The difference between a false teacher and a heretic

[evangelist6589]

There has to be a difference but oftentimes the two are mingled together. I'd say heretics are those that teach anther gospel and or compromise the essential core doctrines of the faith, while a false teacher may just teach a false view on something. Ie Joel Osteen is a heretic, while according to my view those that teach Evangelical Conditionalism I believe to be false teachers.

Heretic
Benny Hinn
TD Jakes
Creflo Dollar

False teaching
Those that teach one has to tithe 10% in order to be right with God= legalism
Those that teach partial preterism= Hank Hanagraaf who may be a false teacher in more than one area.
Those that teach the earth to be old.

Many more examples can be given but based on the reactions from this board we all do not agree on who is a false teacher and what is false teaching, but I certainly hope we all agree on what makes one a heretic.

 

[rlvaughn]

The false teachers that Peter talked about were heretics, or teachers of heresies. See 2 Peter 2:1.

But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.

 

[Covenanter]

There has to be a difference but oftentimes the two are mingled together. I'd say heretics are those that teach anther gospel and or compromise the essential core doctrines of the faith, while a false teacher may just teach a false view on something. Ie Joel Osteen is a heretic, while according to my view those that teach Evangelical Conditionalism I believe to be false teachers.

Heretic
Benny Hinn
TD Jakes
Creflo Dollar

False teaching
Those that teach one has to tithe 10% in order to be right with God= legalism
Those that teach partial preterism= Hank Hanagraaf who may be a false teacher in more than one area.
Those that teach the earth to be old.

Many more examples can be given but based on the reactions from this board we all do not agree on who is a false teacher and what is false teaching, but I certainly hope we all agree on what makes one a heretic.

Partial Preterism is neither false teaching, nor heresy.

The most widespread false teaching among Baptists and Evangelicals is end times teaching centred on Israel, with rapture, tribulation, new temple, millennium, earthly kingdom, etc.

The simple truth of Scripture is that the present Gospel age is the millennium, and the next event of prophecy is Jesus' coming for resurrection and judgment, ushering in the NH&NE.

2 Peter 3
Note how he explains the millennium as the present Gospel age.

Edited to add:
The Lord Jesus Christ is the fulfilment of prophecy. Many thousands of Jews, including priests and Pharisees accepted the Apostolic Gospel, so forming the Church which soon included Samaritans and Gentiles as one redeemed people of God.

If present day Jews and Israelis want the promises of God, repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus.

 

[Rolfe]

Heretic
Benny Hinn
TD Jakes
Creflo Dollar

False teaching
Those that teach one has to tithe 10% in order to be right with God= legalism
Those that teach partial preterism= Hank Hanagraaf who may be a false teacher in more than one area.
Those that teach the earth to be old.

Many more examples can be given but based on the reactions from this board we all do not agree on who is a false teacher and what is false teaching, but I certainly hope we all agree on what makes one a heretic.

So which category would Non-Calvinism fit into? *laugh*

 

[JonC]

There has to be a difference but oftentimes the two are mingled together. I'd say heretics are those that teach anther gospel and or compromise the essential core doctrines of the faith, while a false teacher may just teach a false view on something. Ie Joel Osteen is a heretic, while according to my view those that teach Evangelical Conditionalism I believe to be false teachers.

Heretic
Benny Hinn
TD Jakes
Creflo Dollar

False teaching
Those that teach one has to tithe 10% in order to be right with God= legalism
Those that teach partial preterism= Hank Hanagraaf who may be a false teacher in more than one area.
Those that teach the earth to be old.

Many more examples can be given but based on the reactions from this board we all do not agree on who is a false teacher and what is false teaching, but I certainly hope we all agree on what makes one a heretic.

You are confusing differences in interpretation within orthodox Christianity with false teachings. The false teachers are heretics who teach their heresy.

 

[evangelist6589]

You are confusing differences in interpretation within orthodox Christianity with false teachings. The false teachers are heretics who teach their heresy.

Not really. KJV Onlyism is false teaching, yet not heresy since they hold to the essentials of the faith.

 

[evangelist6589]

So which category would Non-Calvinism fit into? *laugh*

Arminians affirm the essentials of the faith. But the teaching that one can lose their salvation is false.

 

[Revmitchell]

Any teaching that denies a literal future physical return of Christ is a major problem.

 

[evangelist6589]

Any teaching that denies a literal future physical return of Christ is a major problem.

That all you have to say?

 

[Yeshua1]

Any teaching that denies a literal future physical return of Christ is a major problem.

Yes, it would be teaching heresy!

