Theology in the Raw - Bonus Q&A: What is heresy? Marriage without kids, Campus protests, Original sin, Why I'm not Catholic/Orthodox, and much more

Starting point is 00:00:00 Hey friends, welcome back to another bonus episode of theology in the raw. This is where I field a bunch of questions sent in from my Patreon supporters. And I do my best to address as many as I can. Some of which you're going to be able to listen in on here in this short snippet of this bonus episode. Some of the questions I'm going to wrestle with are what do I think constitutes heresy versus bad or wrong beliefs about God? Is it wrong for someone to get married who doesn't to any other questions I'm going to wrestle with. If you want to become a Patreon supporter, you can go to patreon.com forward slash theology and raw support the show for as little as five bucks a month. And then you get access to the, for instance, the full length version of this Q and a episode, you get access, a certain tier levels, get access to a monthly zoom chats.

Starting point is 00:00:58 Also the ability to ask questions and just, we just, there's just a lot of other stuff that goes on in the theology and around community. So if you want to be part of that community, patreon.com forward slash theology in the raw, really, really appreciate all of my many supporters for this podcast. Another couple of quick announcements is I'm going to be much, much more active on my newsletter. We've had a newsletter. It goes out all the time. Typically it's kind of telling people about different happenings at theology and ra. But now I'm going to start to thoughts on paper, original thoughts that are only going to exist on the newsletter. So I would encourage you to sign up for that if you want, if you want a dangerous window inside of my head.

Starting point is 00:01:30 So just go to theology, raw.com. You'll get a pop-up. It's sort of somewhere you can sign up for the newsletter, encourage you to do that. Also the exiles conference, October, the next week, the next week, the next week, the next week, the next week, the next week, the next week, the next week, the next week, go to theology, raw.com. You'll get a pop up. It's sort of somewhere. You can sign up for the newsletter, encourage you to do that. Also the exiles conference, October 4th and 5th in Denver, Colorado, my friends in Denver said it's not in Denver. It said actually in Parker, Colorado, it's in the Denver general area. So I'm just

Starting point is 00:02:00 going to say Denver for those of you who are not in Denver, but yeah, so stoked about this. It's a shorter two-day conference. We're going to talk about discipleship and an election year. We're talking about sexuality in a post purity culture church. That one's going to be fun. And then propaganda, fake news, and what does healthy media consumption look like? Lots of great speakers who are going to be there, including, I mean, gosh, I can't even list them all, but I, I, Derwin Gray is going to be there. Russell Moore, Christine Emba, Rachel Joy Welcher, and Patrick Miller, many, many others.

Starting point is 00:02:32 So check it out again. All the info is at a theology and rod.com. So let's dive in to some of your critics define heresy differently. What do you think constitutes heresy versus bad raw or wrong beliefs in God? I honestly don't know how to answer this question. I, so, well, I, so I Googled around, so what, what is, is there like a textbook definition of heresy and am I on the wrong side of that definition? So I just looked up a few different definitions here. So Miriam Webster says that heresy is adherence to a religious opinion contrary to church dogma already. I was like, which church and which dogma? Yeah. I mean, say there's like maybe a denomination that holds

Starting point is 00:03:37 to our, here are the core beliefs that to be part of this denomination, you need to believe that that makes more sense. That might, that might be those churches dog buzz dogma or maybe, you know, the Catholic church, you take the big, big, like a big or Orthodox church. Maybe they have a set of beliefs that to be Catholic, you have to believe in these kind of bare things. Otherwise you can't be Catholic. The problem is as a evangelical Protestant, do we have it? I mean, the Protestant church doesn't it's such a kind of a vast diversity of churches and denominations and beliefs that there is no like unifying dogma is there that unites all Protestants. If there is,

Starting point is 00:04:18 I don't think I've violated any of those. A second definition given in Miriam Webster is a descent or deviation from a dominant theory opinion or practice. Well, which what constitutes a dominant theory within the Protestant church? Yeah. So I looked at Wiki. I, I, sometimes I look at Wiki and you know, it can be hit and miss. I mean, it's just kind of, you know, whoever wants to say stuff on there. But wiki says that heresy is any belief or theory that is strongly at variance with established beliefs or customs, particularly the accepted beliefs or religious law of a religious organization. The heretic is a proponent of heresy. That's so, that's kind of dumb. Obviously the heretic is a proponent of heresy, but what is heresy? I guess they kind of defined it a little bit. Heresy and Christianity, Judaism and Islam has at times been met with censure ranging from excommunication to the

