Month: October 2026

Strategy, Scripture, and the Mission: The Military Decision-Making Process Meets the Great Commission

Tim J. Clark Brown County, Uncategorized

Introduction

From an early age, I was fascinated by military history and the great battles that shaped nations. My father was a Korean War veteran, and his experiences helped fuel that interest. As I grew older, my curiosity expanded to political theory—why nations go to war, what drives conflict, and what enables societies to maintain peace.

That journey eventually led me to explore the Biblical worldview and a deeper question: Why do people conflict with one another, and what can help us overcome those differences?

Early in my civilian and military careers, I had the opportunity to attend a four-day seminar on Quality, Productivity, and Competitive Position conducted by W. Edwards Deming. That experience sparked years of study, research, and practical application. Over time, I began to recognize an important interrelationship between three areas that are not often considered together: Quality Management, Citizenship, and Christianity.

I have come to believe that the principles of Quality Management, particularly understanding variation, improving systems, and avoiding premature corrective action, offer valuable insights into how we approach both civic and spiritual challenges.

The following article explores how this perspective might help us develop more effective strategies for supporting the Great Commission.

I invite you to consider a different way of looking at an important mission.

In the Military Decision-Making Process (MDMP), Joint Publication (JP) 5-0, Joint Planning, once a mission is received, analysis includes identifying stated and implied tasks, then identifying essential tasks. This leads to the development of plans and strategy, which the President, elected by the citizens, reviews and approves.

  • This joint planning methodology directly mirrors the parallel procedures found in Army doctrine under FM 5-0 / FM 6-0 / FM 3-0 for the Military Decision-Making Process

The Great Commission—recorded in Matthew 28:16–20—stands as one of the most defining and foundational passages in Christian scripture. Delivered by the resurrected Christ to His disciples on a mountain in Galilee just before His ascension, this final directive serves as the marching orders for the global Christian Church.

At its core, the passage bridges Christ’s earthly ministry with the ongoing mission of His followers:

The Great Commission  

16Then the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain where Jesus had told them to go.17 When they saw him, they worshiped him; but some doubted. 18 Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.”

Applying a military analogy to the Great Commission, the Bible identifies the stated tasks.  Sola Scriptura is the Protestant doctrine that the Bible is the only infallible authority for Christian faith and practice.

AI is an example of how emerging technologies, when guided by sound principles and human judgment, can help us explore new approaches to supporting the Great Commission.

Questions to ChatGPT

  • Doesn’t every Christian denomination have to develop interpretations and explanations (implied tasks)?
  • Do the Catholics and Orthodox Christians have the most thorough research and explanations?

ChatGPT Response:

Yes. Your military decision-making analogy provides a very useful framework for examining the Great Commission, and I think it exposes an important issue in the differences between Christian traditions.

Your central observation is correct: Every Christian denomination must identify, interpret, and execute tasks that are not explicitly spelled out in the mission statement itself. The disagreement is largely about how those implied tasks are identified, who has authority to identify them, and how the Church ensures that its interpretation remains faithful to the original mission.

Let’s work through this using your military planning framework.

1. Identify the stated tasks: Matthew 28:16–20

THE MISSION STATEMENT — THE GREAT COMMISSION

“Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you.” — Matthew 28:19–20 (KJV)

We can identify four principal stated tasks:

Stated task Mission requirement
Go Take the Gospel to the nations.
Make disciples Bring people into committed discipleship to Christ.
Baptize Baptize disciples in the name of the Trinity.
Teach Teach disciples to observe everything Christ commanded.

There is also an important enabling condition: Christ’s authority and his promise to remain with his disciples.

2. Identify the implied tasks

This is where your analogy becomes particularly interesting.

A military commander cannot simply issue an order to accomplish a mission without identifying the supporting tasks necessary to accomplish it.

Likewise, the Great Commission does not explicitly describe every activity necessary to make disciples of all nations.

For example:

Implied task Why it is necessary
Evangelism People must hear the Gospel.
Translation People must understand the Gospel in their own languages.
Apologetics Objections and misunderstandings must be addressed.
Catechesis New believers must be instructed in Christian doctrine.
Church establishment Disciples need a continuing community of faith.
Leadership development Churches need qualified teachers and shepherds.
Pastoral care Disciples need guidance and spiritual support.
Doctrinal preservation Christ’s teachings must be faithfully transmitted.
Missionary deployment The Church must organize its efforts to reach different nations.

