The Family and Kingdom Of God
Many don't realize it, but the Universal theory usurps the Family of God,
and the Kingdom of God as set forth in the Bible. There just isn't any
place for the Family and Kingdom of God, if the Universal theory is true.
But the Scriptures make a very clear distinction between the three. Let
us get some exact distinctions, based thoroughly on the Scriptures.
1 - WHAT IS THE FAMILY OF GOD? The Family of God includes all of
the children of God in heaven and on earth.
Ephesians 3:15, where Paul speaks of the "whole Family
in heaven and on earth."
The Family includes all believers, for
we are told in Galatians 3 :26 - "Ye are all the children
of God through faith in Jesus Christ." All believers are God's
children regardless of time or age. Since the Old Testament saints were
saved by faith in the Christ to come (Acts 10:43; Romans 4:16)
they are all members of God's Family. And note that God's Family is much
larger than the Kingdom or Church of God, for it now contains all of the
saved from Abel to the last person saved today. 'God has only one Family.
All believers are children and heirs of God.
2 - WHAT IS THE KINGDOM OF GOD? The Kingdom of God includes all the
saved on earth at any given time. In the parables in Matthew
13: the kingdom is used to include all professors. But in John
3:3-5; Matthew 16:19; 11:11; Luke 16:16; Romans 14:17;
1:13; John 18:36, the Kingdom is composed of all born again
on the earth. This is not the kingdom of Daniel 2:44;
1:6 and kindred passages. Those relate to the Millennial Kingdom yet
future. What is often spoken of as "the spiritual kingdom" is composed
only of the truly born again, and who have been "translated out of darkness
into light and into the Kingdom of God's dear Son." In John 3 he
plainly says that except one be born again, he cannot see - he cannot enter,
the Kingdom of God.
the Family of God includes all of the saved of all
ages, whether in heaven or on earth. The Kingdom of
God includes that part of the Family of God who are on the earth NOW.
3 - WHAT IS THE 'CHURCH OF GOD? The church of God is never used of any
institution, except of an assembly or congregation of baptized believers
in some given locality. For example, "The church of God at Corinth."
(1 Corinthians 1:12).
As H. Boyce Taylor once expressed it:
local individual church is the only kind of church that God has on this
earth today. There is only the Family of God composed of all of the redeemed
of all ages in heaven and on earth. There is only one Kingdom of God, composed
of all the born again on the earth now. There are thousands of churches
of God on earth. Every individual Baptist Church is a church of God. When
a man is born again, he is born into God's Family, and he is a member of
G'od's Family forever. The relationship does not change. Whether in heaven
or in earth, he is in God's Family. When he is born again, he also enters
God's kingdom. This relationship is for life. When he dies he passes out
of God's kingdom on earth, and enters "his heavenly kingdom." (See 2
Timothy 4:18). After he is born again, he is NOT YET IN THE CHURCH
OF GOD, but is now a scriptural subject for admission into a church of
God. Note Acts 2:47 - "The Lord added to the church daily
the saved." Church membership is not something that one gets with
salvation, but a subsequent blessing he gets after salvation by being added
to the church. Baptism is not essential for entrance into either the Family
of God or the Kingdom of God, but Baptism IS ESSENTIAL to admission into
a church of God. Men are born anew into the Family of God and Kingdom of
God, but they are baptized into a church of God (water baptism) I Corinthians
12:13. The one body referred to by Paul in I Corinthians 12:13
was the church of God at Corinth. The local church at Corinth was the body
of Christ at that place. The members of the church at Corinth belonged
to only "ONE BODY" of Christ. That body of Christ probably did not contain
all of the saved at Corinth (I Corinthians 1:2) and none of the
saved anywhere else except at Corinth. Since they belonged to only "one
body" and that was the local church at Corinth, Christ has no other kind
of church or body except a local church. If they had belonged to the local
church at Corinth, which Paul said was a body of Christ, and then to the
kind of church that some believe in, composed of all the saved everywhere,
they would have belonged to two churches or bodies of Christ - one local
and visible, the other universal and invisible. The New Testament knows
nothing of any such confusion as this. The church which Paul called
"the House of God" was a local church. The church which Paul
said was "the pillar and ground of the truth" was a local
church. The church to which Christ promised perpetuity (Matthew 16:18)
was a local church, for He never spoke of any other kind. The meaning of
ecclesia permits of no other kind."
The statements just made will bear any sort of investigation, and the more
investigation is made, the deeper will be come the conviction that Satan
has palmed off a tremendous hoax with his Universal Invisible theory.
Why do the Scriptures speak of the Kingdom of God and the Family of God,
if there is no distinction to be made between these and the church of God?
The Universal theory certainly engulfs the Family and Kingdom, and along
with this likewise swallows up a lot of truth.
