George's original post said that heresy is opposition to "sound Biblical doctrine". I agree with this, but I asked George "Who gets to authoritatively decide what is sound Biblical Doctrine?". His response was:
Quote:
Ultimately I do, since if I don't, someone else is going to decide for me (that's the whole purpose of "studying" the word of God and seeking God's "approval" for "rightly dividing" His word.).
But I don't do these things in a vacuum or on my own, and I don't depend on "schooling"; or professional "scribes" & "scholars"; or even my own intellect. I seek out God's mind on all the issues of life (through His Holy Scriptures - which I have in my hands) and believe what is written in the Bible and act on those things that I learn from it.
|
George said "Ultimately I do", but I think he meant that in a personal sense and not a global sense (i.e. I don't think he meant that he gets to decide authoritatively for everyone else). The problem with this response is that it doesn't answer the question. I asked: who gets to
authoritatively decide what is sound Biblical Doctrine? If George ultimately does for himself (even though he seeks out God's mind in the process) while someone else decides for themselves (who also seeks out God's mind in the process) but comes to a different conclusion, neither is authoritative. Both can call each other heretics, and neither can disprove the charge of heresy against themselves.
George's original post was good on the surface, but once thought through it implies that everyone should call everyone else a heretick at some point (unless they can demonstrate they are truly in 100% agreement on every single point of doctrine), and that even when doing so it's just a chaotic, unauthoritative mess. It's nothing but a source and excuse for schism (1 Cor 12:24) and division (Rom 16:17, 1 Cor 1:10, 1 Cor 3:3, etc.).