Starting point is 00:05:13 death penalty. Ooh, yeah. Heresy is distinct from apostasy, which is the explicit renunciation of one's religion principles or cause and from blasphemy, which is an impious utterance or action concerning God or sacred things. So yeah, I don't know like what constitutes the church dogma that somebody would have to publicly disagree with in order to be a formal heritage. I think that that's, that's a tough question. Some people just kind of, you know, punt to the early church creeds like, all right, if you violate the Nicene creed on some level, if you violate the apostles creed, maybe Cal Sedonian creed, that this would constitute

Starting point is 00:05:55 heresy. I think that's a good default fallback, you know, but even the creeds weren't written in a vacuum. Like they were responding to certain theological crises in the church at that time, which is why, you know, some people like to point out that the early church creeds don't even have a statement on marriage. So any view of marriage kind of goes because the early church didn't have a statement that that'd be one, that'd be one way to look at it. The other way to look at it would be, well, even the quote unquote heretics that were being denounced by these creeds, even the heretics believed in what we would call it kind of historically Christian view of

Starting point is 00:06:38 marriage and marriages between a man and women. So there was no need to put this in the early church creeds because they weren't under dispute at that time or, you know, definitions of marriage were under dispute. So, so yes, I think it's creeds is a good kind of default. Like if somebody's violating, it is disbelieving something in the creeds that, that, that might be one criteria on for, uh, what, what would be a heretic, but again, they're responding to things in their own day and age that we might be responding to different things in our day and age. You could go on like historical consensus, but then again, are we talking about the Western

Starting point is 00:07:16 church, the Eastern church, Catholic church, Protestant church, you know, even if they, you know, Protestant Christianity is so fractured with so many denominations, it's like, you almost have to say, what's denomination do you belong to within the Protestant church and, and maybe violating the norms of the established kind of doctrines of that denomination would constitute a heretic, I guess, but I guess, so does that not apply to me? Cause I'm not part of a denomination. So that's, that's tough. Or even like Protestants, like it's, it's interesting. I mean, Protestants like, like the, for 1500 years, there was kind of one main view of baptism, right? Like hoping of like believers, baptism or credo baptism. I think that wasn't like that would

Starting point is 00:08:01 have been viewed as a, I think I heretical teaching for most of church history. But it's allowed in some circles and Protestantism even there. I mean, wasn't didn't some Protestants kill other Protestants because they were baptizing believers and not not infants. So, so even when you go to like the scriptures, well, if it's, if it's part of the gospel, then it's any disability part of the gospel, then it's a hair, it's heresy. But then I see people smuggle in all kinds of stuff and what they believe is part of the gospel, like age of the year, or I guess in my case, you know, whether you think same-sex attraction is a morally culpable sin that people need to repent from, even if they are living a chaste life in terms

Starting point is 00:08:39 of their sexual desires and their sexual behavior. It's like, well, not now. We're like, we're splitting. We're getting way down deep into that really important issues. But it's not like these were like part of church dogma of any denomination that I, that I know, unless it's like kind of a recent kind of shift or whatever. So in the new Testament, the term for heresy, I know there's a Greek word, hereticon. I think it's, I think it's, oh, I should have wrote this down. I think it's Titus 3.1. But oftentimes when you see language like heresy used in the New Testament, it often has to do with people stirring up factions and divisions in the church. Yes, they might be promoting unorthodox kind of beliefs, primarily unorthodox kind of living, like they're like

Starting point is 00:09:25 they're engaging in sexual immorality, teaching others to engage or help, you know, encouraging others to engage in sexual morality. There's probably a lot of greed and, and addiction to wealth that's kind of wrapped up, but then they're also like stirring up factions with the church. So I think that if we're going to speak from the new Testament, I think we would need to factor that in. So I honestly, I don't, I, in light of everything I'm saying, I think it's just so messy. This is why I think I just rarely throw around the term heresy. And yeah, I do think it can be used by some people to describe people they simply disagree with when their use of heresy would not be recognized with kind of the way that word

