# Heresy vs. Unorthodoxy



## servantofmosthigh (Apr 22, 2008)

OK, here's a new discussion topic: what's the difference between "heresy" vs. "unorthodoxy?"

Mormonism used to be considered "heresy." But it seems that today, many Christians veer from that term and prefer to call it "unorthodox."

What do you think?


----------



## Mushroom (Apr 22, 2008)

I'm just a layman, but they appear to be the same thing to me.


----------



## Simply_Nikki (Apr 22, 2008)

I think heresy is a damnable error, while unorthodox is not necessarily so. Though something can be unorthodox and a heresy at the same time I'd imagine .


----------



## Hippo (Apr 22, 2008)

For a start to be unorthodox is not to say that someone is in error, just that you are not in accordance with historicaly accepted church teaching. All new thoughts will go through at least a stage of being unorthodox before either becoming accepted (and hence orthodox), being rejected (and hence heresy) or just being tolerated.

Heresy is a judgment by the church that that a position is actively in opposition to the teaching of the church and unless the pronouncement is in error there can be no change in the status of that position.


----------



## ModernPuritan? (Apr 22, 2008)

and from what it appears today, we have all but forgotten that pattern. It goes directly from unorthodox immediately into "well, its just their opinions, their understanding, their way" so much so that our "truth claims" that were once "absolute" are now "relative" and no longer truth.


----------



## servantofmosthigh (Apr 22, 2008)

According to J.I. Packer and Mark Dever, in _In My Place Condemned He Stood_, they define _Orthodoxy_ as, "right doctrinal belief, viewed as the church's confession of its faith and stated syllabus for teaching." They then define _Unorthodoxy_ as any deviation from that standard.

They believe that the word _heresy_ today "combines maximum fuzziness of meaning with maximum vituperative emotional heat" that cause this word to be "too hot to handle in any sober analysis," whereas _unorthodoxy_ is "more exact and less explosive."

So it appears that Packer & Dever define these words the way Brad understands them: similar but one being more explosive emotionally and less sober cognitively than the other.


----------



## Zenas (Apr 22, 2008)

servantofmosthigh said:


> Mormonism used to be considered "heresy." But it seems that today, many Christians veer from that term and prefer to call it "unorthodox."
> 
> What do you think?



I find what many Christians say today to be heretical. 

Claiming that God is a glorified man from another planet is not unorthodox. Unorthodox merely means not orthodox for any of a number of reasons except being wrong or right. When a belief is determined to be wrong or right, then it moves into heresey or orthodoxy, respectively, and out of unorthodoxy.


----------



## Mushroom (Apr 22, 2008)

Oops! I confused "unorthodoxy" with "heterodoxy". Can someone linguistically define the difference between the terms? And would heterodoxy be heresy?


----------



## Poimen (Apr 23, 2008)

Mormonism is not heresy. Heresy is defined as something that strikes at the heart of Christian doctrine by a Christian group or person. Mormonism is another religion altogether.


----------



## servantofmosthigh (Apr 23, 2008)

Poimen said:


> Mormonism is not heresy. Heresy is defined as something that strikes at the heart of Christian doctrine by a Christian group or person. Mormonism is another religion altogether.



Mormonism denies the diety of Christ. They believe that Christ is "a" Son of God, not "The" Son of God. That's heresy, alright... To reject the divinity of the 2nd Person is to reject the Trinity. And to reject the Trinity is heresy.

But is it too emotionally loaded to call it "heresy," and better to call it "unorthodoxy," as Packer and Dever think is better suited for today's culture?


----------



## DMcFadden (Apr 23, 2008)

*Heresy* A belief or teaching that contradicts Scripture and Christian theology.

*Heresy, Christological* A view that deviates from the orthodox formulation regarding the person and work of Christ.

*Heretical* Pertaining to any view that has been officially condemned by an authoritative body.

*Orthodoxy *The body of doctrines taught by Scripture, such as the deity of Christ, the Trinity, and the authority of Scripture; also, the segment of Christianity holding these doctrines.

*Unorthodox* Pertaining to a departure from the official view. The term does not usually connote as serious a deviation as does “heterodox.”

Erickson, M. J. (2001). *The concise dictionary of Christian theology *(Rev. ed., 1st Crossway ed.) (211). Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway Books.


----------



## Poimen (Apr 23, 2008)

servantofmosthigh said:


> Poimen said:
> 
> 
> > Mormonism is not heresy. Heresy is defined as something that strikes at the heart of Christian doctrine by a Christian group or person. Mormonism is another religion altogether.
> ...



So does Islam. Is Islam a heresy?


----------



## servantofmosthigh (Apr 23, 2008)

Poimen said:


> servantofmosthigh said:
> 
> 
> > Poimen said:
> ...



I'm not going to answer that because it's sooooo obvious...


----------



## TimV (Apr 23, 2008)

> So does Islam. Is Islam a heresy?



There are those who think of Islam as a Christian heresy. Christ born of a virgin, the second greatest prophet, etc..the difference between Mormonism and Islam in that respect isn't that different. The Alawi who run Syria have a trinity, have Christmas and Ascension Day as holidays even on the national level etc...They really like Christ, and have an exceedingly high regard for Him, especially compared to, say, Jews. But it still doesn't cut it.


