The “Winning” Faction may be Heretical

Because the truth remains true even if no one believes it, it does not depend on human power relationships. Therefore, it is not safe to label people "heretics" because they disagree with us concerning doctrines that were imposed on our ancestors by right of conquest or that disagree with teachings honored by political leadership or majorities today.

Nor can one safely diagnose heresy by observing which factions appear to be the “winners” and “losers” of organizational power struggles or worldly political conflicts and declaring the “losers” to be “heretics.” The “winning” army may even succeed in exterminating the “losing” faction, and still be wrong. Factions that “win” power struggles and come out of them with the temporary ability to dominate, excommunicate or even execute dissenters sometimes are totally wrong, while the factions that “lose” such struggles sometimes are right. God’s Kingdom works on principles opposite those of the world.

            Scriptural examples of “winning” factions that were in the wrong include the faction which followed Diotrephes, criticized in 3 John. Diotrephes had power to excommunicate those who disagreed with him from his local church, but he was an heretic and they were not. Diotrephes’ name is, in fact, enshrined in Scripture as the most notable example of a church leader who abused his authority, the prime example of what to avoid. Scriptural examples of “losing,” minority factions who were right also include nearly all of the Old Testament prophets. Of particular note are Elijah, who was assured by God that there were (only!) 7,000 in Israel who had not bowed the knee to Baal; Micaiah son of Imlah, who presented a true warning to Kings Jehoshaphat and Ahab and was ignored after all the other prophets had presented them a lying but favorable message; Jeremiah, whose warnings were consistently ignored by King Josiah’s successors; and Ezekiel, who was told to persevere in preaching his message even though all of the people would ignore him.

            Therefore, we are not justified in insisting that, merely because a king who belonged to a particular church organization won a military battle that put the nation or continent from which our ancestors came under the political domination of that church organization, all of the doctrines of that organization must have been correct. Nor can we properly say that any deviation from such a doctrinal position imposed by right of conquest constitutes a “heresy.” Moreover, simply because a particular doctrine “wins” in a more majoritarian political contest in a modern denominational organization does not necessarily make it correct or render all dissenters “heretics.” (Recall that all of the other duly recognized “prophets” told Micaiah to follow them in giving a false but favorable report to the two kings.)  Truth remains true even if no one believes it.

NEXT (for now): What About Church Discipline?