The title “King of the Jews” appears sparingly in the Gospels, yet each use is deliberate and explosive. It is never a neutral description or a political convenience. It is a royal claim rooted in the line of David, a challenge to the powers occupying Judea, and a declaration that God’s promises are unfolding in the arrival of the Messiah.
When both Herod the Great and Jesus of Nazareth bear this title, the Gospel writers are not presenting a coincidence. They are revealing a collision of two kingdoms and two competing claims to Israel’s throne. Herod’s kingship was constructed through Roman ambition. Jesus’s kingship was declared by heaven and foretold in prophecy. One sat on a throne built by fear. The other came to establish a throne grounded in truth. Understanding the nativity requires understanding the confrontation between these two kings.
Herod’s Rise Through Roman Power
Herod’s ascent took place during one of the most unstable periods in Israel’s history. The Hasmonean dynasty, once defenders of Jewish freedom, had decayed into internal strife. In the power struggle between Hyrcanus II and Aristobulus II, both sides tragically appealed to Rome for arbitration. Pompey responded by entering Jerusalem in 63 BCE, reducing Judea to a dependent client state. This transition eroded Jewish autonomy and opened the door for opportunists. Antipater the Idumean, Herod’s father, maneuvered himself into Roman favor through loyalty to Julius Caesar, and Caesar rewarded him by appointing him procurator over Judea. Antipater placed his son Herod in Galilee, where Herod quickly proved himself a man Rome could rely upon: efficient, decisive, and unhesitating in the use of force.
When Parthian forces swept into Judea in 40 BCE and installed the Hasmonean prince Antigonus, Herod abandoned the collapsing situation and fled to Rome. Instead of losing everything, he gained far more. With the backing of Mark Antony and Octavian, the Senate formally declared him “King of the Jews.” This title ignored Israel’s Scriptures, disregarded the covenant, and contradicted the lineage God had promised to David. It was a foreign invention imposed upon God’s people for the sake of Roman stability. Herod returned with Roman troops, waged a long and brutal campaign, captured Jerusalem in 37 BCE, and executed Antigonus in order to extinguish the last remnant of native kingship. His crown was not inherited. It was installed.
The Insecurity and Violence of a Counterfeit King
Herod’s illegitimacy was not merely political. It was theological. Herod was an Edomite, a descendant of Esau, belonging to a nation repeatedly condemned in Israel’s Scriptures. The prophets record God’s indignation against Edom for its hostility toward His people. Obadiah declares judgment because Edom cheered when Jerusalem fell and participated in the violence that followed. Ezekiel identifies Edom as harboring “perpetual enmity” and seeking to possess Israel’s land after its suffering. Malachi portrays Edom as a nation God will tear down even if it attempts to rebuild. The Psalms remember Edom’s cry, “Tear it down,” during the destruction of Jerusalem. Within the Old Testament, Edom symbolizes opposition to God’s covenant, resentment toward Jacob, and persistent aggression against Israel. For centuries, Edom stood against the people of God, and God declared that such hostility would not stand unjudged.
Against this prophetic backdrop, Herod’s presence on David’s throne becomes shocking. For the first time in Israel’s history, an Edomite ruled over Judea. This was not merely uncomfortable. It was the inversion of everything Israel expected. The throne meant for the sons of David was occupied by someone whose lineage placed him among those God Himself had condemned for violence and betrayal. No political achievement could erase the theological scandal of an Edomite king reigning in Jerusalem. The people knew this. Herod knew it. And Rome certainly did not care.
This awareness fueled the intense paranoia that marked Herod’s reign. His attempts to legitimize himself were desperate and violent. He married Mariamne, a Hasmonean princess, to graft himself into the dynasty he had overthrown, but insecurity quickly turned into terror that her lineage outshone his own. He executed her, then her grandfather, then her brother, and ultimately two of his own sons. Augustus famously remarked that it was safer to be Herod’s pig than Herod’s child. Herod’s insecurity produced a reign of suspicion, cruelty, and constant bloodshed.
Even Herod’s monumental achievements were driven by fear rather than devotion. His fortresses showcased power, and his renovation of the Temple was intended to display loyalty to Jewish identity. Yet these projects were political tools cloaked in piety. The Temple he embellished was not built to honor God but to hide the fact that he was the wrong king on the wrong throne. Every stone declared what Herod wanted people to believe. None of it changed what prophecy had already said about Edom or what Scripture demanded of Israel’s true king.
Jesus: The True King Born, Not Appointed
In contrast to this counterfeit rule, the Gospels present Jesus as the rightful king whose identity is rooted in prophecy, lineage, and divine action. Jesus was not given His title through political maneuvering. He was born with it. His genealogy confirmed His descent from David. His birth in Bethlehem fulfilled the words of Micah. Angelic proclamations announced that He would sit on the throne of His father David and reign forever. Everything about His coming bore the marks of divine intention. Heaven recognized Him. Scripture prepared the way for Him. The faithful longed for Him.
