"Questions About Words And Names"
The gospel of Christ — God's power to save men from sin when faithfully preached — frequently stirs up controversy. We should not think it strange today that proclamation of Christ's last will and testament is the occasion for many arguments. In fact, it would be strange if it were otherwise. The gospel uproots human traditions and tears down idols which men have erected in their hearts. Such human artifices are not easily overthrown. Repenting and conforming to divine standards do not always come easily.
Saul of Tarsus was "exceedingly mad" against Christians and "persecuted this Way upon death" because he considered Christ an imposter and his followers blasphemers of God and the gospel injurious to the Jew's hope through the Law. This was controversy to the fullest.
For preaching the gospel in Philippi, Paul and Silas were accused as those who "do exceedingly trouble our city" and were thrown into orison. In Thessalonica these same two were cried against as "these who have turned the world upside down are come hither also."
If one examines the effect of gospel preaching in the first century, one is struck by the significant fact that there is either something about the gospel or the manner of presenting it that seldom permits men to be indifferent to it. If it is the gospel itself that produces such an effect, and after our preaching today the same effect does not follow, is this not evidence that we are not preaching the same gospel?
Or, if it is not the gospel itself which produced this effect, then it was the manner of preaching of the apostolic preachers. Before we too quickly criticize the "spirit" of these men or their "lack of love" (in our judgment), look at the results they produced. Do we have better manners than they? Do our results equal theirs? I doubt if anyone would be willing to affirm such.
Indifference to gospel Truth is a hard evil to root out. Too many (one is too many) today believe that sifting through the chaff of error in order to find the kernel of Truth is just a matter of "questions about words and names." (Acts 18:15.) To get the best understanding of the point read the first seventeen verses of the chapter.
Such an attitude is denominated by Roman Catholicism as "indifferentism." I do not know of a better title for it. A Catholic dictionary by Attwater defines the word as: "(1.) The denial that the worship of God and the practice of true religion is a duty of man. Thus indifferentism is of varying degrees and expressed in different maxims: . . . 'It does not matter what you believe as long as you act right' "It may be truly said that the whole duty of man is to find the true religion of God and practice it.
Of one thing I am positive: Those of us who earnestly believe in the absolute necessity to restore — "bring men back to" — primitive New Testament Christianity should be so faithfully planting the seed of the kingdom in the apostolic manner that men cannot long , remain indifferent to its distinctive facts and commands and its unique promises. If this we are not doing, we are either falling short of our duties or flying our colors under false pretenses.
The facts and commands of New Testament Christianity which stand so diametrically opposed to that today which is self-denominated "Christianity" are not merely arguments of "names and words." Grave issues are involved; men's souls stand in the balance.
For example: arguing whether baptism is "for ('in order to,' or, 'because of') the remission of sins" involves much more than contending for a certain formula. It involves the very purpose and design of the command. It puts one into Christ. (Gal. 3:27.) It is the means by which one comes in contact with Christ's blood shed in His death. (Rom. 6:3,4.) This being true, those who are not baptized are not in Christ and have not had their sins washed away by his blood. Who would say that such is just a question of "words and names?"
Arguing over whether the local church may contribute to human organizations designed to do the work of the church involves more than arguments over method and whether good should be done. It involves the divine mission of Christ's blood-bought church. It involves the bed-rock principle of divine organization.
The spirit of indifferentism has some very definite causes and undeniable effects. Sometimes these causes are so deeply rooted in one's mind that they are not apparent to the individual. But, nevertheless, they are there. Space will not allow us to describe such causes and effects but we will name a few.
Causes Of Indifferentism:
1. The inability and/or failure to appreciate the value of Truth. The love of Truth and the unwillingness to stop short of it have been the incentives which produced most of our "modern miracles." What horrible devastations would have been wrought if our medical scientist had thought that ascertaining causes to diseases — with the arguments brought on by their efforts — was only questions about "words and names!" They spent arduous hours searching for the true answers. What rich rewards their searchings brought! (Cp. II Thess. 2:10-12.)
In Christ "are all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge hidden." (Col. 2:3.) And this search offers the richest possible treasure: eternal life.
2. Not a high regard for the ability to differentiate between right and wrong. Paul prayed that the Philippians might learn "to approve the things that are excellent" in order that they might have fruit in Christ and thus be assured of everlasting life. (Phil. 1:9, 10.)
3. A failure to realize the certain fruits of error. We will mention some of the fruits under effects.
4. The fear of being personally condemned — and therefore the desire to avoid such unpleasantness's which accompany self-condemnation. Finding Truth is of little value unless one conforms to it. And to conform to it demands a change. And changes, for most people, are unpleasant.
Effects Of Indifferentism:
1. It destroys confidence in .the Bible as God's
Word. If, because of indifferentism, one can believe that the Bible teaches oppositely on the same question, this is all the Devil needs to discredit God's Word in one's mind.
2. It undermines faith in God. Since God is the author of the Bible, and if one lacks confidence in His ability to accurately reveal Himself to man, the very next step is to disbelieve in God.
3. It deifies man. If one can't believe in God, since he must believe in someone, man begins to believe in himself. And then one is doomed. The "wisdom of men" does battle against the "foolishness of God."
But, there are some things which are purely questions about "words and names." How do we determine such? By personal preference or opinion? Or, by what appears "unreasonable?" The first thing one must do is make sure one has a genuine love of and high regard for Truth. Fight indifferentism. Then, examine the evidence. There is no way to determine what is or what is not "questions about words and names" until the evidence for or against has been properly evaluated.
For example: some brethren believe the New Testament authorizes only "one cup" in drinking the fruit of the vine. Is this a "silly" thing? Most of us have been using "many cups" all of our lives. Established practice does not make a thing right. When one considers all the arguments for "the one cup" in the light of divine teaching, one is then able to say that this is a "question about words and names." But not until this has been done can we be sure. "Prove all things." (I Thess. 5:21.)
The point to this lesson is to increase love for Truth and to discredit the idea that controversy instigated through a study of the New Testament is only "questions of names and words."