Starting point is 00:10:04 is used in the historic church. All right, next question. This is from an anonymous question asker says, is it wrong for someone to get married who doesn't want kids? Does this desire for only non-procreative sex violate God's design for marriage and sexuality? This is a great question. And I don't have a black and white dogmatic firm opinion. I do have some strong leanings and my leanings have shifted over the years. I would say for most of my Christian life, I have just taken for granted that sex and procreation because we can separate the two nowadays, especially nowadays, that it's fine that we separate the two. That's a very kind of Protestant, not that all Protestants think this way, but, uh, this would depart from,

Starting point is 00:11:01 uh, the Catholic church. And I think the Orthodox Church, Don, I don't know enough about the Orthodox Church, that said, no, we shouldn't be separating sex acts or sex relationships from their procreative design. I'm leaning more towards that latter perspective. That's, so in this sense, more of a Catholic perspective on, on marriage and sex. I do think Catholics do some of the, some of the best work when it comes to theology of, of the body, theology of marriage, theology of sexuality. They just, they've been thinking

Starting point is 00:11:36 about this in a more robust way for a long time. And here's where we do have some dogmas within the Catholic church that I think are, are, are worth considering. How's that from my vantage point, sex is designed to take place within the covenant of a marriage. And when I say marriage, I mean a one flesh union between a male and a female that's intended for life. Doesn't mean every sex act will lead to procreation or even should lead to procreation, but the marriage itself has a procreative design built into it. And so obviously in a fallen world, you have things like infertility, you have miscarriages, you know, so, so there's various things in a fallen world where this procreative relationship might not actually result in procreation, but it still does have a procreative orientation to it, a procreative design built into the very structure of the marriage.

Starting point is 00:12:43 I'm trying to think of an analogy off the top of the head off the top of my head, but as you get in trouble when I do that. So let's go with it. Just because you show up to a baseball field with a baseball bat and a glove, some cleats like that doesn't mean you're going to score. Is this getting too cheesy? Okay. But the, the design of the bat that you're using is to hit the ball. The design of the glove is to catch the ball. The design of the cleats is to run around the, like there's a design here, but you might lose a game one nil one nothing. So you, well, you didn't score. Well, yeah, but there's a design built into the things

Starting point is 00:13:23 you brought to the game. I'd be careful here. Whereas if I showed up to a baseball field with, you know, a football helmet, football pads, and then I didn't score. It's like, well, hold on. Like you didn't even follow the design of the game. Yeah. I'm going to, yeah. Take, take that for what it will. I think there's something there. Maybe, maybe I might need to massage that illustration a little bit to make it make more sense. But, uh, so that, yeah. So I think a marriage can have the procreative design built into the very structure of the marriage does not mean it's always going to result in procreation. All that to say, if somebody said, I want to get here, here's, here's where I'm at and take this. This is me thinking through the

Starting point is 00:14:02 theology of this. And again, these are very personal questions that I just want to be sensitive to. I would say this, if somebody says I am called to marriage, but God is not calling me to try infertility, things that are outside of our control. I'm saying things that are within your control. Now, somebody could say, well, we're going to adopt kids. So we're going to forego having a child. And I'm not even talking about that. I'm talking about the fact that you're not even talking about having a child. And I'm not even talking about that. I'm talking about the fact that you're not even talking about having a child. And I'm not even talking about that. I'm not even talking about that. I'm saying things that are within your control. Now, somebody could say, well, we're going to adopt kids. Um, so we're going to forego having our own biological kids at that. I, I've still not, I'm still thinking through that one.

