Hi Mel,
You’re right about the definition – see below. At the root level, “heresy” just means “choice”, but words change over time. To most people “heresy” means a false doctrine that will probably send you to hell if you believe it. 
Greek: αἵρεσις, see: blueletterbible.org/lang/lex … 139&t=NASB
From Vine’s dictionary:
Sonia
Well…it means a lot more than ‘choice’ in context as heresy is always word of extreme disapprobation and heretics are people to be shunned, disciplined, silenced or excommunicated for not cleaving to the approved, official, approbated line of thinking. In our era of free speech and civil liberates there is not much cost to being a heretic over and beyond getting kicked out of ones group.
In todays world you can see the mentality in Muslim countries where serious heresy can result in a death sentence as can ‘apostasy’ from the Islamic faith through becoming a Christian. During the Cold War Soviet dissidents were sent to Siberia for thinking and speaking differently from the Party Line.
That is why there is this weird ‘time warp’ feel to the Rob Bell LOVE WINS controversy as some theological pundits appear to have badly regressed into an essential Midlevel attitude and you can sense how if they could they would like to draw blood or burn Bell at the stake. There is an excellent Satirical cartoon on a factious Rob Bell John Piper debate
< youtube.com/watch?v=Hd171ES6aW0&feature=player_embedded#at=49 >
Just last week I shared with a friend whom I respect highly, still respect highly, shared with him briefly about the struggles I’ve faced over the last year and that these struggles cames as a result of me coming to have faith in Christ for the salvation of all humanity, UR. In his response he used the word Heresy a lot, a whole lot. His basic point was that UR is a Heresy, one long held as a heresy by most of the Church; and thus the reason people have acted so badly towards me, acting very un-Christian, is because I’ve openly admitted to believing in UR. I’m the one who’s actually responsible for their bad behavior. Me walking in grace, love, and forgiveness towards them, and them being judgmental, unloving, and accusatory towards me is my fault because I openly confessed to them that I believe in UR. So, their wrong attitudes and actions are the result of my wrong beliefs.
Throughout church history though, those who have been heresy hunters end up committing some terrible things against those who they see as not submitting to church authority. Ultimately that’s what the English word “heresy” comes down to, doctrine that is rejected by church authority as false. Which “church authority” does one listen to? The denomination that they are a part of. And if the person is not a member of a denomination, then heresy is whatever they declare it to be. Well, the long and short of it is that to me the word “heresy” is about meaningless and powerless because it is used by people to denounces any doctrine that they disagree with, or that their denomination disagrees with and considers dangerous.
Boy, is that hard to distinguish, with all the music and “computer slurring”! LOL
I have to admit that one of the things the whole Rob Bell controversy has made me aware of is the lack of grace from people(it has to be said a lot of ECTers) to anyone who has a different approach to Hell. I was on this blog called pyromaniac and they were talking about NT Wright’s view of Hell as a de-humanisation and the venom spewed at him from some of the posters with some of them even saying things like “he’s in for a big shock on Judgement day” etc. When someone who actually responded very politely suggested annihilationism as a conclusion he arrived at after months of study and prayer, they all turned on him like anything and when he questioned whether they had studied and prayed about it they said “don’t need to”. I was pretty shocked. I’ve even seen attacks levelled at John Stott for holding a tentative annihilationist view. I think it was Jim Cronfel questioned John Stott’s salvation and went on to write a book refuting John Stott on the basis of his being and someone posted Christianity Today said they were disappointed in his view and wondered whether it was because his parents were not Christians, which was imo a low blow.
Illegitimate one toed orphan…
I haven’t heard a come back like that in ages.
I’m pretty sure that the Pharisees, etc. thought Jesus was a heretic. So I guess we’re in good company, eh?
But yeah. Some of the definitions I’ve seen in here; tongue-in-cheek though they may be, are pretty much spot-on in terms of how the word is used and functions in today’s language. My favorite definition of a heretic is “anyone who didn’t go to the same bible college as you.”
