A prominent theologian was expounding on the tradition that God’s grace in some sense extends to all people and to all spheres of their lives. Although the tradition calls it grace, it is not a grace that saves, but a grace that is called common. The doctrine is interesting, not because it is true, but because it makes us marvel that some people can think like this. For the sake of illustration and emphasis, the theologian declared that he would even join hands and march together with Satan worshipers to protest an evil such as abortion.

Those of us who have not been brought up in the faith by this tradition may find the doctrine alarming, but in some circles it is almost a test of orthodoxy. It is remarkable how difficult it is for some teachings to survive when presented to those of a different heritage. Try to force a Chinese Pentecostal to accept the doctrine of cessationism, or common grace, or the covenant of works, and see how far you get. If he has never heard of it, he is going to ask you to prove it from the Bible. He will not permit you to cite tradition to assert an interpretation of the Bible, as the Catholics do, or to draw fantastic inferences supposedly from the Bible, but in fact ex nihilo. He will really make you prove it from Scripture. If you cannot do it, he does not have to believe it. But, of course, if your denomination is large enough, then he is still called the heretic.

The Bible makes a clean and consistent distinction between two kinds of men – the righteous and the wicked, the saints and the sinners, the believers and the unbelievers, the Christians and the non-Christians. The way of the righteous – that is, their way of life and their way of thinking – is completely different from the way of the wicked. They are so different that one excludes the other. The righteous man does not walk in the counsel of the wicked. He does not stand in the way of sinners. He does not sit in the seat of mockers. Rather, he delights in the law of God – he likes it. And he thinks about it all day. How different this is from how non-Christians live. How can the two walk together, unless they agree?

The doctrine of common grace, or some other invention, may give you an excuse to attend a sporting event with a blasphemer. If you are cowardly, you may crack a smile when he berates your Lord or makes some vulgar joke to your face. But the Bible teaches that a righteous way of life entails a separation. Some Christians are weary of the hostility, and they wonder if losing a drinking, smoking, gambling, cursing, fornicating friend is too great a price to secure a pious life with Christ.

Behind this attitude is disapproval of the God who makes this separation. Perhaps the difference has been obscured by sin and by circumstances, so that the weeds now grow together with the wheat, but he would not tolerate the confusion forever. He has determined that the wicked will not stand in the judgment, and that sinners will not stand in the assembly of the righteous. As for us, now is the time to perceive and to live out the distinction, lest we find that we were in the seat of sinners because that was our place all along.

Now if anyone complains that the theologian has misapplied the tradition, good. Let us apply it in a way that totally destroys it. And if anyone objects that the doctrine criticized has been poorly formulated, fine. Let us formulate it in a way that totally denies it. The point that interests me is that there is a difference between the way of the righteous and the way of the wicked. The difference has been instituted by God, and is comprehensive in application, pervading all spheres of thought and life. We are to delight in the standard that defines and reveals this difference, which is the Word of God. Even if we refuse to do it, one day God will make it clear, and with force. We can only hope that those who defend the tradition will end up on the right side when he does so.