. Discerning The Kingdom "let us build us a city and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven; and let us make us a name, lest we be scattered" One name
Remember the story about Babel (Babylon), how they not only wanted to build their own kingdom, advertising the fact they could ascend unto the Throne, or were in touch with heaven (towers, spires, steeples and bells ... ring-a-bell?) but they were also hell-bent on giving it a name. Why? ... least they be scattered away from their project and aspirations. This, by the way, is the industry of religious and political fusion, and empire building, where nothing has changed. However, God did not like their plan and by intervention sowed confusion.
Today, we have many types of religion, giving God many names, and making the whole subject of religion a rather confusing issue. On top of all of this mumbo jumbo we have different brands of Christianity, all with different names, making it even more confusing for a person who is searching for the truth.
How does the verse go ... "where two or three are gathered together in my name (that's Jesus' name), there am I (that's God) in the midst of them ."
Nothing about Jesus' name PLUS ... as God is not the author of confusion. Is He?
However, many have been brainwashed over the years, in more ways than one, that we can only come together under the canopy of an organization bearing the name of that particular organization. In other words, we can't find God unless we are coming under a thing arranged, monitored and controlled by man. Which means ... we can't touch on God unless we are registered by some form of fraternity. Therefore, if the organization is taken away, then apparently so is God! If an organization is destroyed, then apparently so is the presence of God! However, some may be mellowed enough to believe God is waaay outside this picture!
The truth is all human institutions rely on their own identity and distinct name to exist. Take the name away then the organization ceases to exist. However, the Lord's church (that's the called out ones) does not rely on a name, because it is spiritual and only found beyond the bounds of bricks and mortar. A major difference between spiritual Babylon and spiritual Jerusalem is one relies on many names to exist, while the other exists on one name.
When the children of Israel were possessing the Land (a picture of the Christians forsaking the Old for the New) not only were they commanded to destroy the images, altars and shrines of the religious systems they came across, but were also commanded to destroy the names of them out of that place (De. 12:3-5). Furthermore, in their place the Lord's name was to be established.
Is God a jealous God? Is He jealous over His name? You bet, as God means every bit of what He says! Plus the fact that whatever God says ... goes!
To spell things out clearly, in plain speech, bull dozing away the confusion ... the important thing to know is man has made it complicated, while God has made it simple, in knowing His place. For He has promised in His word (Ex. 20:24) ... "in all places where I record my name I will come unto thee, and I will bless thee."
Did you get that? God records His name, not us! How can we expect God's blessing in His House when we pollute His name by substituting it for another, or recording another?
No, I am not a Baptist but scripturally I do believe I am a Christian. To use the term Christian is totally scriptural, and I will not abandon this term/name (although advocated by some) because it has been hijacked by the religious world. If I were to abandon it I would also have to abandon other hijacked names such as "faith", "grace", "church", awe ("awesome"), and "born again", f'instance. If I were to abandon the term Christian I would also have to rewrite the Bible. On who's authority could I do this?
There are some good Baptists around who I really respect and can understand why they use the title Baptist or call themselves a Baptist. Their one and only motive is to preach and promote the cause of Christ. Just as there are some brothers in the Brethren Movement who may consider myself a fellow brethren, not because I belong to their denomination, but because they recognize myself as a brother in Christ. However, this still does not justify their denomination. And denomination it is, just like the Church of Christ, Revival International, Four Square, the Open Brethren, the Free Presbyterian Church, and countless others.
At the same time, I have always believed, and still do, the reason for titles and religious tags is because it goes with a denomination and is used by it's members because they are denominational and blindly or ignorantly choose to live by sight and not faith. Just because a movement may have been built on a particular truth (like the doctrine of justification by faith, f'instance), this does not mean they have the truth. ALL the truth that is! No one does! Not me, you, or Mr. Reverend Trendy propped up on Cowards Castle! Nor Livingstone, Finney, Sunday or Spurgeon for that matter! Then why seal up a truth by institutionalizing someone's revelation? The full complete truth is only found between Genesis 1:1 and Revelation 22:21 of the Holy Bible, God's recorded infallible word on earth, in scripture form. Outside any clerical or human set-up that is!