Many churches of today that are thought of as local churches are not such
in the New Testament sense. The local assemblies of the New Testament times
were independent, self-governing bodies. They had bishops and deacons,
but the bishops were simply pastors and preachers. Their ministry extended
over one church, and they did not boss other preachers and other churches.
How different the function of the bishop today from the function of those
of New Testament times. Of course the most bloated of all the bishops is
the Pope of Rome, who claims to be the vice-gerent of Christ, and who likewise
claims that when he speaks "ex-cathedra," or for the church, he speaks
with absolute infallibility. He is the big boss of the whole world wide
Universal, Visible Church. Other bishops of that church are big men, and
are ecclesiastical bosses, but they are topped by the pope, who has no
Local Church Is The True Church?
Various protestant groups or churches, have their bishops occupying exalted
positions. Their churches are not self-governing. Really, the Church is
the big, over all organization, and the church at any given place is just
a small, subservient unit. Nothing could be more contrary to the New Testament
church pattern than this sort of thing. Big dignitaries, wearing "vestments"
and growling ritual were totally unknown to New Testament times. The terms
bishop, elder, pastor or shepherd, related to the same office, and that
office was that of one who served - not one who bossed.
In reading the writings of the church fathers, as they are called - men
who lived in the early days of Christianity, we can trace the gradual rise
of the errors that eventually produced the Roman Catholic Church. Many
persons have carelessly supposed that the Catholic Church was the original
church - the church from which the others have sprung. This is indeed careless
thinking, and unaccompanied by any study or investigation. Any one who
will take a good look at the simply organized local assemblies of the New
Testament times, and then a look at the complex, hierarchical, tradition
burdened Catholic Church of today, will be bound to see such a shocking
contrast that they cannot possibly identify the two. Unfortunately, when
the Protestant Reformation took place, that reformation was not based upon
the New Testament church pattern. The Protestant groups retained many of
the things that characterized Catholicism.
Take for instance, the Church of England, or Episcopal Church. It was formed
by 'old wicked adulterous Henry VIII, who had his Parliament to pass the
Acts of Supremacy which made him head of the Church, rather than the pope.
Who will say that the Church was any better under the head ship of Henry
VIII? As time went on, the Church of England did make some changes that
were for the better, but let us remember that it is still a state church,
with the reigning Monarch of England as head. Of course there is no more
Scripture for such a visible state Church than there is for the Universal,
Other Protestant Churches have been state churches, deriving authority
and financial support from the state. Religious freedom in the true sense
vanishes when religion is identified with the state government, and often
dissenting groups are persecuted when such is the case. The evils of a
state church hookup are without number. We look at communist Russia today
and we see an atheistic state - one violently set against religion in all
of its forms. This atheistic attitude is in large part due to the corruption
and abuses of the Russian Catholic Church of days gone by.
In England the state church is deemed to be the one and only church, and
other religious groups are not allowed to call themselves churches. That
is why no Baptist assembly in England bears the name church. They have
to use such terms as "tabernacle," "chapel," etc.
The inspired John who wrote Revelation, knew the history of the Catholic
Church and her daughters. That history was revealed to him before the events
ever came to pass. He fore tells the corrupt association of the old Mother
Church with rulers and governments of this earth. For a long period in
the past that Church crowned the kings, and involved herself in all the
graft and corruption of unholy governments. But the worst is ahead. According
to the prophetic Scriptures, there is to arise at the end of this age a
great dictator - the greatest the world has ever known. He will be
a veritable incarnation of Satan, and the cruelest monster of all time.
He will gain ascendancy partly through the influence of a great religious
power. Personally, I believe that we are seeing Anti-Christ's Church in
the building right now. I believe that the ecumenical movement is laying
the foundation for this. We have a host of churches of the various denominations
united in the National and World Council of Churches. Some of the leaders
of these organizations are little better than infidels. They have discarded
the gospel of salvation in favor of what they call "The Social Gospel."
("Another gospel, which is not another" - Paul). The Roman
Catholic Church is not identified as yet with the World Council, but some
changes have been taking place in that Church. These changes do not involve
the supremacy of the pope, nor the hierarchical government of the Church.
Modern Protestantism under the ecumenical leaders is willing to make most
any concessions to Rome, whereas Rome will not go beyond a certain limit
to affect a union. My own prediction is that a huge church union will eventually
take place, with the Roman Catholic Church furnishing the framework. Protestant
ecumenical leaders are ready right now to make virtually any concessions
to Rome for the sake of affecting a world church.
Seemingly we have a picture of Anti-Christ's Church in Revelation 17.
The time for the judgment of this evil and monstrous thing has arrived,
and the angel says to John:
"Come hither, I will show thee the judgment of the great whore that
sitteth upon many waters, with whom the kings of the earth have committed
fornication, and the inhabitants of the earth have been made drunk with
the wine of her fornication ..."
"And I saw a woman sit upon a scarlet colored beast, full of names of blasphemy
and the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet color . and upon her forehead
was a name written, MYSTERY BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND
ABOMINATION OF THE EARTH. And I saw the woman drunken with the blood of
the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus."
