diseases. Whatdo I do worthy of death? I have but a little time to trouble him,
for in a little time I must die, which is that which he means by being perfected:
it is plain that those words today, and tomorrow, and the third day, must not
be taken strictly, for Christ lived more than three days after this. If this will
not satisfyhim, tell him, saith our Saviour, that
I must walk today, and tomorrow, and the day following. I know that, as to
this thing, I am not under his command or power, I must walk, & c.;my days
are not in his hands, and I know that he cannot kill me,
for it cannotbe that a prophet perish out of Jerusalem. Jerusalemis the place
where I must die, not Galilee;the sanhedrim sits at Jerusalem, who alone can
take cognizance ofthe case of false prophets, and Jerusalemis the place where
the people must fill up the measure of their iniquities by spilling my blood.
Upon this our Saviour breakethout into a sad lamentation of the case ofthat
once holy city, the praise of the whole earth.
Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible

The same day there came certain of the Pharisees,....Who dwelt in Galilee, for
they were in all parts of the country: these being nettled and filled with
indignation at Christ, because of the parables he had that day delivered, the
miracles he had wrought, and the severalawful and striking things which
dropped from him, and which they knew respectedthem; contrived to get rid
of him, by frightening him with a designof Herod's, to take awayhis life,
should he continue there: for this seems to be rather a stratagemof theirs,
than of Herod's; though it may he, that Herod might take this method, and
make use of these men in this way, to terrify him; fearing to lay hold on him,
and put him to death; partly because of the people, and partly because ofthe
remaining uneasiness andterror of his mind, for taking off the head of John
the Baptist:
saying, get thee out and depart hence;in all haste, as soonas possible:
for Herod will kill thee: he is resolvedupon it, he has formed a design, and
will quickly take methods to execute it. This was Herod the tetrarch, of
Galilee;from whence we learn, that Christ was as yet in Galilee, though he
was journeying towards Jerusalem, Luke 13:22 for Herod's jurisdiction
reachedno further than Galilee:this was either a device of Herod's, or of the
Pharisees,orof both, to get rid of Christ in the easiestmanner.
Geneva Study Bible
{9} The same day there came certainof the Pharisees, saying unto him, Get
thee out, and depart hence: for Herod will kill thee.
(9) We must go forward in regards to our calling, through the midst of
terrors, whether they be realor imagined.
EXEGETICAL(ORIGINAL LANGUAGES)
Meyer's NT Commentary

ff
Luke 13:31 ff. as far as Luke 13:33 peculiar to Luke from the source of his
narrative of the journey.
According to Luke 17:11, the incident occurredin Galilee, with which Luke
9:51 ff. (see on the passage)is not inconsistent.
That the Phariseesdid not merely give out on pretence their statementin
reference to Antipas (Theophylact, Euthymius Zigabenus, Maldonatus, and
others, including Olshausenand Ebrard), but actually had instructions from
him, because he himself wished to be rid of the dreaded miracle-worker(Luke
9:7; Luke 9:9) out of his dominions, is plain from τῇ ἀλώπεκι ταύτῃ, Luke
13:32, whereby is declaredHis penetration of the subtle cunning[167] of
Herod (not of the Pharisees);in the contrary case, Jesus wouldhave had no
ground for characterizing him just as He did, and that too in the
consciousnessofHis higher prophetic and regaldignity. But that Herod used
even the enemies of Jesus forthis purpose was not unwisely calculated,
because he could rely upon them, since they also, on their part, must be glad
to see Him removed out of their district, and because the cunning of the
Pharisees forthe execution of such like purposes was at all events better
known to him than were the frequent exposures which they had experienced
at the hands of Jesus. On the proverbial ἀλώπηξ, comp. Pind. Pyth. ii. 141;
Plat. Pol. ii. p. 365 C; and thereupon, Stallbaum; Plut. Sol. 30. Comp.
ἀλωπεκίζεινin Aristoph. Vesp. 1241;also κίναδος, Dem. 281. 22, 307. 23;
Soph. Aj. 103.
[167]As a type of cunning and knavery, the epithet fox is so generally
frequent, and this figure is here so appropriate, that it appears quite
groundless for Hofmann, Schriftbew. II. 1, p. 315, to suppose that by the fox is

meant the destroyerof the vineyard (comp. Song of Solomon2:15). References
to the Song of Songs are not in generalto be discerned anywhere in the New
Testament, comp. on John 3:29.
Expositor's Greek Testament
Luke 13:31-33. Warning againstHerod by Pharisees,peculiarto Lk., but Mk.
(Mark 3:6, Mark 8:15) has prepared us for combined actionof court and
religious coteries againstJesussimilar to that againstAmos (Luke 7:10-13),
both alike eagerto be rid of Him as endangering their power.
Cambridge Bible for Schools andColleges
31-35. A Messageto Herod Antipas.
31. The same day] Or, In that very hour (‫,א‬ A, D, L, &c.).
Get thee out, and depart hence] These Phariseeswere as eageras the
Gadarenes to get rid of Jesus;but whether this was their sole motive or
whether they further wished to separate Him from the multitudes who as yet
protectedHis life, and to put Him in the powerof the Sadduceanhierarchy, is
not clear. Thatany solicitude for His safetywas purely hypocritical appears in
the tone of our Lord’s answer, which is yet far more merciful than that in
which the prophet Amos had answereda similar messagefrom an analogous
quarter. Amos 7:12-17.
for Herod will kill thee] Rather, wills to kill thee. The assertionwas probably
quite untrue. Herod had not even wished to kill John, but had done so with
greatreluctance, and had been deeply troubled in conscienceeversince. He
did indeed wish to see Christ, but it was with the very different desire of
“seeing some miracle done by Him” (Luke 23:8).
Bengel's Gnomen

Luke 13:31. Ἡρώδης, Herod) The Pharisees,in saying this, did not say what
was decidedly untrue: for Herod did earn the appellation, fox; and Simonius
suspects that he was so called by many. But Herod was wishing that this
workerof miracles, whom he suspectedto be John, should be removed as far
as possible from him [For which reasonhe the more frequently drove Him
from place to place: Matthew 4:12; Matthew 14:1, comparing Luke 13:13.—
Harm., p. 407]: and the same objectwas the aim of the Pharisees:hence both
conspiredtogether againstJesus.Again, on the other hand, Herod does not
seemin serious earnestto have wished to kill Jesus;for if he was struck with
fear after having killed John, ch. Luke 9:7-8, he could not but have been
struck with more violent fear had he killed Jesus;but he tried to agitate Jesus
(by alarming Him, and to thrust Him out of his country, under the pretext of
his territorial right (comp. Amos 7:12, [where Amaziah uses the same policy
towards the prophet]), and by means of threats derived from that plea, which
the Phariseesreportedto Him, as if in the way of friendly admonition, not in
Herod’s words, but in their own words, and perhaps with exaggerations of
their own invention. Therefore Jesus replies to both in accordancewith the
real state of the case,not being terrified by anything (in any respect). He calls
Herod a fox, employing an epithet accuratelycharacterizing him, on account
of his cunning and hypocritical cowardice (comp. ch. Luke 9:7), inasmuch as
he was throwing out threats which were but a feint, and declaring that He is
not to be deterred by those threats from the performing of miracles: but, at
the same time, He upbraids the persons who announced the tidings of Herod’s
threats, as also the whole of Jerusalem, with their ungrateful and blood-thirty
spirit: Luke 13:33-34. Herodwas a fox, a persecutoron a comparatively small
scale, comparedwith Jerusalem, the greatpersecutor(‘persecutrix’).—θέλει
σε ἀποκτεῖναι, wishesto kill Thee)being irritated perhaps with the act of
Pilate, mentioned Luke 13:1.
Pulpit Commentary
Verses 31-35. -The message ofJesus to Herod Antipas, and the lament over
the loved city of Jerusalem, the destined place of his owndeath. Verse 31. -
The same day there came certain of the Pharisees, saying unto him, Get thee
out, and depart hence:for Herod will kill thee. Very many of the older
authorities read here, instead of "tile same day," "in that very hour." This

incident connectedwith Herod Antipas, which is only related by St. Luke, not
improbably was communicated to Luke and Paul by Manaen, who was
intimately connectedwith that prince, and who was a prominent member of
the primitive Church of Antioch in those days when Paul was beginning his
work for the cause (see Acts 13:1). This curious messageprobably emanated
from Herod and Herodias. The tetrarch was disturbed and uneasy at the
Lord's continued presence in his dominions, and the crowds who thronged to
hear the greatTeacheroccasionedthe jealous and timorous prince grave
disquietude. Herod shrank from laying hands on him, though, for the memory
of the murdered friend of Jesus was a terrible one, we know, to the
superstitious tetrarch, and he dreaded being forced into a repetition of the
judicial murder of John the Baptist. It is likely enoughthat the enemies of the
Lord were now anxious for him to go to Jerusalemand its neighbourhood,
where he would be in the power of the Sadduceanhierarchy, and away from
the protectionof the Galilaeanmultitudes, with whom his influence was still
very great. The Pharisees, who as a party hated the Master, willingly entered
into the design, and under the mask of a pretended friendship warned him of
Herod's intentions.
Vincent's Word Studies
Day
The best texts read hour.
Will kill (θέλει ἀποκτεῖναι)
As in so many cases the A. V. renders as the future of the verb to kill; whereas
there are two distinct verbs; to will or determine, and to kill. The meaning is,
Herod willeth or is determined to kill thee. Rev., would fain, seems rather
feeble.

