Comments on: WHO Decides Heresy; HOW do we decide Heresy?

By: linda

linda — Fri, 20 Jun 2008 22:20:39 +0000

as for how we determine what is orthodox i think using the wesleyan quadrilateral is still wise: scripture, reason, tradition and experience. one thing i always find interesting is that so many people are quick to assert that we can't rely on experience despite my suspicion that it is our experiences that probably shape our faith the most. i think this is because in our experiences we are encountering Yeshua in a holistic way (mind, emotions, & will) and not just intellectually or doctrinally. because we realize in this postmodern age that "scripture" largely means our interpretation of scripture that leaves me wondering what our final arbiter of truth is, or if there is one. i think the answer is Truth (God) but it is not always so easily discerned. the holy spirit must always be leading us into all truth as we utilize the tools (the wesleyan quad) God has given us to determine his will.

By: John W Frye

John W Frye — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 18:06:37 +0000

Many right-wing evangelical conservatives have an itchy trigger finger on the word “heresy.” It appears that “mistaken” and “wrong” have been replaced with “heresy” and “heretic.” You can be mistaken and even wrong and not be heretical. But the self-appointed heresy-hunters blast people with loaded terms which merely mean “You don’t think like me” or “You don’t talk like me” or “You don’t like the (Reformed) writers that I like.”

By: Tad DeLay

Tad DeLay — Mon, 16 Jun 2008 15:39:30 +0000

I’ve been tossing the same questions around in my head for a while now. Those last to questions on orthodoxy all to often yield oversimplified answers like “read your history.” I get that a lot from fundies who, for instance, aren’t aware that church fathers couldn’t even agree for sure whether or not there was an afterlife for the unrighteous (annihilationsists), much less whether or not there was a hell awaiting them.

This isn’t much of an answer, but I often back myself up to asking “Is believing ‘X’ beneficial or harmful?” For instance, if some believe the earth ends in fiery apocalypse, this has obvious implications for how important it is to care for the earth. This understanding could be yielded from Peter, but is harder to reconcile with Paul. So essentially, I get to wondering, “if believing something leads to action that seems contrary to God’s direction (i.e. creation care), then this likely sheds light on what should be considered orthodoxy.”
Just my (highly unfinished) thoughts…