Guilty by Association or Accessory to Heresy?

I am getting so tired of pastors and authors and those who claim to be born-again teachers of the flock continue to “go anywhere for the cause of the Gospel,” and then either affiliate with heretics or forget to actually preach the Gospel.  Author Brandon Hines shares some thoughts on whether “guilt by association” is a biblical argument:

Screen Shot 2016-03-31 at 4.53.57 PM

Almost every time someone points out the evils of partnering with heretics, sharing the stage with false teachers, or in any way violating the “one degree of separation” rule clearly laid out in Scripture, the complaints of labeling them “guilty by association” begin. This never fails. If someone were to mention that John Piper is compromising the Gospel by partnering with false teachers like Rick Warren and Beth Moore, his supporters would come unglued. If a brother critiques Ronnie Floyd for speaking at arch-heretic, Mike Bickle’s, Holy Spirit-blaspheming International House of Prayer (IHOP), he’d more than likely get an earful from those defending him, insisting he’s being accused of “guilt by association.” If a sister critiques Ravi Zacharias for hand-holding with Word of Faith pastrix and “spiritual mama,” Joyce Meyer or Prosperity Gospel tycoon, Christine Caine, she’d be shut down with the same ridiculous argument.

Is this argument biblical?

In United States law, there is a crime called “Accessory”. This term is defined by YourDictionary.com as, “one who knowingly assists a law-breaker in the commission of a crime but does not actually participate in that crime.” In the courtroom, to say that this is “guilt by association” wouldn’t last five minutes. A certain homicide investigator, when asked if this would be a good defense made by said accessory’s lawyer, said it wouldn’t get anyone off. In fact, he’d probably get laughed out of the courtroom.

Thank goodness that modern evangelical discernment does not create United States law, otherwise, it would get people off. You see, to attract a crowd for a heretic by speaking with them or to give them a pulpit from which to speak is assisting a heretic in the spreading of heresy, even if you don’t take part in the heresy yourself. So if heresy were a judicial crime (this is a hypothetical, I am not a theocratist), then these people who do partner with them would be charged with Accessory to Heresy. So saying someone is wrong for partnering with heretics is no more “guilt by association” than driving a getaway car for a murderer is. Guilt by association would better be defined as someone who happens to personally know a heretic and gets branded a heretic for no other reason than that they know that person.

Is this argument supported by Scripture?   (Read the full article here)

, , ,