This is something I have been thinking about recently, and I would like some help from my readers. The question is:
The various early church councils, especially the ecumenical ones, took a stand on various positions, contra Arianism, Pelagianism etc. On top of that, they pronounce anathema on adherents of the various heresies. Now, since their position is biblical, and they were written and signed by the elders, bishops, pastors etc. of the early church to be made binding on all Christians, to what extent are their judgments authoritative for us now?
What I mean by this questions is this: As Christians, are we to follow the judgments of these councils, since their position is bilbical (as opposed to something like the Council of Trent which is unbiblical)? Since these early church leaders unaminously pass judgment on all who follow these heresies, are we to follow their lead and anathemize all who follow those same heresies, i.e. Arianism, Sabellianism, Gnosticism, Pelagianism, monothelitism, monophysitism etc.? I mean, after all, these judgments were pronounced by elders, pastors, and bishops, as an expression of the universal and visible Church of Christ at a certain period in history! As an application, are we at liberty to anathemize T. D. Jakes unless he repents of his false Gospel?
Do think about this, tell me your answer, and why you think your position is correct according to the Scriptures.
7 comments:
Dear Daniel, I have given you my opinion in my latest blog post. See you soon.
Vincent has gave a reply in this post (http://vivavoxdei.blogspot.com/2007/05/transcending-anathemas.html) of his. Hmmm, interesting.
Dear Daniel,
I am very glad that the Lord is leading you to address this question. Frankly, I have been very concerned about most of things you write in your blog especially when you go around declaring so and so a heretic. Now, I understand why are doing but I hope you will restrain yourself from witch-hunting. Its no good for your spiritual life as this will affect the way you see others, you will make enemies unnecessarily. Bro. Vincent has given you a very good answer to your question. I hope your blog can be more edifying (implies that I did not find your blog very edifying). Brother, channel your energy to building up the church of God.
Coming out from a purpose driven, man centered paradigm, I believe Daniel had been very discouraged by all those past experience. I appreciate Daniel’s ability to discern the times, and his flare in repudiating the false teachings that are so inherent in today’s contemporary Christendom. To his credit, he minces no words, and is not fearful of expressing his views. May some of your writings lead some blind sheep away from the slope to perdition.
PS: Er ... brother, where is my comment before this one?
Thanks Vincent. So far, ONLY Vincent has dealt with the issue. The rest just seem to be interested in sniping from the comforts of their ivory towers...
Er ... got typo. "Flair," not "flare." But perhaps "Flare" is a better word. Merriam Webster says: Flare: A sudden outburst. :)
Please read the latest entry of teampyro "why join the church".
No one here is "sniping from the comforts of their ivory towers". Problem is, are you? What is your relationship like with your local church? The judgments of the early church councils, were still at end of the day from "councils" - not just from "lone rangers".
So far, you have attacked quite a few issues/people, but is it in the context of your local church?
Post a Comment