False teachers coexist with a church.

This is an extremely difficult situation, because the court has solved the property question, but it has not solved the spiritual question. A civil judgment can determine who may use a building; it cannot determine what the church should teach, who should preach, or what constitutes sound doctrine.

We would advise the church and Bible college not to try to win the next battle by force. The objective should be: protect the truth, preserve the peace, protect the congregation and students, obey the court, and leave the door open for repentance and reconciliation.

There is an important biblical distinction here: Christian unity does not mean theological surrender, and separation from false teaching does not require hatred or continual warfare.

1. First, accept the civil reality—but do not confuse it with spiritual approval

The church should say clearly:

“We accept the court's decision concerning the use of the property. We will obey the law and respect the legal rights determined by the court. But sharing a building does not mean that we share the same doctrine, ministry, leadership, or ecclesiastical authority.”

That distinction is crucial.

The court may say, in effect, “Both parties may use this property.” It is not saying, “Both parties are doctrinally correct,” nor is it saying, “The church must recognize the other group as a legitimate teaching authority.”

Therefore, the church should stop fighting over the building and concentrate on the things the church actually has spiritual responsibility to govern.

Romans 13 teaches respect for governing authorities, while Matthew 18, Titus 3, Romans 16 and other passages govern how Christians deal with sin, false teaching and division.

2. The church must establish exactly what the doctrinal problem is

We would strongly caution against simply calling someone a “false teacher” because he has a different opinion.

That designation is extremely serious.

The church should appoint a small, doctrinally mature committee—preferably including respected pastors/elders who are not personally involved in the dispute—to produce a written theological report.

The report should answer:

1. What exactly was taught?
2. Where was it taught?
3. What does Scripture actually say?
4. Is the teaching orthodox but controversial, or genuinely heretical?
5. Does it contradict a fundamental doctrine of Christianity?
6. Has the teacher been privately admonished?
7. Has he been given an opportunity to respond?
8. Has he repented or corrected the teaching?
9. Has he deliberately continued spreading the teaching after correction?
10. Has he used the teaching to create factions within the church?

This is important because “I disagree with you” is not the same thing as “you are a heretic.”

But if the teaching truly contradicts the gospel and the person persists after repeated correction, Scripture does require the church to act.

Titus 3:10–11 gives a remarkably direct principle: a divisive person is to be warned, and after repeated warning, rejected. Romans 16:17 likewise tells believers to watch for those who cause divisions contrary to sound teaching and to keep away from them.

3. Do not allow the false teacher to control the church simply because he controls access to part of the property

This is one of the most important practical points.

Property rights and spiritual authority are two different things.

If the church remains the recognized governing body of the congregation, its Board Of Elder (BOE) must continue exercising the authority belonging to that church according to its constitution.

Likewise, if the Bible college is a separate legal or ministry entity, its governing board should govern the college according to its own constitution.

The two entities should therefore establish a formal Property and Ministry Protocol.

For example:

Church ministry

• worship services
• sacraments
• preaching
• pastoral care
• membership
• church discipline
• children's ministry
• prayer meetings

remain under the church's authority.

Bible college ministry

• lectures
• curriculum
• examinations
• faculty appointments
• student discipline
• academic administration

remain under the Bible college's properly constituted authority.

Neither side should attempt to exercise authority over the other's ministry merely because both use the same building.

4. Create a physical “peace agreement”

Since they are forced to share the property, we would recommend something very practical.

The church and Bible college should sign a written Shared Premises Covenant.

It should specify:

• which rooms each party uses;
• which days and hours;
• who holds keys;
• who controls sound systems;
• who controls noticeboards;
• parking arrangements;
• cleaning;
• maintenance;
• security;
• insurance;
• utilities;
• storage;
• use of classrooms;
• use of sanctuary;
• access to offices;
• responsibility for damage;
• procedures for emergencies;
• procedures for complaints;
• prohibition of harassment;
• prohibition of disrupting the other party's meetings;
• prohibition of recruiting members/students from the other group during its activities;
• prohibition of distributing hostile literature on the premises;
• procedure for resolving future disputes.

This is not unspiritual.

It is actually an application of “Let all things be done decently and in order” (1 Corinthians 14:40).

You cannot make people love one another by writing a property agreement. But you can prevent unnecessary conflict.

5. Do not permit the common property to become a battlefield

This is where the BOE must be firm.

No public arguments in corridors.

No confronting people immediately after worship.

No shouting across rooms.

No hostile posters.

No social-media warfare.

No secretly recording people merely to build ammunition against them.

No recruiting church members into a faction.

No approaching students and saying, “You must choose our side.”

No sermons designed primarily to attack the other group.

No gossip.

No anonymous accusations.

No “us versus them” language.