Christ's Messageto Herod
Alexander Maclaren
Luke 13:32
And he said to them, Go you, and tell that fox, Behold, I castout devils, and I
do cures to day and to morrow…
'And he said unto them, Go ye, and tell that fox,
Behold, I castout devils, and I do cures to-day and to-morrow, and the third
day I shall be perfected.
33. Nevertheless Imust walk to-day, and to-morrow, and the day following:
for it cannotbe that a prophet perish out of Jerusalem.' -- LUKE xiii.32, 33.
Even a lamb might be suspicious if wolves were to show themselves tenderly
careful of its safety. Pharisees taking Christ's life under their protection were
enough to suggesta trick. These men came to Christ desirous of posing as
counterworking Herod's intention to slay Him. Our Lord's answer, bidding
them go and tell Herod what He immediately communicates to them, shows
that He regarded them as in a plot with that crafty, capricious kinglet. And
evidently there was an understanding betweenthem. For some reasonor
other, best knownto his own changeable and whimsicalnature, the man who
at one moment was eagerlydesirous to see Jesus,was atthe next as eagerly
desirous to get Him out of his territories; just as he admired and murdered
John the Baptist. The Pharisees,onthe other hand, desired to draw Him to
Jerusalem, where they would have Him in their power more completely than
in the northern district. If they had spokenall their minds they would have
said, 'Go hence, or else we cannotkill Thee.'So Christ answers the hidden
schemes, andnot the apparent solicitude, in the words that I have takenfor
my text. They unmask the plot, they calmly put aside the threats of danger.

They declare that His course was influenced by far other considerations. They
show that He clearly saw what it was towards which He was journeying. And
then, with sadirony, they declare that it, as it were, contrary to prophetic
decorum and establishedusage that a prophet should be slain anywhere but in
the streets ofthe bloody and sacredcity.
There are many deep things in the words, which I cannot touch in the course
of a single sermon; but I wish now, at all events, to skim their surface, and try
to gather some of their obvious lessons.
I. First, then, note Christ's clearvision of His death.
There is some difficulty about the chronologyof this period with which I need
not trouble you. It is enough to note that the incident with which we are
concernedoccurredduring that last journey of our Lord's towards Jerusalem
and Calvary, which occupies so much of this Gospelof Luke. At what point in
that fateful journey it occurred may be left undetermined. Nor need I enter
upon the question as to whether the specificationoftime in our text, 'to-day,
and to-morrow, and the third day,' is intended to be takenliterally, as some
commentators suppose, in which case it would be brought extremely near the
goalof the journey; or whether, as seems more probable from the context, it is
to be takenas a kind of proverbial expressionfor a definite but short period.
That the latter is the proper interpretation seems to be largelyconfirmed by
the factthat there is a slight variation in the application of the designationof
time in the two verses of our text, 'the third day' in the former verse being
regardedas the period of the perfecting, whilst in the latter verse it is
regardedas part of the period of the progress towards the perfecting. Such
variation in the application is more congruous with the idea that we have here
to deal with a kind of proverbial expressionfor a limited and short period.
Our Lord is saying in effect, 'My time is not to be settledby Herod. It is
definite, and it is short. It is needless forhim to trouble himself; for in three

days it will be all over. It is useless for him to trouble himself, or for you
Pharisees to plot, for until the appointed days are past it will not be over,
whateveryou and he may do.' The course He had yet to run was plain before
Him in this last journey, every step of which was takenwith the Cross full in
view.
Now the worstpart of death is the anticipation of death; and it became Him
who bore death for every man to drink to its dregs that cup of trembling
which the fear of it puts to all human lips. We rightly regard it as a cruel
aggravationofa criminal's doom if he is carriedalong a level, straight road
with his gibbet in view at the end of the march. But so it was that Jesus Christ
travelled through life.
My text comes at a comparatively late period of His history. A few months or
weeks atthe most intervened betweenHim and the end. But the consciousness
which is here so calmly expressedwas not of recent origin. We know that from
the period of His transfiguration He beganto give His death a very prominent
place in His teaching, but it had been present with Him long before He thus
laid emphasis upon it in His communications with His disciples. For, if we
acceptJohn's Gospelas historical, we shall have to throw back His first public
references to the end to the very beginning of His career. The cleansing of the
Temple, at the very outset of His course, was vindicated by Him by the
profound words, 'Destroythis Temple, and in three days I will raise it up.'
During the same early visit to the capital city He said to Nicodemus, 'As Moses
lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, evenso must the Son of Man be lifted
up.' So Christ's careerwas notlike that of many a man who has begun, full of
sanguine hope as a possible reformer and benefactorof his fellows, and by
slow degrees has awakenedto the consciousness thatreformers and
benefactors needto be martyrs ere their ideals can be realised. There was no
disillusioning in Christ's experience. Fromthe commencementHe knew that
He came, not only to minister, but also 'to give His life a ransom for the
many.' And it was not a mother's eye, as a reverent modern painter has

profoundly, and yet erroneously, shownus in his greatwork in our own city
gallery -- it was not a mother's eye that first saw the shadow of the Cross fall
on her unconscious Son, but it was Himself that all through His earthly
pilgrimage knew Himself to be the Lamb appointed for the sacrifice. This
Isaac toiledup the hill, bearing the woodand the knife, and knew where and
who was the Offering.
Brethren, I do not think that we sufficiently realise the importance of that
element in our conceptions ofthe life of Jesus Christ. What a pathos it gives to
it all! What a beauty it gives to His gentleness,to His ready interest in others,
to His sympathy for all sorrow, and tenderness with all sin! How wonderfully
it deepens the significance, the loveliness, and the pathos of the factthat 'the
Son of Man came eating and drinking,' remembering everybody but Himself,
and ready to enter into all the cares and the sorrows ofother hearts, if we
think that all the while there stood, grim and certain, before Him that Calvary
with its Cross!Thus, through all His path, He knew to what He was
journeying.
II. Then again, secondly, let me ask you to note here our Lord's own estimate
of the place which His death holds in relation to His whole work.
Notice that remarkable variation in the expressionin our text. 'The third day
I shall be perfected.... It cannot be that a prophet perish out of Jerusalem.'
Then, somehow orother, the 'perishing' is 'perfecting.'There may be a doubt
as to the precise rendering of the word translated by 'perfecting'; but it seems
to me that the only meaning congruous with the context is that which is
suggestedby the translation of our Authorised Version, and that our Lord
does not mean to say 'on the third day I shall complete My work of casting out
devils and curing diseases,'but that He masses the whole of His work into two
greatportions -- the one of which includes all His works and ministrations of
miracles and of mercy; and the other of which contains one unique and

transcendentfact, which outweighs and towers above all these others, and is
the perfecting of His work, and the culmination of His obedience, service, and
sacrifice.
Now, of course, I need not remind you that the 'perfecting'thus spokenof is
not a perfecting of moral characterorof individual nature, but that it is the
same perfecting which the Epistle to the Hebrews speaks aboutwhen it says,
'Being made perfect, He became the Author of eternal salvationto all them
which obey Him.' That is to say, it is His perfecting in regardto office,
function, work for the world, and not the completion or elevationof His
individual character. And this 'perfecting' is effectedin His 'perishing.'
Now I want to know in what conceivable sensethe death of Jesus Christ can
be the culmination and crownof His work, without which it would be a torso,
an incomplete fragment, a partial fulfilment of the Father's design, and of His
own mission, unless it be that that death was, as I take it the New Testament
with one voice in all its parts declares it to be, a sacrifice for the sins of the
world. I know of no construing of the fact of the death on the Cross which can
do justice to the plain words of my text, exceptthe old-fashionedbelief that
therein He made atonement for sin, and thereby, as the Lamb of God, bore
awaythe sins of the world.
Other great lives may be crownedby fair deaths, which henceforwardbecome
seals offaithful witness, and appeals to the sentiments of the heart, but there
is no sense that I know of in which from Christ's death there can flow a
mightier energy than from such a life, unless in the sense that the death is a
sacrifice.
Now I know there has been harm done by the very desire to exalt Christ's
greatsacrifice on the Cross;when it has been so separatedfrom His life as

