Reading John Locke again is very interesting, and while I disagree with certain aspects of his reasoning, I would like to focus on his final chapter in the letters of Toleration. The chapter on Heresy and Schism is a very interesting one indeed. Locke provides a definition of heresy that I don't agree with and leads to somewhat of a cringe when reading the rest of the passage. He defines heresy as follows:
"From this it follows that heresy is a split in ecclesiastical communion between men who have the same religion but differ on some doctrine that isn't contained in the rule that defines the religion." and further says "...among those who recognize only the Holy Scriptures as their rule of faith, heresy is a split in their Christian communion concerning doctrines that aren't explicitly contained in Scripture."
(pg. 28).
If I understand Locke, he is saying that heresy is the split between two men within the same religion who differ in a doctrine that doesn't define the religion. I can't agree with this, and would argue that some heretics are guilty of denying essential truths of Scripture and are guilty of rejecting the foundational truths of God's Word. Mainly Arius comes to mind. Denying the equal deity of the Trinity is a serious offense to Christianity and the Gospel itself. Contrary to Arius's claims, Christ was not created, and Scripture clearly teaches that he has always existed. John 1 clearly defends the deity of Christ and disproves and argument that he is a created being or in any way lesser than the Father. Athanasius faithfully argued against the Arian claims that Christ was a created being, and at one point did not exist. I may have misunderstood Locke, but this is foundational teaching. Heresies are serious, and not to be taken lightly. Some heresies are easy to trip and fall into when discussing very important topics in Scripture, such as the Trinity, but they are important to be aware of. At the rise of heresy, we see great productions of biblical teaching to defend the Christian faith and rebuke the critical doctrinal error.
As for secondary and tertiary issues, I won't scream at or deny the true conversion of other Christians who are: Calvinist, Arminian, Cessationist, Continuationist, Credo Baptist (Who are totally right haha), Paedobaptist, or any other minor doctrine. They do however affect your view of God, and I would encourage everyone to surrender to the Scriptures and seek only for the truth found in them. If you are genuinely diving into God's Word constantly and convicted by the Holy Spirit in your beliefs that don't contradict Scripture, then I will rejoice with you and have great faith that your theology will slowly be shaped by Scripture and the Holy Spirit to conform to the truth. The Apostle Paul wrote to Timothy, "All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work." 2 Tim. 3:16-17 ESV.
I commented on the posts of Gray and AnnaKate
"From this it follows that heresy is a split in ecclesiastical communion between men who have the same religion but differ on some doctrine that isn't contained in the rule that defines the religion." and further says "...among those who recognize only the Holy Scriptures as their rule of faith, heresy is a split in their Christian communion concerning doctrines that aren't explicitly contained in Scripture."
(pg. 28).
If I understand Locke, he is saying that heresy is the split between two men within the same religion who differ in a doctrine that doesn't define the religion. I can't agree with this, and would argue that some heretics are guilty of denying essential truths of Scripture and are guilty of rejecting the foundational truths of God's Word. Mainly Arius comes to mind. Denying the equal deity of the Trinity is a serious offense to Christianity and the Gospel itself. Contrary to Arius's claims, Christ was not created, and Scripture clearly teaches that he has always existed. John 1 clearly defends the deity of Christ and disproves and argument that he is a created being or in any way lesser than the Father. Athanasius faithfully argued against the Arian claims that Christ was a created being, and at one point did not exist. I may have misunderstood Locke, but this is foundational teaching. Heresies are serious, and not to be taken lightly. Some heresies are easy to trip and fall into when discussing very important topics in Scripture, such as the Trinity, but they are important to be aware of. At the rise of heresy, we see great productions of biblical teaching to defend the Christian faith and rebuke the critical doctrinal error.
As for secondary and tertiary issues, I won't scream at or deny the true conversion of other Christians who are: Calvinist, Arminian, Cessationist, Continuationist, Credo Baptist (Who are totally right haha), Paedobaptist, or any other minor doctrine. They do however affect your view of God, and I would encourage everyone to surrender to the Scriptures and seek only for the truth found in them. If you are genuinely diving into God's Word constantly and convicted by the Holy Spirit in your beliefs that don't contradict Scripture, then I will rejoice with you and have great faith that your theology will slowly be shaped by Scripture and the Holy Spirit to conform to the truth. The Apostle Paul wrote to Timothy, "All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work." 2 Tim. 3:16-17 ESV.
I commented on the posts of Gray and AnnaKate
Comments