Notice something important: These are not necessarily optional activities. They are logical requirements, or at least important means, for accomplishing the stated mission.

However, we must distinguish between an implied task that is genuinely necessary and a preferred method of accomplishing a task.

For example, establishing churches is a reasonable implication of making disciples. Requiring every church to use a particular organizational structure is a further interpretive conclusion.

That distinction becomes very important when comparing denominations.

3. Does every denomination have to develop interpretations and explanations?

Absolutely.

Even denominations that strongly emphasize Sola Scriptura must interpret Scripture to determine how to execute the Great Commission.

Sola Scriptura means Scripture is the ultimate and sufficient authority for Christian doctrine, not that Scripture eliminates the need for interpretation, teaching, historical research, or theological reasoning.

Consider some questions that Matthew 28 does not explicitly answer:

    • What exactly constitutes making a disciple?

    • What is the proper understanding of baptism?

    • Who has the authority to baptize?

    • What does it mean to teach someone to observe everything Christ commanded?

    • How should churches be organized?

    • How should Christian doctrine be preserved and transmitted?

    • How should disagreements about biblical interpretation be resolved?

Every Christian tradition must answer these questions.

The difference is in the sources of authority they recognize when answering them.

4. Comparing Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant approaches

Here is where your observation about Catholic and Orthodox Christianity deserves serious consideration.

RomanCatholicChurch

Recognizes three closely related elements in transmitting the Christian faith:

    • Sacred Scripture

    • Sacred Tradition

    • The teaching authority of the Church (Magisterium)

Its approach draws on centuries of councils, papal teaching, theologians, liturgy, and doctrinal development.

EasternOrthodoxChurch

Understands Scripture within Holy Tradition, including:

    • The writings of the Church Fathers

    • Ecumenical councils

    • Liturgical worship

    • The Church’s historic interpretation of Scripture

    • The continuity of apostolic teaching

It emphasizes the Church’s continuity with the faith and worship of the early Church

Protestanttraditions

Generally recognize Scripture as the ultimate doctrinal authority, although they differ considerably in their understanding of tradition and church authority.

They also draw on:

    • Early Church Fathers

    • Historical theology

    • Biblical scholarship

    • Confessions and creeds

    • Denominational theological traditions

One important qualification: Catholicism and Orthodoxy are not identical in their understanding of authority. For example, Catholicism recognizes the distinctive teaching authority of the pope, whereas Eastern Orthodoxy understands authority through the episcopate, councils, and the Church’s conciliar tradition.

5. Do Catholic and Orthodox Christians have the most thorough research and explanations?

I would distinguish between two different questions.

QuestionA: Which traditions have the most extensive historical and institutional theological development?

Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy have particularly extensive bodies of historical theology.

They have accumulated centuries of:

    • Biblical interpretation.

    • Theological scholarship.

    • Ecclesiastical councils.

    • Formal doctrinal definitions.

    • Liturgical development.

    • Writings from bishops, theologians, and Church Fathers.

    • Methods for addressing doctrinal disputes.

This is an important historical reality.

QuestionB: Does that necessarily mean their interpretations are always the most accurate or authoritative?

That is a different question.

The volume, age, and institutional continuity of theological research do not, by themselves, establish that every theological conclusion is correct.

Protestant traditions also have substantial bodies of scholarship, including biblical languages, historical theology, systematic theology, and textual criticism.

The underlying disagreement is about the authority by which theological conclusions are validated.

6. Applying your military planning framework more completely

I would take your analogy one step further.

In military planning, identifying implied tasks is not enough. You must also identify essential tasks.

An essential task is one that must be accomplished for the mission to succeed.

Applying that principle to the Great Commission:

Category Example
Stated task Make disciples of all nations.
Implied task Establish communities where disciples can learn and grow.
Essential task Faithfully transmit Christ’s teachings to those disciples.
Supporting task Develop teachers and church leaders.
Method of execution Establish a particular system of church governance.

This gives us an important distinction:

The Great Commission establishes the mission. Scripture provides the doctrinal foundation. The Church must interpret, organize, and execute the mission.

The remaining question is how the Church determines whether its implied tasks and methods are faithful to Christ’s instructions.

