The Highway Forums General Discussion Theology Discussion Forum How should we respond tolerance of heresy ?

How should we respond to people who are tolerant toward Arminian doctrines, I ask this in light of being in a reformed/Calvinism woman's group on Facebook, the dedate is about if Arminianism is heresy or not. Should we be tolerant toward the tolerance of others ?

There are two extremes in the Calvinist camp, as best as I can tell from years of experience:

1. Those who see non-Calvinists, particularly "Arminians", which are few and far between in actuality, as "brothers & sisters" in Christ who simply have not had the advantage of proper training. The fact is that the overwhelming majority of non-Calvinist professing Christians are theologically semi-Pelagians, which is even more heretical. The "tolerant Calvinists" are by far over represented between the two groups and is becoming more and more popular and acceptable.

2. Calvinists who deem Arminians, semi-Pelagians and those Calvinists from group one as unregenerate.

I stand squarely in the middle of these two groups. Scripturally, and historically Arminianism and its more evil sister semi-Pelagianism is damnable heresy. Those who TRULY believe in either of these systems of theology, both intellectually and in their heart cannot be truly saved. I do believe there is a very small amount of people who profess to believe these systems of theology are biblical but when they are shown from Scripture and sound reasoning to be grossly in error, they reject them and embrace the doctrines of grace.

Those who profess to be Calvinists in the first group who accept Arminians and/or semi-Pelagians as "brothers & sisters" in Christ are unfortunately woefully inconsistent, for whatever reason, with what they profess. This is a sad inconsistency on their part. The consequences of their inconsistency is very serious for they give false assurance to those who are still dead in their sins and under the just condemnation of God unless they repent and believe upon Christ with a true saving faith wrought by the sovereign work of the Holy Spirit. Some have even adopted a false gospel and are leading many to perdition.

On the other hand, those who profess to be Calvinists in the second group leave no room for the possibility that one who professes Arminianism or semi-Pelagianism could be saved. But they go even further in their insistence that even those Calvinists in the first group are unregenerate. A few include a provision in that IF a Calvinist in the first group would repent of their belief that Arminians/semi-Pelagians are true Christians, they can be saved. Otherwise, they will be damned. The reality is, of course, that few if any are known to have repented of this inconsistent belief, meaning that they are all unregenerate and reprobates.

One thing is for sure is that just because someone professes to embrace the doctrines of grace is no guarantee that they are regenerate either. One is not saved because of belief in right doctrine, but rather in the person of the biblical Christ. And, at the same time, one isn't saved without believing in right doctrine either.

Lastly, in my experience in speaking with hundreds of people who are part of the "Evanjellycal" movement and too many who profess to be "Reformed", the sad truth is, the majority have no valid profession of faith. Thus, it is always my practice to speak the Gospel to them and encourage them to seek the one true living God through repentance and faith in the person of the Lord Christ. (1Cor 3:6-10)

Hey-lo Sister!

It was suggested my 2 cents might be of use, sooo...

I’ll take a crack at this one…

First of all, I’m very glad you posed this question. In reformed circles, we tend to be very (I didn’t say overly!) cautious and critical of what doctrine people espouse. Let me first explain the reason for this: in the book of Galatians, Paul writes,

8 But even though we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to that which we have preached to you, let him be accursed. 9 As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to that which you received, let him be accursed. 10 For am I now seeking the favor of men, or of God? Or am I striving to please men? If I were still trying to please men, I would not be a bond-servant of Christ.
Gal 1:8-10 (NASB77)

Here, Paul makes a bold pronouncement against a false Gospel. He places a curse upon any man, or angel that would preach another Gospel. First, it the Greek word, “anathema,” which is translated “curse” in these verses, is not a reference to excommunication from the Church, as some men account it. No, but I find that this anathema is used as a separation from Christ, which is the lake of fire. Does this seem a harsh or irrational thought? Consider that even angels are worthy of receiving this curse if they preach another Gospel. Are angels present for excommunication from the Church? Certainly not! However, just as Satan and his angels, they are to be separated from God, forever more.