When the Magi arrived in Jerusalem asking, “Where is He who has been born King of the Jews,” they unintentionally exposed the fault line running beneath Herod’s throne. They did not ask, “Who will become king?” Their question implied something Herod feared more than anything else: the true king had arrived, and his own days were numbered. Herod inquired of the chief priests and scribes, who correctly identified Bethlehem as the birthplace of the Messiah, yet they remained passive. The Magi traveled to worship the child. Herod plotted to kill Him. His massacre of the infants in Bethlehem was not the impulse of a deranged ruler. It was the calculated response of a counterfeit struggling to eliminate the genuine heir.
The Divergence of Two Kingdoms
As Jesus began His ministry, the contrast between the two kings only deepened. Herod’s rule was rooted in fear, propped up by fortresses, guards, and the ever-present watchfulness of Rome. Jesus’s authority flowed freely and needed no political backing. He healed the sick, cast out demons, forgave sins, and revealed the kingdom of God through teaching that carried a weight unlike anything the people had heard. His authority transformed lives rather than threating them. People followed Him not because they feared Him but because His words carried truth and hope.
Herod protected himself from every perceived threat. Jesus moved toward those who threatened Him and spoke truth without hesitation. Herod clung to a throne he was never meant to hold. Jesus refused to grasp power and instead walked willingly toward the suffering that would reveal His glory. Their kingdoms were not simply different in character. They were fundamentally opposed. One existed through the will of man. The other through the will of God.
The Fall of Herod’s House and the Rise of Christ’s Reign
Herod died in 4 BCE, consumed by paranoia, disease, and the collapse of his relationships. His divided kingdom was split among his sons, who failed to maintain the fragile stability he had achieved. Rome soon intervened again, reducing Herod’s territory and authority even further. His dynasty, born in violence and upheld by fear, crumbled into irrelevance. He is remembered as a tyrant whose insecurity drove him to madness.
Meanwhile, the kingdom Jesus established continued to grow. Without any political office, military force, or earthly resources, His movement expanded through faith, repentance, and the power of the Spirit. When Jesus entered Jerusalem riding on a donkey, the people recognized the symbolism immediately. He was reenacting Solomon’s coronation and fulfilling the prophecy of Zechariah. The crowds hailed Him as the Son of David. Yet instead of seizing a throne, He confronted corruption, submitted to betrayal, and carried a Roman cross out of the city. His enthronement came through suffering, not conquest. His crown was made of thorns, yet His authority eclipsed every ruler who had sat upon David’s throne.
The final inscription of His title appears at the crucifixion, where Pilate ordered a sign reading, “Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews.” The religious leaders wanted it changed to read, “He claimed to be.” Pilate refused. What was meant as mockery became the most accurate declaration ever fastened to wood. Unlike Herod, Jesus did not remain in the grave. His resurrection vindicated His identity and established a kingdom that continues to advance to this day.
Conclusion
Herod was an Edomite king placed on David’s throne through the will of Rome. Jesus was the Davidic king placed into the world through the will of God. Herod ruled through fear, violence, and deceit. Jesus ruled through truth, mercy, and sacrifice. Herod attempted to secure his throne by shedding innocent blood. Jesus secured His throne by offering His own. One king’s rule collapsed the moment he died. The other rose and reigns forever. The contrast is absolute. The throne of Herod turned to dust. The throne of Christ endures for all generations.
Discussion Questions
- How does Herod’s identity as an Edomite, and the prophetic condemnation of Edom, heighten the significance of Jesus being born as the true Son of David in Bethlehem?
- In what ways does Herod’s kingship, established through Roman decree and upheld by fear, serve as a deliberate narrative foil to Jesus’s kingship, which is rooted in prophecy and divine appointment?
- Why do you think the chief priests and scribes knew the prophecy about the Messiah’s birthplace yet remained indifferent, while pagan Magi recognized and sought the newborn king? What does this reveal about spiritual responsiveness and blindness?
- How does the contrast between the violence Herod uses to preserve his throne and the sacrifice Jesus embraces to establish His kingdom help clarify the nature of true authority in Scripture?
- What does the inscription “King of the Jews” on the cross reveal about the irony of earthly power versus divine sovereignty, and why is Pilate’s refusal to alter it significant in the larger narrative of Christ’s kingship?
Want to Know More? Five Solid Resources
- Peter Richardson, Herod: King of the Jews and Friend of the Romans
A detailed historical study examining Herod’s political rise, relationship with Rome, building projects, and the sociopolitical complexities of his reign. - Emil Schürer, A History of the Jewish People in the Time of Jesus Christ
A foundational historical reference on Second Temple Judaism, including Rome’s involvement in Judea, the Hasmoneans, the Herodian dynasty, and first-century political structures. - Paul L. Maier, In the Fullness of Time: A Historian Looks at Christmas, Easter, and the Early Church
A historically grounded look at the birth of Jesus, Herod’s rule, and the broader cultural and political context surrounding the Nativity narratives. - M. Eugene Boring, Mark: A Commentary
Though focused on Mark’s Gospel, this commentary offers a strong treatment of the title “King of the Jews,” Roman mockery, and the theological implications of Jesus’s kingship at the crucifixion. - N. T. Wright, Jesus and the Victory of God
A major scholarly work on Jesus’s mission, identity, and kingdom proclamation, including the contrast between Jesus’s kingship and the political powers of His time.
About the Author