7. An important biblical consideration: Who was originally responsible for executing the mission?

There is another passage I would put alongside Matthew 28:16–20.

In Acts 2:42, the early Christians devoted themselves to:

    • The apostles’ teaching.

    • Fellowship.

    • Breaking of bread.

    • Prayers.

This is significant because it provides an early picture of how the apostolic community organized its life following Christ’s commission.

It suggests that the Great Commission was not understood simply as an individual evangelism assignment. It involved establishing and maintaining a community of disciples grounded in apostolic teaching and worship.

That gives us an important historical question:

If Christ commissioned the apostles, and the apostles established the early Church, shouldn’t the practices and teachings of that early Church be important evidence when determining how the Great Commission was intended to be executed?

Catholics and Orthodox Christians would answer that question emphatically in the affirmative.

Many Protestants would agree that the early Church is important evidence, while maintaining that its teachings and practices must ultimately be tested against Scripture.

My assessment of your central argument

I think you are identifying a legitimate weakness in simplistic presentations of Sola Scriptura.

Sometimes the argument is presented as though reading the Bible alone eliminates the need for an interpretive authority or a theological framework.

But that is not how Christian communities actually function.

Even a congregation that claims to follow the Bible alone must make interpretive decisions about baptism, communion, church leadership, discipleship, worship, and doctrine.

The real debate is not whether interpretation is necessary. It is who has the authority to interpret, what sources inform that interpretation, and how the Church distinguishes faithful interpretation from error.

I would leave you with one particularly important question:

If Jesus gave the Great Commission to the apostles, and those apostles established the Church, should we understand the Church’s subsequent teachings, practices, and historical continuity as merely optional reference material, or as essential evidence for understanding how Christ intended his mission to be carried out?

That question gets to the heart of the Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant disagreements about Scripture, Tradition, and Church authority.

Epilogue

This Question and Answer (Q&A) process with AI reminds me of a class where students and the professor interact, with interchangeable roles.  I ask questions, review responses and questions, and can follow up with more questions.  Beyond a post or article, some sessions became so extensive they could be published in a series or book. (An example: Quality Leadership Matters: A Journey of Discovery in the Age of Artificial Intelligence).

ChatGPT Response:

I like the classroom analogy. It captures something important about our discussion: learning is not necessarily a one-way process in which a teacher delivers information and a student simply receives it. Questions, challenges, follow-up questions, and reflection can deepen both participants’ understanding.

Here is a polished version that preserves your conversational tone:

Reminds me of taking a class where there is an ongoing interaction between students and the professor. The roles can be interchangeable: I ask questions, examine the responses, challenge assumptions, and follow up with more questions.

Through that process, ideas are explored, perspectives are challenged, and understanding develops. Eventually, the discussion can be summarized in a post or paper, benefiting both the teacher and the student.

In a sense, that’s what this discussion has become. We are exploring Scripture, theology, history, and the implications of what we believe. The objective isn’t simply to get answers, but to ask better questions and arrive at a deeper understanding.

One thought: I particularly like your observation that the roles are interchangeable. It reflects the idea that teaching and learning can happen simultaneously. A good question from a student can cause a teacher to revisit an assumption, examine historical evidence, or articulate an explanation more clearly. That is a productive intellectual and theological exchange.

 

Christians with opposing beliefs

Tim J. Clark Uncategorized

Sep 25, 2026. Brown County Pride returns bigger, By Nicole Whitaker

Oct 16, 2026. Letter to the Editor: Biblical truths and modern relationships by Ken Wagler

  • The conversation surrounding human sexuality and the LGBTQIA+ community is one of the most significant topics facing the church today. Navigating this sensitive subject requires Christians to hold firmly to biblical truth while reflecting the profound unconditional love of Jesus Christ, through a faithful and compassionate examination of the Scripture.

Oct 23, 2026. Letter to the Editor: A rebuttal to condemnation of LGBTQ, Michael Day, Nashville

  • This letter is in response to Ken Wagler’s opinion piece in the Brown County Democrat.
    Not all Christians share in his opinion/views of LGBTQ behavior.
  •  I felt a strongly different sexual attraction, I would want my neighbor to accept that and not be critical of it, if I posed no danger to them.