----------



## Poimen (Apr 23, 2008)

servantofmosthigh said:


> Poimen said:
> 
> 
> > servantofmosthigh said:
> ...



There is no need to bait people on the board. If you don't want to answer the question just say so. 

Heresy is division; it is schism on doctrinal points. The Mormon church as of its founding was never part of the Christian faith though some of its followers may have left the church.


----------



## bookslover (Apr 23, 2008)

Are you talking, maybe, in the OP, about the difference between orthodoxy and heterodoxy?


----------



## beej6 (Apr 23, 2008)

The fact that no one likes to use the term "heresy" doesn't make it less valid, nor should "unorthodox," a weaker word, be used to substitute for it. 

Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormons who represent themselves as Christian yet fail the Trinitarian test are thus heretics.

I'd probably say that semi-Pelagians are unorthodox, but as a confessional Presbyterian, how else could I characterize them?


----------



## servantofmosthigh (Apr 23, 2008)

Poimen said:


> servantofmosthigh said:
> 
> 
> > Poimen said:
> ...



I thought I did say so... OK, if I didn't, here it is: I'm not going to answer that...

Reason why I'm not going to answer that? Because it's soooooo obvious.


----------



## Pergamum (Apr 23, 2008)

I am with Poimen here. Other religions are not heresy, but other religions. Heresy is from within the church..i.e. a traitor in the ranks, not a foreign invading army.

Also, I would stress that to call someone a heretic is to call him damned and not a child of God. Therefore it should be reserved only for those that deny the Trinity of the orthodox views of Christ. Other errors may be gross errors, but we only do disservice to erring brothers (like Dispensationalists and most Arminians) if we call them heretics.


----------



## py3ak (Apr 23, 2008)

servantofmosthigh said:


> Poimen said:
> 
> 
> > servantofmosthigh said:
> ...


*
Pastor Shin, please be careful with the snarkiness. I understand its entertainment value, but it is a form of entertainment rather out of place in conversation among Christian brethren*. 

Now, back to the regularly scheduled programming.


----------



## Ron Henzel (Apr 23, 2008)

While I don't necessarily subscribe to it, some time ago I posted one definition of heresy here.


----------



## DMcFadden (Apr 23, 2008)

Ron Henzel said:


> While I don't necessarily subscribe to it, some time ago I posted one definition of heresy here.



Ron, if memory serves me, that is EXACTLY the definition of heresy that famed scholar Jaroslav Pelikan used in his 1992 – 1993 Gifford lectures at the University of Aberdeen and in his magnum opus, the five volume *The Christian Tradition: A History of the Development of Doctrine *(1971-1989). You are to be commended for your use of scholarly tools. Dr. Foxworthy certainly captures the sense. Thanks for contributing it to this thread.


----------



## servantofmosthigh (Apr 24, 2008)

py3ak said:


> servantofmosthigh said:
> 
> 
> > Poimen said:
> ...



Py3ak, be at peace. There was no snarkiness (whatever that means) on my part.

But this dialogue between myself and Poiman, and with Py3ak assuming some kind of snarkiness was communicated by me that wasn't there perfectly illustrates Packer's and Dever's point that the term "heresy" too easily maximizes emotions and confusion whereas "unorthodoxy" doesn't.

Py3ak, you fell for it. I set the question and situation up. Poiman clued it in earlier with the "bait" being set. You took the bait... 

If you don't get it, brother, PM me and I'll explain.


----------



## Contra Marcion (Apr 24, 2008)

Poimen said:


> Mormonism is not heresy. Heresy is defined as something that strikes at the heart of Christian doctrine by a Christian group or person. Mormonism is another religion altogether.



Exactly! However, one thought - Mormonism, in the days of Joseph Smith, _was_ indeed a heresy, as he was getting more and more "out there" in his crazy ideas, and _splitting off_ from the Christian faith. As an apostate Christian (objectively, anyway), Joseph Smith was a heretic. Subsequent generations of Mormons, having never been part of the visible Church, are simply practitioners of an different religion altogether, and damned unless they repent and believe the gospel.


----------



## Simply_Nikki (Apr 24, 2008)

Pergamum said:


> I am with Poimen here. Other religions are not heresy, but other religions. Heresy is from within the church..i.e. a traitor in the ranks, not a foreign invading army.
> 
> Also, I would stress that to call someone a heretic is to call him damned and not a child of God. Therefore it should be reserved only for those that deny the Trinity of the orthodox views of Christ. Other errors may be gross errors, but we only do disservice to erring brothers (like Dispensationalists and most Arminians) if we call them heretics.



I agree. Heresy or Heretics are those so far outside the realms of the essential orthodox Christian faith, that they can no longer be considered "Christian". 

I've had to be more careful with the terms myself as some like to call Arminians or charismatics, or some other disagreeable detail of Christianity's fine points, "heretics". I concur, heretic should be reserved for those with damnable offenses, like gnosticism = heresy, open theism = heresy, oneness pentecostalism = heresy.


----------



## py3ak (Apr 24, 2008)

servantofmosthigh said:


> py3ak said:
> 
> 
> > servantofmosthigh said:
> ...



So are you saying you pretended to be aggressive and disrespectful in order to illustrate that emotionally charged words do not facilitate communication?


----------



## servantofmosthigh (Apr 25, 2008)




----------

