Spiritual people need to create a whole culture. You might have higher chakras more open than the ones you use for coping in the material world - once you open your root chakra, you are better with the materials than someone, who had it open when they were born; but if you don't do it - the materialistic people will get you debunked.
What means debunked:
You bring a good spiritual argument, but your words are somewhat distracted when you touch logical arguments. Very often, the spiritual models are mathematically very consistent - but if you are weak in math, you speak in a way that they do their work, but there seem to be mathematical inconsistencies.
You live a good life, but you are weakly connected with material world. Then, your spirituality look like wasting your time or creating unrealistic goals - and this is an argument, which gets you debunked, materially; as people do not trust your material activities, those get blocked. When the material world is blocked, it blocks also your spiritual world - you don't have the environment, food, etc., to organize your spiritual union and really have time and space with all these people.
Being debunked in a mass: many people originally from academic world or work life, once they raised their material awareness, got kicked out. There are material walls around this - we need to unify the spiritual people from all races, nations and religions, to gain together the minority, which is more enlightened, and join them to culture. Personal awakening is half of the story - the other half is cultural awakening, which also involves all chakras from material to the spiritual planes.
In the material world, spiritual things you do often do not get paid.
What we need:
Meditate over material world alone, and learn the 5 elements of Buddhism (or elements of any other system). Meditate over it's material structure: the officials and city space provide you with material infrastructure; the tastes, rooms, spaces, environments - you need to get a specific feeling about them; work hard to make this a material meditation, not social - on material level you want the things, objects, smells and tastes specifically; this has nothing to do with your relations with people who pay salaries, taxes, or bring you these things - your energy-magnet needs to be materially attributed. Create good karma with the material world; which appears as personally material - the objects and environments - and socially material - the people, like officials, who do the repetitious work and appear as your material condition - you need to have a materially strong shield about those things.
Create a culture. Spiritual people need to unite many like them, to get the following: logically and philosophically reasoned spiritual view, this is called science; the officials, companies, work environments, so that a spiritual people can access everything. The structures to produce food, computers, etc., which fit our spiritual views - for example, if you make computers with love, you probably won't affect the ecosystem and get better material karma; in case you only avoid harming the ecosystem, you really cannot benefit from this - there are many ways you harm the ecosystem, which you rather feel with your material heart, than thinking alone.
This is the material world - we need to cover all aspects of life, otherwise we are being debunked as a spiritual society. This means building a culture - people, who can cover all aspects of life in a spiritually awakened world; from material work to science, and this science would be taught to spiritual people so that they won't make stupid mistakes. About material world - people made such mistakes centuries ago, later they become educated; spiritual sciences progress slower in coherence of thinking and material attributes, and they lack this energy it gets. Also we need to break the walls of government offices and create new companies, so that we do not lack the material support - this is all material, as the attribute of government infrastructure or companies is to stay there and provide you with processes of material qualities - the quality that in office, you get your papers done, is not spiritual (like a party or music festival) but it's material quality of life itself, being stable and following the rules without thinking much. Matter is the same - stable and not thinking much, so a material object always gets the same work done. This is a material chakra of society itself, and operates like material element - once you get this open, you probably happen to meet a better officials in your life, and they have different views on you, also because you get your material thing done.
Additionally, I have another word - the word "pagan" should be used for a person who seeks good things, like money and power, having a theory, which is not based on ethics, but manipulation of things. Such theories leave space for black and white, like there is black magic and white magic - this should be considered whether one's theory about witchcraft has ethical and moral basis or not. For example, self-affirmations for better personal outcomes lead to practices of unethical companies and corporations, which is a pagan activity, because it A) contains a practices and rituals to gain more power and money, namely self-affirmations and autosuggestion, also a general manipulation of people, which are activities taught by theory of magic (it's more materialistic, but using the same method - that affirmation becomes reality) and B) those practices are not based on ethical theory. We should call religious what is based on ethical theory - even if it has a materialistic belief; for example, if you build your system of self-affirmations and autosuggestion on theory, which finds balanced truth between you and society, and unites the people from all races and religions, then you are being "religious". Even good theory about society, and how life evolves into higher and more ethical forms in Universe - you might do this from solely materialist perspective in sense that you highly doubt the forces you have not seen; but this is high religion - to doubt what you have not seen. I'm living inside of things I did doubt before, because I did not have a first-hand experience ..but this higher ethics, it happens in higher parts of the brain, associated with third eye and crown chakra - it's not particularly non-local, so it must be material or local activity of those chakras, but those high conceptions about society are kind of all-oneness essentially, and even not believing in God this is a way you can "live in harmony with God" - God being our higher unity. If such people do not attack other people based on their beliefs, which might have more solid experience and deeper philosophical vision, they are religious - left alone, they would build up a kind of religion, where everybody can live, and with their five senses and wisdom of mind, they would build up some degree of general unity.
