For all of those who have yet to grasp this Biblical concept -
---------
It Is Right To Name Names?
Many mistakenly believe that it is wrong to expose error and to name the guilty teachers; but they are wrong according to the Bible.
Paul named Peter publicly. Peter was guilty of unscriptural practice. ��But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed...But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of the Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?� (Gal.2: 11-14). The whole issue revolved around salvation by the law or by grace. When the integrity and purity of the gospel is at stake, then we have no choice when it comes to the matter of exposing error and naming names.
Paul named Demas for loving the world. �For Demas hath forsaken me, having loved this present world� (II Tim. 4:10). Those who forsake the cause of Christ for worldly living and pleasure should be named and exposed.
Paul named Hymenaeus and Alexander. Paul told Timothy to �war a good warfare; Holding faith, and a good conscience; which some have put away concerning faith have made shipwreck: Of whom is Hymenaeus and Alexander; whom I have delivered unto Satan, that they may learn not to blaspheme� (I Tim.1: 18-20). God�s true servants should war a good warfare, and name those who have departed from the faith that was once delivered to the saints. Paul is not here discussing the faith of salvation but the faith was a system of doctrine. These men had made shipwreck of it and Paul exposed them and called their names.
Paul named Hymenaeus and Philetus. He told Timothy to �study� that he might be able to �rightly� divide �the word of truth. But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness. And their word will eat as doth as canker: of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus; who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some� (II Tim.2: 15-18). False doctrine overthrows the faith of some, so those who are proclaiming it must be exposed.
Paul named Alexander the coppersmith. �Alexander the coppersmith did me much evil: the Lord reward him according to his works: Of whom be thou ware also; for he hath greatly withstood our words� (II Tim.4: 14-15). It is clear that this is not a personality problem, but a doctrinal problem. Alexander had withstood the words and doctrine of Paul. He was an enemy to the truth. Godly pastors face the same problem every day. They stand and proclaim the truth, and then their members go home and hear this truth disputed by radio and TV preachers. Often times these false prophets are sending their publications into the homes of members of true churches. Then the man of God is supposed to keep his mouth shut, according to many. Only a coward will be silent when the truth of the Bible is under attack.
John named Diotrephes. �I wrote unto the church; but Diotrephes, who loveth to have the pre-eminence among them, receiveth us not� (III John 9). He related how this man had prated again him �with malicious words� (v10). He further said, �Beloved, follow not that which is evil, but that which is good. He that doeth good is of God, but he that doeth evil hath not seen God� (v.11). It is not wrong to name those whose doctrine and practice is contrary to the Word of God.
In fact, the whole Bible abounds in examples of false prophets being named and exposed. All this modern day talk about love, used as an excuse for not exposing error, is not really biblical love but is really sloppy agape.
Jude exposed �the error Balaam� (Jude 11). John exposed �the doctrine of Balaam, who taught Balac to cast a stumbling block before the children of Israel, to eat things sacrificed unto idols, and to commit fornication.� (Rev.2: 14). This gets right to the heart of the matter, concerning the doctrine of separation. Balaam never did curse Israel even though he wanted the wages that he was offered to do so. The men of Israel committed �whoredom with the daughters of Moab ...and bowed down to their gods� (Num.25: 1,2). Why did they do this? Because Balaam taught Balac how to break down the barrier of separation between the Moabites and the Israelites. We know this to be so because it is plainly stated in Rev.2:14 and Num.31:16. This sin resulted in 24,000 men of Israel dying under the judgment of God.
Nathan identified the man. There was a man in a very high place who was a secretly an adulterer. Surely a lowly unpopular prophet could not rebuke this man who held the highest office in the land. Nathan went right into the presence of David, revealed the sin in a parable form, and then told the enraged David, �Thou art the man� (II Sam.12: 7).
Hanani named king Jehoshophat. In many ways Jehoshophat was a good king, but he mistakenly forgot to practice religious separation. He caused his son to marry wicked king Ahab�s daughter. (See II Chron.18: 1; 21:1-6). He made an alliance with Ahab and went to the battle of Ramoth-Gilead with him (II Chron. 19:2). We have a question for those who insist on working with charismatics, Catholics, and members of the National Council of Churches. �Shouldest thou help the ungodly, and love them that hate the Lord?�
Yes, it is right to expose error and to name those who are in error.
It is right to �earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints� (Jude 3). It was once delivered and it has never been recalled for revision. We had better beware of �false teachers ... who privily shall bring in damnable heresies� (II Pet.2: 1). Faithful messengers will warn the sheep of these heretics, and identify them by name. It is not enough to broadly hint of their identity, for the young lambs will not understand and will be destroyed by the wolves.
