One of the many ways we must “fight the good fight” (1Tim. 6:12) in our time is the recovery of robust Biblical speech to combat the many errors, compromises, and assaults upon faithful Christian belief both inside and outside the Church.
This is true of every generation of the Church. But one of the errors of our time is – ironically enough – the idea that Christians should not fight for what they believe is right, or fight against what they believe to be wrong, with appropriately strong words.
More often than not, when a Christian begins to fight for/against such things today, they are – ironically enough – fought against by other Christians for manifesting a “combative spirit” or some other such charge. Needless to say, such Christians usually come armed with an arsenal of verses about peace, meekness, gentleness, and so on. What is a poor Christian combatant to do?
We know what we’re expected to do, of course: lay down our arms (that is, our Bible verses) and bow meekly before the benevolent Gentleness Coalition who are politely stationed outside with a rather robust barricade, warning that our terribly combative posture could be a serious safety hazard to the effective witness of the Gospel and the unity of the Church.
Indeed these days the charge of “combative tone” is the closest you might get to seeing church discipline actually enforced within the average mainstream evangelical church or network (as some brothers discovered not too long ago).
Gentleness over Combativeness?
One such set of counter-verses to Christian combatants occurs in Ephesians 4, where Paul speaks of the need for believers to walk “with all humility and gentleness, with patience, bearing with one another in love, eager to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.” (Eph. 4:2-3).
To many, it seems straightforward enough. Stop disagreeing so strongly, forget your differences, be peaceable, and show the world your unity. To sharply disagree or say things which offend other Christians is thus seen as “divisive,” “breaking the bond of peace,” or “failing to bear with one another in love.”
Perpetual combativeness certainly can be a sign of immaturity, of course. Parents rarely need to call out their children for insufficient combativeness when they disagree with a parental command, lose a board game, or miss out on dessert. Indeed, if a sibling “borrows” a favourite toy, many children seem more than willing to go to war for their pound of sibling flesh if they believe some great injustice has been done!
Christians are not called to be childish, impetuous, or malicious. There really is such a thing as an unhealthy desire for “quarrelling” and an approach to opponents which is unfair, hot-headed, and ungentlemanly (see 2Tim. 2:24-25). But we must discern the need of the hour, and the way some Biblical verses are frequently used to support subtly unbiblical things. Failing to oppose such things over time always causes greater damage and disunity in the long run.
Aren’t We Always Meant to “Build Up”?
The Church in the west has been passive for far too long. We have forgotten what it means to fight for our convictions. We live at a time when the wolves are at the door and many of the supposed gatekeepers have not only welcomed them in with open arms but have strongly chastised those who tried to stop them. They pat the wolves, stone the prophets, and wonder why their sheep keep disappearing.
In our era of perpetual evangelical winsomeness, the greatest evangelical “sin” was to seem unwelcoming or disagreeable. To speak against compromise in the Church too strongly tends to incur the charge of immaturity, as though the one alerting the Church to doctrinal and social evils is like the child attacking their sibling for taking their favourite toy or winning the game. “Let it go”, “Learn to get along”, “Love doesn’t insist”, “Be nice”!
Those who bring challenge to the established mindset must often speak in strong words to be truly heard. We need not make something seem worse than it really is; we simply need to say it is as bad as it is when it is as bad as it is. The desire to sugar-coat the truth in “nicer” tone often misrepresents the severity and urgency of the issue. It’s not always nice to be nice.
Those who really wish to challenge their fellow Christians – or indeed to challenge those in the world with Christian convictions – will be accused of falling foul of Paul’s teaching on gentleness and unity, of seeking to tear down rather than build up.
Again, Paul appears to emphasise this later on in the same chapter of Ephesians:
“Let no corrupting talk come out of your mouths, but only such as is good for building up, as fits the occasion, that it may give grace to those who hear…Let all bitterness and wrath and anger and clamour and slander be put away from you, along with all malice. Be kind to one another, tender-hearted, forgiving one another.” (Eph. 4:29-32).
Such verses gladden the hearts of the perpetually winsome, who might see “corrupting talk” as anything seeking to challenge or deconstruct an opponent’s ideas or credibility with too sharp an edge or too “inappropriate” a tone. “Surely,” they say, “there can be no argument for Christians to argue when it doesn’t always immediately ‘build up’ their opponent? Listen to Paul, see – be gentle! Don’t say anything that won’t make them feel affirmed! If someone’s in error, don’t make too big a thing of it; be tender-hearted; be kind; be nice!”
I’m not saying there are no times where some exhortations like this should be heeded. But beyond everyday “fellowship” issues within church communities, this therapeutic approach should not be applied en masse to cover all of our strategic theological and public engagement.
When Cowards Abuse Unity
Using Paul’s exhortations for tender-hearted unity against the righteous Christian combatant (or perhaps, the “protestant”…) can often be (ab)used in such a way that it puts them in a situation where they cannot possibly disagree without seeming to prove the point of those who are (somewhat ironically) “protesting” against them.
Too often this tactic is used as a subtle strategy today to make the cowards seem like the heroes, as though they “chose” unity above their insatiable desire to confront evil or error. Most of the time, such people just did exactly what felt most comfortable to them, and were glad they had some verses to back them up. They often don’t care about the net effect of their cowardice because the effects are less immediately obvious than those of the zealous over-confronter. The effects of cowardice may be subtle, but they are usually ten times more destructive over the long haul. Entire denominations fall into apostasy not because of confronters but because of cowards, and the nice guys who kept letting them get away with it.
If we truly care about love and unity, we must not only oppose the bullies and fools, but also oppose the cowards, who may be abusing the concept of unity in order to suit their own desires. When confronting such people, they probably won’t like you for it, at least not at first. But over time, loving confrontation on significant issues is more likely to lead to deeper unity among God’s people in the long run.
