Word Studies in the Bible
By E. M. Zerr
[Page 11] |
HERESY - FACTION
This heading is selected by request. The second word does not occur in the text of the English version. It is recognized in one definition of the first word, or at least in one form of that word. Hence I can use the suggestion made to me and still be in the classification adopted for this column. This is from HAIRESIS which Thayer defines as follows: "Act of taking, capture; choosing, choice; that which is chosen; chosen opinion, tenet; heresy; a sect or party; dimensions." In Titus 3: 10 Paul uses the word "heretick" which is from HAIRETIKOS. Thayer defines it, "fitted or able to take or choose; schismatic, factious." I have examined a number of other lexicons which give substantially the same definition as Thayer.
Since "sect" is a part of the definitions cited above, and is also a word used in the English version of the New Testament, it occurred to me to see what I could learn from the lexicons. I was interested in finding that it is from the same original as the word in our heading. Hence whatever would be said of one by way of comment might justly be said of the other.
The reader has doubtless noticed that the beginning of the definition stresses the idea of taking or accepting something with the motive of choice. This is a general view of the subject, and when taken
[Page 12] |
In Acts 24: 14 Paul says, "after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers." In the same book, 28: 22, Paul was talking to some Jews about his situation. In their reply they made the following statement: "Concerning this sect [meaning the Christians], we know that every where it is spoken against." In both of these passages just cited our heading word is used in a way which could be truly thought of in a complimentary manner. The point here is that the words under consideration cannot justly be fastened upon any disciple or group of disciples as a stigma without further information. Such a use of them is almost crass if not slanderous.
The basic meaning of heresy is in the word "choice." If a man adopts and/or advocates a certain doctrine merely because it suits his personal fancy or choice, regardless of whether he is considering any authoritative origin for the doctrine, then it becomes a heresy in the bad sense. By the same token he could be called a heretick. And the mere fact of his holding such a doctrine would make him guilty of being factious. If he pushes his notions to the extent of influencing others to accept them so that they form a group, such group should be regarded as a faction. The faithful brethren must then exercise discipline against them, and after the first and second admonition they must be excluded. (Titus 3:10.)
Coming back to the fundamental meaning of heresy or sect, it refers to doctrine that has been chosen. And whether the situation is to be condemned or favored depends upon the reason for the "choice." When a man accepts Christ as his Master he should do so from choice and not because he is forced by outside parties. Likewise when a group of disciples adopts the New Testament as its rule of life, it should be by their choice. Also if they adopt the language of the New Testament when speaking of the Lord's body, they should do so by choice and not from outside pressure.
In view of the foregoing it is lamentable that faithful brethren are stigmatized as "sects" because they insist on using the same language that is used in the New Testament concerning the divine institution. They know the Lord established but one church. If they refer to that one institution as the church of Christ or the body of Christ or the family of God, their choice is authorized by the inspired writings. They should not be slandered by being called a sect in the unfavorable sense of that word. If I thought the church of Christ were a sect I would get out of it, and cast my lot with some one of the popular denominations, where the authority of the apostles has very little weight.