This is why I call myself a Bible believer, or Jesus follower, or Christian. There is safety in this. Paul warned against building something on a human identity. For while one saith, I am of Paul; and another, I am of Apollos; are ye not carnal? When he spoke about one planteth, and one watereth, he was only referring to labouring on what had already been laid, the one and only foundation ... Christ. Paul never shunned to declare ... all the counsel of God. Which is the FULL gospel (not to be confused with Fool Gospel)! Even this title ... 'Full Gospel' has been capitalized on and tagged a denomination or an organization, despite the fact the gospel should not be exploited in any shape or form, for any human agencies gain, with or without the word "Full".
Capitalizing on a name is an excuse to build another religious club, under the guise it is extending and promoting the kingdom of God and bringing glory to His name. It works like an oxymoron ... two opposites that cancel each other out. Like the tradition of the pharisees making the word of God to no effect, who actually transgressed the commandments of God by their tradition.
A biblically borrowed name, at it's best ... a gimmick!. At it's worst ... bordering on idolatry!
One Kingdom
Let's proclaim and promote the kingdom of God only, and bring glory to His name only, and not taint the great commission with unscriptural trends and marketing ploys. Nor use a name to make it sound biblical, or give it some sort of scriptural credence, or stamp God's endorsement on it. An emphasis on just one borrowed or generic name already spells error, as it is a biblical name taken out of context, or giving its original meaning a wrong connotation.
By the way ... naming a book or a website, or something, for illustration proposes has got nothing to do with it. It is institutionalizing something that is set apart for God that is.
Expounding further, the title Pentecostal is unscriptural (although pentecost is mentioned in scripture as an advent). Therefore, a movement based on and celebrating this advent (the coming of the Holy Spirit) must be error as it is majoring on the Holy Spirit, contrary to Jesus saying when the Spirit would come He would point the individual to Jesus Himself.The Charismatic Movement is based on the gifts of the Spirit (also mentioned in scripture). This Movement must also be error also, as it is majoring on the gifts and not the Giver, again placing a larger emphasis on the Holy Spirit instead of Jesus. This would be due to the reason as a young believer in Christ, and converging one weekend by car onto a camp for a convention, I had a horrible feeling in my gut as I read the big sign post, greeting visitors as they drove in. Even though I could not understand what was wrong at the time and was afraid to question, the sign post read "Holy Spirit Convention". Today, it sums everything up in this doctrinal department.
In regards to the gifts ... what about the rest of the importance of the New Testament? There are also other majors to major on! The Baptist Movement is based on water baptism (immersion) which again is scriptural. To say it began with John the Baptist (as some do) is a weak justification, or more of a weak fabrication. John also lived on a diet of honey and locusts. However, who would like to make a doctrine outta that? John never wore his 'Sunday best' or a Western suit and tie, did he? However, many today do, thinking they are pleasing God when they are actually doing it out of obligation to their denomination. Just like many other traditions they count as dear and proper.
John represented the conclusion of the Old, being the last of the Old Testament prophets. He was merely pointing people to the fulfilment ... Jesus! Once John's baptized disciples left him to follow the Lamb, they were re-baptized into Christ. No longer were they John's followers, but Jesus' ... Christians (identified with Christ). So much for (the John) the Baptist Movement!
On the other hand, if the emphasis is not on John the Baptist then the Baptist denomination must be based solely on the New Testament principle of baptizing. However important this may be, this is still only one aspect of the gospel. Therefore, this justification still falls short. Whattabout the importance of the rest of scripture? Although I'm not saying they all may necessarily leave out the rest (although many do), it is where the emphasis is placed that must come under scrutiny. Remembering, a wrong emphasis is taking scripture outta context. Nothing more or nothing less.
He's just one example of many many more I could use, but as I have been accused of being a Ruckmanite, I will just use this one:
I remember some time back sitting down to watch a video by Peter Ruckman. His message was spoiled by his long opening, setting up the platform for his sermon. This opening was nothing more than giving his Baptist Denominationa big "pat on the back". Why does something manmade need a big spiel or praised by its own adherents, when it is not endorsed by God in the first place and has got absolutely nothing to do with His new creation or dispensational programme? Their are many more in the Body of Christ who don't want a bar of it, and are they missing out on something if they do? Does God really care how good a denomination is flourishing or being successful, or isn't? Sorry Brother, but no where does the scripture encourage us to promote or glory in any church let alone exalt His Body (which happens to be scriptural in this instance). Only the Head of the church Christ Jesus the Lord, is the only one worthy!
