Christadelphianism (Briefly Tested by Scripture)

Christadelphianism makes a great show of appealing to Scripture. Every lover of the truth will be well content to judge this system by such an unerring standard. No seeker after light need fear the result. If it be of God, Scripture will surely be its amplest vindication; if not of God, its fullest exposure.

Nor is it mere details we shall have to consider. There is not one important fundamental doctrine upon which Christendom has for ages been agreed that is not by this system denied. The matter under consideration is of the most vital importance, about which none of us can afford to be neutral.

We have no hesitation in saying that the system is antichristian throughout. The great majority of its followers are almost exclusively gathered from the ranks of those who are unlearned in the Scriptures, and are thus deceived by a show of learning and voluminous appeal to Scripture. Their persistent propaganda is inspired by the devil, whose personality they deny; and their opposition is to Christ, whose Godhead and atoning work they blasphemously refuse to admit. This is a strong statement, but none too strong. The reader is entitled to demand full proof. And this we shall seek to give.

The simplicity of the Christadelphian’s mode of worship (?) all tends to deceive. They have their plain meeting rooms, their appointed hours for the breaking of bread, lectures, preachings, and the like. Their appeal to Scripture appears to the unlearned most convincing, and when they air their second-hand knowledge of Hebrew and Greek words, how can the unlearned meet them? And the very scriptural terms, which mean one thing in the minds of the listeners, very often mean quite another thing on their lips.

  “Ministers of righteousness” they profess themselves to be, but we have no hesitation in saying that in reality they are the “ministers of Satan” (see 2 Cor. 11:13-15). The book from which we shall cull extracts to show what they distinctly hold, and which was sent to the writer by a Christadelphian to convince him of their tenets, consists of thirty-six propositions with about five hundred Scripture quotations. The number of Scripture quotations only proves their infatuation, for Scripture is their exposure as we shall see. Read by the careless or ignorant, they may succeed in misleading, but once let the truth be clearly stated by Scripture, it will soon be apparent how great is the deception.

1. Christadelphians believe that the Lord Jesus Christ was not divine, but merely a man—thus aiming a fatal blow at the whole scheme of redemption. Let us quote their own words:
  “Jesus Christ the Son of God, is not the ‘second person of an eternal Trinity of Gods’ but the manifestation of the ONE ETERNAL CREATOR who is ‘above all and through all’ (Eph. 4:6) and ‘out of whom are all things’* (Rom. 11:36). This Creator is Spirit dwelling corporeally** and personally in heaven, yet, in His Spirit-effluence He begot Jesus, who was, therefore, HIS SON: by the same power He appointed him and dwelt in him, and spoke to Israel through him (Heb. 1:1). Jesus Christ, therefore, in the days of his weakness, had two sides—one DEITY, the other MAN: but not as construed by Trinitarianism, which makes Jesus the Son Incarnate. The man was the son whose existence dates from the birth of Jesus; the Deity dwelling in him was the Father, who, without beginning of days, is externally pre-existent. There were not two or three eternal persons before the man Christ Jesus, but only ONE—God the Father, whose relation to the son was afterwards exemplified in the event related by Luke (chap. 1:35), by which was established what Paul styles the ‘mystery of godliness’; ‘God manifested*** in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory’ (1 Tim. 3:16).”
{*“Of Him . . . are all things,” is the correct quotation.
**How strangely careless yet deceptive is this piece of writing. The Creator is Spirit. How, then, can he dwell corporeally in heaven?
***Should read “manifest,” but we quote exactly.}

We have quoted this proposition in full, so that there can be no mistake as to the teaching of the Christadelphians on this vitally fundamental point. Scripture most plainly, positively, and emphatically gives the lie to such blasphemy, both directly and indirectly, both from Old and New Testaments.

In this proposition is stated as clearly as words are able, that the Lord Jesus is not God the Son. No one believes in “an eternal Trinity of Gods,” but Christendom believes in God the Father, God the Son, God the Holy Ghost—ONE God. Christendom believes in a Triune God, not in a plurality of Gods. The truth of this can be proved most clearly from Scripture. Yet we are told in this proposition that there are not two or three eternal persons, that Jesus is not the Son Incarnate, that He is only God’s Son as begotten into this world, whose existence dates only from His birth, that DEITY is not essential to the person of the Lord Jesus, but “the Deity indwelling in Him was the Father.”

