Preaching and naming names: when is it appropriate to mention the names of other preachers?

In the manuscript below you will notice that I “call out” one of prosperity preachers by the name of Creflo Dollar. My sermon on Philippians 4 dealt with Paul’s contentment both in hunger and in abundance. I mention Creflo Dollar and his comment that you won’t have peace if you don’t have money. I believe that such teaching is a serious offense to the teaching of the Bible and contrary to the heart of the gospel.


This, however, does raise a good question, namely when is it appropriate to mention the name of other preachers in a sermon, particularly when it is a point of disagreement?

This Specific Example

In this particular example, I not only feel it is appropriate but I believe it is important to do so. The reason is that believe that prosperity gospel preachers manipulate the gospel and do serious harm to the body of Christ. The prosperity teaching, namely that God promises His children will be healthy, wealthy, and always abounding, is a serious assault on the biblical text and completely contrary to the teachings of the Bible.

Therefore, as a pastor who takes the protection of his flock very seriously, I will unapologetically continue (when appropriate) to expose those teachings and teachers in the culture who do serious manipulation to the gospel of Jesus Christ. I have, and will continue, to address serious theological error that are in the mainstream Christian culture.

The Larger Context

Given what I have stated above, one should not conclude that preaching should be a time of name calling and should only been done when the situation warrants. Here are a few questions I think are important to consider.

1. Is it a gospel issue? Is what you are addressing a minor disagreement or a major theological issue. There is a significant difference between the disagreements preachers have about minor issues as opposed to issues that are leading people away from the integrity of the gospel. If it is a serious gospel issue, then I think it is appropriate, in a Christian spirit, to address it straight on.

2. Is it a character attack or a theological attack? I certainly do not believe that it is appropriate to get into character issues. Theological issues, particularly those that are of serious nature, should be open to public criticism because the integrity of the gospel is at stake. Therefore, so long as personal attacks are avoided, theological critique is appropriate if the theological issue is significant.

3. Is it biblical or a personal agenda? Preaching should never be about personal agendas but faithfully teaching the biblical text. I do not believe that it is appropriate to merely address personal disagreements in a sermon. However, exposing another’s view (when a gospel-centered issue is at stake) in light of the biblical text is appropriate.

At the end of the day it is the pastor’s responsibility to faithful care for the flock of God. In a politically correct culture we are supposed to tolerate all beliefs and never expose error. The gospel of Jesus Christ, however, does not give us such freedom. Though not a common practice, I believe that there are occasions when the integrity of the gospel is at stake and preachers must be willing to graciously address those issues, along those who advocate them, for the protection and edification of the body of Christ.

Pastor Wes