that the life has not been regarded as a sacrifice, northe death as obedience.
Rather the sacrificialelement runs through His whole career, and beganwhen
He became flesh and tabernacledamongstus; but yet as being the apex of it
all, without which it were all-imperfect, and in a specialsense redeeming men
from the powerof death, that Cross is setforth by His own word. For Him to
'perish' was to 'be perfected.' As the ancientprophet long before had said,
'When His soul shall make an offering for sin,' then, paradoxicalas it may
seem, the dead Man shall 'see,'and 'shall see His seed.'Or, as He Himself
said, 'If a corn of wheatfall into the ground it abideth alone, but if it die it
bringeth forth much fruit.'
I do not want to insist upon any theories of Atonement. I do want to insist that
Christ's own estimate of the significance andpurpose and issue of His death
shall not be slurred over, but that, recognising thatHe Himself regardedit as
the perfecting of His work, we ask ourselves very earnestlyhow such a
conceptioncanbe explained if we strike out of our Christianity the thought of
the sacrifice forthe sins of the world. Unless we take Paul's gospel, 'How that
He died for our sins according to the Scriptures,'I for one do not believe that
we shall ever get Paul's results, 'Old things are passedaway;all things are
become new.' If you strike the Cross off the dome of the temple, the fires on its
altars will soongo out. A Christianity which has to say much about the life of
Jesus, and knows not what to say about the death of Christ, will be a
Christianity that will neither have much constraining powerin our lives, nor
be able to breathe a benediction of peace overour deaths. If we desire to be
perfectedin character, we must have faith in that sacrificialdeath which was
the perfecting of Christ's work.
III. And so, lastly, notice our Lord's resolvedsurrender to the discerned
Cross.

There is much in this aspectin the words of my text which I cannot touch
upon now; but two or three points I may briefly notice.
Note then, I was going to say, the superb heroism of His calm indifference to
threats and dangers. He will go hence, and relieve the tyrant's dominions of
His presence;but He is careful to make it plain that His going has no
connectionwith the futile threatenings by which they have sought to terrify
Him. 'Nevertheless' -- although I do not care at all for them or for him --
'nevertheless I must journey to-day and tomorrow!But that is not because I
fear death, but because I am going to My death; for the prophet must die in
Jerusalem.'We are so accustomedto think of the 'gentle Jesus, meek and
mild' that we forget the 'strong Son of God.' If we were talking about a man
merely, we should point to this calm, dignified answeras being an instance of
heroism, but we do not feelthat that word fits Him. There are too many
vulgar associations connectedwith it, to be adapted to the gentleness ofHis
fixed purpose that blenched not, nor faltered, whatsoevercame in the way.
Light is far more powerful than lightning. Meeknessmay be, and in Him was,
wedded to a will like a bar of iron, and a heart that knew not how to fear. If
ever there was an iron hand in a velvet glove it was the hand of Christ. And
although the perspective of virtues which Christianity has introduced, and
which Christ exhibited in His life, gives prominence to the meek and the
gentle, let us not forget that it also enjoins the cultivation of the 'wrestling
thews that throw the world.' 'Quit you like men; be strong; let all your deeds
be done in charity.'
Then note, too, the solemnlaw that ruled His life. 'I must walk.'That is a very
familiar expressionupon His lips. From that early day when He said, 'Wist ye
not that I must be about My Father's business,'to that last when He said, 'The
Son of Man must be lifted up,' there crops out, everand anon, in the
occasionalglimpses that He allows us to have of His inmost spirit, this

reference of all His actions to a necessitythat was laid upon Him, and to
which He ever consciouslyconformed. That necessitydetermined what He
calls so frequently 'My time; My hour'; and influenced the trifles, as they are
called, as well as the greatcrises, ofHis career. It was the Father's will which
made the Son's must. Hence His unbroken communion and untroubled calm.
If we want to live near God, and if we want to have lives of peace amidst
convulsions, we, too, must yield ourselves to that all encompassing sovereign
necessity, which, like the greatlaws of the universe, shapes the planets and the
suns in their courses and their stations;and holds togethertwo grains of dust,
or two motes that dance in the sunshine. To gravitation there is nothing great
and nothing small. God's must covers all the ground of our lives, and should
ever be responded to by our 'I will.'
And that brings me to the lastpoint, and that is, our Lord's glad acceptanceof
the necessityand surrender of the Cross. Whatwas it that made Him willing
to take that 'must' as the law of His life? First, a Son's obedience;second, a
Brother's love. There was no point in Christ's career, from the moment when
in the desertHe put away the temptation to win the kingdoms of the world by
other than the God-appointed means, down to the last moment when on His
dying ears there fell another form of the same temptation in the taunt, 'Let
Him come down from the cross, and we will believe on Him'; when He could
not, if He had chosento abandon His mission, have savedHimself. No
compulsion, no outward hand impelling Him, drove Him along that course
which ended on Calvary; but only that He would save others, and therefore
'Himself He cannotsave.'
True, there were natural human shrinkings, just as the weight and impetus of
some tremendous billow buffeting the bows of the ship makes it quiver; but
this never affectedthe firm hand on the rudder, and never deflectedthe vessel
from its course. Christ's 'soul was troubled,' but His will was fixed, and it was

fixed by His love to us. Like one of the men who in after ages died for His dear
sake, He may be conceivedas refusing to be bound to the stake by any bands,
willing to stand there and be destroyed because He wills. Nothing fastened
Him to the Cross but His resolve to save the world, in which world was
included eachof us sitting listening and standing speaking, now. Oh,
brethren! shall not we, moved by such love, with like cheerfulness of
surrender, give ourselves to Him who gave Himself for us?
(32) Go ye, and tell that fox . . .—The word was eminently descriptive of the
characterboth of the Tetrarchindividually, and of the whole Herodian house.
The fact that the Greek word for “fox” is always used as a feminine, gives,
perhaps, a specialtouch of indignant force to the original. He had so identified
himself with Herodias that he had lost his manliness, and the proverbial type
of the worstform of woman’s craft was typical of him.
Behold, I castout devils.—Whatwas the meaning of the message?Whatwe
read in Luke 23:8, perhaps, supplies the answerto that question. Herod
“hoped to have seensome miracle done by Him,” and Jesus, reading his
thoughts, tells him that the time for such sights and wonders was all but over.
One day, and yet another, and yet a third—so our Lord describes, in
proverbial speech(comp. the analogous forms of Exodus 5:14; Hosea 6:2), an
interval of very short duration, and then “I am perfected.” The word is
strictly a presenttense used predictively, and may be either middle or passive
in its meaning, the latter being most in harmony with the use of the verb
elsewhere.“ThenI am brought to the end; then I reachthe goalof this human
life of Mine.” Very noteworthy in connectionwith this passageis the
prominence given to the verb throughout the Epistle to the Hebrews, as, e.g.,
in Hebrews 2:10; Hebrews 5:9.

Luke 13:32. Ἰδοὺ, ἐκβάλλω … τελειοῦμαι]Behold, I castout demons, and I
accomplishcures to-day and to-morrow, and on the third day I come to an
end; to wit, not in generalwith my work, with my course (Acts 20:24), or the
like, but, according to the context, with these castings outand cures. A
definitely appropriate answer, frank and free, in oppositionto timid cunning.
To-day and to-morrow I allow myself not to be disturbed in my work here in
the land of Herod, but prosecute it without hindrance till the day after to-
morrow, when I come to a conclusionwith it. Jesus, however, mentions
preciselyHis miraculous working, not His teaching, because He knew that the
former, but not the latter, had excitedthe apprehension of Herod.
τελειοῦμαι](the present of the certainfuture, not the Attic future) might be
the middle (Jamblichus, Vit. Pyth. 158);but in all the passages ofthe New
Testament, and, as a rule, among the Greek writers, τελειοῦσθαι is passive. So
also here; comp. Vulg. It.: consummor. τελειοῦν means ad finem perducere,
the passive τελειοῦσθαι adfinem pervenire. Hence: I come to a conclusion, I
have done; with what? the context shows, see above. Againstthe explanation
of the end of life, so that the meaning would amount to morior (Theophylact,
Euthymius Zigabenus, Beza, Calvin, Grotius, Bengel, Kypke, and many
others; comp. also Neander, Baumgarten-Crusius, Schegg,Bisping, Linder in
the Stud. u. Krit. 1862, p. 564), are decisive even the statements of the days
which, in their definiteness,[168]couldnot be taken(as even Kuinoel, Ewald,
and others will have them) proverbially (σήμερονκ. αὔρ: per breve tempus,
and τῇ τρίτῃ:paulo post; comp. Hosea 6:2), as also πορεύεσθαι, Luke 13:33.
Just as little reasonis there for seeing prefigured in the three days, the three
years of the official ministry of Jesus (Weizsäcker, p. 312).
[168]E.g. the expressionis different in Dem. De Cor. § Luke 195:μία ἡμέρα
καὶ δύο καὶ τρεῖς. See Dissenon the passage, p. 362.

