Must Names Always Be Called?
There is no question that there is authority to call the names of those who teach and practice error (1 Tim. 1:20; 2 Tim. 1:15, e.g.) and that this can be done. But must it always be done and is it a sign of weakness on the part of one who refuses to always do so? The best way to answer this question is to examine the practice of speakers and writers in the New Testament. Did they always call the names of the practitioners and proclaimers of error?
The following passages should make it clear that while Luke, Paul, John and Jude sometimes did call names, they also saw fit on other occasions not to mention specifically who they were talking about.
Acts 15:1 “certain men came down from Judaea and taught the brethren, saying, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved.”
Acts 15:24 “certain who went out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls.”
Rom. 16:17 “them that are causing the divisions and occasions of stumbling”
1 Cor. 15:12 “how say some among you that there is no resurrection from the dead”
2 Cor. 10:10 “his letters they say”
2 Cor. 10:12 “certain of them that commend themselves”
2 Cor. 11:13 “such men are false apostles, deceitful workers, fashioning themselves into apostles of Christ”
2 Cor. 12:21 “I am afraid that when I come again my God may humiliate me before you, and I may mourn over many of those who have sinned in the past and not repented of the impurity, immorality and sensuality which they have practiced.”
Gal. 1:7 “there are some that trouble you”
Gal. 2:4 “the false brethren privily brought in”
Gal. 4:17 “they zealously seek you in no good way; nay they desire to shut you out”
Gal. 5:12 “they that unsettle you”
Phil. 1:15 “some indeed preach Christ even of envy and strife”
Phil. 3:18 “many walk of whom I told you often…they are the enemies of the cross of Christ”
2 Thess. 3:11 “some that walk among you disorderly”
1 Tim. 1:3 “charge certain men not to teach a different doctrine”
1 Tim. 1:6 “some having swerved have turned aside unto vain talking”
Tit. 1:10-12 “there are many unruly men, vain talkers and deceivers…one of themselves, a prophet of their own, said,”
1 John 2:19 They went out from us, but they were not really of us; for if they had been of us, they would have remained with us; but they went out, in order that it might be shown that they all are not of us.
1 John 2:26 These things I have written to you concerning those who are trying to deceive you.
2 John 7 “many deceivers are gone forth into the world”
Jude 4 “there are certain men crept in privily, even they who were of old written of beforehand unto this condemnation, ungodly men”
It ought to be obvious, therefore, that the calling of names falls into the realm of judgment; it is not something that must be done always. Thus we err in using “name calling” as some sort of litmus test in determining the “soundness” of a preacher. If one determines to call names that is his prerogative and if one does not call names that is likewise his privilege. The one who chooses not to call names is not necessarily “soft” and “compromising” anymore than the one who does call names is filled with hatred.
In condemning men today who do not always call names, we likewise condemn the four inspired men listed above.
David Smitherman