Most conservative scholars of the Bible have been in agreement that the
Roman Catholic Church is here designated. (Together with those of the ecumenical
movement who have been absorbed by her). No other great religious power
is fittingly described - especially as "drunken with the blood of
the saints and martyrs." The historical claim has been made over
and over again, that among Baptists alone, fifty million have been martyred
for their faith.
Anti-Christ and his False Prophet will welcome the help of this great religious
world power, as they gain ascendancy over the world, but the time will
come after that power is gained that Anti-Christ will want to be worshipped,
and he will neither need or want this bloated caricature of a Church. He
and his associated rulers are described in Revelation 17:16 in these
"These shall hate the whore, and shall make her desolate ...
for God hath put in their hearts to fulfil his will ... and the
woman that thou sawest is that great city which reigneth over the kings
of the earth." In this last expression Rome is clearly indicated.
BLAME ME ... THEY ARE NOT MY WORDS!
I am not trying to give a commentary on Revelation, and perhaps some reader
is saying, "What has all this to do with the question as to the true church?"
It has a great deal. What is the great Roman Catholic Church that has steeped
herself in the blood of martyrs called? She is called a WHORE. This vile
name comes from her illicit association with rulers and governments through
the centuries. That is not a name that I have given her - that is God's
name for her! But let us go further - and this is something to arouse the
indignation of some, but remember you will have to take this matter up
with God; they are His words, not mine.
What does it say about the whore? It calls her "THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS."
A mother is one who has produced offspring. God says here in His word that
this mother harlot has produced a family of harlots. WHO ARE THE HARLOT
DAUGHTERS OF THE OLD ROMAN CHURCH? Like it or not, there can be only one
answer to this question. THEY ARE THE PROTESTANT DAUGHTERS WHO HAVE SPRUNG
FROM THE ROMAN CHURCH!
I am dealing with the question as to which church that is local and visible
can be the true church the one Jesus started. IT CAN'T POSSIBLY BE ANY
OF THE PROTESTANT GROUPS THAT HAVE COME OUT OF ROME.
It is true, however, that we have dozens of religious groups who call themselves
churches, who are not Protestants in the historical sense. They have come
into existence long after the Protestant Reformation. WHAT IS WRONG WITH
THEM? Several things:
1- They were started by some man or woman, and not by Christ.
2 - They didn't exist for centuries after Christ started His church, so
they could not possibly be identified with the church He started. Such
so-called churches have no valid reason for their existence. The only thing
that excuses the existence of such churches is the theory of the Universal
Church, for they claim to belong to that. And after all - so they reason
- the real Church is the one that all believers are added to, the Great
Universal Invisible "Body."
3 - They are rivals to the church that Jesus started. If He started a church,
and if that church has continued to exist through the centuries, then Why
should someone - anyone - start a new church? If one person has a right
to start a church then any person has the same right. The situation has
resulted in scores of churches of almost every kind and description.
4 - Christ promised that His church would never be prevailed against -
would never be put out of existence. The forming of a new church, centuries
after Jesus made that promise, indicates that those starting the new church
don't believe that He has kept His word.
Many do not seem to realize the preciousness to Christ of the church He
started. "Christ also loved the church and gave himself for it,"
we read in the Scriptures. Reference there is to the church He started
- not some figment of the imagination that is Universal and Invisible.
He loves this church He started and gave His very life for it. If that
is true, then it is an inconsiderate and unholy thing to try to palm off
a man- founded church - a counterfeit - in the place of the church that
Christ started. It is equally wicked to try to palm off an anti Scriptural
monstrosity under the guise of the Universal Invisible Church. Let it be
remembered that Jesus used the word church as recorded in the Scriptures
21 times in addition to Matthew 16:18. In these 21 instances, beyond
question or argument, He meant the local assembly. Isn't it strange that
people can hold that He meant something different in Matthew 16:18
than in all of these other instances? As some one has so aptly said, "The
probabilities are 21 to nothing that He meant local assembly in Matthew
16:18. A probability of 21 to nothing is a certainty."
One of the most popular of all current sayings goes like this: "IT
DOESN'T MATTER WHICH CHURCH YOU BE lONG TO." That statement is bad
enough, but it is made worse by adding, "WE ARE ALL WORKING FOR.
THE SAME PLACE."
Such statements are made in an effort to be "broad,"
but they only serve to reveal the ignorance and lack of clear thinking
on the part of the one making such a remark. In the first place, here are
churches holding entirely different doctrines concerning the things of
life and destiny - mutually contradictory teachings concerning just about
everything. How can it possibly "not matter which one belongs to?" And
as to our "all working for the same place," the Scriptures make it abundantly
clear that any one who is "working" to get to heaven, simply won't get
there. "Not of works," we read, "lest any man should
To Baptist Authors
To PBC Home