The Question About Philip

A problem arises over the identification of Herodias' first husband for the gospels state that he was 'Philip� (Matt 14:3; Mark 6:17 ) whereas Josephus states that he was Herod, son of Herod the Great and Mariamne II, daughter of Simon the high priest (Antiq. xviii. 5. 1 ; 109). Many scholars think that the gospel accounts are incorrect. Since the Herodian family is hopelessly confusing, it is thought that Matthew and Mark confused this Herod with Philip the tetrarch who later married Herodias� daughter Salome. However, as easy as this solution may be at first sight, it is untenable for several reasons.

First, the gospels would be guilty of three historical errors, viz. (1) that they confused this Herod with his half, brother Philip, (2 ) that they made Philip the tetrarch husband of Herodias instead of the husband of her daughter, and (3) Salome would have been the daughter of Philip the tetrarch who according to Josephus had no children---three blunders in matters of well-known history with which the evangelists otherwise show familiarity. Also, when the Christian community had such as Joanna, wife of Chuza who was Antipas' financial minister (Luke 8: 3 ), and Manaen who was an intimate friend of Antipas (Acts 13 :1) it seems that to have such a historical blunder as this is incredible.

Second, tile gospels speak of a daughter of Herodias fore she was married to Antipas (Matt 14 ; ~6, 8-11; Mark 6:22, 24-26, 28) which harmonizes exactly with Josephus' reference to having' a daughter named Salome (Jos. Antiq. xviii. S. 4 � 136) . There are too many details to be mere coincidence and consequently it is improbable that the evangelists confused the Philips.

Third, the objection that Herod the Great would not have had two sons with the name Philip is untenable for although they had the same father, they had different mothers. Also, Herod the Great had two sons named Antipas/ Antipater and two sons named Herod.

Fourth, it is not unreasonable for Herodias' first husband to have a double name, viz., Herod Philip. Certainly no one disputes that the Herod of Acts 12:1, 6, 11, 19, 20, 21 is the Agrippa of Josephus or accuses Luke of confusing this Herod with Herod, king of Chalcis (A.D. 41-48) or that Archelaus is Herod Archelaus.

Fifth, if the evangelists meant that Herodias' former husband was Philip the tetrarch, why did they not call him by that title as they had Antipas right within that same pericope (Matt 14:1; Mark 6:14, 26)?
Therefore, it is most reasonable to consider that the Philip in the gospels and the Herod in Josephus to be one and the same person. In fact, to do otherwise would seem to create inextricable confusion.