Heretic

Over time, words rot. One word that has grown increasingly rotten is the word “evangelical.” In recent time, an evangelical can believe that God is still growing (Open Theism), that there is no hell (either annihilationism or universalism), that Paul did not have a concrete theology of justification (New Perspectivism or New Paulinism), that abortion is permissible (plain paganism), that homosexuality is laudable (hedonism) and that God’s love trumps his hatred for sin (idolatry).

I believe it is time to resurrect an old term – heretic. It has not been used nearly enough in our century. In an age of syncretistic pluralism, we are loathe to label Tony Campolo (who supports homosexuality and does not believe in an eternal hell), Joel Olsteen (who espouses a prosperity gospel gilded with Norman Vincent Peale positive thinking), Brian McClaren (who also does not believe in hell and who believes that you can be a fully justified Buddhist who loves Christ as if He were religious garnish), Benny Hinn (not a lot to be said) or Kenneth Copeland (even less to be said) heretics.

There is something missing in the current American expression of Christianity. The division between acceptable teachers and those that distort truth has become blurred. I guess that no one wants to be known for only those things (or people) that they stand against. In the paraphrased words of Ravi Zacharias, ‘He who slings mud loses lots of ground.’

I still find it somewhat tragic that there are no guides to help Christians discern between wolves and sheep. The greatest gift that my Baptist liberal arts education gave me was to help me pick the good writers out from among the sea of bad writers.

The word “heretic” is still powerful and has yet to lose its sting. I hope for its resurrection.