Therefore, this is the anathema placed by Paul over a false Gospel. It would behoove us here to ask what a false Gospel is. First Corinthians 15 gives a detailed understanding of the Gospel, and in the first few verses, Paul writes that

...the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received, in which also you stand, 2 by which also you are saved, if you hold fast the word which I preached to you, unless you believed in vain. 3 For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures
1 Cor 15:1-4 (NASB77)

Nevertheless, here is the question we must answer… who is “our” in verse 3? I believe that John 3:18, Phil 3:18, Jude 1:4, John 6, et al, would be among verses that would show us that this is not for all men; but rather God’s elect. So, now we have understood that a false Gospel is to receive anathema, whether the heavenly angels preach it, or another man: no one is immune from the punishment of preaching a false Gospel.

I will answer your question, but I want to be thorough, so that I leave no stone unturned in your mind. Hopefully, this allow you to follow a Biblical train of thought I am presenting, to give you not only an answer, but evidence for your answer.

I think it is also intelligent to understand that there are men who once preached a false truth, whom God has graciously reigned in and conformed to a manner appropriate of the truth of the Gospel. The Greek tense for “preached” suggests that this false preacher would be a man consistent in his error, seen simply by considering the English rendering “should preach.” If this is the consistent message of a man, continuously in opposition to the Gospel, which is presented from the Bible, he is actually a man already under God’s cursing, if he holds fast to his false teaching (Jude 1:4).

Therefore, a man persistently preaching a false Gospel is accursed. The Gospel is seen in 1st Cor 15, as Christ dying for our (elect) sins. This fact can also be seen by reading the context of John 3 (paying close attention to v 16-21), and especially when the Bible presents us with Ephesians 1:4-7, and Eph 2:1-10. These verses all point out to us (along with Romans 9, which I will not refer to here, specifically, due to its familiarity among most reformed brethren), that salvation is the sovereign decision of our Lord, and that we have nothing in it ourselves, even if it were to “accept” the rebirth God has given us (John 1:12-13).

Now, explicitly answering the question (and thank you for bearing with me until now), it is our Christian responsibility to treat men with love, and God defines this love as first, loving Him, and then loving our neighbor. That being said, to love God is to obey Him (among other things), and be in agreement with what God calls sin, and what He calls righteousness. To love our neighbor is also defined as keeping God’s commandments (2 Jn 5-6). You see, nothing has changed. The two great commands to men are the substance of the Decalogue. Therefore, we are to love our neighbor, by pointing out truth and error to them (Jas 5:19-20), and if they are stubbornly unwilling to receive it then we are to mark and disassociate with them (Rom 16:17-18, 1 Cor 5:11-13), so that they are put to shame, being put apart from the fellowship. Attempts to restore are only sought out carefully, cautiously, and at a distance.

Arminianism is absolute heresy, because it espouses a false God, and a powerless atonement. It takes the key to the doors of Heaven and hands them to the hands of men to determine who may enter the Kingdom. It is essentially Open Theism (or Open Futurism, if you like), at its very sickest. This sickness says, while God knows the future (that will be decided by humans), He would be open to prayers, and actions that would allow the future to change, if it be advantageous to the eventual end God wants to get to. Ask any Arminian who goes to Heaven. They can only answer, “whoever wants to!” and this leaves God out of the equation. This means God crushed His very only, unique Son, for merely an open possibility that someone MIGHT come and be saved. This eliminates much of what Christ says in the New Testament.

Now, while I stand firm on all I have said, I would caution you in this way: there is a difference in dealing with Teachers of heresy, and Followers of heresy. These teaching must be approached directly, and “as-a-matter-of-factly,” because as men who either are teaching heresy out of ignorance, apostasy, or false conversion, they will be judged twice as harshly, by God (Jas 3:1), and therefore should be approached with all the more vigor, and zeal. Those who are followers of such should still be handled sternly, but with wisdom, and discretion, because some simply can be babes in the matters of God, and have been led astray (as many of us may have been) but deceitful teaching. If you find some are in need of stern reproof, then act accordingly—and do likewise if one need gentle persuasion, being careful not to persuade the intellect only, but also work to persuade the heart; for heart work is an important work.

So, in conclusion, I first hope I have been helpful, and answered your questions. If any has taken issue with parts of my response I welcome your loving correction (as a young man still learning, I have need of a tangible example of loving correction), and look forward to helping this sister with her question. Secondly, I stand firm: Arminianism is heresy, and should not be tolerated; however, we need to exercise wisdom in responding, and understand who it is we deal with.

