Where do we draw the line of heresy?
Sermon • Submitted
0 ratings
· 10 viewsNotes
Transcript
Sermon Tone Analysis
A
D
F
J
S
Emotion
A
C
T
Language
O
C
E
A
E
Social
Heresy not only misunderstanding -
Heresy not only misunderstanding -
English Standard Version Chapter 11
for there must be factions among you in order that those who are genuine among you may be recognized!
Destructive, denying Master who bought them
Destructive, denying Master who bought them
English Standard Version Chapter 2
But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing upon themselves swift destruction
Heresy- any teaching that changes
Heresy- any teaching that changes
The nature of salvation so that it is no longer 100% dependent on the work of God in Christ
The Roman Catholic Church’s denial of sola fide is a false doctrine that requires an affirmative answer to those questions. By denying that sinners are declared righteous through the instrumentation of faith alone, Roman Catholicism actually makes the very same error as the Judaizers (they just advocate adding different works to Christ’s righteousness). See this post for more on this.
But the Wesleyan Arminian’s doctrine of synergism, though unbiblical and rightly labeled as “bad theology,” is not a damning error. Perhaps the logical implications of it are—and if a synergist was truly consistent with himself it would lead to heresy. But Wesleyan Arminians avoid the damning errors of Pelagianism and semi-Pelagianism by confessing that the source of their faith in God’s grace alone, and not anywhere in themselves. Their doctrine of prevenient grace is not to be found anywhere in Scripture, and they can’t consistently account for why one believes in Christ while another doesn’t, but they are in a manner saved by their inconsistency, as they nevertheless look to Christ alone through faith alone for salvation.
The nature of God (any member of the trinity) to the point that to believe it is to truly believe in a different God
1) I think we have to answer “yes” to that question in consideration of the God of Open Theism, who suggest that God is “in process,” is learning, and does not know the future. This is an outright denial of the omniscience of God—the One who insists that He declares the end from the beginning, and brings to pass all the plans of His heart (; ; ; ). This isn’t simply a misunderstanding about the God who is; this is a fundamentally different god.
Other election views not heretical
CBC STATEMENT OF FAITH