There's been a lot of activity in the comments section under my post regarding Brian McLaren. The word "heretic" has been thrown around quite liberally by someone who believes he is justified in doing so. In light of that, I've been thinking about what is essential and what is non-essential. If I'm a Calvinist (which I am) and you're an Arminian, am I justified in calling you a heretic? If I believe in a literal six-day, twenty-four-hours per day, view of creation (which I do) and you are a theistic evolutionist, can I shout "heretic!" from the rooftops, the newspapers, and my blog?
Here's my understanding of the Gospel:
The Gospel is the incredibly "good news" that Jesus Christ has opened up a way, through his death and resurrection, for us to be reconciled to God: our Creator and Sustainer and King.
There are two necessary responses to this good news: turn from your own way (repentance) and trust in God's way (faith). Those who turn and trust give evidence that the miracle of God's grace has opened their eyes and their hearts to the things of the kingdom. When you define the core concepts of the Gospel in this way, a lot of other things become secondary issues (i.e. things we may or may not fully agree on) that have no positive or negative effect on our salvation or security in Christ. In other words, these things are NOT the Gospel. Included in those things are:
- The ways Christians should get involved in social justice, the environment, and other social action projects
- The differing views of the inspiration of Scripture
- Splitting theological hairs within "theology proper" (the doctrine of God)
- The various theories of the atonement
- Our church structures and models
- Missiological and evangelistic strategies
- Principles of hermeneutics
- The application of redemption (election, regeneration, conversion, baptism of the Spirit, sanctification, etc.)
- Definitions of fundamentalism, legalism, neo-orthodoxy, liberalism
- Whether one considers himself to be pre-modern, modern, or Post-modern
- Arminianism & Calvinism (in spite of what Spurgeon said, Calvinism is NOT the Gospel)
- And on and on…
So, whether we ever agree on these secondary issues, we are brothers and sisters in Christ if we have embraced the good news, evidenced by repentance and faith. You may not like my inerrantist arguments or my Pauline missiology or my supralapsarianism, but I can't just call you a heretic and write you off as a non-Christian if you're following Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord.
Here's a famous saying of undetermined origin that I try to remember:
In Essentials, Unity; in Non-essentials, Liberty; in All Things, Charity.
I’m a heretic. He’s a heretic. Wouldn’t you like to be a heretic too?
Honestly, heretic is overused and few understand what it means. In modern English, “heresy” is simply being different from a standard belief. This means that from the perspective of other groups of Chrisians, I am a heretic and you are a heretic.
But, what does “heresy” mean in Scripture? I think it means contrary to the gospel – as you pointed out. Not contrary to what we add to the gospel, or what we think it takes to explain the gospel. I wrote a blog post about this not too long ago called “Dropping the ‘H’ Bomb“.
Those who separate from other Christians because of differing beliefs that have nothing to do with the gospel are being divisive, and according to Scripture, this divisiveness is true heresy.
-Alan
Are you suggesting that we should never use the word and/or never separate from those who teach things which we believe are *radically* different from what is absolutely crystal clear in Scripture? Are you suggesting ecumenicism?
I’ll concur with the assessment that Supra/Infralapsarianism is splitting theological hairs and is clearly a non-essential as it has no significant effect on either our understanding of how to live as disciples of Christ or what to preach to the lost.
Whether or not Scripture is authoritative and objectively true is something I’d consider an essential though. Do you disagree with this assessment? I’m certainly open to discussion about what should and should not be considered and essential doctrine (liberty in non-essentials and charity in all things).
But I’d also like to reassure you that I’m not just some mean-spirited bully trying to be divisive. I find the basic tenets of post-modernism to be antithetical to the Bible and the worldview it presents. That is primarily why I am so adamant to assert that Mr. McLaren, Mr. Bell, and Mr. Jones have largely departed from the Gospel in their teachings, particularly with regard to their embrace of post-modernism’s epistemology and philosophies. I’ve heard their messages. I’ve read their literature. I’m sorry if it offends, but given what I have come to know of them from these teachings, I simply cannot in good conscience consider them to be properly Christian.
