"Look at the legalized adultery we call divorce.
Men marry one wife after another and are still admitted into good
society; and women do likewise. There are thousands of supposedly
respectable men in American living with other men's wives, and thousands
of supposedly respectable women living with other women's husbands."
- R. A. Torrey From R.A. Torrey's book How to Pray, pages 94-95
R.A. Torrey (1856-1928) was a very well-known Christian writer,
evangelist, pastor, graduate of Yale University, and was also the
superintendent of Moody Bible Institute for 19 years.
TRINITY BARS THE
DIVORCED.; No Remarriage in the Church or Any of the Chapels.
The clergy of Trinity Church announced yesterday that under no
circumstances will divorced persons be married by any of the clergy of
that Episcopal parish, nor will such marriages be permitted either in
the church at Wall Street and Broadway or in any one of the parish's
eight chapels. The announcement was as follows:
View full article New York Times
December 7, 1904, Wednesday
Comment/question
Herodias was the "guilty" spouse who left her
husband Phillip with no reason to. Therefore her marriage to Herod was
not a ligitimate one. I agree. However I believe Phillip would have
been free to remarry.
Response
What do you do with Romans 7:2-3? Paul very
clearly taught that even in the face of adultery, only death dissolved
the marriage bond. Not one time in all of his teachings on marriage will
you find that divorce dissolves a marriage. In
Comment/question
I suppose you will always have to believe this
is a passage regarding remarriage when it's not at all. There is a law
they broke and John said what it was and we find it in Scripture. John
the Baptist said it was unlawful to have his brother's wife.
Leviticus 18:16
You may not have sex relations with your
brother's wife, for she is your brother's.
It wasn't that Herod could not have married any other divorced woman or
vice versa, but that he was married to his brother Philip's wife! That
was the sin.
Response
It doesn't matter if they broke incest laws or
he was committing adultery------either way their divorces and marriage
to each other did NOT make them married in the sight of God. Herodias
belonged to PHILIP----in spite of a divorce, in spite of a new marriage.
She did NOT belong to Herod. God does not acknowledge(nor join together)
ILLICIT marriages-----incestual, adulterous, or homosexual.
Comment/question
You can play a John the Baptist (by The Holy
Spirit) was addressing points much deeper than of the adulator in the
marriage between Herod, and Herod’s brother’s wife, making Herodias the
wife of two uncles of Salome. John had been telling him, "It's not
lawful for you to have her!" John addressed Herod yet Herodias was
convicted.
Do you think if Herodias had divorced her
husband John would not have lost his head, by that conviction? If Herod
had been “lawful”.?
After all Herod Antipas appeased the Jewish
people by openly observing their law.
Response
John specifically addressed Herodias as the
wife of Philip. She DID divorce Philip----see Josephus' antiquities of
the Jews (Book 18, chapter 5, section: 1, 4). She openly defied the laws
of her country by divorcing her husband and marrying another man.
Marriage while one had a living spouse was not allowed (
Do I think Herod would have cut off John's head anyways? Who knows, but
we do know WHY his head was taken............rage.........rage by a
woman who is rabidly protective of her sinful life.
Comment/question
If Herodias repented and became a believer
(she was not a Christian) ... she would have to look at her situation
carefully. If she would have decided to leave Herod to go back to
Phillip (if he would take her back) I am not convinced she would be
expected to before God. She was wrong to marry another man for sure.
However playing musical marriages and possibly uprooting your children
after you have been remarried for a number of years is not something I
see the Lord wanting either.
Simply put ... I am not convinced that the Lord expects His people to
leave their new spouse and family (kids) to go back to their former
spouse. Were they wrong? Yes for sure they were ... however I am not so
sure that staying in the marriage and raising the kids in a stable
Christian home is something the Lord would judge as wrong.
Response
You don't sound too convinced. Either in
the case of Herodias, her 1st marriage is dissolved or it is not in the
sight of God. We see by John's comments that it is NOT dissolved, that
she and Herod are actually involved in an adulterous relationship, not a
lawful marriage. If Herodias wanted out of that sin, her ONLY option
would be to forsake her adultery.
You say the Lord would not want to uproot families, yet I gave you
scripture that shows EXACTLY that due to disobedience. The act of
repentance for the men in Ezra 9-10 WAS to leave their families
(children and wives).
Comment/question
I guess the question is ... Does someone
continue to commit adultery if they stay in the marriage even after they
have confessed their sin to the Lord and admitted how wrong they were
and that they should have stayed with their first spouse? ... I am not
so sure they do continue to live in adultery.
Response
Again, you don't sound very convinced of your
position. If the Lord has said that He does not recognize the divorce in
the first place, then the "marriage" is not recognized either because in
the Lord's eyes, the persons involved are STILL married to their
covenant spouses-not to their new "spouses". To then say they should
STAY in those relationships is to tell people to stay in their
sin.........very dangerous counsel.
Comment/question
The Bible says Philips wife, John the Baptist
could have simply said Philips Wife because Herod and Phillip were
half-brothers, making their marriage wrong. Herodias was also Philips
niece making that marriage wrong also...
The point is you can't use that example to make a blanket statement on
divorce and remarriage....
Response
Like I asked someone else today..........who
was Herodias' husband in the eyes of the Lord according to John?
