Biblically speaking, what makes one a heretic?

By Faith Alone said:

I see you used and upper case "C" in church. How do you define..."church"?

Click to expand...

The bride of Christ, built by Christ, which is led by the apostles and their successors.

hedrick said:

The initial question seems based on a misconception. It asked what is a heresy Biblically. But heresy as it's used now is a term based on widely accept Christianity theology, not Biblical standards.

Click to expand...

Exactly. It's NOT a Biblical definition. It is a church decree of a serious doctrinal error, but what may make the grade at one point in time may not be considered a heresy at another.

catholichomeschooler said:

The bride of Christ, built by Christ, which is led by the apostles and their successors.

Click to expand...

The ministry of our Lord is not restricted to His walk on earth and did not end at the Cross. His earthly ministry was not directed at Gentiles although the gentiles were reconciled to God on the Cross.

Matt 15:24....I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
Matt 16:18...upon this rock I will build my....ISRAEL

The passage to which was referred "tell it to the church" were Jewish synagogues and not Gentile churches. The Greek word is "ekklesia" and can be misapplied if not textually considered.

The "Bride of Christ" is foreign to Scriptures. It is the Bride of the...LAMB. That is His title to the nation Israel.

The Bride of the Lamb is the Pearl of Great Price (Matthew 13:46) and is an elect group from the elect nation of Israel.

It's basically an opinion. To me all non-Catholics are heretics to varying degrees based upon the definition of the word.

Heresy-unorthodox religious opinion: an opinion or belief that contradicts established religious teaching, especially one that is officially condemned by a religious authority.

If I believe Catholicism is the Orthodoxy then anything that goes against the established doctrines would be heretical.

If a Non-Catholic accepts the essential tenets of Christianity as defined in the Nicene Creed then I accept them as a Christian and would not call them a heretic unless they held some other wild belief. Although they meet the basic definition of a heretic, I reserve that word for major heresies like the denial of the trinity. If they hold a major heresy like that then they are not Christians in my mind.

The KJV says

Titus 3:8-11 KJVLook up verse 10 in several modern translations and you'll have a fairly good grasp of what a heretic is.

MoreCoffee said:

The KJV says

Titus 3:8-11 KJV

(8) This is a faithful saying, and these things I will that thou affirm constantly, that they which have believed in God might be careful to maintain good works. These things are good and profitable unto men.
(9) But avoid foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and vain.
(10) A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject;
(11) Knowing that he that is such is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned of himself.
​

Look up verse 10 in several modern translations and you'll have a fairly good grasp of what a heretic is.

Click to expand...

Yes, but it's not the same as the usual Christian definition. Paul, and also in this case pseudo-Paul, tried to get people to avoid the kinds of divisive conflicts that resulted in most of the definitions of orthodoxy and heresy. I would argue that from a Biblical point of view both sides of those debates, and those who sanctioned the whole system of requiring detailed doctrinal conformity, were heretics in the sense in which it is defined by this passage.

The Christian tradition stood Paul on his head. Paul said "avoid divisive arguments." The tradition says "anyone who disagrees with me is being divisive by insisting on their heretical belief." This is *NOT* the same thing.

football5680 said:

It's basically an opinion. To me all non-Catholics are heretics to varying degrees based upon the definition of the word.

Click to expand...

That's not the POV held by your church, however, and I think it's fortunate that this is so. There's enough divisiveness as it is.

yogosans14 said:

What beliefs and what criteria has to be met in order to be considered a "heretic"?

Click to expand...

One of the earliest and hottest debated measures was the Trinity or understanding the Godhead.

From there things broke down rapidly over the centuries as more filters and sifters were added and various factions broke apart in our never ending quest to be 'the sole right one and to come up with some man made formulas to 'make ourselves perfect.'

Albion said:

That's not the POV held by your church, however, and I think it's fortunate that this is so. There's enough divisiveness as it is.

Click to expand...

Well, yeah, it is pretty much their attitude Albion. The only break they give other christians is if they are of ignorant and uninformed. How do you think they got so many numbers in the first place?

football5680 said:

Heresy-unorthodox religious opinion: an opinion or belief that contradicts established religious teaching, especially one that is officially condemned by a religious authority.

If I believe Catholicism is the Orthodoxy then anything that goes against the established doctrines would be heretical.

Click to expand...

Oh, look, somebody get's it!

If a Non-Catholic accepts the essential tenets of Christianity as defined in the Nicene Creed then I accept them as a Christian and would not call them a heretic unless they held some other wild belief. Although they meet the basic definition of a heretic, I reserve that word for major heresies like the denial of the trinity. If they hold a major heresy like that then they are not Christians in my mind.

