But there is one course infallibly safe for us, and that is to follow the New Testament phraseology. We ought not only to use New Testament names, but should pay some regard to the frequency of the use of those names. When a man uses the name _christian_ more in one half hour than it is used in the whole New Testament, it is a clear evidence that there is something wrong with him. The same is true of the name Disciple, or any other designation found in the Scriptures. The man who is truly under Jesus, not only uses New Testament designations for the people of God, but uses them in the same manner as found in Scripture. We never find “Christian church” in Scripture. We find no “Disciple church,” or “Disciples’ church,” in the New Testament. Such names are incongruous. Yet they are current in some sections of country. In some parts of Kentucky and Indiana you hear of the “Christian church” very frequently. In the Western Reserve, Ohio, you will hear both “Disciple church” and “Disciples’ church” very frequently. In the New Testament “the church of Christ” is found; but “the church of God” much more frequently. The members are called Christians, Disciples, and frequently only designated “people of God,” “children of God,” “brethren,” etc. By giving a little attention, we can converse in the same way. In nine cases out of ten, we can express ourselves in the simple words, “the brethren,” “the church,” etc., and be as perfectly understood as if we would adopt the most sectarian designation. The adoption of all names unknown to the New Testament, is wholly unwarrantable. There is no matter of more importance than this. Let us learn to use the precise language of the New Testament, and use it in the same sense as used there; and, above all, see to it, that we not only call ourselves Christians and Disciples, but that we be indeed _Christians, Disciples_. INDIVIDUALITY AFTER DEATH. Will the dead maintain their _identity_ and _individuality_? Is there any clear light on this? We will not discuss it, but refer to a few evidences. Fifteen hundred years after Moses died, and before any had risen from the dead, he held a conversation with Jesus in the mountain of transfiguration. He had not lost his identity nor his individuality. He did not lose his consciousness. See Matt. xvii. 1-4; Mark ix. 2-4; Luke ix. 28-30. The rich man died, and in _hades_ he lifted up his eyes in torment. See Luke xvi. 23. He did not lose his identity, individuality or consciousness. Nor is there any account of his existence being such as he had before he was born. Nor did Lazarus lose his identity, individuality or consciousness. These men were both identified, conscious, and retained their individuality. They were not in the same place or state, though both were in _hades_. There was a great gulf between them—the one in Abraham’s bosom, and the other in _tartaros_.