Over the past three months, we have been considering the question whether it makes a difference what name the corporate body of Christians wears. Of course, it begins with an appreciation and respect for the name of God Himself. It is holy and consequently, wherever He attaches His name, it is holy. Wherever God places His name, it belongs to Him. He has authority over it. Therefore, in name and action it is to honor God.
That applies to the nation of Israel, the city of Jerusalem and especially the temple. In the New Testament age, the nation of Christians, the spiritual city of Christianity, and the spiritual temple bear the name of God and His Son, Jesus Christ. The church is the term God chose to use most frequently to identify this spiritual people which bears His name.
But through the course of history, sinful, selfish man has frequently refused to humble himself to God’s standards. He has decided to teach other doctrines than what Christ’s church has been instructed to teach. Many letters in the New Testament deal with these false teachers. At that stage, while some false teachers were identified by name, there did not seem to be an organized movement, bearing its own name/designation. In the days of John, some “went out from us, but they were not really of us” (1 John 2:19). That almost sounds like an organized movement away from the Truth.
Certain false ideas came to be identified by Greek terms associated with those ideas, like gnosticism and docetism. Yet, as far as I know, there was no “Gnostic Church” or “Docetic Church.” Some heretical ideas were associated with the chief proponent of those ideas, like the Manichaeans after Manichaeus (216-276 A. D.). Some heretical Christians dredged up ideas from ancient Greece and synthesized those ideas with Christianity and came to be identified as neoplatonists. Again, as far as I know, there was no “Church of Manichaeus” or “Neoplatonist Church.”
With heretical ideas swirling around, named after men like Montanus (montanists) or monarchianists (propagated by a heretic named Paul of Samosata), or donatists (after Donatus), those who believed they were teaching the “universally accepted” truth of the Gospel called themselves the Catholic (“universal”) Church. But when others divided with the catholics over what was supposed to be standard doctrine, they came to be identified as the Orthodox Church.
Can you see where and how men quit honoring Christ; they quit submitting to His authority? Honestly, it’s because they no longer belonged to Him and their names/designations reflected that. Rather than trying to be the church of Christ, they were simply trying to distinguish themselves from one another.
A pharmacy that is not online viagra canada present physically may be working for selling fake medicines only. A lot of the directories additionally categorize their purchase generic levitra vets. In fact most men avoid it and never gulp a tablet without recommendation. viagra 100mg sales http://deeprootsmag.org/2013/04/16/on-dawning-saffron-engages-east-and-west-in-service-to-rumis-impassioned-insights/ order viagra It is rather popular as a memory stimulant, but is a natural substance that does more than that.
The Protestant Reformation continued in the same vein. When Luther began preaching against abuses among the Catholic priests, those who followed him and his doctrine came to be identified as Lutherans. Those connected with John Calvin were Calvinists. Some, with pure motives no doubt, realized certain doctrines were being neglected and started emphasizing those doctrines. Subsequently, they came to be identified with those doctrines: Anabaptists, Baptists, Congregationalists, Episcopalians, Presbyterians.
The problem with emphasizing one doctrine (to the point you become identified with that doctrine by name) is that you neglect other doctrines. The only way to stay balanced and to emphasize what needs to be emphasized is to go back to being the “church” of Christ. Focus on Him and all of His doctrines (see Acts 20:27).
In modern times, we have seen the rise of “community” churches and other “non-denominational” churches with nondescript names like “The Rock.” It is somewhat humorous to see and hear what man decides to call his churches, to distinguish them from other churches. But they keep failing to honor Christ by wearing His name. They have jettisoned the names of old mainline churches (Baptist, Methodist, Presbyterian) because they see a lot of “baggage” hanging on those names. But they keep the same old doctrines of men.
If the church of Christ is not reflecting the doctrine and character of Jesus Christ, changing the name does not resolve the issue. If we are to be pleasing to Jesus, we cannot stop being the church of Christ but we might go back to being the church of Christ (Rom. 16:16).
–Paul Holland