To be consistent, in alluding to God the Father the printer employs capitals, also He, His, Him, as referring to Him; but in referring to the Lord Jesus as Son, and He, His, Him as referring to Him, small type is used.

I do not hesitate to say that in writing this proposition the Christadelphian writer has blasphemed against the Person of God the Son, and puts himself, and all who agree with him, outside the pale of salvation, unless indeed repentance be granted to them.

The whole proposition is entirely false. Let Scripture, to which they so confidently appeal, answer them. The Christadelphians assert that the Lord Jesus had no existence previous to His incarnation. The Lord’s own words are:
  “BEFORE Abraham was, I AM” (John 8:58).
  “I am” is the name of Jehovah—the self existent God. What could be plainer? The Lord here claims for himself Deity.

To be unsound as to the Person of Christ is to build a house on sand—there can be no reliability in the superstructure. He is the chief corner-stone of Christianity, and unsound as to His Person, the whole Christadelphian system is false and unsound. But let me give further proof. Again observe carefully the words of the Lord Jesus Himself:
  “And now, O Father, glorify Thou Me with Thine own self with the glory which I had with THEE BEFORE THE WORLD WAS” (John 17:5).

The Christadelphian asserts that the Lord Jesus had no existence before His birth into this world. As we have already seen, He Himself asserts His existence “before Abraham,” and so now in this second Scripture “before the world was.” The Christadelphian blasphemes and is the enemy of Christ, for he denies the glory of His Person.

Again, as a direct affirmation of the Deity of the Lord Jesus, Romans 9:5 needs no comment. It speaks for itself:
  “Of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, GOD BLESSED FOR EVER.”

Hebrews 1:8 is equally plain:
  “But unto the Son He [God] says, Thy throne, O GOD is for ever and ever.”

Take also the majestic opening of the Gospel of John:
  “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by Him, and without Him was not anything made that was made” (John 1:1-3).

  “And the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us, (and we [the apostles] beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father), full of grace and truth” (v. 14).

The proposition already quoted in full states, “There were not two or three eternal Persons before ‘the man Christ Jesus,’ but only ONE.” But the Scripture just quoted states that the Word was eternally WITH God, and that the Word WAS God. Here Scripture states that there is more than one eternal Person in the Godhead. Indeed, we do not need to go beyond the very first chapter in the Bible to confirm this and refute the Christadelphian error.

  “And God said, Let US make man in OUR image” (Gen. 2:26).

The word, “God” in Genesis 1 is throughout in the plural number; not singular, which stands for only one; not dual, which stands for two; but plural which stands at the least for three. Thus the Persons of the Godhead are enshrined in the very first verse of the Bible. Can the Christadelphian explain this? The disciples were instructed to baptize in the name of the Father and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. (See Matt. 28:19). That were blasphemous unless the Son and Holy Ghost were equal with the Father.

How blind man is when he endeavours to square Scripture with his thoughts, instead of allowing Scripture to be the blessed source of his thoughts!

To refer to the Scriptures quoted from John 1, we have clearly stated:
  (a). The eternal existence of the Word — “In the beginning was the Word.”
  (b). His distinctive place in the Godhead — “The Word was with God.”
  (c). His Godhead — “The Word was God.”
  (d). Creation ascribed to Him — “All things were made by Him.”
  (e). The Incarnation of the Word — “The Word was made flesh.”

Could refutation of Christadelphian teaching be more convincing and clear? This eternally uncreated self-existent One, co-existent and equal with God, became a Man. None of us could be said to have become anything at our birth, for we had no previous existence. This could only be said of a Divine Person. “The Word was made [more correctly translated, became] flesh.” The Christadelphian says that the Lord Jesus had no existence previous to His birth.