You are saying that a new vow dissolves a previous one, this particular
example in scripture shows that not to be the case as does Rom. 7:2-3.
Comment/question
As for the case of Herodias and Herod. It is
clear that Herod somehow got Herodias to leave her husband and marry
him.
Here is the crucial point -- Herodias' marriage to her husband Phillip
was never subject to marital infidielity on the part of Philliip her
husband. Herodias left Phillip and married Herod.
Had her husband cheated on her she would have had Biblical grounds to
get divorced and remarry. That was not the case so yes her marriage to
Phillip was still a valid and binding marriage in the sight of God.
Response
So it is your contention that if one WANTS
their marriage, (Philip for example), then the marriage is still intact,
though the other person is remarried. In that case of
adultery(remarriage), adultery does not dissolve the original covenant.
Do you believe then that it is up to the innocent on whether the
marriage is valid or not? If they want their covenant partner back, they
can stand and wait----causing their spouse to be in a continual state of
adultery. If they don't want that partner, they can "release" them and
then they wouldn't be in a constant state of adultery?
Comment/question
Ok so then we are the Phillips, did Phillip have the right to marry
again?
Response
No, John clearly said that she was PHILIP's wife.........her divorce of
him and subsequent remarriage to Herod did NOT dissolve her marital bond
to Philip...........so if the bond was intact for her, it was for him as
well...........
Comment/question
Herodias/Philip - The issue was the relationship was prohibited in the
OT law i.e. his brothers wife, not that it was a second marriage.
Response
It doesn't matter whether it was incest OR adultery. The fact remains
that she DID divorce Philip, DID marry Herod, and that marriage
was STILL not lawful. Your belief that a remarriage/new
vows/adultery nullifies the previous LAWFUL marriage, cannot be
supported by scripture.
Comment/question
I'm confused. Since Philip was still alive, their marriage
was illegal. That means that:
~Her abandonment of Philip to live with Herod didn't end her marriage -
but doesn't the "Pauline Privilege say something different?
~Her relations with Herod didn't end her marriage - but wouldn't that
consistute the adultery that Jesus and Shammai both said ends a
marriage?
~Her divorce didn't end her marriage - which is supposedly what Deut. 24
says
That says to me that the sole determinant of the validity of a second
marriage is whether or not the original spouse is living.
But that's crazy talk. I must've lost my head or something to believe
that.
Response
I'm right with you, brother!
Here is the writing by Josephus about Herod/Herodias illicit marriage:
http://library.untraveledroad.com/Ch/Josephus/Antiquities-Jews/Book18/Herod-Tetrarch.htm
Here's the footnote: "1This Herod seems to have had the additional name
of Philip, as Antipus was named Herod-Antipas: and as Antipus and
Antipater seem to be in a manner the very same name, yet were the names
of two sons of Herod the Great; so might Philip the tetrarch and this
Herod-Philip be two different sons of the same father, all which Grotias
observes on Matthew 14:3. Nor was it, as I with Grotias and others of
the Philip the tetrarch, but this Herod-Philip, whose wife Herod the
tetrarch had married, and that in her first husband’s lifetime, and when
her first husband had issue by her-; for which adulterous and
incestuous marriage John the Baptist justly reproved Herod the
tetrarch, and for which reproof Salome, the daughter of Herodias by
her first husband Herod-Philip, who was still alive, occasioned him to
be unjustly beheaded.'
Comment/question
This footnote is just one more source that identifies the
difficulty that John the Baptist had with the marriage being related to
the fact that he married his brother's wife while his brother was still
living.
Response
The footnote identifies Herod and Herodias' marriage as
both incestuous AND adulterous. The simple fact of the matter is that
even though they "married" each other, their marriage was unlawful. It
is no different today when people commit adultery. They may think they
are married, but what does Jesus say, "they commiteth
adultery".................
Listen to our sermons and radio broadcasts online!
Add Spirit of Hosea sermons and radio broadcasts to your webpage
with the FLAM mp3 player below.
Get the mp3 player code for your webpage HERE
Whenever our sermons are updated, they automatically update in the player on your webpage.
A Preacher's Repentance From Adulterous Remarriage.
The Testimony of J.M Humphrey
Tony Sexton's Repentance From Remarriage Adultery
More Testimonies of Repentance From Adulterous Remarriage & Messages of Encouragement
Frequently Asked Questions, Comment, Arguments About Marriage Divorce & Remarriage
Sermons & Radio Broadcasts on marriage, divorce, remarriage & more.
Orville Swindoll
A
Fellowship, Support & Discussion Forum
Theological Foundations
has an online fellowship and discussion forum for those who
are standing for their covenant marriages and for those who
have repented of adulterous remarriages.
The Hosea Project is an international, nondenominational
effort by volunteers to contact each Pastor and leader of
the Christian Church worldwide with this message of
repentance and restoration.
Listen to the Hosea Project message
Looking for a church that teaches the permanency of marriage?
I do NOT in any way endorse the entirety of a number of these sites below, nonetheless, they may contain useful information and/or resources.
Critique
of David Instone-Brewer on Divorce
By Dr. Leslie McFall
Former lecturer in Hebrew and Old Testament. Now a full-time researcher in
Biblical Studies.
Former Research Fellow at Tyndale House Library (Cambridge, England).
**More MDR links at