I’m not asking you to take my word for it. I am, however, asking that you be discerning and not take their words as wholly and necessarily true simply because they claim to be Christian. I don’t need to remind you that not everyone who claims the name of Christ is actually a true believer.
Grace and Shalom to you,
–
B.C.
Bill C.,
I wasn’t sure if your comment was directed toward Bill L. or me. Yes, there are times when we should recognize false teaching that is contrary to the gospel and that we whould separate ourselves from those teachers. However, please note that even though Paul pointed out problems with the beliefs and practices of various churches, there were actually very few that he separate from. He did not separate from the church at Corinth, in spite of all their problems. However, he came very close to separating from the churches of Galtia. Why the difference? Because the churches of Galtia were following another gospel. The gospel should be our standard. Paul spells out his gospel in 1 Cor 15 clearly and simply.
-Alan
Bill Carlisle: I am suggesting biblical ecumenism in light of Paul’s teaching in Romans 12:3-5 and 1 Corinthians 12. You and I do not have the option of throwing everyone out of Christ’s body just because they may believe and/or teach things contrary to what we believe. Were you a Christian when you formerly embraced an Arminian soteriology? Are Calvinists the only ones going to heaven? My post above is quite clear, I think, on what constitutes essentials versus non-essentials.
As UberGoober pointed out, Christian growth and maturity and experience often bring about significant changes in our own theological views. Some of my Reformed brothers draw the circle of “essentials” much too large, perhaps even requiring that someone embrace of an entire confession of faith, like the Second London Confession or the Westminster Confession. I prefer a minimalist approach: for example, embracing The Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy and then using the Bible itself.
I would also recommend a little book, What Is an Evangelical by D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones. He was a highly respected Reformed pastor-theologian who shares what he considers to be the essentials and the non-essentials. And Dr. Roger R. Nicole also wrote an excellent article entitled How to Deal with Those Who Differ from Us.
I think we are in agreement on more than you may believe, BL.
I agree that some who are Reformed draw the circle too large, but as long as we’re not so far gone that we can’t bring ourselves to sit down over tea or coffee and talk things over I think we’re ok.
I consider the Arminian my brother, though I do believe him to be in error. I myself was in error in my understanding of God’s election, but I was always sort of on the fence with regard to Calvinism because while I believed the Bible to be authoritative true, I just had never explored and wrestled with those particular soteriological questions until my mentor prompted me to examine the question of whether or not we are able to choose God on our own.
This led me down the path of examining the depravity of the heart of man and onto the rest of the points given by the Synod of Dordt which logically flow from a more accurate understanding of who man is according to the Bible. But I digress.
I think the main point of this discussion was the question of if and when should we cut off fellowship with a body or individual. It should be noted that there is a difference in joining a Baptist congregation over a Presbyterian one and refusing to fellowship at all with a Presbyterian over the issue of paedobaptism. Though I hold that the Calvinist confessions more accurately reflect, as a systematic theology, what the Bible teaches, I will certainly take your suggestion on books (I’m reading through The Holiness of God by Sproul at the moment) and look into more of what we ought to consider “essential” and also what there is that while we may be just as convinced of its truth, is a point where grace can and should be shown as we strive with our brothers (as opposed to against them) in order that we might all know God more clearly together.
May I also suggest to you that you pick up a book by the late Ernest Pickering entitled Biblical Separation? I found it to be an interesting read, both from its historical narrative and its Scriptural instruction.
Tim Keller recently said:
“It is necessary to draw boundaries. What really matters is how we treat the people on the other side of those boundaries. People are watching. We’re going to win the younger leaders if we are the most gracious, kind, and the least self-righteous in controversy. The truth will ultimately lose if we hold the right doctrines, but do so with nasty attitudes and a lack of love.”
It is easy to disagree. It is difficult to disagree and not be a jackass about it. Keller’s words echo in my head.
Hi Bill,
Your understanding of the gospel needs further qualifying, defining and unpacking. Someone could deny the Trinity and still agree with your statement. That’s the danger of equivocation isn’t it, using the same form of words but attributing diverse (and opposing) meanings to those words.
Heretics and orthodox believers almost always use the same vocabulary, they always differ radically however in the meaning given to those words.
Blessings
Martin