Starting point is 00:14:51 That would at least has kids built into the plan for marriage. Um, what I don't want to do is assume marriage is simply a romantic sexual commitment between two people who fall in love. Like to me that that's, that's, that's not, I'm not saying that's wrong. I don't want to do is assume marriage is simply a romantic sexual commitment between two people who fall in love. Like to me that that's, that's, that's not, I'm not saying that's wrong. It's, it's, it's that part of that. But I mean, they're the theology of marriage goes, goes much deeper than simply like each other. We want to live together. We want to have sex, you know, in a good point. I think that's a good point. I think that's a good point. I think that's a good point. I think that's a good point. I think that's a good

Starting point is 00:15:28 point. I think that's a good point. I think that's a good point. I think that's a good point. I think that's a good point. I think that's a good point. I think that's a good point. I think that's a good point. I think that's a good point. I think that's a good point. I think that's a good point. I think that's a good point. I think that's a good is a robust theology of marriage that could justify deliberately going against a significant part of the design of marriage. And if there is a robust argument, then wrestle with it. I just, from my vantage point, again, that's the way I'd word it. I'd say the burden of proof would rest on the person saying we're called up marriage, but not to have kids. Hey friends, if theology in Iran has blessed or challenged you in any significant way,

Starting point is 00:16:09 would you consider supporting the show financially? You can do so through Patreon at patreon.com forward slash theology in the raw. All the information is in the show notes. You can support the show for as little as five bucks a month. And in doing so, you get access to all kinds of different premium content. And most of all, you just get access to the theology in the raw community. We have all kinds of awesome chats and messages back and forth. And it just, it means the world to us that you support the show.

Starting point is 00:16:34 As the show has grown, so have all the expenses and all the work that goes into pulling it off. So again, if you would like to support the show, you can go to patreon.com forward slash theology raw. And I just want to thank my, uh, the people that are already supporting the show. Thank you so much for keeping this show, not only going, but also thriving. So patreon.com forward slash theology and rock. Woody wants to know what are the main reasons I am not Catholic or Orthodox. This was, I'm like, Oh, I'm going to go with this one. I'm like, Oh, I'm going to go with this one. I'm like, Oh, I'm going to go with this one. I'm like, Oh, I'm going to go with this one. I'm like, Oh, I'm going to go with this one. I'm like, Oh, I'm going to go with this one.

Starting point is 00:17:15 I'm like, Oh, I'm going to go with this one. I'm like, Oh, I'm going to go with this one. I'm like, Oh, I'm going to go with this one. I'm like, Oh, I'm going to go with this one. I'm like, Oh, I'm going to go with this one. I'm in. Some of you aren't going to like that response. Like, no, you're, you need to be deliberately against these brands of Christianity. I'm like, yeah, okay. We'll get there. But I'll get to some critiques. But I mean, at the end of the day, if I was raised in an Orthodox family, say I was born in Greece, my parents are Greek and we went to Greek church every Sunday. I most likely would probably be Greek Orthodox, right? Same thing. I was born in a Catholic family and then not that people can't leave their faith traditions, but there's a good likelihood. If I did stay in Christianity,

Starting point is 00:17:55 I would probably stay in the faith, the brand of Christianity that I was raised in. So the fact, I just, I've, I don't think I've ever even been to mass. I've been inside of a Orthodox and Catholic church in the sense, you know, I travel, when you go to Europe, you just see those most beautiful churches ever. So you go inside and sometimes there's services and stuff. So in that sense, I've, I've been in, you know, I've seen services sort of, but I mean, it's just, it's not the tradition I was raised in. So, and also I, I don't feel like I have a great understanding of all the ins and outs of Catholic and, or Orthodox teaching. I've had people in the podcasts, you know, for you to help, um, inform me on that. And whenever they do, I do find

Starting point is 00:18:35 a lot more beauty in these traditions than I normally have growing up. Um, especially, I would say, especially the Orthodox church of the two, man, there's the Eastern Orthodox Church. There's a lot of things I do resonate with. But again, I'm very naive in the teaching and beliefs and practices of the church. So because of my lack of knowledge, I can't say, oh, I'm all in, I'm all for it. That, I'm not, I'm not, I'm not, I'm not, I'm not, I'm not, I'm not, I'm not, I'm not, I'm not, I'm not, I'm not, I'm not, I'm not, I'm not, I'm not, I'm not, I'm not, I'm not, I'm not, I'm not, I'm not, I'm not, I'm not, I'm not, I'm not, I'm not, I'm not, I'm not, I'm not, I'm not, I'm not, I'm not, I'm not, I'm not, I'm not, I'm not,