Here creation is ascribed to Him, repeatedly ascribed to Him also in other parts of Scripture (see Colossians 1:16; Hebrews 1:2, 10). Wherever Divine Persons are distinguished in connection with creation, the divine work of it is invariably attributed to the Son, Colossians 1:17 adding a further thought:
  “By Him [the Son] all things consist.”

The refusal to admit that “the Word was made flesh” earns the condemnation of Scripture, and exposes the real character of Christadelphian doctrine as antichristian.

  “Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: and every spirit that confesses not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world” (1 John 4:2-3).

Could their condemnation be clearer? They refuse to confess that “Jesus Christ is come in the flesh” and instead of being “Christ’s brethren” (the meaning of Christadelphian), Scripture brands them as being antichristian. I know they quibble and say that they acknowledge “Jesus Christ come in flesh,” but it is unavailing. Scripture testimony is overwhelming as to His existence previous to His birth. He became a real Man at His birth, but in His own proper Person was “God manifest in the flesh,” and Simeon could hold the precious Babe in his arms and say:
  “Lord, now lettest Thou Thy servant depart in peace, according to Thy word; for mine eyes have seen THY SALVATION” (Luke 2:29).

But in denying the essential deity of the Son the fountain of Christadelphian teaching is poisoned at its source. What wonder, then, that the stream emanating from such a source is baneful and poisonous! To proceed further:
  2. Christadelphians deny the atoning value of the death of Christ, and thus would take from us, if they could, the Saviour. They say:
  “The death of Christ was not to appease the wrath of offended Deity, but to express the love of the Father in a necessary sacrifice for sin, that the law of sin and death which came into force by the first Adam might be nullified in the second in a full discharge of its claims through a temporary surrender to its power; after which immortality by resurrection might be acquired, in harmony with the law of obedience. Thus sin is taken away, and righteousness established.”

Here the death of the Lord Jesus is looked at as the expression of the Father’s love. Doubtless it is the expression of God’s love, and who would wish to question that? But mark, reader, the righteousness of God demanding satisfaction for sin is entirely ignored. The death of Christ, they say, was not to appease the wrath of God. Surely holiness and righteousness had their claims, and if God’s love is to be righteously shown to sinners in the offer of forgiveness of sins and salvation, there must be satisfaction rendered to God’s holiness and righteous claims against sin. In the book quoted from, Christ is not referred to as Saviour, nor the precious blood as that which alone can cleanse from sin, and the confession of Jesus as Lord is altogether ignored. How inexpressibly sad! The truths of atonement and substitution are, however, fully brought out in Scripture:
  “He was wounded for our transgressions, He was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon Him; and with His stripes we are healed” (Isa. 53:5).
  “Christ also has once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust that He might bring us to God” (1 Peter 3:18).
  “The blood of Jesus Christ, His Son, cleanses us from all sin” (1 John 1:7).

But as part of this sad travesty of the truth, the death of Christ is not the sole ground of our blessing. Indeed, in the pamphlet before us, we repeat, the word Saviour does not once occur. How significant! We must believe according to the Christadelphian, the gospel which means for them the assenting to Christadelphian blasphemies. Not even then is it sufficient to believe the gospel. Baptism with them is essential to salvation. They say of intelligent believers:
  “To such it is the means of that present union with Christ which is preparatory to perfect assimilation at the resurrection. It is, therefore, necessary to salvation.”

Mark you, necessary to salvation. Then the dying thief did not go to heaven, for he never received Christian baptism, nor will any who are saved at the eleventh hour on dying beds. But did I speak of the believer going to heaven? The Christadelphian has no hope of going to heaven. In fact he does not wish to go there, judging by their book lying before me. Every Christian is cheered by the hope of reaching heaven. Christadelphianism would seek to rob them of this blessed hope. Every step the Christadelphian takes plunges him more deeply than ever in the bog of his own errors. To cover one error he must invent another. For cool audacity the following quotation is unparalleled:
  “EARTH and not ‘heaven above the skies,’ is the inheritance of the saints.”

Then the dying thief, according to the Christadelphian did not go to heaven! It is admitted even by them that the Lord Jesus Christ is in heaven. Why He should be the only Man allowed to go to heaven they do not enlighten us. Will the Christadelphian tell as if the words of the Lord Jesus addressed to the dying thief are true or not?

