As Far As Scripture Goes

Should we be nuanced these days or bold and blunt? Should we pick a side, or should a third way be pursued?

The discussion is ongoing (Link 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, ad infinitum).

John Frame, writing years before the current debates (c. 2025), provides us with a helpful reminder that neither nuance nor a third way is the point. Being biblical is the point.

At the beginning of his book on ethics, The Doctrine of the Christian Life (2008), Frame writes:

Before we begin our study, there is another question we need to ask. All of us are biased in favor of certain conclusions, even at the outset of our study. We cannot be neutral. But we ought to be self-conscious, even critical, of our biases.

There are those who enter the field of ethics with a goal of dispelling legalism. Perhaps they were raised in a church that imposed all sorts of rules on the kids and they didn’t like it. So as ethicists they want to emphasize our freedom as individuals to make decisions for ourselves.

Others enter the field disgusted by the moral decline in our society. They may also be impressed by the rigorousness of Scripture and the high cost of discipleship. They are attracted to an ethic that does not compromise with worldliness, a radical ethic of discipline and self-control.

We tend to describe the first type of ethic as liberal, the second as conservative. Down through the years, ethicists have tended to divide into conservative and liberal parties. For example, in ancient Judaism there were the schools of Shammai (conservative) and Hillel (liberal). Catholicism has had Jesuits (liberal) and Jansenists (conservative). The liberal tendency to find loopholes in the moral law, to justify apparent sin, has given casuistry a bad name. The conservative tendency toward harshness and austerity has given moralism a bad name.

In this book, I urge readers not to side with either tendency. The point of Christian ethics is not to be as liberal as we can be, or as conservative. It is, rather, to be as biblical as we can be. So this book will seem to be more liberal than the majority on some issues (e.g., worship, cloning, just war, gambling, deceiving) and more conservative on others (e.g., the Sabbath, the roles of women, stem cell research). God’s Word has a way of surprising us, of not fitting into our prearranged categories. Jesus rebuked both the conservative Pharisees and the liberal Sadducees; Paul rebuked both legalists and libertines. Understanding God’s will rarely means falling into lockstep with some popular ideology. We need to think as part of a community, listening to our brothers and sisters, but we also need the courage to step aside from the crowd when God’s Word directs us in that way.

So in this book I will be drawing some fine distinctions, as theologians are wont to do. I do this not to gain a reputation for subtlety and nuance, but simply to follow Scripture. My goal is to go as far as Scripture goes, and no farther, to follow its path without deviating to the left or the right. I trust God’s Spirit to help us thread these needles, to help us find the biblical path, even when it is narrow and relatively untraveled. May he be with writer and reader as we seek to walk by the lamp of God’s Word. (Frame, J. M. (2008). The Doctrine of the Christian Life. P&R Publishing, pp. 6-7. Emphasis mine.)

I like that: Be as biblical as we can be; go as far as Scripture goes and not farther.

Let’s not focus on being nuanced or blunt; let’s focus on being biblical. Let’s not worry about picking sides (or the middle) but seek to go where Scripture goes and no further.