“It has been the open or concealed goal of each successive Christian heresy to shield Western antiquity’s native concept of deity from the import of biblical narrative about God, that is, to protect deity from contamination by temporality’s slings and arrows, above all from women’s wombs or the tombs women tended.”
– Robert W. Jenson (from “For Us . . . He was Made Man” in Nicene Christianity: The Future for a New Ecumenism)
Perhaps “heresy” simply names the result of using “classical theism”
to rationalize the Incarnation.
Would you agree?
Cruciform Theology 
So far as Christological heresy is concerned I think I would agree. Refusing to accept necessary transcendental paradox seems to get us in a lot of trouble.
LikeLike
I agree with Chris H. It seems to me that most “classical” heresies from the early church period have somehow tried to reconcile the “fully human, fully God” mystery by diminishing one or the other (usually the fully human part). I think some things will just remain a mystery and I’m okay with that. Some mystery is a necessary part of any faith or theology.
LikeLike