  “Today shalt thou be with Me in paradise” (Luke 23:43).

Was the Apostle Paul indulging in false hope when he tells us of his
  “Having a desire to depart, and to be WITH CHRIST, which is far better” (Phil. 1:23)?

Or what sense will there be in being
  “Caught up . . . in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so shall we ever he with the Lord”? (1 Thess. 4:17).

If earth is to be our portion, what need will there be of being caught up in the clouds? If heaven is to be the believer’s portion, how simple and natural! Again the Lord says:
  “In My Father’s house are many mansions: if it were not so I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you unto Myself; that where I am, there ye may be also” (John 14:2-3).

Even the Christadelphian writer finds this verse a difficulty, for he allows that it is quoted in opposition to their doctrine, but explains it away by saying that it is but a parabolic expression of the truth in perfect harmony with all we are seeking to maintain.” Thus in words of high-sounding pretension the true issue is evaded.

Surely the Father’s house is in heaven, and there would be no sense at all in the passage if it referred to the Father’s house in heaven, and then did not mean that it would be the abode of the believer. We are not at all prepared to give up our sure and certain hope of heaven at the bidding of Christadelphianism, which would fain deprive the children of God of their heavenly calling and destiny. Their gospel is a poor one indeed. No divine Saviour, no atoning work, no heaven for the believer.

Well do they deserve, and assuredly will they reap the curse:
  “Though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed” (Gal. 1:8).

We cannot, in the small compass of a pamphlet, examine exhaustively or at length this evil system, but we have still one or two important points to bring before our reader.

3. If Christadelphianism denies the divine personality of God the Son, we are quite prepared that they should deny the divine personality of the Holy Ghost. They teach that:
  “The Spirit is not a personal God distinct from the Father but the radiant, invisible power or energy of the Father, filling universal space and forming the medium of His omniscient perceptions and the instrument of His omnipotent behests whether in creation or inspiration; the distinction between the Father and the Spirit being not that they are two persons, but that the Father is Spirit in focus so intense as to be glowing substance inconceivable, and the Spirit, the Father’s power, in space-filling diffusion, forming with the Father a unity in the stupendous scheme of creation, which is in revolution around the Supreme Source of All Power.”

Thus in grand, swelling, empty words they deny the personality of the Spirit of God.

On the contrary, Scripture repeatedly refers to the Holy Ghost as a Person.

  “Howbeit when HE, the Spirit of truth, is come, HE will guide you into all truth; for HE shall not speak of Himself: but whatsoever HE shall hear, that shalt HE speak: and HE will show you things to come” (John 16:13).

Again the Lord says:
  “If I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send Him unto you” (John 16:7).

Here the Lord distinctly shows that until His ascension the Holy Ghost was not present in indwelling power with the believers. John 7:39 tells us that:
  “The Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.”

The grand-sounding proposition of Christadelphian teaching ignores this altogether. It would not suit them to notice it. Such an event as the Lord distinctly sending the Holy Ghost to indwell the believers, forming them into one body, one church, is quite outside their notice in the pamphlet before us. And by the way, John 16:7, just quoted, is a further claim for the divine personality of God the Son, in that who but a Divine Person could speak of sending the Holy Ghost to indwell and teach the believers, incorporating them, too, into the body of Christ and the Church of God? and all this fulfilled on the day of Pentecost.

It is admitted that “it” referring to the Holy Ghost, is used in certain cases, for throughout Scripture He takes the place of Servant; hence by Him believers worship the Father and the Son, but Scripture never speaks of the Holy Ghost being worshipped or invoked in prayer, though nonetheless a Divine Person, co-equal with the Father and the Son—yet ONE GOD. By Him all true worship and prayer are addressed to the Father and the Son.

Further, 1 Corinthians 12:11, uses language that could only be applicable to a Divine Person, attributing sovereignty to Him:
  “But all these works that one and the self-same Spirit, dividing to every man severally as He will.”

