A prominent child of privilege had glaring personal weaknesses. He was overly image conscious, and he constantly got in trouble for indulging his hedonistic sexual desires.
On paper, he followed God. In practice, he did nothing of the sort.
Many of the people ignored his personal transgressions. But a well-known preacher called him out, at great personal cost.
Headlines and History Books
This story sounds like it’s ripped from the headlines. In fact, it’s ripped from the history books. This is the story of Herod Antipas and his chief critic, John the Baptist.
Herod Antipas was the son of the Herod you probably know from the Christmas story, and he ruled the area where Jesus performed most of his ministry. Herod was a slave to his sexual desires. For example, he divorced his first wife (a political marriage) to marry his brother’s wife instead — even though doing so was politically and morally detrimental.
This foolish act heightened geopolitical tensions. When his ex-father-in-law, a nearby king, attacked Herod for divorcing his daughter, Herod had to be bailed out by the Romans. More importantly, for John the Baptist, this foolish marriage was utterly immoral. Under Old Testament law, Herod was guilty of incest for marrying his sister-in-law.
On paper, Herod was a Jew. But he wasn’t living according to God’s standards. So John the Baptist felt compelled to call him out for his sexual sin. “It is not lawful for you to have her,” John repeatedly, publicly proclaimed (Matthew 14:4).
Herod didn’t like to be criticized by a popular public figure, but he was too weak to do anything about it. His new wife, Herodias, had no such qualms. At his debauched birthday party, she sent her teenage daughter (Herod’s niece and step-daughter) to dance seductively for her husband. Carried away by his lust, Herod gave in to whatever the girl asked — including having John the Baptist beheaded.
A Public Faith
Clearly, none of the 2016 Presidential candidates are as flawed as Herod Antipas. For that, we can be thankful. I share this story, though, not to criticize a candidate; I share it so we can learn from John the Baptist’s actions.
The fact that John criticized a leader’s sexual misconduct was unusual. John wasn’t a politician; he was an evangelist. He spent most of his time in the wilderness, urging people to repent and proclaiming the Kingdom of God. But though he primarily dedicated his life to saving people’s souls, he lost his life for calling out a public sin. John defended the sanctity of marriage in the face of one of the world’s most powerful men, and he lost his life for it.
I wonder if John’s friends and disciples ever encouraged him to stay silent. “John, keep quiet about Herod! No need to rattle the cages.” “We’re here to save souls, John, not get in the middle of politics.” “John, it’s either him or Rome. He’s the lesser of two evils.”
But John knew his faith was not simply a private matter; it had implications for every square inch of life. So he felt compelled to hold his leaders — particularly those who claimed to follow God — to a higher standard.
Our ultimate allegiance isn’t to a donkey or an elephant, but a crucified Savior.
Why This Matters for Us
This election, prominent voices (both secular and Christian) tell us to keep our faith private. After all, we’re electing a “Commander in Chief,” not a “Pastor in Chief.”
For instance, some prominent faith leaders urge us to vote for policies, not people — to care about the substance of the issues, not the character of the person advocating for them. And I understand where they’re coming from. There are legitimate issues at stake in this election, and the two major party candidates are less than stellar.
I wonder, though, if John would disagree. Herod Antipas may have been right about trade laws, but he was totally wrong about marrying his sister-in-law. And John could not remain silent; he refused to sweep it under the rug. John was so convinced that character matters that his head was served on a platter.
John understood that we can’t place faith in a box that we only crack open once a week. Our faith is the lens through which we see all of life. It transforms how we live privately and how we act publicly. Our faith is just as true on Monday as it is on Sunday. And God’s sexual standards are just as true in the Oval Office as they are at the altar.
So this election, you are faced with a difficult decision. There are no easy answers. And no candidate is perfect — even in a good election. But, as John modeled, it’s entirely appropriate to hold our leaders to a higher standard. Do they claim the name of Christ? If so, do their lives line up with the principles in God’s word? Are they people of integrity, character, grace and honesty?
