Jude 2

Since I enjoy etymology and enjoy when people use words correctly, I thought I would post the meanings of this word.


Dictionary.com Unabridged
her·e·tic /n.

–noun 1. a professed believer who maintains religious opinions contrary to those accepted by his or her church or rejects doctrines prescribed by that church.

2. Roman Catholic Church. a baptized Roman Catholic who willfully and persistently rejects any article of faith.

3. anyone who does not conform to an established attitude, doctrine, or principle.


—Synonyms 1. apostate, backslider, recreant, protestant. 3. dissenter, skeptic, freethinker.
_____________________________________________________________

American Heritage Dictionary -

n. A person who holds controversial opinions, especially one who publicly dissents from the officially accepted dogma of the Roman Catholic Church.

___________________________________________________________
WordNet -

noun
1. a person who holds religious beliefs in conflict with the dogma of the Roman Catholic Church

2. a person who holds unorthodox opinions in any field (not merely religion)
_____________________________________________________________


American Heritage New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy, Third Edition -


One who challenges the doctrines of an established church. Martin Luther was proclaimed a heretic for rejecting many of the tenets of the Roman Catholic Church.
____________________________________________________________


Gee, I guess in a way, we are ALL heretics.

Now, Shellie, why are you trying to stir up your brother in law?

Most who participated in the Azusa St. Revival were labeled as Heritics also.

Shellie wrote:One who challenges the doctrines of an established church. Martin Luther was proclaimed a heretic for rejecting many of the tenets of the Roman Catholic Church.

____________________________________________________________


Gee, I guess in a way, we are ALL heretics.

EXACTLY in the same way that we are not Members of the TRUE CHURCH because we arent members of THE COG Split #4.

This definition does not minamalize the fact that there are TRUE heretics posing and accepted as normal Christians.

Sabellianism or Modalism has LONG been accepted as heretical.
It describes one God in different modes.


T D Jakes has repetatively expressed his belief in God thusly:

"God--There is one God, Creator of all things, infinitely perfect, and eternally existing in three Manifestations: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit."


or

"Don't argue with people about foolishness. Don't argue about the Godhead--the Bible says it's a mystery. If it's a mystery that means it's a supernatural thing and everybody who thinks they understand it--really don't. It's impossible to explain how one God can be three persons and three persons be one God. And you're gonna blow your computer and short circuit your p.c. trying to explain something that you don't even understand. You can't even explain how a brown cow eats green grass and produces white milk. So you know you can't explain God. So just shut up arguing about it and say it's a mystery. All we know is that He's Father in creation, Son in redemption, and Holy Ghost in regeneration and it's all good.

Look how he says it's a mystery and then defines the mystery in modalist ideas.

At times he even describes god in PANTHEISTIC terminology.

God was saying "I am a transformer. I can become whatever I need to be." But He IS a spirit. When God says "I AM that I AM" He says "I can become whatever" and
He showed off from that point on all through the wilderness. He just kept turning into stuff. He kept turning into stuff. They said "We're hungry." He started dropping His loaves of bread. They said "We want meat." He became quail and started flying through the air. They said "What are we going to do for water?" He became water, came gushing out of a rock. They said "It's hot out here!" He became a pillar of cloud by day. They said "It's cold at night." He said "I'll became a cloud of fire by night." They said "We can't drink this bitter water." He became a tree and turned the bitter water sweet. I mean He just kept turning into stuff! One God manifesting in a multiplicity of ways. One God. Now, you don't divide all of those manifestations into different gods. The God of Bread, the God of Quail, the God of Water, the God of tree, the God of Cloud, the God of Fire. Just one God Who manifests Himself in many different ways. Okay? You with me? Your God is multifaceted, manifold, many shades. Okay?


But like I have repeatatively said: In Pentecostalism God can be anything.

He can be the Jesus Only, or everything of T D Jakes.
He can be the "not God" of Creflo Dollar.
He can be pointless and not needed once you understand the principles of faith (Kenneth Copeland)
Or he can be a Nine part entity as described by Benny Hinn (who repented of such idiocy)



If he can be all those things why can't he be Allah, Or Buddah or whomever else or whatever else you want to describe him?