To be spiritually safe is to be scriptural in every sense of the word ... piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, going right to the thoughts and intents of the heart! What is one's motive when they are not able to let go of a tag or a religious title, let alone a denomination or clique, but would rather promote it, thinking they are on God's side or placing others on God's side, thinking they are doing Him a great favour?
We could go on mentioning the Methodist Movement being built on the methods of John Wesley (again, a wrong emphasis). The Salvation Army being built on the militancy of William Booth (did Jesus really want to organize us militarily and put uniforms on us, with flags and all), and so on, and so on? All to justify a movement based on a man or his concept. Even a "scriptural" concept (sometimes)! All to do with men building or justifying their little "Christianized" empires (or sub empires) on earth. Is Christ divided? Nope!! Do denominations create division and cliques? Yes!!
Furthermore ... what are the parables based on? Are they not based on the kingdom? What did Jesus place emphasis on so much throughout the gospels? Was it not the kingdom! What do we suffer for, and endure tribulation for? Yes, nothing but the kingdom!
Whose kingdom? His kingdom! What is it called? Merely ... the kingdom of God! Where is it? Where can it be found? Certainly not ... "Lo here! or, lo there!" said Jesus. It is only found in Christ and not in any of those who claim to follow Him, whether they are the real McCoy or a clayton version. Christ is the king of His kingdom and the door to it. No one else can claim ownership or access. There are no human proxies or medians to go through. Jesus is the only way to the kingdom.
Remember ... "One Way Jesus"!! Too bad this just became a slogan too, inoculating the public against the truth. And the way!
The book of Acts begins with the kingdom of God ... "speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God." We find the kingdom proclaimed throughout the book and sandwiched in the middle ... "persuading the things concerning the kingdom of God." As it ends with emphasis on the Kingdom ... "Preaching the kingdom of God, and teaching those things which concern the Lord Jesus Christ."
This is Christ's invisible, spiritual realm, where He is king. In His kingdom. Where scripture places a very large emphasis. Moreover, it does not come with human observation, as it is only spiritually discerned, and can only be seen when one is born of the Spirit. Furthermore, it is not found in word (title, name, term or deed that is) but in power and demonstration. It is set up in the heart of the believer and established (spiritually) on the earth as we obey His word. This is why we walk by faith and not by sight. Nor relying on tangibles, like religious trappings and outward paraphernalia. We live in it, in the present continued sense, by faith, with our affection set in heaven, and our sights on what is not seen or visibly observed. Yes, the KINGDOM!!
This kingdom cannot be institutionalized, marketed, or sold. It cannot be placed into a neat wee packaged slot, labelled with a trendy catchy brand, then traded. Or sold. It can not be exploited for personal gain or for a group. It cannot be pigeon-hold in order to produce a likely candidate, at a convenient time. The kingdom is eternal and is only a home to them who repent and turn to Christ. It is only heaven to them who serve Him in contriteness and humility of heart, with a childlike simplicity and trust.
Denominations are visible fraternities. Denominations complicate. They obscure the full picture, and bring confusion; basically because they are sending out the (wrong) signals to the world instead of the simple gospel. To come to the kingdom doesn't one have to come as a little child? Jesus said if you don't, "he shall not enter therein." However, you can still be a member or join a denomination irrespective of whether you have been born again or not. This alone sends a mixed message as well as the confusion again of Babel, and clouds the true intent of the gospel.
A denomination is found "Lo here! or, lo there!" The kingdom of God is found within you. It is not found geographically but by revelation.
Acts 8:12. "But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women."
Who were they baptized into? Certainly not into a denomination or a movement!
1 Corinthians 1:13. "Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?"
Paul as Paul had nothing to do with the kingdom. His job was to point people to Jesus, who was the door to the kingdom.
The kingdom! His kingdom! Have you given it much thought? Will your tradition allow you to? One hasn't much choice really! As Jesus said you were either for Him, or against Him!
One body! One name! One King! One kingdom! And no alternatives!
Are you seeing the kingdom?
Contents.I.Guestbook.I.The Holy Bible Links.I.Website Links.I.Contact I Free Search.I.Home . 