 

[Yeshua1]

You are confusing differences in interpretation within orthodox Christianity with false teachings. The false teachers are heretics who teach their heresy.

The false teachers mentioned in scriptures seem to be ones teaching false doctrines/heresies, as it seems to imply a knowing rejection of the truths of scripture, and teaching contrary to it.
Others would be teaching wrongly, based upon a sincere misunderstanding of scripture truth, such as infant baptism, speaking in tongues etc.

 

[evangelist6589]

Yes, it would be teaching heresy!

Indeed so

 

[JonC]

Not really. KJV Onlyism is false teaching, yet not heresy since they hold to the essentials of the faith.

No, really (if we take a biblical stance....by this I mean if we define "false teaching" the way that Scripture defines "false teaching").

What you mean is error in doctrine/interpretation vs false teaching/heresy. And I do place KJVO in the latter group (although certainly those folk can be saved despite this error). Here is the question to ask - is their doctrine different enough that it would prevent you from uniting with them in Christ?

I could worship with an Arminian, or for that matter many non-Calvinistic Christians.

I could worship with a church that believed we give 10% and one that believes we give 100%.

I could NOT worship with a church that was KJVO (depending on how they arrived at their conclusions).

I could NOT worship with a church that altered teachings on divorce, fornication, SSM, ect. to meet their desires.

The first to I'd consider differences in interpretation (even if I considered their view error) and they are brothers. The last two I consider false teachers. False teachers are people who teach heresy.

 

[JonC]

The false teachers mentioned in scriptures seem to be ones teaching false doctrines/heresies, as it seems to imply a knowing rejection of the truths of scripture, and teaching contrary to it.
Others would be teaching wrongly, based upon a sincere misunderstanding of scripture truth, such as infant baptism, speaking in tongues etc.

I'm not sure that intent plays so much into it (because of the warning about the responsibility of teaching). I believe that most false teachers do not believe what they are teaching is false (but they have, by their teachings, rejected truths of Scripture).

 

[TCassidy]

I could worship with an Arminian, or for that matter many non-Calvinistic Christians.

If by Arminian you include one who believes you can lose your salvation, I could not worship with that person. He/she is preaching "another gospel" and I would have to separate from that person/group. "What fellowship has light with darkness?"

I could worship with a church that believed we give 10% and one that believes we give 100%.

No problem for me. I "don't let the left hand know what the right hand is doing."

I could NOT worship with a church that was KJVO (depending on how they arrived at their conclusions).

That would depend on what type of KJVO they were. If they believed that a person could only be saved if the verses that drew them to the Lord were from a KJV, or that refers to other bible versions as "perversions" or that lies (deliberately or through ignorance) regarding bible preservation and translation, then I would say no. But other, more moderate positions, I would just write off to their being untaught.

I could NOT worship with a church that altered teachings on divorce, fornication, SSM, ect. to meet their desires.

Agreed. (Although I don't know what SSM is.)

 

[Rob_BW]

I'll second the SSM question.

 

[JonC]

If by Arminian you include one who believes you can lose your salvation, I could not worship with that person. He/she is preaching "another gospel" and I would have to separate from that person/group. "What fellowship has light with darkness?"

I agree....I probably should have excluded Arminianism (I was just thinking non-Calvinism and that within the SBC).

Agreed. (Although I don't know what SSM is.)

I'll second the SSM question.

It's like a civil union between Fred and Jeff. ....bad (and something that the SBC frowns upon ).

 

[Rob_BW]

Oh, I was way off. The acronym was too close to CCM, so I was wondering which type of music would cause you to separate from a church.

 

[The Biblicist]

Unless you are speaking and writing under inspiration every teacher to some extent misrepresents or teaches things that are not true. However, for someone to be designated a false teacher their whole ministry is characterized around certain teachings that repudiate either essentials of salvation or essentials of service. Such a person is a heretic. While those basically sound in the faith can be guilty of teaching heresies but such errors do not repudiate essentials of salvation or service and their ministry is not characterized by those errors. Just my opinion.

 

[evangelist6589]

Unless you are speaking and writing under inspiration every teacher to some extent misrepresents or teaches things that are not true. However, for someone to be designated a false teacher their whole ministry is characterized around certain teachings that repudiate either essentials of salvation or essentials of service. Such a person is a heretic. While those basically sound in the faith can be guilty of teaching heresies but such errors do not repudiate essentials of salvation or service and their ministry is not characterized by those errors. Just my opinion.

So you would consider those that teach KJV Onlyism, and those Independent Baptists that teach legalism not to be false teachers or teaching error?