Are We Taking John The Baptist’s Side Or Herodias’ Side In Their Dispute On Divorce?

Mark 6:17-28 reads “For Herod himself had sent forth and laid hold upon John, and bound him in prison for Herodias’ sake, his brother Philip’s wife: for he had married her. For John had said unto Herod, It is not lawful for thee to have thy brother’s wife. Therefore Herodias had a quarrel against him, and would have killed him; but she could not: For Herod feared John, knowing that he was a just man and an holy, and observed him; and when he heard him, he did many things, and heard him gladly. And when a convenient day was come, that Herod on his birthday made a supper to his lords, high captains, and chief estates of Galilee; And when the daughter of the said Herodias came in, and danced, and pleased Herod and them that sat with him, the king said unto the damsel, Ask of me whatsoever thou wilt, and I will give it thee. And he sware unto her, Whatsoever thou shalt ask of me, I will give it thee, unto the half of my kingdom. And she went forth, and said unto her mother, What shall I ask? And she said, The head of John the Baptist. And she came in straightway with haste unto the king, and asked, saying, I will that thou give me by and by in a charger the head of John the Baptist. And the king was exceeding sorry; yet for his oath’s sake, and for their sakes which sat with him, he would not reject her. And immediately the king sent an executioner, and commanded his head to be brought: and he went and beheaded him in the prison, And brought his head in a charger, and gave it to the damsel: and the damsel gave it to her mother.”

The story is this: Herod and Herodias are in an unscriptural marriage based upon Old Testament law. John the Baptist tells them their marriage is unlawful in God’s sight. Herodias gets so mad she has John’s head cut off. Notice John was not just saying it was wrong for Herod to marry Herodias; he was also saying it is not lawful for Herod to have her. In other words, God (thru John) is demanding that their marriage be terminated.

Now let’s draw a parallel to New Testament unscriptural marriages …

Matthew 19:9 reads “… whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.” If we are not requiring such adulterous marriages (as described by Matthew 19:9) to be terminated today, aren’t we taking Herodias’ side in her dispute with John the Baptist?

Think about this quote from Anthony Dunnavant in the Orange County (California) Register – “Some conservative groups believe that divorced people who marry another spouse are living in sin. However, the number of divorces in the United States has led most denominations away from that teaching.” Mr. Dunnavant, though probably a flaming liberal, is right. Churches have compromised on this issue not because a restudy of the Bible led them to change. They have compromised because the divorce rate has increased, and they are afraid of small membership numbers if they stand where Jesus stood. We see this precise compromise of Matthew 19:9 from the 1984 Methodist Creed Book – “Where marriage partners, even after thoughtful consideration and counsel, are estranged beyond reconciliation, we recognize divorce as regrettable but recognize the right of divorced persons to remarry.”

What about the congregation where you worship? Statistics say that in the great majority of congregations across America, maybe 20% of the adult membership are couples in second or third marriages that violate Matthew 19:9. Next notice Romans 7:2-3: For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband. So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man. Now if we are not requiring such adulterous marriages (as described by Romans 7:2-3) to be terminated, aren’t we taking Herodias’ side in her dispute with John the Baptist?

The Old Testament law read in Ezra 10:10-11 “And Ezra the priest stood up, and said unto them, Ye have transgressed, and have taken strange wives, to increase the trespass of Israel. Now therefore make confession unto the Lord God of your fathers, and do his pleasure: and separate yourselves from the people of the land, and from the strange wives.” These marriages were unscriptural for a different reason, but how many modern-day preachers are willing to tell men in unscriptural marriages (per Matthew 19:9) today they need to separate from their wives like John the Baptist and Ezra did?

Why is there so much pressure for preachers/churches to compromise on this issue? Put yourself in their shoes. If a couple in an adulterous marriage (per Matthew 19:9) requests to be a member at congregation A and they reply we would love to have you but you will have to terminate your marriage first, and the couple asks the same thing of congregation B just down the road and they reply we will take you just as you are, where do you think the couple is likely to end up? That’s why less than 5% of churches today stand for the truth on this issue, when 100% did only a century ago. All congregations want to grow in number, and the pressure to compromise in order to grow became too great. They sold out Jesus for the sake of numbers and contribution. Keeping numbers up has become more important than whose side we take in God’s dispute with Herodias in Mark 6:17-28.

What comes next? …

Compromise on adulterous marriage inevitably leads to compromise on gay marriage. Preacher Ken Wilson writes – “I have proposed a path for these pastors that allows them to embrace people who are gay, lesbian, and transgender and to accept them fully — welcome and wanted — into the company of Jesus. I wrote A Letter To My Congregation when I realized my views had changed and I needed to communicate the intense theological, biblical, pastoral, and spiritual process that I had been through to get to this new place. It began with a burr beneath the saddle of my conscience: why was I willing to let so many divorced and remarried couples know that they are welcome and wanted while refusing that same welcome to gay and lesbian couples? How could I say to the remarried couples, whose second marriage was clearly condemned by the plain meaning of scripture, ‘You are welcome and wanted,’ while saying to the two (lesbian, ptd) mothers raising their adopted child together, ‘I love you, but I hate your sin’?

The following 2015 quote further exemplifies this ungodly philosophy – “United Methodist Church … leadership voted to submit … a … legislative proposal … that removes "prohibitive" language from The United Methodist Book of Discipline concerning homosexuality. … the proposal would allow United Methodist pastors to perform same-sex marriages in United Methodist churches. … this proposal does not consider homosexuality incompatible with Christian teachings even though Methodists have historically recognized the practice … as sinful.”

So if we are taking Herodias’ side in her Mark 6 dispute with John on adulterous marriage, whose side are we going to eventually take in the gay marriage debate?

hear Bible Crossfire Sunday nights at 8:00 central on SiriusXM radio Family Talk 131 or at http://www.BibleCrossfire.com