Religion:
A) Connects other religious people from all groups and races, the animal world and plants, the ecosystem, and also the potential alien connections; connects on basis that they connect back; and tries to educate the uneducated. It also fights with forces of pagans so that they cannot control the society so much - they would infect the money and energy flow; and whereas today we are too evolved to fight this with weapons, we see the battles in society around money and power; having some money and power or self-worth is called Life, and you need to get one - so, in more subtle terms of todays society it's battle of life and death.
B) Base their theories about life, manipulations of matter etc., on basis of higher ethics; thus having open at least the rational part of their higher chakras. They have kind of higher vision, infinite potential in the world of abstract theories and the world as perceived by senses. So they meet the criteria of religion and should be called religious.
We should also, seeing the violent religious activities from the past - the fight around belief, and how one can use their model of the world to manipulate others and manipulate the material world (instead of letting it flow for better, and seeking the harmony); we should associate such activity with faithful non-believer who thinks that their presupposition are somehow higher than evidence; for example, that non-existence of telepathy does not need an evidence, but existence of telepathy needs an evidence on their kind. Science of century ago was very open to both sides and should be considered useful - if the scientific research itself is biased on either side, assuming it as truth-in-case-of-no-reliable-argument, it's affecting others; so in degree of how much the witch-seeking Catholics murdered worthy people, we would call themselves heretics - indeed they were very paranoid with otherwise good theories about how humans should be; and thus they went sometimes too far. But if I imagine a human-eating people fighting for mystic force without ethics, then this description would lead my thoughts to the fact that they are criminal - I would support the freedom fighters to get away from such force. So, the non-religious people, especially if they fight to make their beliefs superior in terms of money and power - heretic is a very good word, even if those people originate from something religious; for example Catholics originate from religion - but some of their activities have been questionable. Sceptics, as well originate from religion - science was here to find Truth, through a world-wide activities connecting high thinkers; this is more or less a religion. In case they fight their beliefs and destroy lives for this, they must be considered heretic or pagan.
This is my try to put the words into right context - not what history they have, but what they originally meant and how they are defined.
Additionally - the word "heretic" is not used much for long time, and is considered wrong by many. But, when we define a typical debunker - a person, who attacks another based on belief and uncommon experience, using either a lack of arguments on his side, or playing on psychological effects such beliefs can have when in wrong use; but rarely really getting deep into the argument. The opponent, often, has some spiritual experience or belief, but as it's common for many people, their beliefs are not very solid in logical coherence - often, I find myself their expressions silly, but even by scientific reasoning I can find a poorly expressed, but solid truth in this. I think in case such attacking person is destroying the believer either materially, morally or in terms of worth, the belief on part of unbeliever is far too strong - I generally accept the method of doubt and philosophical methods to reach the core truth; but here this is not the case - a sceptic often does not show such beliefs nor even a seek of coherence in their own thought. I think, the word "heretic" should be used here, whatever historical connotations it brings up - with such a violent, materially affecting show of ones disbelief, they become heretics even in todays world.