CAN WE REALLY be a grammaticaster in order to make us all equal (i e Under certain definitions we're all heretics), to MINIMIZE the fact that there are true genuine Heretics running rampant in Pentecostalism today.

paul wrote:Most who participated in the Azusa St. Revival were labeled as Heritics also.

Y'all might want to examine the history of the Azuza Street Revival a little closer before you hold it up as a standard of orthodoxy. It wasn't everything a lot of folks cracked it up to be. Charles Parham & William Seymour ended up enemies for the remainder of their lives over it...

Mike Vande wrote:

paul wrote:Most who participated in the Azusa St. Revival were labeled as Heritics also.

Y'all might want to examine the history of the Azuza Street Revival a little closer before you hold it up as a standard of orthodoxy. It wasn't everything a lot of folks cracked it up to be. Charles Parham & William Seymour ended up enemies for the remainder of their lives over it...

Realizing that every movement has its faults and generally is characterized by excess in the beginning. The label of heritic was placed upon them mainly because of the concept of "Tongues".

Gerald Creasy wrote:CAN WE REALLY be a grammaticaster in order to make us all equal (i e Under certain definitions we're all heretics), to MINIMIZE the fact that there are true genuine Heretics running rampant in Pentecostalism today.

You know how you start looking at a certain model of new car, and suddenly you notice them everywhere?

It's kind of like when you are a certain model of Christian, and you start to see the glaring faults within that branch to the exclusion of others. Gerald, there are some messed up, off-base, Theologically-challenged, downright crazy people in the pentecostal/charismatic wing of the Christian mental ward --- and every other branch has their wacky uncles, too. The Baptists have those folks who picket the funerals of fallen warriors, the Catholics have priests from the Order of St. Michael (Jackson) who like altar boys too much, the Episcopalians have gay priests, and on it goes...

I hope you will avail yourself of those free, online Seminary classes, but be prepared -- you will be stretched way outside your comfort zone and faced with much, MUCH broader understandings of the parameters of orthodoxy.

Pastor Gary wrote:It's kind of like when you are a certain model of Christian, and you start to see the glaring faults within that branch to the exclusion of others. Gerald, there are some messed up, off-base, Theologically-challenged, downright crazy people in the pentecostal/charismatic wing of the Christian mental ward --- and every other branch has their wacky uncles, too. The Baptists have those folks who picket the funerals of fallen warriors, the Catholics have priests from the Order of St. Michael (Jackson) who like altar boys too much, the Episcopalians have gay priests, and on it goes...

APPLES AND ORANGES

The examples you have given are extremes.

The Majority of Baptists do not approve of Westboro.
The Catholic Church condemns pedophilia.


While the examples I give ARE extremes: THERE IS NOT A PENTECOSTAL CODEMNATION from ANY Pentecostal Church (as in the Catholic churches condemnation of Pedophilia) or even an preponderance of anti-type (compare Pentecostal opinion of Jakes, Creflo and Copeland to the opinion of Most Baptists to Westboro).


And quite frankly I am OFFENDED (but who cares, right) that MY INSISTENCE that someone that preaches modalism or that Jesus wasnt God or that you don't even have to have God if you have faith are Heretics IS CONSIDERED FOOLISH and typified as a mental trick (seeing things everywhere once you notice something new)

Pastor Gary wrote:I hope you will avail yourself of those free, online Seminary classes, but be prepared -- you will be stretched way outside your comfort zone and faced with much, MUCH broader understandings of the parameters of orthodoxy.

FYI I've been reading/listening to Pentecostal and Non-Pentecostal sources for over twenty years. Guess which one dances with IDIOCY REGARDING THE NATURE OF GOD more than any Other?

I will not endorse Jesus Only, Jesus isn't God etc as a "broader orthodoxy"
I am sorry to see that you have.

You've jumped to a massive conclusion friend.

Engaging in the grand theological discussion and examining ideas dispassionately does not imply acceptance, merely civility.

But since we're batting this around: can you say with 100% certainty that Jakes et al will go to hell because they misunderstand the Trinity?