Luke 13:32. τῇ ἀλώπεκι ταύτῃ, this fox; the fox revealedin this business,
ostensibly the king, but in a roundabout way the would-be friends may be hit
at (Euthy. Zig.). The quality denoted by the name is doubtless cunning,
though there is no clearinstance of the use of the fox as the type of cunning in
the Scriptures elsewhere.—σήμερον, etc.:this note of time is not to be taken
strictly. Jesus is in the prophetic mood and speaks in prophetic style: to-day,
to-morrow, and the third day symbolise a short time.—τελειοῦμαι as to form
may be either middle or passive. If middle it will mean: finish my healing (and
teaching)ministry in Herod’s territory (Galilee and Peraea). This meaning
suits the connection, but againstit is the fact that the verb is never used in a
middle sense in N.T., and very rarely in classics. Takenpassivelyit will mean:
I am perfectedby a martyr’s death (Hebrews 11:40; Hebrews 12:23).
Commentators are much divided betweenthese meanings.
32. that fox] Rather, this she-fox, as though Christ saw him actually present,
or identified his fox-like nature with that which the Pharisees were now
displaying. The fact that the word is feminine may be only due to its being
generic. The fox was among the ancients, as well as among the modems, the
type of knavish craftiness and covert attack. This is the only word of
unmitigated contempt (as distinguished from rebuke and scorn) recorded
among the utterances of Christ, and it was more than justified by the mingled
tyranny and timidity, insolence and baseness ofHerod Antipas—a half-
Samaritan, half-Idumaean tetrarch, who, professing Judaism, lived in heathen
practices, and governedby the grace ofCaesarand the help of alien
mercenaries;who had murdered the greatestofthe Prophets to gratify a
dancing wanton; and who was living at that moment in an adultery doubly-
incestuous with a womanof whom he had treacherouslyrobbed his brother
while he was his guest.
to day and to morrow] It is probable that these expressions are general(as in
Hosea 6:2). They mean ‘I shall stay in Herod’s dominions with perfect
security for a brief while longertill my work is done.’It must be remembered

that Peraea was inthe tetrarchate of Herod, so that this incident may have
occurredduring the slow and solemn progress towards Jerusalem.
the third day I shall be perfected]The word teleioumai has been variously
rendered and explained. Bleek makes it mean ‘I shall end’ (my work in
Galilee);Godet, ‘I am being perfected,’in the sense of ‘I shall arrive at the
destined end of my work;’ Resch, ‘] complete my work’ by one crowning
miracle (John 11:40-44). This solemn meaning best accords with other usages
of the word, e.g. in the cry from the Cross tetelestai, ‘It is finished’ (John
19:30). See too Hebrews 5:9; Hebrews 11:40. Teleiosis became anecclesiastical
term for ‘martyrdom.’
Bengel's Gnomen
Luke 13:32. Εἴπατε, tell ye) if you dare.—ἐκβάλλω, κ.τ.λ.,I castout) He does
not add, I preach the Gospel;for this would have been less within the
comprehensionof Herod. From the goodness ofJesus’actions, the wickedness
of Herod’s designs againstHim stands out the more palpable and
glaring.[133]—ἐπιτελῶ, I use despatchin performing cures [conficio])I am
urgent, inasmuch as My time is short. He speaks with majestyin making
answerto His enemies;with humility towards His friends. See Matthew 11:5;
Matthew 12:27.—σήμερονκαὶ αὔριον)So the LXX., ΣΉΜΕΡΟΝ ΚΑῚ
ΑὔΡΙΟΝ, Joshua 22:18 [ἘᾺΝ ἈΠΟΣΤῆΤΕ ΣΉΜΕΡΟΝ ἈΠῸ ΚΥΡΊΟΥ,
ΚΑῚ ΑὐΡΙῸΝ ἘΠῚ ΠΆΝΤΑ ἸΣΡΑῊΛ ἜΣΤΑΙ Ἡ ὈΡΓΉ], with which comp.
Luke 13:28.[134]It is equivalent to a proverb concerning the time to come; as
the phrase, yesterdayand the day before, χθὲς καὶ τρίτηνἡμέραν, is used
concerning the time past. If it had depended on Herod, not even a day would
have been left to the Lord.—τελειοῦμαι)I reach the goal—the consummation.
Comp. Hebrews 11:40 [“Thatthey without us should not be perfect.”]On the
third day He departed from Galilee [the territory of Herod], turning His
course towards Jerusalem, being about to die there; see Luke 13:33, at the
end: and so, from this time forth, He vividly realized to His own mind the
consummation. [Nor did He return after this to Galilee, previous to His
resurrection.—Harm., p. 407.]

[133]After the feeding of the five thousand, recordedin ch. 9, Luke is sparing
in the mention of miracles performed by our Lord in Galilee. Howeverin this
passagehe observes, in generalterms, that He spake thus (of casting out devils
and doing cures)on the journey, which He had determinately undertaken for
the enduring of His Passion:Luke gives three instances of such miracles, ch.
Luke 11:14, Luke 13:11-12, Luke 14:2-3.—Harm., p. 406.
[134]ἐὰν—λαλήσωσι—ταῖς γενεαῖς αὔριον, where to-morrow is used for
hereafter;to-day, for in the present times.—ED. and TRANSL.
Pulpit Commentary
Verse 32. - And he said unto them, Go ye, and tell that fox; literally, that she-
fox. The Lord saw through the shallow device, and, in reply to his false
friends, bade them go to that intriguing and false court with a message which
he would give them, The epithet "she-fox" is perhaps the bitterest and most
contemptuous name ever given by the pitiful Masterto any of the sons of men.
It is possible it might have been intended for Herodias, the influence of that
wickedprincess being at that time all-powerful at court. Behold, I castout
devils, and I do cures to-day and to-morrow, and the third day I shall be
perfected. "TellHerod or Herodias that I have a work still to work here; a
few more evil spirits to castout, a few more sick folk to heal. I am going on as
I have begun; no message, friendly or unfriendly, will turn me from my
purpose. I have no fears of his royal power, but I shall not trouble him long;
just to-day and to-morrow - this was merely (as in Hosea 6:2) a proverbial
expressionfor a short time - and on the third day I complete my work." This
completion some have understood by the crowning miracle on dead Lazarus
at Bethany, but it is far better to understand it as referring to the Passion, as
including the last sufferings, the cross, and the resurrection. The τελειοῦμαι
here was supplemented by the utterance with which the blessedlife came to its
close onthe cross - Τετελέσται!Τελείωσις became a recognizedterm for
martyrdom.

That fox
Herod. Describing his cunning and cowardice.
Cures (ἰάσεις)
Used by Luke only.
I shall be perfected (τελειοῦμαι)
The present tense:"the present of the certain future" (Meyer). The meaning
is, I come to an end: I have done. Expositors differ greatly. Some interpret, "I
end my careerof healing," etc.;others, my life.

Tell that fox - A fox is an emblem of slyness, of cunning, and of artful
mischief. The word is also used to denote a dissembler. Herod was a wicked
man, but the "particular thing" to which Jesus here alludes is not his "vices,"
but his "cunning, his artifice," in endeavoring to remove him out of his
territory. He had endeavoredto do it by stratagem - by sending these people
who pretended great friendship for his life.
Behold, I castout devils ... - Announce to him the fact that I am working
miracles in his territory, and that I shall continue to do it. I am not afraid of
his art or his enmity. I am engagedin my appropriate work, and shall
continue to be as long as is proper, in spite of his arts and his threats.
Today and tomorrow - A little time. The words seemhere to be used not
strictly, but proverbially - to denote a short space of time. Let not Herod be
uneasy. I am doing no evil; I am not violating the laws. I only cure the sick,
etc. In a little time this part of my work will be done, and I shall retire from
his dominions.
The third day - After a little time. Perhaps, however, he meant "literally" that
he would depart on that day for Jerusalem;that for two or three days more he
would remain in the villages of Galilee, and then go on his way to Jerusalem.
I shall be perfected - Rather, I shall have ended my course "here;" I shall
have "perfected" whatI purpose to do in Galilee. It does not refer to his
"personal" perfection, for he was always perfect, but it means that he would
have "finished or completed" what he purposed to do in the regions of Herod.
He would have completed his work, and would be ready then to go.