In all things, honor God. Moreover, if men seem (to your discernment and not merely another’s estimations alone) seem contentious, and hateful of God’s sovereignty, then prayerfully disassociate with them. However, I would suggest always seeking clarity, rather than assumption, on what a person understands (their viewpoint). I have made the mistake of “going on gut” too often. Stop. Look. Listen. Hear what they have to say, Biblically discern it, and then prayerfully act in accordance to Scripture.

Grace be with you sister, as you walk with Christ,
Chris (The Exegete)

I would hardly say that 1Cor 15:1-4 is "a detailed understanding of the Gospel". Rather, it is a very brief summary of SOME of the major tenets of the Gospel. Surely, the Gospel is only to be understood in "detail" from a reading of the entire Bible. The content of the Gospel will vary depending upon the individual or group one is speaking to according to their knowledge of biblical truth. What I consider to be a bare minimum of what should be included in the Gospel can be found HERE.

Secondly, in Gal 1:9 Paul doesn't restrict his anathema to false preachers or teachers but rather his curse is cast upon anyone. The word "preachers" here should not be confined to something spoken behind a pulpit in an established church. I believe it is best understood as the general proclamation of the things concerning God's salvation in Christ.

Thirdly, I certainly agree with your understanding of the word "cursed/accursed" (Grk: anathema). And what is this "another Gospel"? Yes, it could refer to the gospel of Mormonism, Jehovah's Witnesses and other sects and cults. But specifically here in Paul's letter to the Galatians... and to us today, he says it is a different gospel (v. 6) and even more specifically, it is a perversion (Grk: metastrepho) of the Gospel. In short, it is a counterfeit gospel; it sounds like the true Gospel because it has elements of truth in it mixed with damnable error. This is one of the reasons Paul is so adamant to anathematize those who speak a false gospel. Take careful note that a false gospel leads to death!

So how serious is this matter of bringing and/or believing in a false gospel? Paul does not mince his words nor resort to tender euphemisms when addressing this issue. For example, look how he chastises those in Corinth who were entertaining a false gospel:

And if there was any doubt as to how passionate Paul was in defending against all false gospels but particularly those false gospels which were synergistic (admixture of grace + works) and warning believers to guard against such, he uses some very harsh and descriptive language:

This is a perfect expression of love to those who were endangered by these "soul winners". And, as well it was a loving manner of speaking in such terms that they who were perverting the Gospel might understand the severity of God's judgment upon them.

Lastly, I am in full agreement with you in regard to how we are to treat both false pastors, elders, deacons; office bearers, and laity... both in a loving manner which does not exclude harsh words of warning and a call to repentance and faith in the true Lord Jesus Christ of the true Gospel.

Pilgrim

Thank you for your balanced and valued reply.

Being on Social media like Facebook, I often question the sincerity and honesty of some people. It is so, so difficult at times. People often forget we are dealing with the virtual world and we as believers should exercise great caution , lest we stumble and fall and we do fall. It is only be the Grace of our Lord that we are able to get up again. Facebook can also never be our "church" although some think differently.

Hello brother Chris , thank you for your reply . I am grateful to be a newbie around

God bless

Elmarie

A very warm



to our new members

Elmarie

and

Chris (The Exegete)

Great to see you here!

Thank you for the welcome

Ah Pilgrim,

I just wanted to express my thanks for your reply to my comments; I see that you are one for very specific clarity (which isn't always my strong area), and I was just appreciative that you require such pinpoint clarity: it will serve me well in the future to do likewise. Thank you brother.

You are entirely welcome. I do appreciate your kind response. There are some who think I am way too "nitpicky" and have expressed as much here on the Board. However, in my defense, if one is needed which you can read HERE I pointed out from the past that our forebearers were likewise very precise in their writings, which anyone can clearly see when reading the historic Confessions and Catechisms of the Reformed churches.

Well...
let me tell you: I thought you were being nitpicky too. I heard that you were very precise in this manner and your initial response to kme kind of caught me off guard because I expected an "atta boy!" pat on the back type thing.

then I thought about the real problem: I just didn't want to be corrected! once I realized that truth and clarity was more important than ego... pfft, it was easy to be appreciative of your response (espescially once I realized it was a biblically accurate response!). so again, thanks. :-)

I'm typing this on my android, so that's all I will type for now.