Starting point is 00:19:22 I'm not, I'm not, I'm not, I'm not, I'm not, I'm not, I'm not, I'm not, I'm not, I would need, that would be a big, a big shifts. Not, not that couldn't make it, but it sounds even as I think about it, it just sounds kind of almost overwhelming with all the things that are going on in life. But I would say, okay, let's say some of the teachings that I might not resonate with. And I know some of you are going to eye roll this one. Those of you, especially in these faith in these different traditions, but solarura. Okay. Hold on before you throw things at me. I'm well aware that the Catholic church and the Eastern church, you know, derives their teachings from the Bible, that they teach from the Bible, that especially the leaders in the church know the scriptures

Starting point is 00:20:01 and some of the best commentaries I know are written by Catholic scholars. Joseph Fitzmeyer's commentary on Romans is outstanding. And there's other Catholic scholars. I can't think of right now. Luke Timothy Johnson, I believe is any Catholic has written some really great commentaries. And I benefit from Catholic scholarship very, very much. So the whole, you know, assumption growing up, they're like, Oh, Catholics just believe in tradition. It's the Protestants that actually believe the Bible. Like I know that that's not true. And I also know that Protestants who follow scripture solar scripture also have traditions that shape their understanding of scripture. So, so I understand you can't, it's hard to separate scripture from tradition. It is very, the very, it's tradition that produced

Starting point is 00:20:45 the Canon, you know, and even gives us the orthodox, the doctrines is going back to earlier point that the very things we consider like core doctrines of the faith, you know, the Nicene Creed and so on, like that came from tradition, right? Obviously interactive with scripture. So I guess, I guess what I mean is like, I, and I don't even, yeah, I guess as a Bible scholar, teacher, person, like I, I do like the freedom of, I do like the freedom of being able to go the text leads, even if it disagrees with tradition. So, so, so for instance, like the Catholic church, I think, correct me if I'm wrong, holds pretty firmly to eternal, an eternal conscious torment via of hell. That's okay. That's fine. A lot of presidency too, but like, I just don't,

Starting point is 00:21:33 I see the based on many, many passages in scripture and doing Greek word studies on like Appalooja and other, you know, I only us and, and, and other significant Greek words like come to the, I come to the conclusion that I don't think eternal conscious torment is the best understanding biblically speaking of, of hell. So what do I do? So the Catholic church, well, that's what we believe. So just got to believe it. I'm not even saying that's the accurate summary of the Catholic church. Maybe some people are saying, well, that is the church dogma, but you're free to disagree with that. If that's true, then I can kind of live with that. Or something like just word theory was very much born out of Augustine,

Starting point is 00:22:14 right? And it's very much kind of a historic Catholic teaching, which I don't agree with. The Catholic Church seems to be pretty anti-reformed, which I would be more, you know, mildly reformed, especially my soteriology and other aspects of the faith. And I'm again, fine being around non-reformed people, you know, whatever. But like, if it was like a dogma, like if you're a reform, you just can't be Catholic. I'm like, I see, I want the freedom to be able to be reformed if I want to be, if the scriptures are leading me more in that direction in my reform, so I don't scare too many of you. I might reform quote unquote commitment as many footnotes to it, which I've, I've blogged about elsewhere. So

Starting point is 00:22:54 the priesthood of all believers I do see in scripture. And again, maybe I'm misunderstanding the Catholic teaching on this, but it seems that the role the priest plays in the ecclesiological rhythms, I might have some issues with the role of Mary. I'm having some mixed feelings about that though, because the more I understand what the Catholic church actually teaches, it's, it's not, it doesn't seem to be just, Oh, they idolize Mary. They worship Mary, Mary. They feel Mary like not God, but when I hear Catholic actual Catholics articulate the beautiful role that Mary has in a theology, it's like, Oh, that's way more nuanced. And I'm using the word nuance, according to the Catholic church.