The Ancient Tapestry of Duty: Military Doctrine, Joint Publications, and the Foundations of Human Behavior

Tim J. Clark Uncategorized
Summary of AI responses to the topics: Biblical Guidance and Military History and Doctrine, along with parallel  areas of study and traditions 
When we seek enduring models for human behavior, leadership, and moral responsibility, our minds naturally turn to theological frameworks and sacred texts. The Bible and ancient spiritual traditions provide the bedrock principles of human dignity, stewardship, and moral accountability.
Yet, running parallel to these spiritual traditions is an equally ancient, rigorously tested practical tradition: the accumulated wisdom of military history, professional ethics, and codified doctrine. Long before modern governance was codified, warrior codes, operational histories, and institutional discipline served as humanity’s primary laboratories for defining duty, honor, and shared responsibility under extreme stress.
Examining this lineage—from ancient texts and timeless principles to modern institutional guidance like U.S. Joint Publications—reveals a continuous thread of professional and ethical tradition that shapes how free societies maintain order, leadership, and accountability.

1. The Antiquity of Military Ethics and Doctrine

Military history is fundamentally a record of organized human conflict and cooperation under conditions of ultimate stress. Because warfare requires immense collective effort and demands that individuals subordinate personal survival to a greater mission, ancient civilizations quickly recognized that raw force alone was insufficient. Survival and victory required shared norms, rigorous discipline, and clear behavioral boundaries.

  • Ancient Codes and Epics: Foundational texts like Sun Tzu’s The Art of War, the Mahabharata’s moral discourse on duty and just war, and the rigorous jurisprudence of Roman military discipline established early frameworks for professional conduct, the treatment of non-combatants, and the lawful exercise of authority.

     

  • The Evolution of the Profession: Over centuries, these accumulated lessons transformed from an unwritten warrior ethos into formal institutional expectations, creating a continuous thread of professional ethics that predated many modern legal systems.

2. The Bedrock: The Principles of War

At the heart of military doctrine lie the enduring Principles of War—time-tested maxims that guide commanders in applying combat power and organizational energy. While forged in the crucible of armed conflict, these principles serve as universal tenets for effective leadership, strategic planning, and crisis management in any complex environment:

  • Objective: Direct every military operation toward a clearly defined, decisive, and attainable goal. Knowing precisely what success looks like prevents wasted effort.

  • Offensive: Act with initiative rather than merely reacting to events, seizing and retaining the momentum.

     

  • Mass: Concentrate the effects of overwhelming combat power at the decisive place and time.

     

  • Economy of Force: Allocate minimum essential power to secondary efforts so that maximum strength can be applied where it matters most.

     

  • Maneuver: Place the enemy or the problem at a disadvantage through the flexible application of movement and combat power.

     

  • Unity of Command: Ensure unity of effort under one responsible commander for every objective, eliminating ambiguity and divided loyalties.

     

  • Security: Never permit an adversary to acquire an unexpected advantage, maintaining constant vigilance and protection.

     

  • Surprise: Strike at a time, place, or in a manner for which the adversary is unprepared.

  • Simplicity: Prepare clear, uncomplicated plans and concise orders to ensure thorough understanding and execution across all echelons.

3. Modern Additions: Adapting to Complex Realities

As the nature of conflict evolved into complex, asymmetric, and protracted environments, military thought leaders recognized that traditional maxims alone required expansion. To bridge the gap between tactical victory and lasting strategic success, joint doctrine formally integrated crucial modern principles:

  • Restraint: The disciplined balancing of the need for security against the necessity to limit collateral damage and prevent the unnecessary use of force. Restraint demands strict self-governance under pressure.

  • Perseverance: Recognizing that underlying causes of conflict can be deep and elusive, perseverance ensures the patient, resolute, and persistent commitment necessary to attain the ultimate strategic objective.

     

  • Legitimacy: Maintaining the legal and moral authority in the conduct of operations. Rooted in actual and perceived rightness, fairness, and adherence to laws, legitimacy is often the decisive factor in securing enduring peace and public trust.

4. Doctrine as Institutional Culture and Behavioral Guardrails

In contemporary military systems, doctrine does much more than dictate tactics on a battlefield. It defines organizational culture, shared mental models, and the baseline expectations of how professionals should think, act, and lead.

