The Church Militant: Where Do We Draw The Line?

Do we, the church (Christians, the body of Christ), have the right, or the obligation, to be militant (to speak and act boldly) on issues that are not specifically commanded or prohibited by Scripture?

My rule (for myself, but offered for your consideration):

  1. There are some things specifically commanded in Scripture which must be obeyed, and some things specifically prohibited which must be avoided.

  2. Everything else is lawful.

  3. Even though something is lawful, it may not be beneficial. (The law of neighbor love and looking out for the brother of weaker conscience come to mind).

  4. The goal on any issue or matter not specifically commanded or prohibited (meaning it is not moral and therefore a matter of preference or personal priority; e.g., the will of God is silent) is wisdom.

  5. It is equally immoral for me to impose my (non-biblically commanded or prohibited) priorities or traditions on someone as it is for them to impose theirs on me.

  6. So where do I draw the line? If two Christians of good reputation, sound mind, and committed to Biblical accuracy sincerely hold two different opinions on an issue and, if Scripture does not specifically command a different position or prohibit that opinion, then I accept that it is the will of God for both opinions to stand.

In other words, I don't have to get my own way.

Saint Augustine offered a particularly effective rule of life: "Love God and do what you want." This rule of life should apply as much to the other brother as it does to me.

This is not an endorsement, but I think Dr. Ben Carson is as good an example of what I'm trying to say as any person in public life at the present time. And I have spent a couple of hours with him personally one-on-one.

Until every church disciples every man…

Patrick Morley, PhD Executive Chairman, Man in the Mirror