We seek truth for science, but in hands of heretics the science is not an objective search of truth, and such science can not be considered worthy - it's made by heretics. We should consider science theories, which leave the religious topics open, give arguments of both sides, do not rely on psychological belief that one or another religious belief can be used for manipulating the masses or some person - I have seen scientific belief used as often and such arguments are not generally scientific; for example, an "argument against God" or against karma - you can say that by having some outside force leading people to better life, consequences of their actions, their actions are not based on inner truth; I barely know materialist, whose actions are based on inner truth, and I really have not seen the materialism effectively guiding people to behave purely by faith, without considering external consequence. For most of our spiritual world, the cause and effect is learnt from life, meditated upon, and seen - these kinds of activities are used by pure science for reaching the truth, and the culture of debunker is based on common myth that their activities are such; still, I see debunkers working without really learning the spiritual theories they attack, without doing their practices and gaining honest experience - without doing the trial for error. Without any trials they get the error, and then they assume their previous belief to be true - for example, non-existence of God is somehow stronger truth than existence of God, and in case we are not up to argument or proof of neither side, we need to assume that this does not exist. Many people have first-hand experience of seeing auras, thus those people argumenting with each others have solid scientific basis, they do not need the sceptics pointing out things which "cannot be verified"; still, in such cases, such people cannot argue on side of their provable basis without being distracted.
I can show some truths of heretics:
That, by physics, there is no good and bad energy, and therefore you cannot sense them - there is only a neutral energy. This is nonsense and I am going to debunk this: energies in physical world affect life in either positive or negative direction, and so do the potentials. Thus, people are having either positive or negative energy, and this "theory of physics", if it really implies such theorem, must be wrong.
That, in mathematics and physics, the dimensions are axes of space and thus the spiritual dimensions are not dimensions. I can show that mathematically, infinities form new dimensions; but which is more important - even properties of an object are mathematically considered dimensions, and thus, if you measure an object on more axes, you are indeed having more dimensions.
That from physics it turns out that emotion and feeling are not fundamental qualities of matter, because our brains work just like the rest of matter. Feelings and emotions are measured by measurable activities and what separates life from dead matter is how it reacts to environment. This is an utter nonsense and from such an argument I really cannot see, what is life and whether it exists in environment - from that we are composed the same way with the rest of space, we must assume that the rest of space has some rudimentary life-like quality like senses; and our life is not a reaction, but it consists of our ability to feel - to have a separate, distinct qualities of mind, which themselves are not matter.
That we do not have spirit, mind or soul, because our brain processes reflect our mind processes. It must be considered that the talk of the brain processes is entirely different from the talk of the mind processes, and those are distinct qualities or attributes of this thing - surely, there is the same underlying reality behind our brain and our inner vision, but those two are definitely distinct qualities of the same thing, and it does not follow anyhow from physics theory, that we can feel and sense - I do not see how we have to use physics to conclude this element of reality. Our inner senses are aspect of reality, and very real reality, and this aspect of quality itself is what is considered spiritual; whether it reincarnates or not - is another question -, but we definitely rather call this thing soul than spirit, than try to fool another person with physics equation to demonstrate how they feel better. I cannot really meditate upon the frequency of my brain waves and the synapses between neurons - not much happens. I meditate upon my feelings and inner visions, and this is much more practical and real theory. I do not know what should happen by trying to fool myself into believing that this consists merely in brain activity, and that brain activity is all I need to actually contemplate on - I have not really seen the brain activity, and I cannot find a natural process to regulate the electrons in brain; in relation to my personal development, the way I see it all internally is real and true.
We can see many theories, which take your viewpoint, their viewpoint - and seeing argument on neither side, assume that theirs is true and yours is false. We see also bullying of such kind: a spiritual person knows as few about math as a typical housekeeper, but they are asked hard math questions about their activities, and in case they do not know the answer, they are told to be wrong and hit out of society (thus we need our own society - a way to fulfill all needs and get those people out, who happen to be outsiders inside someone's other's material world).
So: such people, who fight their faith of non-existence of mystical experience and the reality behind mystical experience; I propose to use the word "heretics" in case they affect the lives, material well-being, opportunities, feeling of self-worth or worth in society of other people. This because, they have their basic non-faith belief system, and they are fighting to make it appear as material world to others, or a world with it's own cause and effect. I do not see a reason to use the same word for a philosopher, who is open to new ideas and does not want to completely believe anything - such kind of person should be called "seeker".