4. Christadelphians also deny the personality of the devil. They teach:
  “The Devil* is not (as commonly supposed) a personal supernatural agent of evil, and that in fact there is no such BEING in existence. The Devil is a scriptural manifestation of sin in the flesh in its several phases of manifestation—subjective, individual, aggregate, social and political, in history, current experience, and prophecy; after the style of metaphor which speaks of wisdom as a woman, riches as MAMMON and the god of this world, sin as a master etc.”
{*How inconsistent is the writer of this pamphlet! He refers to the Son of God by carefully writing “son” without a capital; yet while the devil is described by him as “a scriptural manifestation of sin in the flesh,” and therefore strictly impersonal, the writer is careful to honour this impersonal “manifestation” with a capital D.}

The purpose of Satan is well served if people can be persuaded that he does not exist. We do not fear what does not exist. Can subtlety go further?

Scripture distinctly gives the lie to this. Genesis tells us how the serpent deceived our first parents. Now there was no “sin in the flesh” till the fall; hence, if Satan is a personification of “sin in the flesh,” what “sin in the flesh” could he personify? Adam and Eve were innocent. And it cannot be contended that the serpent is not Satan in view of the prophecy God addressed to him:
  “It [the woman’s seed, Christ] shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise His heel” (Gen. 3:15).

And further, Revelation 20:2, identifies the serpent as Satan;
  “And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years.”

Twice in the book of Job we are told that Satan presented himself before God, and that the Lord addressed questions to him, and received answers, and that he received permission from God to strip Job, but was only allowed so to do for Job’s eventual blessing and prosperity. Let the reader study Job 1 and 2 and see the absurdity of being asked to make “sin in the flesh” the equivalent for Satan.

A last Scripture quickly forces us to the conclusion that Christadelphian teaching on this point is nothing short of error and blasphemy.

  “Then was Jesus led up of the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted of the devil” (Matt. 4:1).

Will you dare substitute “sin in the flesh” for the devil in this passage? Was “sin in the flesh” present with Jesus? One shrinks from penning such a question. To ask it is to answer it; and the heart that loves the Lord and owes its all to Him is indignant that error is so audacious—and worse. The Christadelphian, not content with denying the essential deity of the Son, refusing the atoning value of His work, will now attack His precious, holy, sinless humanity by making Him a sinner like ourselves. Where is our Saviour if Christadelphian sophistries stand? Gone!!! We could wail with Mary at the sepulchre, “They have taken away my Lord, and I know not where they have laid Him.” But no, a thousand times no. On the contrary, we can say triumphantly with Paul, “I know whom I have believed.”

5. Christadelphians, not content with denying heaven to the believer, refuse to believe in a hell or eternal punishment at all. They settle it in very few words. They say:
  “It also follows, of necessity, that the popular theory of hell and ‘eternal torments’ is fiction.”

Scripture is not written for the learned only, nor to deceive the simple. The parable of the rich man in Luke 16, though a parable, is intended to teach a solemn truth and convey a solemn warning. As Christadelphians deny heaven to be the believer’s portion, and deny the very existence of hell, they are forced to propound what they call “conditional immortality” to cover their retreat. If the spirit of man is immortal it must go somewhere, and if heaven is not the dwelling-place of the believer at any time, it is convenient to get out of the difficulty by denying the immortality of the soul and spirit, and, therefore, when a man dies they say:
  “He is utterly unconscious, as if he had never existed.”

The Christadelphian says:
  “Soul in the Bible . . . never expresses the idea of immortality.”
  “Spirit in the Scriptures . . . signifies breath, life, vital energy, mind, disposition, etc., as attributes of human nature while alive.”

Mark those two words, “while alive”; that is, when dead, a man’s soul and spirit die too. If so, the parable in Luke 16 is awkward for such a theory. We read (v. 22) that the rich man died and was buried, and according to Christadelphian teaching was as though he had never existed, yet we read in the next verse:
  “In hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and sees Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.”

The Christadelphian would likewise tell us that Abraham and Lazarus, being dead, were also as if they had never existed, yet in this parable (a parable to teach the truth) we have the unbeliever in hades in torment, and Abraham and Lazarus in heaven.

The Apostle Paul, too, says (2 Cor. 5:8):
  “We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body and present with the Lord.”