Ephesians 4:29–32 and James 3:13–18 become particularly important here.

The church must demonstrate that doctrinal firmness and Christian character can exist together.

6. But peace does NOT mean allowing false teaching to continue unchecked

This is where some churches make the opposite mistake.

They say:

“For the sake of unity, let's just tolerate everything.”

That is not biblical unity.

Paul could say, “Make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit” (Ephesians 4:3), but the same apostolic tradition also required churches to guard sound doctrine.

Paul instructed Titus to silence teachers who were upsetting whole households with false teaching (Titus 1:9–11). Romans 16:17 tells Christians to distance themselves from those who deliberately cause divisions contrary to apostolic teaching. 

So the principle should be:

Peace without compromise.
Truth without hatred.
Separation from error without personal vengeance.

7. The false teacher should not automatically be given a teaching platform

This is particularly important if the Bible college remains on the same property.

If the church determines, through proper ecclesiastical procedure, that a particular teacher is teaching serious doctrinal error, the church should not invite him into its pulpit merely because he occupies the same building.

Likewise, the Bible college's academic authorities must determine whom they appoint to teach its students.

The principle is simple:

Sharing a building does not create shared ministry.

If someone has been removed from teaching because of doctrinal error, he should not simply be given another platform under another ministry name.

8. Establish a “no-poaching” rule

This may be one of the most important safeguards.

Both sides should agree:

“We will not deliberately recruit the members, students, staff or ministry workers of the other party into our own faction while they are participating in the other's ministry.”

The Bible college should not become a recruitment centre for a church faction.

The church should not use its congregation to destroy the Bible college.

Students should be free to study without being pressured to declare political or theological allegiance to one faction.

If a student has a theological concern, there should be a formal academic process for raising it.

9. Establish a doctrinal appeals process

If the dispute concerns serious theology, don't settle it through Facebook, WhatsApp or corridor conversations.

Create a Doctrinal Review Panel of perhaps 5–7 mature theologians/pastors from outside the immediate conflict.

They should examine the actual documents, sermons, lectures and published statements.

The accused teacher should receive:

• the specific charges;
• the biblical grounds;
• the opportunity to respond;
• reasonable time to respond;
• the right to present evidence;
• a written decision.

That is much closer to the biblical principle of establishing a matter through witnesses than simply circulating accusations. Matthew 18:15–17 moves from private confrontation to witnesses and finally to the church when necessary.

10. The church should repent for its own part in the division

Even if one person genuinely introduced serious error, the moderator should not assume that everyone else is innocent of sin.

The church should ask:

Where did we become proud?

Where did we fail to listen?

Where did we speak harshly?

Where did we gossip?

Where did we allow personalities to replace biblical principles?

Where did we fail to discipline appropriately?

Where did we allow the controversy to become an idol?

Paul's rebuke of Corinth is especially relevant. Their lawsuits were not merely a property problem; Paul regarded the very existence of such lawsuits among believers as a spiritual defeat.

The church should therefore hold a corporate repentance service, not a service designed to condemn the other party.

11. Do not keep litigating the same dispute

If the court has already made its decision concerning the property, the church should ask its lawyers what obligations remain, comply with the judgment, and avoid turning every subsequent disagreement into another legal battle.

1 Corinthians 6 is very challenging here. Paul asks why Christians cannot find spiritually mature people capable of settling ordinary disputes among themselves and says that continual lawsuits between believers constitute a defeat.

There are obviously situations involving criminal conduct, abuse, safeguarding, regulatory obligations or matters that genuinely require civil authorities. Those should not be concealed under the language of “Christian forgiveness.”

But ordinary ministry and property disputes should not become an endless cycle of litigation.

12. Separate “ecclesiastical fellowship” from “neighbourly coexistence”

This is perhaps the theological key to the whole situation.

The church can say:

“We will not worship together where we cannot confess the same faith.”

But it can simultaneously say:

“We will share the car park peacefully.”

It can say:

“We will not invite this teacher to preach in our church.”

while also saying:

“We will not harass him when we meet him in the building.”

It can say:

“We reject his teaching.”

while also saying:

“We will pray for him and hope for his repentance.”

That is a much healthier biblical model than either total capitulation or perpetual warfare.

13. Teach the congregation how to behave

The moderator should preach a series—not about the personalities involved, but about Christian conduct during doctrinal conflict.

I would use:

Matthew 18:15–20 — How Christians confront sin

Romans 12:17–21 — Do not repay evil for evil

Romans 16:17–18 — Protect the church from divisive teaching

1 Corinthians 1:10–13 — Christ is not divided

1 Corinthians 6:1–8 — Do not turn Christian disputes into worldly warfare

Ephesians 4:1–6 — Maintain the unity of the Spirit

Ephesians 4:15 — Speak the truth in love

Titus 3:9–11 — Deal with divisiveness

2 Timothy 2:23–26 — Correct opponents with gentleness

That last passage is especially important. Paul does not tell Timothy to become aggressive. He tells the Lord's servant not to quarrel, but to be kind, patient and able to correct opponents gently.