32. that fox—that crafty, cruel enemy of God's innocent servants.
Behold, I castout devils and I do cures—thatis, "Ploton and ply thy wiles;I
also have My plans; My works ofmercy are nearing completion, but some yet
remain; I have work for to-day and to-morrow too, and the third day; by that
time I shall be where his jurisdiction reaches not; the guilt of My blood shall
not lie at his door; that dark deed is reservedfor others." He does not say, I
preach the Gospel—thatwould have made little impression upon Herod—in
the light of the merciful characterof Christ's actions the malice of Herod's
snares is laid bare [Bengel].
to-day, to-morrow, the third day—remarkable language expressive of
successive steps ofHis work yet remaining, the calm deliberateness with
which He meant to go through with them, one after another, to the last,
unmoved by Herod's threat, yet the rapid march with which they were now
hastening to completion. (Compare Lu 22:37).
I shall be perfected—I finish my course, I attain completion.
See Poole on"Luke 13:31"
And he said unto them, go ye and tell that fox,.... Herod, who it may be sent
them, of which Christ was not ignorant, nor of his designin it; and who, as
Nero, for his cruelty, is compared to a lion, so he for his subtlety in this
instance, as well as in the whole of his conduct, to a fox; though some think
Christ has a regard to the Pharisees, andtheir craftiness, in forming this

story, pretending goodwill to him, by acquainting him of Herod's malicious
designs, when their view was only to scare him out of their country; so the
false prophets and teachers, are for their cunning, subtlety, and flattery,
compared to foxes, Sol2:15 as well as for their greediness andvoraciousness:
the word is used with the Jews, for a vain and empty man, in oppositionto a
goodman; as in that saying (d) of R. Jannai,
"be thou the tail of lions, and not the head of "foxes;"''
or "vain men", as the gloss explains it:
behold, I castout devils; or "I will castout devils", as the Ethiopic version
reads, in spite of him, let him do his worst:
and I do cures today and tomorrow; and so for some time to come;and which
was doing good, and was whatHerod and the Pharisees, hadthey any
humanity in them, would have rejoicedat, and have chose that he should have
continued with them, and not have threatenedhim with his life, or have took
any methods to send him from them:
and the third day I shall be perfected;that is, in a little time after, I shall be
made perfect by sufferings, my course will be finished, and I shall have done
all the work completely, I came about; and till that time come, it is not in his
power, nor yours, nor all the men on earth, or devils in hell, to take awaymy
life, or hinder me doing what I am about.
(d) Pirke Abot, c. 4. sect. 15. & Jarchi in ib.
Geneva Study Bible

And he said unto them, Go ye, and tell that {h} fox, Behold, I castout devils,
and I do cures {i} to day and to morrow, and the third day I shall be {k}
perfected.
(h) That deceitful and treacherous man.
(i) That is, a small time, and Theophylactsays it is a proverb: or else by to day
we may understand the present time, and by tomorrow the time to come,
meaning by this the entire time of his ministry and office.
(k) That is, when the sacrifice for sin is finished.
Luke 13:33 Nevertheless,I must keep going today and
tomorrow and the next day, for it is not admissiblefor
a prophet to perish outsideof Jerusalem.
BIBLEHUB COMMENTARY
(33) NeverthelessI must walk.—Better, I must journey, or, I must go onward,
the word being that used in Luke 9:51; Luke 9:53. The words indicate the
intensity of conviction and of purpose as that expressedbefore. I cannotbring
myself to acceptthe words that follow—“to-dayand to-morrow . . .”—as
meaning that there were but three days to pass before He should enter
Jerusalem. It would not have been true in fact. It would have seemedobvious,

had we not too abundant proof of men’s want of power to enter into the poetic
forms of Easternspeechwhenthey differ from our own, that the literal
meaning here is altogetherout of place, and that the same formula is used as
in the preceding verse, with the same meaning—i.e., as conveying the thought
of a short, undefined interval.
It cannot be that a prophet perish out of Jerusalem.—The wordused here for
“it cannot be,” occurs in this passageonly of the New Testament, and has a
peculiar half-ironical force—“Itis not meet, it would be at variance with the
fitness of things, it is morally impossible.” Jerusalemhad made the slaughter
of the prophets a specialprerogative, a monopoly, as has been said, of which
none might rob her.
BensonCommentary
Luke 13:33-35. Nevertheless,I must walk to-day, &c. — Notwithstanding all
that he can do, I shall, for the short time I have left, do the works of Him that
sent me, without being afraid of any man; because my life cannotbe taken
from me till the time come, which is appointed of God. When that period is
arrived, I shall be offeredup, yet not here, but in the bloody city. Forit cannot
be that a prophet perish out of Jerusalem — That unhappy city, which claims
prescription for murdering the messengersofGod. Such cruelty and malice
cannot be found elsewhere. If a true prophet was put to death, he was
prosecutedas a false prophet. Now the supreme court, whose prerogative it
was to judge prophets, had its seatat Jerusalem. Inferior courts did not take
cognizance ofsuch causes;and therefore, if a prophet was put to death, it
must be at Jerusalem. So Dr. Lightfoot here. Our Lord, “in saying a prophet
could not perish out of that city, insinuated, that he knew the intentions of the
Pharisees too wellto pay any regard to their advice respecting departing from
Galilee for fear of Herod. Or, in making this observation, his designmay have
been to display the wickednessofthat city, the inhabitants of which had been,
in every age, the chief enemies of the messengersofGod: and to this agrees
what our Lord says of Jerusalemin the pathetic lamentation which he now

utters concerning it, on accountof its crimes, its obstinacy, and its
punishment.”
O Jerusalem, Jerusalem— Thou guilty and miserable city, which, though
thou hast been distinguished by divine favours beyond any place on earth, yet,
with the utmost ingratitude and cruelty, killest the prophets, and stonest, as
the vilest malefactors, them that are sent unto thee — As the ambassadors of
God. How often would I have gatheredthy children — Unto myself, with all
the tenderness of paternal love; as a hen her brood under her wings — To
cherish and defend them. Three solemn visits he had made to Jerusalem, since
his baptism, for this very purpose. And ye would not — You were still
regardless ofthe offers of my grace, and would not be persuadedto hearken
to my call, and to acceptmy favour. And now, behold, with awful dread, and
mark the prediction and event: your house is left unto you desolate — Is now
irrevocably consignedto desolationand destruction. Forverily I sayunto you
— I will quickly ceasemy labours among you, and withdraw from you in such
righteous displeasure, that ye shall not see me until the time come when,
taught by your calamities, ye shall be ready and disposedto say, Blessedis he
that cometh in the name of the Lord — Wishing in vain for the succourof him
whom you now despise. See onMatthew 23:37-39. This does not imply that
they should then or ever see Jesus atall; but only that they would earnestly
wish for the Messiah, and, in the extremity of their distress, be ready to
entertain any one who might offer himself under that character. Compare
Luke 17:22-23.

I must walk ... - I must remain here this short time. These three days I must
do cures here, and then I shall depart, though not for fear of Herod. It will be
because my time will have come, and I shall go up to Jerusalemto die.
For it cannotbe that a prophet should perish out of Jerusalem - I have no fear
that Herod will put me to death in Galilee. I shall not depart on that account.
"Jerusalem" is the place where the prophets die, and where "I" am to die. I
am not at all alarmed, therefore, at any threats of "Herod," for my life is safe
until I arrive at Jerusalem. Go and tell him, therefore, that I fear him not. I
shall work here as long as it is proper, and shall then go up to Jerusalemto
die. The reasonwhy he said that a prophet could not perish elsewhere thanin
Jerusalemmight be:
1. That he knew that he would be tried on a charge of blasphemy, and no
other court could have cognizance ofthat crime but the greatcouncil or
Sanhedrin, and so he was not afraid of any threats of Herod.,
2. It "had been" the fact that the prophets had been chiefly slain there. The
meaning is, "It cannot easilybe done elsewhere;it is not usually done.
Prophets have generally perished there, and there I am to die. I am safe,
therefore, from the fearof Herod, and shall not take the advice given and
leave his territory."