I don't think anyone thinks it's wrong to name names, I could be wrong though. I think the problem you should be referring to is people's opposition to the way names are named and the names used, and how those methods violate forum rules. I don't think Paul was in the business of public humiliation or name-calling, and I don't think Peter's error, even though it was a pretty big error, was so big that Paul did not deal with Peter in love or caused Paul to consider Peter to be someone less than a follower of Jesus. Yes, it's definitely expected that we are to call out error when we see it, but not to cast down or puff up or humiliate. Gentle correction, truth spoken in love, patience, endurance, long-suffering, giving preference to the weaker believer, using wisdom, being harmless as doves, etc. Those are all biblical principles/verses. I'm not sure you're saying this exactly, but I would like to see a bible verse where it says to speak the truth, consequences be damned? Shoot first, deal with collateral damage later? Even Jesus didn't do that, and He is God.
Also, I'm glad you put "teaching" in parentheses. I only see people offering their opinions most of the time. The only ones I would consider to be "Teachers" are the ones who maintain that they are absolutely right and have nothing to add or learn in a discussion.
"I answered the question! Everybody else agree or be quiet!"
Personally, I think you have an axe to grind, for whatever reasons. So, I am not going to go back and forth over theoretical arguments.
Have you paid attention to recent threads? Threads about Billy Graham? Paul Crouch? Nelson Mandela? , etc. What about past threads where others such as Osteen or Hinn have been called out?
This article address the issues that have arisen from threads like those. There are some WEAKER folks here who do not seem to understand the Biblical principles concerning evil men, false teachers, false prophets, etc and how they are to be dealt with. These WEAKER members make comments like, we shouldn't "spew poo from the pew", "it's just not Godly and its not righteous" to "criticize" people by name. They refer to those who point out error as, "divisive", "bashers", "stooping to Satan's level", "bashing Yahshua's kids", "accusing the brethren", and a host of other IGNORANT labels.
Sadly, often times those who do good here are called evil and those doing evil are applauded and encouraged.
I have the same axe to grind as you do. Truth. You're free to stand up and proclaim the truth, and I will always encourage you to do so. However, it's "how" you go through with it that I have a problem with, not for myself per se, but because I see how ineffective it makes you. In your current mode, you're just another divider who loses patience with people, and instead of realizing that and changing, you shift the problem onto everybody else. Take the time, endure the hardship, stay patient and gentle, accept that everyone is not on the level you think they should be, and you might actually have an effect in the edification of a few more people than you currently have. That should be your most sought after goal, not casting people off to the side and ignoring them when they hold on to the "truth" they've been taught. Perhaps instead of treating everyone like false teachers, treat them like the people who have been deceived by the false teachers. All I'm getting from you right now is that you wish I was gone so you wouldn't have to deal with/listen to me. That is not the attitude you should have.
Your "concern" for my "ineffectiveness" at proclaiming the truth is touching, Mark. :ribbit:
Unfortunately, due to the fact that you are a hardened cult follower, your credibility is suspect. It's very hard to even truly consider anything that you have to say considering your view of truth is heavily skewed and that your whole perspective of reaity is seen through a false filter.
"You and I cannot be useful if we want to be sweet as honey in the mouths of men. God will never bless us if we wish to please men, that they may think well of us. Are you willing to tell them what will break your own heart in the telling and break theirs in the hearing? If not, you are not fit to serve the Lord. You must be willing to go and speak for God, though you will be rejected." --C.H. Spurgeon
Well, good advice should still be good advice, take it or leave it. I provided enough biblical support, but you're allowed to ignore it I suppose, so long as you can discredit the messenger. Are you entirely sure that you aren't the hardened cult follower?:goofball:
You may or may not be aware of this but I read and study the Bible quite a bit. I just don't draw the same conclusions from it that you do. Therefore, what you might believe is "Biblical support" proves not to be so in many cases.
Since SDA has been around less than 200 years and one of it's founders and "leaders" was both a proven plagiarist and a FALSE prophet, you are the one blindly following the cult, my friend.
My belief system is historic orthodox Christianity traceable to the Apostles. I've taken the time to address this before also.
8Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance: 9And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham. 10And now also the axe is laid unto the root of the trees: therefore every tree which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.
Galatians 5
22But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, 23 Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law.
I'm not really concerned with how far back you can trace your theological lineage. What fruit are you displaying?
Are you getting paid to be my judge here? I am just curious because you spend an inordinate amount of posts trying to make these same points. You've proven time and time again that you are incapable of right judgment. You are selective in the enforcement of the standards that you proclaim -- thereby you show that you lack justice which is a weightier matter of the law.
Further, you have consistently defended others here who have been repeatedly shown to lie and bear false witness. Please let me know when you get tired of calling EVIL - good and good -evil. Okay?
Btw, Mark you are perverting those Scriptures. (why am I not shocked? ) I am neither an ethnic Jew nor a Judaizer. I am of the FAITH of Abraham not the genetic seed.