Starting point is 00:23:34 And I'm not going to worship somebody who's not God. But when I hear Catholic, actual Catholics articulate the beautiful role that Mary has in a theology, it's like, Oh, that's way more nuanced. And I'm using the word nuance able to do that. I'm not going to be able to do that. I'm not going to be able to do that. I'm not going to be able to do that. I'm not going to be able to do that. I'm not going to be able to do that. I'm not going to be able to do that. I'm not going to be able to do that. I'm not going to be able to do that. I'm not going to be able to do that. I'm not going to be able to do that. I'm not going to be able to do that. I'm not going to be able to do that. I'm not going to be able to do that. I'm not going to be able to do that. I'm not going to be able to do that. I'm not going

Starting point is 00:24:03 to be able to do that. I'm not going to be able to do that. I'm not going to be able to do that. I'm not going to be got some disagreements, I think, but I would want to really understand it. Are my disagreements, am I actually disagreeing with what the Catholic church and Eastern church is, is actually believing? But again, of the two, I think I would lean more on the East Eastern side of things. Ryan T wants to know, do I hold to the Western doctrine of original sin or the Eastern idea that we're born of the essence of God and therefore are born good and why I, again, I don't have a firm understanding of the Eastern teaching on this. I did that the last time I had, I'm blinking on her name now, but, uh, an Eastern theologian on the podcast about six

Starting point is 00:24:45 months ago or so, man, again, every time I talk to people in these traditions that I'm not familiar with, they correct a lot of my misunderstand, my miss my assumptions, but, but from what I understand, yeah, the Eastern idea kind of rejects the idea of any kind of like original sand or even like the fall, fallen nature, all these things. Yeah, I would hold to some form of the Western doctrine of original sin. I do think there are, there isn't one monolithic view of this in the Western church. There's different versions of, even for instance, how the sin of Adam is kind of transmitted to all humanity. There's been some misunderstanding, I think on the, the, the Greek words in Romans

Starting point is 00:25:33 five 12 on this, uh, in whom all sinned or because all sinned. Um, uh, I, you know, when I read passages like Ephesians two and Paul's use of the word, uh, sarks, the Greek word sarks translated flesh Ephesians to, uh, we're dead in our trespasses and sins. I think this, the, the kind of Western idea of being like total depravity being part of our human nature. I do see that in scripture. Ezekiel 36 and 37 valley of dry bones. When God breathed life into us that we were spiritually dead, not sick, but dead. So here's my reform. I guess leanings come out. So yeah, though the whole kind of reform Western understanding of total depravity, I do see in scripture. Paul seems to have a, a very pessimistic anthropology in that sense. Now I don't think that mutually excludes

Starting point is 00:26:32 us also bearing God's image being the pinnacle of God's delight of, of being valuable in God's eyes, because if we're not valuable in God's eyes, if we're not, if we're worthless creatures, you know, just worms. And what does that say about the price that God paid to redeem us? If we're, if we're on sale, if we're, you know, a thrift store commodity, then, you know, what does that say about the blood of Jesus? The price God paid to reconcile us to himself. So I think, I think we're extremely valuable. We bear God's image. We're delightful in His eyes. We have the spark of the divine in us by virtue of bearing His image. Sorry, I keep saying bearing His image. I apologize. By being in God's image. Yeah, that's where I'm at. You know, this is a theological

Starting point is 00:27:19 question I haven't wrestled with super extensively, but that I guess that's the briefest summary I can give of where I'm at. Brody wants to know, is it biblical to have different denominations? Should we be concerned with putting manmade prefixes before our faith? Baptist, Methodist, Presbyterian that that's me. I didn't know it's not not Brody. Yeah. I, you know, the term biblical stuff, like, are we saying it's our denominations prescribed in the Bible or described in the Bible or do we, or we would go so far as to say denominations go against a new Testament ecclesiology. I certainly like, so what it was biblical means certainly denom, certainly different denominations aren't

Starting point is 00:28:05 contained in the Bible. You don't see Baptist, Methodist, and Presbyterians, and Anglicans in the New Testament. I don't think the New Testament prohibits denominations. That doesn't mean they're there for the world. Hey friends, I hope you enjoyed this portion of the Patreon Only Q&A podcast. If you would like to listen to the full-length episode and receive other bonus content like monthly podcasts, opportunities to ask questions, access to first drafts of my research and monthly Zoom chats and more, then please head over to patreon.com forward slash theology in the raw to join theology in the raw's patreon community. That's patreon.com forward slash theology in the raw. This show is part of the Converge Podcast Network.

Theology in the Raw - Bonus Q&A: What is heresy? Marriage without kids, Campus protests, Original sin, Why I'm not Catholic/Orthodox, and much more

There aren't comments yet for this episode. Click on any sentence in the transcript to leave a comment.