33. it cannot be that a prophet, &c.—"Itwould never do that," &c.—awful
severity of satire this upon "the bloody city!" "He seeksto kill me, does he?
Ah! I must be out of Herod's jurisdiction for that. Go tell him I neither fly
from him nor fearhim, but Jerusalemis the prophets' slaughter-house."
See Poole on"Luke 13:32"
Nevertheless,I must walk,.... The Syriac versionreads, "I must work", and so
the Arabic: as going about doing good, casting out devils, and healing
diseases:
today and tomorrow, and the day following: a few days more in Galilee, and
towards Jerusalem:all the Oriental versions read, "the day following I shall
depart"; either out of this world; or out of Galilee, and go to Jerusalem, and
there suffer and die:
for it cannotbe that a prophet perish out of Jerusalem;because the great
sanhedrim only satat Jerusalem, to whom it belonged to try and judge a
prophet; and if found false, to condemn him, and put him to death; the rule is
this (e);
"they do not judge, neither a tribe, nor a false prophet, nor an high priest, but
by the sanhedrim of seventy and one.''
Not but that prophets sometimes perished elsewhere, as Johnthe Baptist in
Galilee;but not according to a judicial process, inwhich way Christ the
prophet was to be cut off, nor was it common; instances ofthis kind were rare,
and always in a violent way; and even such as were sentencedto death by the
lessersanhedrim, were brought to Jerusalem, and publicly executedthere,
whose crimes were of another sort; for so runs the canon(f);

"they do not put any one to death by the sanhedrim, which is in his city, nor
by the sanhedrim in Jabneh; but they bring him to the great, sanhedrim in
Jerusalem, and keephim till the feast, and put him to death on a feastday, as
it is said Deuteronomy 17:13 "and all the people shall hear and fear."''
And since Jerusalemwas the place where the prophets were usually put to
death, it follows,
(e) Misn. Sanhedrin, c. 1. sect. 5. & T. Bab. Sanhedrin, fol. 18. 2.((f) Misn.
Sanhedrin, c. 10. sect. 4.
Geneva Study Bible
{10} Nevertheless Imust walk to day, and to morrow, and the day following:
for it cannotbe that a prophet perish out of Jerusalem.
(10) Nowhere else are there more cruel enemies of the godly than within the
sanctuary and Church itself: but God sees it and will in his time have an
accountfor it from them.
EXEGETICAL(ORIGINAL LANGUAGES)
Luke 13:33. Nevertheless (althoughI am not, through your advice,
disconcertedin that three days’ ministry) the necessitystill lies before me, to-
day and to-morrow and the next day, to obey your πορεύου ἐντεῦθεν, since it
is not allowable that a prophet, etc. Jesus means to say, “Neverthelessit
cannot at all be otherwise than that I should conjoin with this work, which is
still to be done to-day and to-morrow and the next day, the departure from
Galilee, since I shall not perish in Galilee, as Herod threatens, but in order to

perish must proceedto Jerusalem, whichafter all has the monopoly, that a
prophet must not be slain out of it.” In the answer, which as looking
approaching death in the face at once boldly contemns the threatening of the
timid prince, are accordinglyinvolved the three positions—(1)I have
undertaken to labour three days more in Galilee, and in that undertaking I
will not be disconcerted;(2) nevertheless, Imust in these three days contrive
my departure from Galilee;[169]and wherefore this? in order to escape the
death with which Herod threatens me? No; (3) I must do this because I must
not in Galilee—notoutside of Jerusalem, but just in that place of the murder
of prophets—die; and therefore must make for Jerusalem.[170]
ΠΟΡΕΎΕΣΘΑΙ]depart, Luke 13:31. It is not in contradiction with Luke
13:22, for while travelling Jesus was accustomedto castout demons, and to
perform cures. If He wishedto do the latter, He could at the same time do the
former. Mostof the commentators (even Grotius, Kuinoel, Olshausen)are
grammatically and contextually wrong (see Luke 13:31) in the explanation:
travel about undisturbed in my occupations. Whenothers, following Syr.,
limit πορεύεσθαι merely to Τῇ ἘΧΟΜΈΝῌ, interpreting it either as to depart
(Theophylact, Casaubon)or to die (Euthymius Zigabenus, Elsner), they
supply (comp. also Neander)after αὔριονa thought such as ἘΡΓΆΖΕΣΘΑΙ or
ἘΝΕΡΓῆΣΑΙἋ ΕἾΠΟΝ. This is indeed to make the impossible possible!
ΟὐΚ ἘΝΔΈΧΕΤΑΙ] it cannotbe done, it is not possible (2Ma 11:18, and see
Stallbaum, ad Plat. Rep. vi. p. 501 C), with ironically excited emotion makes
the frequent and usual hyperbolically to appearas necessary(for all the
prophets were not actually slain in Jerusalem, as is showneven in the instance
of the Baptist) for the purpose of showing how empty the threatening of
Herod appears to Jesus, since He must rather go to Jerusalemto die. The
opinion (Grotius, Drusius, Knatchbull, Lightfoot, Wolf, and others) that He
refers to the right belonging exclusivelyto the Sanhedrim of judging prophets
and condemning them to death (Sanhedr. f. 2. 1, f. 89. 1, and elsewhere)is
mistaken, since the matter here in question is of the actual ἀπολέσθαι, and

since Jesus could not place Himself on a level with those who were condemned
as false prophets. Comp. Winer in Zimmerman’s Monatsschr. II. 3, p. 206.
[169]The inference is not here to be drawn (so Wieseler, Synopse,p. 321)that
Jesus was still distant three days’ journey from the end of His expedition
(Jerusalem, not Bethany, as Wieselerwill have it, see ver. 22, and on Luke
9:51 ff.). The occupationof these three days is rather, according to ver. 32,
principally the casting out of demons and healings;but the journey must have
been bound up therewith, so that Jesus intends on the third day to reach the
limit to which in Luke 17:11 He has already come.
[170]Schleiermacheris wrong in assuming (Schr. d. Luk. p. 195)that Jesus
means to saythat He must still abide two days in the place, and then for two
days more journey quietly, etc. In ver. 33 they are indeed the same days as in
ver. 32. De Wette considers the saying as unimportant,—that it is probably
incorrectly reported; and Holtzmann finds the sectionso obscure that on that
accountMatthew omitted it. According to Baur, Jesus marks out the
πορεύεσθαι, the progress on His journey never to be interrupted as His proper
task, which would be in harmony with the Pauline characterofthe Gospel.
With this conflicts the statement giving the reasonὅτι οὐκ ἐνδέχεται κ.τ.λ.
Bleek conjectures thatσήμ. κ. αὔρ. καί was introduced from ver. 32 by a
transcriber’s error at an early period.
Luke 13:33. πλὴν, for the rest, or, on the other hand, introducing the other
side of the case = I must work still for a little space, yet I must keepmoving on
southwards, as the proper place for a prophet to die is Jerusalem, not Galilee.
The secondnote of time (σήμερον) coincides with the first: work and moving
southwards go hand in hand.—οὐκ ἐνδέχεται, it is not fitting (here only in
N.T., cf. Luke 17:1). John was murdered in Machaerus, but that was an
offence againstthe fitness of things. The reply of Jesus is full of dignity and
pathos. In effectHe says:I am not to be driven out of Galilee by threats. I will

work till the hour comes. Neverthelesskeepyour minds easy, princes and
Pharisees!I must soonendure a prophet’s fate, and not here. I go to meet it in
the proper place, though not in fearof you.
33. I must .walk]Rather, I must journey; the same word as in Luke 13:31,
“depart.” It seems to imply, ‘I will not leave Herod’s dominion, but I shall
journey on at my own leisure through them.’
it cannot be] i.e. there is a moral unfitness in the murder of a Prophet
anywhere but in Jerusalem. The words are those of terrible irony; and yet,
even amid the irony, the voice of the Speakerseemedto break with tears as
He uttered the tender appeal of the next verse.
Bengel's Gnomen
Luke 13:33. Τῇ ἐχομένῃ, on the following day) This expressionhas a wider
meaning than τῇ τρίτῃ, on the third day (the day after to-morrow), which is
included in τῇ ἐχομένῃ. The journey to the city of Jerusalemwas not a
journey of only two days: see Luke 13:22, ch. Luke 17:11. Whence it appears
that the third day was not merely a day of consummation, πλὴν [beginning of
this ver.], but also, before this, of farther journeying and progress.[135][“IfI
were to proceedstraight-way,” saith He, “to the place where I am about to be
slain, there would be need of at leasta three days’ journey.”—Harm., l. c.]—
πορεύεσθαι, to walk, depart) They had said, πορεύου, depart, Luke 13:31. He
replies, This very thing which you so suddenly enjoin upon Me (viz. to
depart), is not a thing to be done in one day.—οὐκ ἐνδέχεται, it is not
usual[136])This phrase admits of exceptions:for instance, John the Baptist
was “a prophet” who “perished out of Jerusalem.”—ἀπολέσθαι,perish) by a
public judicial procedure.
[135]πορεύεσθαι, to walk, implying His furthering the advancementof His
kingdom during His journey.—ED. and TRANSL.