Be willing to evaluate every candidate — including the one you intend to vote for — because our ultimate allegiance isn’t to a donkey or an elephant, but a crucified Savior. We’re not primarily Republicans or Democrats, but citizens of the Kingdom of Heaven. As a result, we are free to affirm the good and call out the bad in every candidate and every party platform — no matter who we plan on casting a ballot for.
So before you vote, research the candidates. Evaluate their lives and policies. Pray. And remember that John the Baptist died believing that character matters.
Image Credit: Caravaggio, Wikimedia Commons
Comments and Pingbacks
2016-10-26 22:02:13
Kevin
No, actually John probably wouldn't disagree. Character does matter and in this election, one candidates character is a C- and the other is a descending F+. This isn't occuring in a vacuum or inside an ivory tower; we're living in a real and evil world. Decisions have to be made. David, an adulterer, conspirator and murderer was a man "after God's own heart". Clearly, self-righteous and sanctimonious Christians would have disagreed 100% with God's choice of him as King! And that, under a theocracy! Jesus Christ Himself instructed His disciples to pay taxes to Caesar. Yep, they were instructed to financially underwrite an incredibly decadent and overtly pagan culture/government. If the Bible is true, and it is, particularly Romans, we are all just as indecent as Donald Trump. The humble among us know that. He said he was sorry and actually asked for forgiveness. You don't want to answer to God for not forgiving, now do you? However, the rest of us will do your heavy lifting for you (generic) on November 8. Know this however, all of the agony, blood and placenta that will result in P.B. abortions now jacked up with federal money, will be on you. And that's just one of the important issues. Are your delicate sensibilities really that valuable? No one measures up to the standard mentioned in this article. It is Well crafted article though and I mean that!
2016-10-27 09:27:34
Intersect Staff
Kevin, thank you for reading and interacting with this article. My intent with this article was not to tell people who to vote for -- nor to say that the issues don't matter -- but to emphasize that character matters also. My prayer is that we would be willing to honestly evaluate candidates' character, no matter who we vote for. As I said, there are no easy answers in this election. And I respect people who come to different conclusions than I do. Blessings, Nathaniel
2016-10-27 16:14:15
Juan David Prettel
You said: "On paper, Herod was a Jew." That was quite a generalization. One may think that his origins do not make a difference in the argument, but they do. He wasnât a Jew at all. According to Josephus, he was the grandson of Antipater II, an Idumean. After Pompey was defeated by Julius Cesar in 48BC, Antipater made an alliance with Cesar which led to the Herodian dynasty and their leadership over Judea. This was a leadership limited by the power and directives of Cesar. Why do I think this makes a difference? Because he was not was very likely raised under his familyâs values and not the Torah-observant values taught in Israel. Of course he knew about the Scriptures; he had been raised in Israel while his father ruled. Hence the Bibleâs mentioning of his fear of John âknowing that he was a righteous and holy manâ (Mark 6:20). In fact, it says that âhe kept him safe [while in prison] ⦠heard him, he was greatly perplexed [by John], and yet he heard him gladlyâ (v.20). When he was asked for Johnâs head, âhe was exceedingly sorryâ¦â All of this to say, not that he lived the life of a God-fearing man by any means, but only to say that he had been often convicted by Johnâs words on his personal sins. He never acted to make amends but rather decided to live in sin. That was his choice. However, it is important to note that he was neither a Jew ethnically, nor was he a Jew by upbringing. He was a foreigner living and ruling in a land assigned to his family for political convenience. So, to say that âhe was not living according to Godâs standardsâ actually fills the expectations from a heathen living among the children of Israel. But we do see that John was used by God to bring conviction to his life on a regular basis. In my opinion, this was a way by which Herod was shown mercy; he was constantly given a chance to repent, a chance that he declined time after time. Regarding his marriage to Herodias, it is fair to say that it would have been Biblically accepted had his brother been dead (Deut. 25:5; Mk 12:19). But of course, he wasnât. So he acted in âimpurityâ (Lev 20:21). On the other hand, you said you wrote not to criticize a candidate but to encourage learning from John the baptizer. However, one can easily draw lines of comparison that lead to Trump from your reasoning throughout the paper. You wrote: âHerod Antipas may have been right about trade laws, but he was totally wrong about marrying his sister-in-law. And John could not remain silent; he refused to sweep it under the rug. John was so convinced that character matters that his head was served on a platter.