Heterodox Christians

When we say " I am a liberal", what immediately comes to mind in the Christian circle is that one is referring to someone whose theological position has deviated from orthodoxy, such that the person now does not consider Bible as the authoritative text in matters related to conduct and doctrine. The person may say or write that she considers resurrection of Jesus Christ as figurative, and not literal and so on.

But when we say "I am a liberal" in political discourse, what is being meant is that the person believes in freedom of religion, freedom of speech etc., and that the state ought not to impose what to believe, eat, dress etc. upon citizens.

In this interview of Dr. Hobson by Albert Mohler, Dr. Hobson identifies the two strands and considers the former as bad tradition and the latter as good tradition within Christianity. 

It seems to me that the former way of using the word "liberal" should be discarded. I think this strand should be called "heterodox Christianity" instead of "liberal Christianity"'. "Liberal Christianity" as Dr. Hobson uses should be referred to that version of Christian political thought that advances freedom of religion, freedom of speech etc.

The word "liberal" is from "liberty" which at one point of time began to be considered, and still is, a political virtue alongside fraternity, equality etc. So I believe that it is a mistake to use "liberal" for doctrinal deviation. I think the word "heterodox" is more appropriate for doctrinal deviation.

In Indian tradition, those religious schools or denominations that accept the authority of the Vedas are considered as "orthodox", and those like Buddhism, Jainism, Carvaka ( Pronounced as "charvak" as it is in "charcoal") are considered as "heterodox" because the latter schools do not accept the authority of the Vedas.

I think because of this confusion that the use of the word "liberal'' has caused, many Christians detest liberal version of democracy, without really knowing what liberal democracy is as a political philosophy. However, the other spectrum of liberal democracy is conservative democracy. And in a democratic state like India preference for conservative democracy is to strangulate Christianity because freedom to practice one's religious values is being stifled. And one could get killed for consuming beef because cow is considered sacred by many Hindus, but not so by Christians and Muslims. 

Even in the West where religious diversity is now ever growing, it seems to me that it is liberal democracy and not conservative democracy that has to take deeper roots. But if we think that being a liberal is a bad thing, because it is associated with doctrinal deviation, then it seems to me that evangelical Christians may detest political liberalism though it is something that we need to endorse and work it. Therefore, I want to submit that "heterodox Christians" should be the term employed to refer to those whose theological view has deviated from doctrinal orthodoxy.