  • Guiding Principles: Modern doctrine captures hard-won lessons paid for with operational failure and sacrifice. It institutionalizes collective memory, ensuring that new generations of leaders do not have to relearn foundational mistakes from scratch.

     

  • Values and Ethics: Beyond technical execution, doctrine explicitly embeds core values—such as integrity, selfless service, loyalty, and personal accountability—that govern conduct in peace just as surely as they do in war.

5. The American Lineage: The Role of Joint Publications

In the United States military context, this lineage is formally captured, refined, and continuously updated within the Joint Publications system overseen by the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

  • Joint Doctrine (e.g., Joint Publication 3-0): These manuals represent the codified synthesis of American military experience, strategic thought, and operational art. They establish standard terminology, fundamental principles, and unified guidance for conducting operations across all military services.

     

  • Beyond Tactics: While Joint Publications focus on the synchronization of joint forces, they are deeply rooted in the philosophy of command, leadership dynamics, and the ethical application of national power. They reflect a deliberate effort to harmonize historical lessons with the complexities of modern civic and operational environments.
While theological traditions offer the essential moral and spiritual compass for human behavior, military history and doctrine provide an equally ancient, highly practical tradition focused on collective survival, duty under fire, and principled leadership in the face of chaos. Through institutional mechanisms like the Principles of War—augmented by modern tenets of restraint, perseverance, and legitimacy—the military profession continually translates centuries of historical experience into living guidance for those charged with defending free institutions.

Other Areas of Study and Traditions 

Philosophy is perhaps the most direct and profound parallel. If the Bible provides the moral and spiritual foundation and military doctrine provides practical, operational execution under fire, philosophy supplies the rigorous intellectual architecture that bridges the two.

Several major areas of study and traditions naturally fall into this same category of providing enduring guidance for human behavior, leadership, and social order:

1. Philosophy and Ethics (The Intellectual Framework)

Philosophy has spent millennia attempting to answer the exact same core question: How ought a human being to live and act within a community?

  • Virtue Ethics: From Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics to Stoicism (figures like Marcus Aurelius and Epictetus), philosophy treats character not as a fixed trait, but as a habit built through discipline, courage, temperance, and wisdom. Stoicism, in particular, was explicitly designed as a mental and behavioral toolkit for maintaining duty and emotional equilibrium under severe external stress—making it a natural bridge between philosophy and military codes.

  • Political and Social Philosophy: Works addressing the social contract (Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau) and the nature of justice (Plato’s Republic) establish the underlying rationale for why free citizens accept authority, law, and shared sacrifice.

2. Legal Jurisprudence and Natural Law

Long before modern statutory codes, the tradition of Natural Law—championed by thinkers like Cicero, Thomas Aquinas, and later enshrined in constitutional frameworks—posited that certain moral and behavioral truths are inherent in human nature and discoverable through reason.

  • This tradition sets the conceptual boundaries of legitimate authority, the rule of law, and the fundamental duties individuals owe one another, anchoring both civil governance and military rules of engagement (such as Just War Theory).

3. Classical Literature and Epic Traditions

Across almost every civilization, foundational narratives and epics have served as cultural textbooks for transmitting behavioral norms, honor, and tragedy.

  • Beyond the Mahabharata and Sun Tzu, works like Homer’s Iliad and Odyssey, classical Greek tragedies (Sophocles, Aeschylus), and historical accounts like Thucydides’ History of the Peloponnesian War explore the crushing weight of leadership choices, hubris, loyalty, and the consequences of moral failure under pressure. They provide case studies in human nature long before formal psychology existed.

4. Professional Codes of Ethics (Medicine, Law, and Engineering)

Modeled similarly to military professionalism, specialized civil professions developed their own binding traditions of conduct—such as the Hippocratic Oath in medicine or canons of engineering ethics.

  • These traditions share the fundamental premise that certain roles carry unique responsibilities and temptations, requiring a formalized, counter-cultural commitment to putting the welfare of others or the public trust above personal gain.

By placing these side-by-side, you see a magnificent, interconnected web of guidance: Theology provides the spiritual compass; Philosophy provides the rational justification and framework for virtue; Classical literature and history provide the narrative human examples; and Military doctrine and jurisprudence provide the hard-tested mechanisms for translating those ideals into collective survival and disciplined action under chaos.