Pastor Gary wrote:You've jumped to a massive conclusion friend.

Engaging in the grand theological discussion and examining ideas dispassionately does not imply acceptance, merely civility.

But since we're batting this around: can you say with 100% certainty that Jakes et al will go to hell because they misunderstand the Trinity?

I think therein lies the difference. A oneness view of God does not negate the person or work of Christ and does not invalidate the faith of one who believes in Him. Some beliefs (whether explicitly or implicitly) actually serve to deny the Lord that bought us.

As a related aside, biblically the term rendered heresy has to do not only with unorthodox belief (which was not mere disagreement with a certain dominant or accepted school of thought but with the direct teaching of Christ and His apostles) but with factionism.

Pastor Gary wrote:But since we're batting this around: can you say with 100% certainty that Jakes et al will go to hell because they misunderstand the Trinity?

That is a different issue entirely. Did Paul turn over to Satan those who misunderstood the ressurrection, for which he called them profane?

Seems like a non-issue to me and yet his words were exceptionally strong.

Can you name ONE Pentecostal Organization, Confluence or Group of Organizations who has publicly reprimanded ANY of the SPOTLIGHT Pentecostals??

While I THINK we both agree that the examples I rail about are extremes, why do the Pentecostal EXTREMES have such prominence?

With the Example You Offered in comparison - the Westboro church: Where are their multimillion dollar ministries? Where are their book sales? What churches study them for spiritual guidance?

Those things do not exist because Baptist don't idolize their heretics.

Back when I was first saved, I attended an A of G in Bremerton, Washington. One thing I remember was the preparation the congregation went through for a big evangelisitic push the pastor had in mind. He told us that we didn't necessarily need to expect that the people who accepted Jesus to become part of our congregation. He said that we needed to tell them to get plugged in somewhere, but if they were more comfortable elsewhere, we shouldn't insist that they come there. He named some other churches, and one he mentioned specifically was the "Jesus Only " church. I remember it because I had never heard of a "Jesus Only" church before.

Now there was a very active United Pentecostal Church there in town. Their guys were out of the streets witnessing constantly. And they were as insistant about being the "only church" as any exclusivist group ever was. At some later point, I had a run-in with some of those guys, and they left a pretty bad impression, believe me.

The A of G pastor wasn't a fool, nor was he unaware of the UPC and what they taught and said about his denomination. But he said that they would be a viable alternative to his church. his take was efven though they didn't accept anyone else as Christian, they still taught salvation through the Blood of Christ, and that was all that was needed.

Maybe that's too simple for some folks, I don't know. But I think the pastor had a point.

While the examples I give ARE extremes: THERE IS NOT A PENTECOSTAL CODEMNATION from ANY Pentecostal Church (as in the Catholic churches condemnation of Pedophilia) or even an preponderance of anti-type (compare Pentecostal opinion of Jakes, Creflo and Copeland to the opinion of Most Baptists to Westboro).

TCOG, Smith

Gerald Creasy wrote:Can you name ONE Pentecostal Organization, Confluence or Group of Organizations who has publicly reprimanded ANY of the SPOTLIGHT Pentecostals??

Okay. We'll concede this one to you: all Pentecostals are ignorant rubes who don't know Generations from Revolutions, fall for any gimmick that comes down the pike, can't be trusted to discern profits from prophets, and generally shouldn't be allowed to breed another generation. How's that work for you?

Pastor Gary wrote:

Gerald Creasy wrote:Can you name ONE Pentecostal Organization, Confluence or Group of Organizations who has publicly reprimanded ANY of the SPOTLIGHT Pentecostals??

Okay. We'll concede this one to you: all Pentecostals are ignorant rubes who don't know Generations from Revolutions, fall for any gimmick that comes down the pike, can't be trusted to discern profits from prophets, and generally shouldn't be allowed to breed another generation. How's that work for you?

NOW you're drawing TCOGNC into the discussion and there's already enough cross-purpose talking going on.

I think the envionment MAY BE a little Different with me in the Bible Belt and you in the Grass Skirt, BUT you KNOW I have a Point.