14. Give the congregation one very clear rule

I would tell the church:

“Do not make the controversy your Christian identity.”

Some people become so consumed by a doctrinal conflict that Christianity becomes:

“I am against them.”

instead of:

“I belong to Christ.”

The church must continually bring people back to Christ.

Not:

“Which faction are you in?”

But:

“Are you following Christ?”

Not:

“Whose side are you on?”

But:

“Are you walking in truth, holiness, love and humility?”

15. What if the other side deliberately provokes the church?

Do not respond emotionally.

Document the incident.

Have two or three appropriate witnesses.

Follow the agreed protocol.

If it involves a doctrinal matter, use the doctrinal process.

If it involves property, use the property process.

If it involves misconduct, use the disciplinary process.

If it involves a genuine criminal matter, use the appropriate authorities.

In other words:

Don't fight fire with fire. Build a system that makes fire difficult to spread.

16. The ultimate goal should be repentance, not revenge

This is where Titus 3 is particularly powerful.

Paul's instruction concerning a divisive person is not:

“Destroy him.”

It is:

warn → warn again → reject if necessary.

The purpose of biblical discipline is ultimately the holiness of Christ's church and, where possible, the restoration of the sinner.

Therefore, even if the church must restrict someone's ministry, it should continue praying:

“Lord, bring this brother to repentance. Bring him back to sound doctrine. Heal the wounds he has caused. Heal the people who have been wounded. Preserve your church from error and preserve us from bitterness.”

A proposed Moderator's declaration

If I were actually moderating this situation, I would put something like this before both parties:

The church and the Bible college acknowledge that they are now required to share the same property. We therefore commit ourselves to conduct our ministries in a manner worthy of Christ.

We recognize that the civil court has determined the legal rights concerning the property. We will respect that decision and will not use the shared premises as a place of retaliation, intimidation or harassment.

At the same time, we recognize that legal possession of property does not determine the truth of Christian doctrine. Each ministry shall remain responsible for its own teaching, governance, appointments, membership or student matters, worship, discipline and ministry decisions according to its constitution and proper ecclesiastical authority.

We will not require one another to endorse teaching that we believe to be contrary to Holy Scripture. Serious doctrinal accusations shall be dealt with through proper biblical and ecclesiastical procedures, with specific charges, competent witnesses, opportunity to respond, and impartial review.

No person whose teaching has been formally determined to be contrary to the essential doctrines of the Christian faith shall be given a teaching platform within a ministry that has rejected that teaching.

We will not use the shared property to recruit members, students or workers into opposing factions. We will not distribute inflammatory material, engage in public harassment, interrupt one another's meetings, or use social media to continue personal attacks.

Where disputes arise, we will seek first to resolve them privately and then through appropriate Christian mediation. We will not resort to civil litigation over ordinary matters that can reasonably be resolved through Christian mediation, except where legal action is genuinely necessary or required by law.

We acknowledge that unity in Christ does not require compromise of essential truth, and doctrinal disagreement does not justify hatred, slander or revenge.

We therefore commit ourselves to speak the truth in love, to correct error with humility, to discipline sin according to Scripture, to forgive personal offences, and to pray for the repentance and restoration of those who have departed from the truth.

Our common prayer shall be that Christ—not our personalities, factions, institutions or property—will have the final place of honour among us.

“For there is one body, and one Spirit... one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all.” — Ephesians 4:4–6

Our strongest advice for the moderator would be this:

Do not try to force two incompatible ministries to become one ministry.

Instead, establish peaceful coexistence with clearly defined boundaries.

The church should be firm on doctrine, disciplined in governance, peaceful in property matters, gracious toward persons, and relentless in prayer.

And there is one sentence we would repeatedly give to both sides:

“We do not have to agree in order to live peacefully; but we must not sacrifice the truth in order to achieve peace.”

That is particularly important in a case involving alleged heresy. Peace at the price of truth is not biblical peace; but truth pursued without love can also become another form of destruction. Paul holds both together: “speaking the truth in love” (Ephesians 4:15).

Finally, 1 Corinthians 6 should cause both sides to humble themselves. Paul does not regard a Christian lawsuit as a triumph for the winner. He says that the existence of such lawsuits can itself represent a defeat for the church. 

So the moderator's task now is not simply to determine who won the court case. The deeper question is:

“How can we prevent this property from becoming a permanent monument to Christian division, and instead make our conduct in this difficult situation a testimony to Jesus Christ?”

That should become the church's new direction.