[136]Lit. “It is not admissible. The phrase occurs here only in New
Testament.—ED. andTRANSL.
Pulpit Commentary
Verse 33. - Nevertheless Imust walk to. day, and to-morrow, and the day
following: for it cannot be that a prophet perish out of Jerusalem. He reflects,
"Yes, I must go on with my journey for the little space yet left to me;" and
then turning to the false Pharisee friends, with the saddestirony bids them not
be afraid. Priest and Sanhedrin, the unholy alliance againsthim of Sadducee
and Pharisee, wouldnot be balked of the Victim whose blood they were all
thirsting after. Their loved city had ever had one melancholy prerogative. It
had ever been the place of death for the prophets of the Lord. That sad
privilege would not be takenfrom it in his case.
It cannot be (οὐκ ἐνδέχεται)
The verb means to acceptoradmit; so that the sense is, "it is not admissible
that." The expressionis ironicaland hyperbolical, with reference to
Jerusalemas having a monopoly of such martyrdoms. "It would be contrary
to use and wont, and, in a manner, to theocratic decorum, if such a prophet as
I should perish elsewhere thanin Jerusalem" (Godet).
PRECEPTAUSTIN RESOURCES
BRUCE HURT MD

Luke 13:31 Just at that time some Pharisees approached, saying to Him, "Go
away, leave here, for Herod wants to kill You."
KJV Luke 13:31 The same day there came certain of the Pharisees,saying
unto him, Get thee out, and depart hence:for Herod will kill thee.
Go away, leave here Neh 6:9-11; Ps 11:1,2;Amos 7:12,13
Just at that time - More literally "At that very hour," (ESV) the very hour
Jesus had given the stern, serious warning for everyone's need to enter the
"Strait gate." (Lk 13:24-30)If the the Pharisees heardit, then they were
probably "gnashing of teeth" (cf Lk 13:28)at His remarks.
Luke uses hora severaltimes in similar phrases...
Luke 1:10 at the hour of the incense offering.
Luke 2:38 At that very moment she came up
Luke 7:21 At that very time He cured many people
Luke 10:21 At that very time He rejoicedgreatlyin the Holy Spirit,
Luke 12:12 the Holy Spirit will teachyou in that very hour what you ought to
say
Luke 13:31 Just at that time
Luke 20:19 The scribes and the chief priests tried to lay hands on Him that
very hour,
Luke 24:33 And they gotup that very hour and returned to Jerusalem,

Some Pharisees approached- They drew near, which is the Greek verb
proserchomai(4334)whichis the same verb used in Hebrews to describe
believers drawing near to God (Heb 4:16, Heb 7:25, Heb 10:1, Heb 10:22, Heb
11:6) and by Peterof "coming to Him as a living Stone." (1 Pe 2:4) These men
were not drawing near to Him for life but to tell Him about death!
Luke's uses of proserchomai -
Lk. 8:24; Lk. 8:44; Lk. 9:12; Lk. 9:42; Lk. 10:34; Lk. 13:31;Lk. 20:27;Lk.
23:36;Lk. 23:52;Acts 7:31; Acts 8:29; Acts 9:1; Acts 10:28;Acts 12:13; Acts
18:2; Acts 22:26; Acts 22:27; Acts 23:14;Acts 28:9;
Pharisees (5330)See note on pharisaios. Theyhad probably heard His
characterassessmentofthem in Luke 12:1 "Bewareofthe leavenof the
Pharisees,whichis hypocrisy."
Luke's uses of Pharisees -
Lk. 5:17; Lk. 5:21; Lk. 5:30; Lk. 5:33; Lk. 6:2; Lk. 6:7; Lk. 7:30; Lk. 7:36;
Lk. 7:37; Lk. 7:39; Lk. 11:37;Lk. 11:38; Lk. 11:39; Lk. 11:42;Lk. 11:43; Lk.
11:53;Lk. 12:1; Lk. 13:31;Lk. 14:1; Lk. 14:3; Lk. 15:2; Lk. 16:14; Lk. 17:20;
Lk. 18:10; Lk. 18:11;Lk. 19:39; Acts 5:34; Acts 15:5; Acts 23:6; Acts 23:7;
Acts 23:8; Acts 23:9; Acts 26:5
Saying to Him - In Luke's lastrecord of a direct encounter with the Pharisees
Jesus had issuedseveralscathing "Woes" (Lk 11:42, 43, 44, 46, 47, 52-note)
and as a result "the scribes and the Pharisees beganto be very hostile and to
question Him closelyon many subjects." (Lk 11:53-note).

Spurgeon- Think of the Phariseesbeing concernedabout Christ’s life! What
an affectationof regard! Yet it was only affectation. We must always be on
our guard againstthe foes of God even when they speak most fairly; indeed, it
is their agreeable, affectionate words that we have most cause to dread.
Go away, leave here - Go awayis a command in aoristimperative (Do this
now! Don't delay! is the idea) and leave is in the present imperative (Keep on
leaving! is the idea).
For Herod wants to kill You - Keep in mind that at this time Jesus was either
in Perea (favored by MacArthur - cf. Mt. 19:1; Mk 10:1; Jn 10:40–42)orin
Galilee (most favor the latter) both of which were ruled by Herod. The
question arises is whether this was a genuine threat? While we cannotbe
dogmatic, the factthat Herod was wicked(poneros = determined, aggressive,
fervent evil that actively opposes good)(Lk 3:19-note) and had already
murdered one prophet (Lk 9:9-note), indicates that he was certainly
"capable" offollowing through and murdering a secondProphet.
Wants (present tense = continually his desire)(2309)(thelo)"expresses not
simply a desire, but a determined and constantexercise ofthe will." (W E
Vine)
This Herod should be distinguished from "Herod the Great" (Mt 2:1, 3, 7, 12,
13, 15, 16, 19) who ruled Palestine from 37 B.C. until he died in 4 B.C. Herod
the Greatwas knownfor his extensive building projects (including the Temple
in Jerusalem)and for his cruelty. Regarding the latter trait, we could say
"like father, like son," for Herod Antipas was Herod the Great's son.

The Herod here in Lk 13:31 is Herod the tetrarch of Galilee also knownas
Herod Antipas and a son of Herod the Great. (Mt 14:1,3, 6, Lk 3:19, 9:7, Acts
13:1). Herod is called King Herod in Mk 6:14 (Mt 14:9) but technicallyhe was
not a king but a tetrarch, a ruler with rank and authority lowerthan a king. A
tetrarch ruled over Galilee and Perea (the regionthrough which Jesus was
journeying through in this sectionof Luke) but his rule was only with the
approval of the Roman authorities. This was roughly equivalent to being
governorof a region. Herod the tetrarch imprisoned John the Baptist(Mk
6:14-29, cf Lk 3:20) and later had him executed(Lk 9:9, Mk 6:27-28). Herod
the Tetrarchalso had a hand in the unjust trial of Jesus (Lk 23:7-12)Herod
the Tetrarchruled from 4 B.C.–A.D. 39, sharing the rule of his father’s realm
with his two brothers (purple regions in map).
Wiersbe reasons that "The Pharisees wantedto get Jesus back into Judea
where the religious leaders could watchHim and ultimately trap Him, so they
tried to frighten Him away." (BEC)
Luke 13:32 And He said to them, "Go and tell that fox, 'Behold, I castout
demons and perform cures today and tomorrow, and the third day I reach My
goal.'
KJV Luke 13:32 And he said unto them, Go ye, and tell that fox, Behold, I
castout devils, and I do cures to day and to morrow, and the third day I shall
be perfected.
Go and tell that fox Lk 3:19,20;9:7-9; 23:8-11;Ezek 13:4; Micah3:1-3; Zeph
3:3; Mk 6:26-28
I castout demons and perform cures today and tomorrow Lk 9:7; Mk 6:14;
Jn 10:32; 11:8-10

the third day I reach My goalJn 17:4,5;19:30;*Gr:; Heb 2:10; 5:9
And He said to them - Notice what He does NOT sayto them - He does not say
"Thank you for alerting me to the danger!" While the JewishPhariseeswere
clearly opposedto the Roman's titular ruler Herod, when it came to the
"Usurper" Jesus (to their spiritually blind eyes), these two enemies became
"friends." The enemy of my enemy is my friend is an ancient proverb which
suggeststhat two opposing parties canor should work togetheragainsta
common enemy, and they saw Jesus as their "enemy." We see collusion
betweenthese two enemies in Mark...
Mark 3:6; The Pharisees wentout and immediately beganconspiring with the
Herodians againstHim (Jesus), as to how they might destroy (apollumi) Him.
Mark 12:13 Then they *sentsome of the Phariseesand Herodians to Him in
order to trap Him (Jesus)in a statement.
Go and tell that fox - What does Jesus mean by calling Herod a fox? It is not a
complement but a phrase expressing "utter contempt" (Leon Morris)
MacArthur - For Jesus to make such a derogatorystatement was highly
unusual; Herod is the only individual in the New Testamentfor whom the
Lord expressedsuch contempt. Some may wonder whether Jesus’comment
was a violation of the Mosaic law, whichforbids speaking evil of a ruler (Ex.
22:28;Eccl. 10:20;cf. Acts 23:5). While that was normally the case, there were
exceptions. Godoften directly rebuked Israel’s rulers through the prophets.
Speaking through Isaiah God said to Israel, “Your rulers are rebels and
companions of thieves; everyone loves a bribe and chasesafterrewards. They
do not defend the orphan, nor does the widow’s plea come before them” (Isa.
1:23). In Ezekiel22:27 God lamented that Israel’s “princes within her are like
wolves tearing the prey, by shedding blood and destroying lives in order to get