So evidently the apostle and the Christadelphian are not one in the matter, for Paul recognized himself as distinct from his body, and expressed a confidence in being with the Lord in the disembodied state.

Then again examine the following verse with care:
  “Fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear Him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell” (Matt. 10:28).

If the soul is mortal, how is it that those who are able to kill the mortal body cannot likewise kill the mortal soul; and, if they kill the body, how can they avoid at the same time killing the soul? The Christadelphian is here impaled on the horns of a dilemma. There is no escape from the situation. Only God can destroy the soul; over the body man has power, but none over the soul, for the soul is immortal. And as to denying hell, surely the testimony of Scripture is ample and explicit:
  “And death and hell [hades] were cast into the lake of fire” (Rev. 20:14).

Evidently death and hell [hades] are not the same thing, and clearly the lake of fire is distinct from them both, else how could they be cast into the lake of fire?

Death, the wages of sin, when viewed in contrast to hades, is not a place, but a condition—viz., that of bodies without souls. Hades is death’s counterpart, no more a place than death, but like death a condition—viz., that of souls without bodies.

At the resurrection of the unbelievers, bodies and souls shall be reunited; thus, those, who formed in their disembodied state the kingdoms or conditions of death and hades, are cast into the lake of fire that is hell, the existence of which the Christadelphians refuse, but which, spite of their denial, exists, and which alas! shall be their portion if they die in their sins.

These errors as so inextricably mixed up one with the other that it is difficult to treat of them save in groups. As the Christadelphian denies heaven for the believer, but promises him earth, and as he denies hell’s existence at all, a question arises. How will the believer get his portion on earth, and what will become of the unbeliever?

6. As to the future portion of the dead, the Christadelphian teaches:
  “At the return of Jesus Christ, from heaven, to establish his kingdom on earth, he will, first of all, summon before him for judgment the whole of those who are responsible to his judgment . . . Faithful and unfaithful will be mustered together before his judgment seat for the purpose of having it declared, after account rendered, who is worthy of being invested with immortality and promoted to the kingdom, and who is deserving of rejection, and reconsignment to corruption after punishment.”

Again, what then is the destiny of the wicked according to the Scriptures? The answer . . . is that “they will be put out of existence by divine judgment, with attendant circumstances of shame and suffering.”

In death, they tell us, a man, instead of having ‘gone to another world,’ is simply a body deprived of life, and as utterly unconscious as if he had never existed. Corruption will destroy his dead body, and he will pass away like a dream.”

At death, they say, responsible mankind fell into a state of absolute non-existence. Then, to be logical, a new creation rather than a resurrection will be needed. But, say they, when the judgment day comes the dead are raised, and those who are worthy are “invested with immortality,” and the unworthy are “put out of existence with attendant circumstances of shame and suffering.” Where is this in the gospel? Where are the atoning merits and sufficiency of the finished work of Christ? Ignored, and the Saviour insulted. According to this system the dying thief, whose ear received its last message from the lips of the Saviour, “TODAY shalt thou be with Me in paradise,” is still sleeping his sleep of oblivion, and is not yet “in paradise,” and never will be, and even at the resurrection he will be still on trial, and may be “reconsigned to corruption after punishment.” Likewise the Apostle Paul, according to the Christadelphian, is still sleeping his sleep of oblivion, and is not “present with the Lord,” and is still to be judged. And, further how came Moses and Elias to be on the mount of transfiguration, if they were as though they had never existed? Scripture says:
  “By one offering He [Christ] has perfected for ever them that are sanctified” (Heb. 10:14).

Is this true? “By one offering,” says Scripture, are believers made worthy—by our lives and worthiness say the Christadelphians, who would thus rob us of heaven and salvation and all that we hold dear.

Never will Christadelphian lips join in the outburst of the redeemed:
  “Unto Him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in His own blood and has made us kings and priests unto God and His Father: to Him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen” (Rev. 1:5-6).

Christ did not die to satisfy the wrath of God against sin, they tell us; hence they have no saving, cleansing value in their creed for the precious blood, without which, God tells us, there is no forgiveness.