Click to expand...

You mean like not accepting IC or transubstantiation or any other dogma that requires belief in your sect?

Albion said:

Exactly. It's NOT a Biblical definition. It is a church decree of a serious doctrinal error, but what may make the grade at one point in time may not be considered a heresy at another.

Click to expand...

squint said:

Well, yeah, it is pretty much their attitude Albion. The only break they give other christians is if they are of ignorant and uninformed. How do you think they got so many numbers in the first place?

Click to expand...

Not so. "Heresy" is explicitly about major or substantial departures from the approved doctrines, NOT (as 'football' said) a belief that "contradicts religious teaching."

Again, maybe I'm taking note of a technical error that no one else cares about and I will shortly be the recipient of a lot of outraged criticism. But that IS the whole point of the thread--what constitutes a heresy.

Albion said:

Not so. "Heresy" is explicitly about major or substantial departures from the approved doctrines, NOT (as 'football' said) a belief that "contradicts religious teaching."

Again, maybe I'm taking note of a technical error that no one else cares about and I will shortly be the recipient of a lot of outraged criticism. But that IS the whole point of the thread--what constitutes a heresy.

Click to expand...

Some people can take 3 words from the text, even if they are not connected in a sentence, and make a heresy of them.

Are such positions not Biblical based heresy?

Any anti closet (insert religion) hating religionist that expels brothers can also be called a heritic imb

squint said:

Some people can take 3 words from the text, even if they are not connected in a sentence, and make a heresy of them.

Click to expand...

I suppose that's possible, yes.

Are such positions not Biblical based heresy?

Click to expand...

You already stipulated that they were heresies.

Albion said:

I suppose that's possible, yes.

You already stipulated that they were heresies.

Click to expand...

There are many 'club filters' that religious men impose upon us.

There really is only ONE heresy.

That heresy we all personally carry.

It is put forward by Paul in Galatians 4, showing that the son of the flesh wars against the son of the spirit, the SONS OF GOD.

No amount of head knowledge or religious knowledge, ritualism, sacerdotalism, sacraments are going to justify ISHMAEL. That's just the way it is.

All of Judaism and ALL of christiandom have been vainly trying to justify their personal ISHMAEL's for thousands of years now.

It's probably time to get over it and get over him.

MoreCoffee said:

The KJV says

Titus 3:8-11 KJV

(8) This is a faithful saying, and these things I will that thou affirm constantly, that they which have believed in God might be careful to maintain good works. These things are good and profitable unto men.
(9) But avoid foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and vain.
(10) A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject;
(11) Knowing that he that is such is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned of himself.
​

Look up verse 10 in several modern translations and you'll have a fairly good grasp of what a heretic is.

Click to expand...

HERESY is the obstinate denial after Baptism of a truth which must be believed with divine and Catholic faith.

The above definition (which is taken from the CCC Glossary) looks rather similar to saint Paul's comments in the passage quoted in the post above; specifically, an obdurate opposer of the teaching of saint Paul was to be regarded as a heretic after a first & second admonition.

hedrick said:

Yes, but it's not the same as the usual Christian definition. Paul, and also in this case pseudo-Paul, tried to get people to avoid the kinds of divisive conflicts that resulted in most of the definitions of orthodoxy and heresy. I would argue that from a Biblical point of view both sides of those debates, and those who sanctioned the whole system of requiring detailed doctrinal conformity, were heretics in the sense in which it is defined by this passage.

The Christian tradition stood Paul on his head. Paul said "avoid divisive arguments." The tradition says "anyone who disagrees with me is being divisive by insisting on their heretical belief." This is *NOT* the same thing.

Click to expand...

I am not sure what your stated objection is intended to mean. Please explain.

MoreCoffee said:

HERESY is the obstinate denial after Baptism of a truth which must be believed with divine and Catholic faith.

Click to expand...

There you go. Giving the Catholic church WAY more than is due.

Every once in a while I pray a little prayer that all the churches get together to refine our doctrine like the early days. One big church council. Instead of butting heads we should be coming together to find common ground like civilized folks do. The problem with my pipedream is that we'd still have guys say, "screw that noise. According to such-n-such a verse..you're in idiot and wrong!" So heretical churches will exist, but they must be identified as such. People confuse JWs and mormons as being christian all the time, a fine example of why they need to be identified.

to be a heretic one must be against Christ. it sounds vague but it makes perfect sense. those who are lead by anything other than God and try to set themselves up as something when they are nothing is what a heretic is.