Many in the church today are disturbed when the preacher calls the name of various denominations in identifying certain religious errors. Neither personal nor denominational names ought to be used according to these people. Just preach general principles and let it go at that.
Jesus condemned the practices of the Pharisees and the scribes in the strongest terms, and he called the religious groups by name. More than that, he called their names to their faces. As an example note this language: "But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in" (Matt. 23:13). Jesus directed the statement to those condemned and He identified them by their religious names. He also specified their sins without apology. Now if we follow this pattern today, many in the church are offended.
The Holy Spirit by Paul said: "For which I am an ambassador in bonds: that therein I may speak boldly, as I ought to speak" (Eph. 6:20). "That I may make it manifest, as I ought to speak" (Col. 4:4). "But as we were allowed of God to be put in trust with the gospel, even so we speak; not as pleasing men, but God, which trieth our hearts" (1 Thess. 2:4). "Seeing then that we have such hope, we use great plainness of speech" (2 Cor. 3:12).
We must speak boldly to make manifest the truth of the gospel, not to please men, but God, and we must use great plainness of speech. This requires the calling of names when it is necessary to manifest the truth of God. What good will it do to speak of a true fact that is not understood or applied by the hearer? The principle is the same as in speaking in unknown tongues when there are none to interpret. No one is edified.
There is, however, a danger in calling names in the wrong connection. To call a man a name he repudiates is wrong. Frequently, I have been called a "Campbellite," but I deny that religious name. I do not claim to follow Campbell in any sense; I do not claim to be a member of anything started by Campbell or any other man. But if I did glory in the name "Campbellite" and if I willingly applied that name to my religious belief, it would be right to call me by that name in order to identify my religious affiliation.
To call one a Baptist, Methodist, Presbyterian, or Catholic, when he willingly applies the name to his own religious affiliation, is not to call him a name in reproach. Then why do men become angry when the name they willingly wear religiously is called publicly? It is not because the name is called publicly but because that religious body is identified as being in error. That is what makes men angry. If the name were called with approval, they would rejoice in the fact that the name is used publicly.
I would call no man a name he repudiates. If one who is a member of the Baptist Church should repudiate that name, I would never call him a Baptist. However, I have never met a member of the Baptist Church who would reject that name, therefore, I call him Baptist because he willingly wears that name. I am never offended when one calls me a Christian because I wear that name with honor. I am a member of the church of Christ and I am not offended when men speak of me as belonging to the church of Christ. I reject the name "Campbellite" and do not wear the name. Those who call me by that name are either ignorant of the facts or else they are willingly calling me a name I repudiate.
In addition to names of religious bodies, Paul used the personal names of those who sinned in order to apply the principles of right and wrong. "Holding faith, and a good conscience; which some having put away concerning faith have made shipwreck: of who is Hymanaeus and Alexander; whom I have delivered unto Satan, that they may learn not to blaspheme" (1 Tim. 1:19,20).
Hindrances to Unity
by H. E. Phillips
With all lowliness and meekness, with longsuffering, forbearing one another in love; endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace (Eph. 4:2-3).
The idea of religious unity has created many movements toward that end, some of them creating even more discord and party spirit. The religious world today is terribly divided over many matters. Even in the church there are parties that expel any resemblance of the unity taught in the New Testament.
The very term "denomination" strongly implies division. It refers to different religious bodies called by different names to distinguish them. Division is condemned by the Holy Spirit. "Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them" (Rom. 16:17). "Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment" (1 Cor. 1:10). By the questions: "Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were ye baptized the name of Paul?" (vs. 13), the apostle shows the absurdity of division growing out of the doctrine of Christ.
Unity is a part of the doctrine of Christ. He prayed that those who believe on Him should be one in the same way and sense that Christ and the Father are one (John 17:20-21). We are to endeavor to KEEP THE UNITY of the Spirit. We are to try (test) the spirits to know whether they are of God or men. "Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world" (1 John 4:1).
In spite of these statements by the Holy Spirit and the efforts of godly men and women, there are some hindrances that stand in the way of true unity. I shall mention only two or three.
1. Ignorance. Many will accept the idea of unity in words, but because they do not know the doctrine of the New Testament they practice division. It takes more than word of mouth to accomplish unity among the disciples. Ignorance causes some to draw conclusions from partial evidence (they are not acquainted with the Bible to know all the evidence), and then demand that all others accept their conclusions. The idea that there are saved in all churches is not reached by studying the word of God. The doctrine that moral goodness is all that is required to effect unity does not come from the word of God. Ignorance of the nature and mission of the church of our Lord has caused much division, and it is the very foundation upon which the denominations are built today.
2. Loyalty to men. Paul warned of false teachers within the church who would lead others away from the truth. "For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock. Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them" (Acts 20:29-30). Jesus gave a like warning: "Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves" (Matt. 7:15). Loyalty to man is first based upon human wisdom and importance. Just because a certain man has a degree from some college of reputation, or because he is well-known throughout the nation, or because he has material wealth, it does not follow that he is right in his preaching. Human wisdom tends to elevate the man and decrease the importance of God's word. Loyalty to men causes many to accept just about any doctrine they preach, whether it is taught in the New Testament or not. This hinders true unity.
3. Emotionalism. The unnatural appeal to emotion is the usual course followed by false teachers. To millions, the practice and destiny of their parents are of much more importance than what the word of God says. When emotion is aroused beyond its normal function, men and women will not listen to the Book of Books.
