what is HERSEY ?
curmudgeon
HERESY; is any teaching rejected by the Christian community as contrary to
Scripture and hence to *orthodox doctrine*.
Most of the teachings that have been declared heretical have to do with
either the nature of GOD or the person of Jesus Christ.
The term HERSEY is not generally used to characterize non-Christian belief.
That is to say, systems of belief such as atheism or agnosticism, or
non-Christian religions such as Buddhism or Islam are not technically
heresy.
The term HERSEY is generally reserved for any belief that claims to be
Christian and scriptural but has been rejected by the church as
sub-Christian or antiscriptural.
*curmudgeon*
"The best read illiterate in the country"
((( s.r.c.b-s is a moderated group. All posts are approved by a moderator. )))
((( Read http://srcbs.org for details about this group BEFORE you post. )))
theologynut
On Jun 10, 8:44=A0pm, "curmudgeon" <briticanlan...@bresnan.net> wrote:
> HERESY; is any teaching rejected by the Christian community as contrary t=
o
> Scripture and hence to *orthodox doctrine*.
> Most of the teachings that have been declared heretical have to do with
> either the nature of GOD or the person of Jesus Christ.
f.
> That is to say, systems of belief such as atheism or agnosticism, or
> non-Christian religions such as Buddhism or Islam are not technically
> heresy.
> The term HERSEY is generally reserved for any belief that claims to be
> Christian and scriptural but has been rejected by the church as
> sub-Christian or antiscriptural.
>
> *curmudgeon*
> "The best read illiterate in the country"
>
tor. )))
> ((( =A0 Readhttp://srcbs.orgfor details about this group BEFORE you post.=
=A0 )))
Heresy and its history is a fascinating subtext of Christian history.
In the first century, there was a plethora of Judaisms and
Christianities. Just as denominations proliferated after the
Reformation, sects proliferated after the fall of the temple: Church
fathers cite Donatists, Docetists, Montanists, Marcionites, Gnostics,
Ebionites, and Judaizers. Elaine Pagels says that Christianity was
actually more diverse in the first century than it is now, with our
established canon of scriptures. In fact, the established canon came
about because of the debate as to what was true doctrine and what was
not. Marcion precipitated this debate by trying to jettison the
entire Hebrew scriptures as containing too unsavory a deity. (The
Hebrew scriptures are what the epistle to Timothy was referring to
when it says that "All scripture is edifying," because the New
Testament wouldn't exist for another two centuries at the time Timothy
was written.) Lists had long been in existence as to what was most
well recieved and diligently copied, but there was debate about books
like Revelation and The Shepherd of Hermes. Voting finally decided
the question of what was to be included in the canon, which is a word
meaning "plumb bob" or "true measure". There is evidence of tampering
with the approved books as well--trinity passages were added to John,
an ending added to the gospel of Mark, and the Pericope Adultera about
the woman caught in adultery does not appear in the earliest
manuscripts. Translation and transmission reaped their harvest of
variations as well. Political vississitudes and vaguaries have
precipitated many inquisitions and holocausts throughout the last
twenty centuries--anti-semitism seems to have been written into the
New Testament because of first century polemics. Understanding the
mindset of the writers of the Bible is crucial to understanding the
Bible. As is always inevitable in human affairs, there is a mixed bag
to be found in the Bible. It is a fascinating phantasmagoric fount of
everything noble and debased in human nature. The same brew to be
found in all literature.