â I agree with you that character matters. I wonder, though, if Johnâs reproof of Herodâs actions had more to do with his concern for a man and his soul rather than having to do with his concern for the politicianâs character and values. Perhaps both reasons drove him to speak up. I think it was the former reason that drove him harder though. Perhaps, He knew that Herod was not completely hardened towards his warnings (see Mk 6:20), and maybe he hoped that God would convict him at one point. Sadly, Herod fought against the voice of conviction, and ended up succumbing to the demands of thoroughly evil voices surrounding him (Herodias and her daughter). There is no question that they were determined to do harm to him; however, Herod struggled with the idea and internally feared Johnâs warnings. I am not in support of Trump nor do I think he is ideal in any sort of way. If anything, he is a candidate filled with ungodly traits which puts him far from being the person this country needs in office. However, I wonder if he too may be privately heeding the voices of many godly men who are concealing and praying for him. That puts him nearer to becoming a far better option than his counterpart who unapologetically defends ungodly policies that will further drag our nation down to the pit of immorality. What if he is, like Herod at one point, struggling with his sins and growing to learn to fear godly warnings? Maybe he wonât make the same mistake as Herod and end up deciding to heed the voices of evil. As Dr. Brown puts it: âIf Donald Trump is our next president, he might well stand up for our religious liberties, helping to push back against the anti-Christian spirit rising in our land... (but) if Hillary Clinton is our next president, you can be sure that you will be in her crosshairs.â What we should ask ourselves is not whether or not Trump or Hillary have the character we should desire in our leaders. It is clear that neither one of them do. The fact is though, one of these two people will surely take office. And as far as we know, one of these two people will surely attack every shred of morality left in our standing laws and fight against Christianityâs influence in government and society while the other âmightâ fight to keep religious freedoms as well as fight in favor of the unborn. Isnât it better to take a chance if the outcome may benefit our future in some very important ways? What are we going to do? In what way would our vote influence either result? That perhaps is what we must take at heart at this point. Again, this is just my opinion. The future of our children and our nation is at stake. In the meantime, as you have highlighted in your article, we must not sweep under the rug immoral behaviors but confront them with the gospel in hopes that both candidates may come to grips with their need of the Savior and repent. So far, I see one of them closer to being the one who might heed the voice of truth and follow counsel. But again, I could be wrong about this assumption.
2016-10-27 16:34:11
Intersect Staff
Juan David, thank you for reading and interacting with the piece, brother. You make some solid critiques, and I appreciate your reminder that we should call out leaders' sins not so we can brag about about our perceived self-righteousness, but so that they might repent. I also respect your decision-making re: Trump. You're not whitewashing either candidate; you have taken both candidate's moral shortcomings into consideration, and you feel compelled to vote for one over the other. I respect that decision. - Nathaniel
2016-12-14 06:32:01
The 10 Most Read Intersect Articles of 2016 | Intersect
[…] John the Baptist Died Believing Character Matters Does character matter? John the Baptist was so convinced that it did that his head was served on a platter, says Nathaniel Williams. […]
2017-01-20 10:39:28
How Should Christians Respond to President Trump? | Intersect
[…] authority is Christ himself. Does it mean that we ignore his faults or mistakes? No, because John the Baptist rightfully pointed out his leader’s public sin (Matthew […]
2017-11-17 15:24:30
Christian Men: Be Different. Be More. | Intersect
[…] an earlier Intersect Project article, John the Baptist Died Believing Character Matters, Nathaniel Williams […]
2021-01-20 06:00:43
How Should Christians Respond to President Biden? | Intersect
[…] authority is Christ himself. Does it involve ignoring his faults or mistakes? No, because John the Baptist rightfully pointed out his leaderâs public sin (Matthew […]