dishonestgain.” Hosea 7:3–7 records God’s strong rebuke of Israel’s wicked
leaders.
One writer says "Upon hearing of Herod's threat, Jesus pegs the Tetrarchas
a varmint in the Lord's field, a murderer of God's agents, a would-be
disrupter of the divine economy." (Quotedin The New International
Commentary on the New Testament – The Gospelof Luke)
Hughes adds that "Laterwhen Jesus stoodbefore Herod, the Masterwould
say nothing to him at all, againshowing contempt for him. As Leon Morris
has remarked, "When Jesus has nothing to sayto a man that man's position is
hopeless."Herod was a dead man in every way. (Preaching the Word -
Preaching the Word – Luke, Volume II: That You May Know the Truth)
Foxes were wellknown to be both cunning and dangerous scavengers (cf. La
5:17-18;Ezek 13:4). For example notice the effectof foxes in Song 2:15-note
“Catchthe foxes for us, the little foxes that are ruining the vineyards, While
our vineyards are in blossom.” JoelGreencalls this trait "the proclivity of fox
for malicious destructiveness."
MacArthur - Rabbinical writings often used "the fox" to signify someone who
was both crafty and worthless. The Pharisees, who trembled at Herod's
power, must have been astonishedat Christ's boldness. (The MacArthur
Study Bible)
Behold (2400)idou - As Spurgeon says "Beholdis a word of wonder; it is
intended to excite admiration. Wherever you see it hung out in Scripture, it is
like an ancient sign-board, signifying that there are rich wares within, or like
the hands which solid readers have observed in the margin of the older
Puritanic books, drawing attention to something particularly worthy of
observation." I would add, behold is like a divine highlighter, a divine

underlining of an especiallystriking or important text. It says in effect"Listen
up, all ye who would be wise in the ways of Jehovah!"
I castout (ekbállō) demons (daimonion) and perform cures today and
tomorrow and the third day - Mostwriters interpret this "triple time
reference" as a Hebrew "idiom for a short indefinite time followedby an
imminent and certain event” (Ellis). It speaks ofjourneying on, continuing the
miraculous (signs)ministry without interruption or detours! Jesus is simply
saying He would continue doing what He setout to do until He was finished,
regardless oftravel recommendations from the Phariseesordeath threats
from Herod. He would continue unperturbed and unhindered. His miracles
would continue to attestto His powerand authority overboth the
supernatural (casting out demons) and the natural world (healing) and were
evidence that the Kingdom of God had come upon them (Lk 11:20-note, Mt
12:28). They were signs, that pointed in the "right direction" so to speak, but
sadly as described below, for the most part the miraculous signs to the "Way,
the Truth and the Life" (Jn 14:6) were not heeded.
Spurgeonon castout demons, etc - That is, “I shall stay my full time here,
while I have work to do, I shall do it, and I am not going awayuntil it is
finished. I am not afraid of Herod threatening to kill me, for I am immortal
till my work is done.” He is not even flurried, or put about by such a message
as that. Besides whenmen mean to bite, they do not usually bark; and if
Herod had meant to kill Christ just then, he would not have told him what he
was going to do.
Perform (658)(apoteleofrom apó = intensifies the meaning of + teleo =
complete)means to perfect, accomplishor achieve the natural purpose.
Apoteleo is a strong word, implying an ultimate and final consummation. The
only other NT use of this verb is to describe sin "accomplishing" death(James
1:15-note), essentiallythe opposite end result comparedto Luke's use

describing Jesus'purpose to cure. In other words in James apoteleo
personifies SIN as "running its course" andof reaching its goal(the final
stage). Here in Luke, Jesus says in essence Imust finish my course (cf Paul's
words " I have finished the course" - 2 Ti 4:7-note)
NET Note on time phrases today and tomorrow and the third day - The third
day is a figurative reference to being further on in time, not a reference to (a
literal) three days from now. Jesus is not even in Jerusalemyet, and we know
that the events of the lastdays in Jerusalemtake a week.
BDAG writes that the expressiontoday and tomorrow and the third day
"refers to a short period of time, the exactduration of which the speaker
either cannot or does not wish to disclose."
I reachMy goal - What is Jesus goal? Ultimately His goalwas to die for the
sins of the world, and the resurrectionon the third day after His crucifixion
would attest to the fact that He had conquered sin and death.
A THOUGHT TO PONDER:In using the phrase third day could Jesus have
been making an allusion to the consummate fulfillment of His goalof
redemption made available for sinners, a goalwhich was validated by His
resurrectionon the third day? It is just a thought, although in contextis
probably not the intended meaning here. Nevertheless, itis notable that third
day is an integral part of the Gospelmessageas Paulwrote to the
Corinthians...
For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ
died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and

that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures (1 Cor15:3-4-
note)
Relatedreferences to the third day...
From that time Jesus Christ beganto show His disciples that He must go to
Jerusalem, and suffer many things from the elders and chief priests and
scribes, and be killed, and be raisedup on the third day. (Mt 16:21)
And while they were gathering togetherin Galilee, Jesus saidto them, "The
Son of Man is going to be delivered into the hands of men; and they will kill
Him, and He will be raisedon the third day." And they were deeply grieved.
(Mt 17:22-23)
(Jesus) "Behold, we are going up to Jerusalem;and the Son of Man will be
delivered to the chief priests and scribes, and they will condemn Him to death,
and will deliver Him to the Gentiles to mock and scourge and crucify Him,
and on the third day He will be raised up." (Mt 20:18-19)
(Jesus)saying, "The Son of Man must suffer many things, and be rejectedby
the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raisedup on the
third day." (Lk 9:22)
(Jesus)ForHe will be delivered to the Gentiles, and will be mockedand
mistreated and spit upon, and after they have scourgedHim, they will kill
Him; and the third day He will rise again." (Lk 18:32-33)

(Angels at the tomb) saying that the Son of Man must be delivered into the
hands of sinful men, and be crucified, and the third day rise again." (Lk 24:7)
But we were hoping that it was He who was going to redeem Israel. Indeed,
besides all this, it is the third day since these things (Jesus'crucifixion)
happened. (Luke 24:21)
(Jesus) and He saidto them, "Thus it is written, that the Christ should suffer
and rise again from the dead the third day and that repentance for forgiveness
of sins should be proclaimed in His name to all the nations, beginning from
Jerusalem. (Lk 24:46-47)
(Peter) "GodraisedHim up on the third day, and granted that He should
become visible, (Acts 10:40)
Allison Trites agrees with the thought that the third day was an allusion to the
resurrectionwriting "The mention of the “third day” here is a strong pointer
to Jesus’coming resurrection. “Luke’s readers undoubtedly would call to
mind the Lord’s resurrection. This meaning is confirmed by the following
word, ‘finish’ [or ‘accomplish,’NLT]” (Ellis 1981:190)." (CornerstoneBible
Commentary - Luke)
Wiersbe - Jesus had work to do and He would accomplishit. After all, Jesus
walkedin the light (John 9:4; 11:9–10), andfoxes went hunting in the
darkness!(BEC)
Reach...goal(5048)(teleioo relatedto teleios from telos = an end, a purpose, an
aim, a goal) means to accomplishor bring to an end or to the intended goal

(telos). It means finished and wanting nothing necessaryforcompleteness.
This verb does not mean simply to terminate something but to carry it out to
the full finish, in this case clearlyreferring to Jesus'missionto provide
redemption for sinful mankind.
In John 5 Jesus used the same verb teleioo declaring
“But the testimony which I have is greaterthan the testimony of John; for the
works which the Father has given Me to accomplish(teleioo)–the very works
that I do–testifyabout Me, that the Father has sent Me. (Jn 5:36)
In His greatpriestly prayer in John 17 Jesus usedthe same verb teleioo
testifying
“I glorified You on the earth, having accomplished(teleioo)the work (so sure
is the work to be finished that He speaks in pasttense) which You have given
Me to do. (Jn 17:4, the fulfillment of Jn 4:34 which also uses teleioo)
The relatedverb teleo is used by Jesus in His triumphant cry "It is finished!"
(tetelestai)(Jn 19:30-note)He had reachedHis goaland the results of His
accomplishmentwould continue throughout eternity! Hallelujah!
Hughes adds that "in the wider context of Luke, this was a cryptic reference
to Jesus'death and resurrectionbeing under divine control. King Jesus had
addressedHerod, the petty monarch, with regalcontempt and kingly
confidence. This was sovereign premeditation! As the Mastersaid on another
occasionwhenhe affirmed that he would lay down his life for his sheep, "No

Jesus was responding to herod's threat

Jesus was responding to herod's threat

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to Jesus was responding to herod's threat

Similar to Jesus was responding to herod's threat (20)

More from GLENN PEASE

More from GLENN PEASE (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Jesus was responding to herod's threat