That pretty much sums up the mentality of those who sling this word around, in my experience…
Not only was it a low blow, but completely irrelevant and illogical.
Someone should point out to that guy that Jesus’ parents weren’t Christians either…
Of course, the amusing thing about that is that ‘right belief’ per se doesn’t save you…
Chris,
Off the cuff, in connection also with your private message concerned about heresy, I can remember early on in considering universalism, worrying that I might be wrong about fundamental beliefs, and I’m sorry that such concerns are paining you. My pastor has said to me, “your universalist exegesis may well be right, but woudn’t it be scary if you are wrong?” I replied, "Do you mean, am I afraid that God would burn me forever for exegeting incorrectly? In all candor, no, I find it inconceivable that God’s judgment or ultimate love centers on having a quite correct understanding of doctrine.
My impression is that two main beliefs are treated with drastic concern in Scripture. For Jesus, it was the devout’s exclusionary belief that rejected God’s love for sinners. For Paul, it was churchly belief that works of the Mosaic Law, or in effect exclusionary conversion to Judaism, was necessary to be embraced by God. For both of these rejections (of the availability of universal grace) seemed to justify a harsh approach to its’ proponents. But I don’t see Paul typically anxious about doctrinal conformity. Even when he clearly seems to have a preferred belief, he urges Christians to make up their own minds and respect those who think pleasing God involves differing assumptions (e.g. Rom. 14). In 1 Cor. 15 he doesn’t even seem agitated about brethren who doubt the resurrection (to my mind a cardinal belief)! It appears to me that he is much more concerned with whether we live in accord with Christ’s values, and may apply discipline about that. Since I don’t doubt the need for universal grace, I frankly never worry about being a heretic. It is hard for me to imagine a good God who would hang our fate on intellectual correctness. I think if we want to worry about something, it should be about the consequences of the way we live and fail to love, and how God will deal with that. But my belief is that I can even trust God to do what is good in that arena.
I welcome your take on my spontaneous thoughts.
Grace be with you,
Bob
Great post, Bob.
I’ve had a few friends ask me, “Doesn’t it worry you that what you’ve come to believe is considered heresy by almost all of the church throughout history?” To which I reply, “Yes, frankly it scared the hell out of me for months!” You see, I value and respect the greater body of Christ tremendously, but ultimately I must be honest concerning what I’ve come to believe. And I’ve come to believe based on my personal study of scripture, as well as hours of prayer and meditation, and days of fasting, that Jesus really is the savior of all humanity. This time in study, prayer, meditation, and fasting has convinced me so firmly now, that I no longer worry that my beliefs are not main-stream.
Others also ask me, “Do you not worry that you might be wrong?” To which I reply, No, I don’t worry that I might be wrong, because I “assume” that I AM WRONG in some of my beliefs! And my trust is not in my understanding of scripture, but in the Lord. So though I be wrong, I trust the Lord to lead me to the truth. Shoot, if UR is correct, then I’ve been wrong over 40 years, though I was saved, had a relationship with God, was filled with the Holy Spirit, and passionately loved God and others. I trust in the Lord, so I do not worry about being wrong and am open to learning something new. So I regularly pray for God to teach me the truth and show me where my beliefs are off.
I have come to the place though that when others start dissing what I’ve come to believe, using the word Heresy, it, well, turns me off, it hinders me from listening to them. This is especially true for Protestants who claim Sola Scriptura; instead of appealing to scripture, they appeal to tradition which really seems hypocritical to me. Frankly, when people use the word heresy I have to struggle to not just assume that they are speaking out of fear and ignorance; because that is what I’ve experienced. The one’s who’s knee-jerk reaction is to pull the heresy trump card do so because they have not studied the subject, have not wrestled with the issue, and are afraid to have their beliefs seriously challenged. This is often the case, but not always the case so I have to consciously make an effort to seriously consider their objections and concerns.