Want Some Answers ???


Christadelphian's
Index
Home




Hi Kevin,

>>By faith I mean all the things that encompass my belief.<<

Kevin, that’s not true 'faith.' It’s not a saving faith. Your faith should be in God NOT “all the things” of a religious group. The Bible teaches you should trust in God, not men's doctrines and interpretations ie Roberts/Thomas.

>>You also believe that there is some minimal belief set required for salvation; obviously a pagan won't be saved

I believe there’s a difference between faith in doctrines and faith in God. Many have faith in doctrine at the expense of faith in God. Hearing the gospel and placing faith in God can save a pagan. But hearing the gospel and placing faith in doctrine will not save anyone. What is your “minimal belief set required for salvation”?

>>What I meant is that I believe that my faith, which you call 'Christadelphainism' is an accurate representation of the teachings of the Bible

You’re sincere as a Jehovah’s Witness or Mormon. A sincere faith that Christadelphian doctrine is the ‘accurate representation of the’ truth. That’s not a saving faith. If Christadelphianism is wrong you believe it anyway, so you place your faith in Christadelphianism.

>>As for whether it's the solidity of my faith that saves me or not, that's just playing around with semantics.<<

Will the solid faith of a sincere Mormon who believes in his church, save him? No! And the doctrines of his sect fool him into thinking faith in his group is faith in God [bad semantics].

But as for faith in God, as I said, it's not a 'solid' or shaky faith that
saves. It’s not 'my faith' but God's grace. The gift of salvation is by grace through faith, not by faith through grace. Salvation is a Divine Work, not a human procurement. For you, it’s a sect you place your faith in. For me, it’s Who I place my faith in.

>>Obviously we can't be saved by believing just anything about anything; there has to be a minimum knowledge of who God is and how he works

Obviously, “How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? And how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? [Rom 10:14]. And those who believe? They are saved [Jn.1:12 6:29 8:24 11:40 20:31 Mk.9:23 Ac.13:39 15:11 16:31 Rom.10:9]. Even “little ones” [Mtt.18:6].

The Good News [gospel] of God’s grace is that all can believe and be saved. The sad deceitful news of Christadelphianism is that only Christadelphians can be saved. But only on conditions.

>>I don't believe I earn my salvation, however, I do believe that something is required of us<<

That’s a contradiction. The “something [which] is required” results in “salvation”. If YOU do not have it, you are not saved. The Christadelphian idea of salvation is that it is “of us”. The Bible contradicts that. Read, Eph 2:8 "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God” When you say, “I believe that something is required of us”, that “something” is your works. The Christadelphian idea of salvation is just a ‘hope’. And a poor hope at that. I find it easier to place my faith in God rather than Roberts or Christadelphianism.

I mentioned Col.1:15-17 and the importance of understanding who Christ is in relation to salvation. You reply,


>>I don't see how your passage below where you say that Christ is God in the flesh follows from a passage that says he's the 'image' of the invisible God<<

I agree. But you only quoted part of what I said. The rest reads – “Because Christ is God in the flesh [The Word became a human being Jn.1:14]”. The NIV reads, “The Word became flesh” [Jn 1:14]. Which means ‘God became flesh’. So from John it’s clear Christ is God. As Paul says, “…great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh” [1 Tim.3:16].

Col.1:15-17 says more about Christ's pre-existence referring to His deity rather than His humanity and His eternal being, rather than the incarnate Son. Yet the significance of “in Him….through Him and for Him” conveys a meaning far deeper than Philo’s Logos of an abstract Idea or Ideal. It’s descriptive of a divine Person. Yet, the fact Christ was God manifest in the flesh is found in Colossians. Note, “For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him” [Col 1:19]. Whose fullness? “For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form” [Col 2:9].


>>To me it seems crystal clear that someone who is 'the image' of someone else, is NOT the same person [Heb.1:2]

Yes, it would refer to the Second 'Person' of the Godhead. Just as Hebrews 1:2 implies ‘Through Him God made the worlds’. The word ‘image’ means [1] Jesus enabled us to see what God is like. God is a Spirit and invisible but in Christ He made Himself visible [Jn.14:9]. [2] He came as the representative to reveal God’s love. The Greek word ‘eikon’ [image] which we get ‘icon’ means likeness [ie ‘head of a coin’, an exact representation]. Jesus said, ‘He that hath seen me, hath seen the Father’.

>>Yet the fact that he is the image of God, and has been given all authority in heaven and earth, this explains his current positions, and most of honorifics ascribed to him<<

Lightfoot [that learned Hebraist of the 17th century] says this word ‘image’ applies “whether preincarnate or incarnate, [He] is the revelation of the unseen Father”. If this only spoke of “his current positions” why does it say, “through Him God created everything” [Col.1:16]? Did God create the world after Christ rose from the dead? No! “Christ existed before all things and in him all things hold together” [Col.1:17]. This very passage refutes the Christadelphian interpretation of it. Christadelphianism has led you away from salvation, the gospel and from God Himself as revealed in Christ.

>>I'm glad you think Dr. Thomas and Robert Roberts would be proud of me. The fact that I believe as they do without being a follower of theirs lends strength to my belief<<

They are not so wonderful for the foundation of doctrine. Admit it, you ARE “a follower of theirs”, a clone, in fact.

>>I realize you think what we teach is far from truth, but I haven't yet heard any good biblical evidence of it, just a hodge podge of assumptions resting on other assumptions

Do you really seek evidence or truth? If you studied NT Greek you wouldn't be a Christadelphian. The meaning of these words, death, hell, grave, destroy, soul, spirit, and word, are contrary to Christadelphian doctrine. Their Greek meanings indicate [1] man is body, soul and spirit, [2] death not extinction, [3] punishment for the wicked is eternal torment. [4] Roberts/Thomas laid a corrupt foundation. [5] God is a Tri-unity.

The NT Greek has no word(s) for extinction and the Bible writers and Jesus never taught it. The more Greek you study the more errors and contradictions you find in Christadelphian doctrine.

Promise me. Buy yourself a copy of Vines Expository Dictionary of NT Words and READ it. You can get a copy from most decent Christian bookshops that have a wide range of reference materials.

Look-up - death, hell, grave, destroy, soul, and spirit [Another good Expository Dic., is L.O Richards dic.] Don't worry if you can't read Greek or Hebrew. These books explain with English the word meanings. Christadelphian literature selectively quote from Vine giving the wrong impression. Write back and let me know what you think.


>>Can you answer this one question: Was it possible for Jesus to have sinned?

No doubt you want to change the subject and forget the shambles of Christadelphianism regarding salvation. It’s hard for you to accept that there’s no salvation message taught in Christadelphianism. Yet it is the most important matter to study. The truth will reveal Christadelphian doctrines are wrong and it might even result in your salvation.

But the answer to your question is, ‘no’. It is only our fallen nature that turns our necessary testing into temptation. He was sinlessly perfect, God’s unique Son. If He could have fallen, then the whole issue of redemption hung in the balance until the cross and resurrection. If Christadelphians believe He could, what assurance do they have He cannot sin today? [Heb.13:8 “Jesus Christ, the same yesterday, today and forever’]. If He could have sinned on earth, peccability must characterize Him forever.

Look forward to hearing from you.
Regards,

Mark



Index
Home