We have seen what the Christadelphian teaches about the responsible portion of mankind, but what about the heathen—“the irresponsible of mankind,”—as Christadelphianism describes them? They teach that
  “They are exempted from responsibility and will pass away in death, as though they had never existed. THEY WILL NEVER SEE THE LIGHT OF RESURRECTION.”

This is a very easy way of disposing of what they call “by far the largest part of mankind.” The texts they quote in proof of this wild statement teach quite the opposite. For instance:
  “There shall be a resurrection of the dead both of the just and the unjust” (Acts 24:15).
  “The Lord Jesus Christ who shall judge the quick and the dead” (2 Tim. 4:1).
  “We shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ” (2 Cor. 5:10).

Surely the dead are the dead, and include the heathen dead, as well as those who have been privileged to live in so-called Christian lands. No distinction is made in Scripture between what the Christadelphian describes as the responsible dead and the irresponsible dead. On the contrary, God says:
  “As I live, says the Lord, EVERY knee shall bow to Me and EVERY tongue shall confess to God” (Rom. 14:11).

Surely, “every” means every and does not exclude “by far the largest part of mankind”.

Thus the Christadelphian refuses the Scripture he professes to bow to.

But we have a further question to ask him. Is any portion of mankind irresponsible? Romans 1, which discusses the condition of all mankind, clearly shows that where the knowledge of God has been given up, which is the condition of heathendom, there is the testimony of creation rendered to the Creator’s eternal power and Godhead,
  “So that they are WITHOUT EXCUSE” (Rom. 1:20).

How powerful and majestic such a testimony is, Psalm 19 tells us:
  “The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament shows His handiwork. Day unto day utters speech, and night unto night shows knowledge. There is no speech nor language where their voice is not heard.”

And further, how did the heathen become heathen? Simply by giving up the knowledge of God, for at the start of the world’s history all had the knowledge of God, Romans 1 tells us:
  “And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind” (v. 28).

As to the heathen, we can take our stand with Abraham, who asked, “Shall not the judge of all the earth do right?”

Scripture shows plainly there are degrees of punishment the same measure is not meted out to all.

  “He that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required; and to whom men have committed much, him they will ask the more” (Luke 12:48).

Surely it is our highest wisdom to bow to God, and leave all in His righteous, holy hands.

We have now briefly examined Christadelphian teaching. To answer it carefully and exhaustively would have been to swell this small pamphlet into a large volume. But enough has been shown to prove that this system is antichristian and Satanic. We can understand that, once having started with the wrong premise as to the Person of God the Son, error after error was needed wherewith to bolster up this daring attack on Christianity.

It may be contended that amidst this mass of error the Christadelphians at least are sound as to their acknowledgment of God the Father. Even this contention Scripture takes from them, and they are left most completely under the curse of Scripture. Scripture tells us in this connection that:
  “Whosoever denies the Son, the same has not the Father” (1 John 2:23).

  “For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist . . . Whosoever transgresses, and abides not in the doctrine of Christ, has NOT GOD . . . If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed; for he that bids him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds” (2 John 7, 9, 11).

Without God, without the Father, without the Son, without the Holy Ghost, without atonement, without a hope of heaven, how truly terrible their condition is! Theirs is indeed a system of error without one redeeming feature.

The book of their teaching, which we have been discussing, is dishonest in its intention and make-up. Their Christadelphian blasphemies and negetions are first stated, and then with this evil bias in their minds they quote Scriptures which by no means prove what they assert, and leave out Scriptures which most clearly refute their propositions. For instance, they say that the Lord Jesus did not exist before His birth, and quote texts which relate only to His birth into this world, and ignore such as, “Before Abraham was, I am.” How evident is their evil intention! But once let the Deity of God the Son be known, as it is unmistakeably presented in Scripture, then their whole system is weaker than a wooden shanty in a West Indian hurricane.

We turn from their system, from its blasphemies and negations, with grief and abhorrence, and it is our joy and delight to say of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, “My LORD AND MY GOD” (John 20:28).

That God may deliver souls from this deadly error, and honour His blessed Son by so doing, is our earnest prayer.