Hi David, you wrote,

>>Hi Mark I was interested to discover your website....its a shame you do not publish the full details of correspondence received, so that I am able to follow a thought pattern from both yourself and an inquirer.<<

Yet you tag your email "confidential and may be subject to legal privilege." Which suggests you are happy to read their mail but don't want them to read yours. I keep "full details" private. As for "thought patterns" you will need to read slowly and think carefully.

>>I understand you have a PHD in Philosophy of some description, and appear to have a particular penchant for Western religions. However from Reading your site I cannot establish where you are located, or what contact you have had with Christadelphians. Also from reading your site, like many others I can only assume you haven't done enough research on the full Christadelphian landscape, because you are merely focussing on writings from a very small sample set and publishing your writings as if you have in fact done all the research. I am familiar with most of the books you refer too, and know the people that have written some of them, though haven't read them all cover to cover, as you obviously have.<<

If I "haven't done enough research on the full Christadelphian landscape" you missed a perfectly good chance to enlighten me, perhaps next time? I've never claimed to know it all.  But glad I don't need to 'research' Christadelphianism to know the truth (Jn.14:6) or receive salvation (a free gift from God’s grace).

>>First I'll tell you a little bit about me, I am in fact a Christadelphian, but don't let that put you off talking to me. I am, like you, interested in Theology and Philosophy. I have an interest in your site as it appears you want to know purely factual information about "other religions" to fulfil an academic need. I don't proclaim to know all varying Christadelphian beliefs, and the different people that propound them, but I am very familiar with Christadelphian history, and differences between groups, and why these exist.<<

I’m a Christian (very different from Christadelphian’s). So you "don't proclaim to know all varying Christadelphian beliefs".  This sounds like it’s you (not me) that hasn’t "done enough research on the full Christadelphian landscape". Remarkable that Christadelphian's insist they alone have the truth yet are so divided (which group should we follow?).

>>If you are interested in continuing you investigation into this cult, because any religion not professing the Trinity is defined as a cult, I will gladly help, and provide you with much of the information you need to properly complete this work.<<

I have plenty of information already on “Christadelphian history” and doctrines etc. If I'm wrong, as you say, then its the explanation why, which is lacking.
 

>>I only urge you this, be careful about how you say things, from the small snippets I can gather from your site, you have an aggressive manner. If you want information that will help you understand the intricacies of "other religions" ask people to explain themselves, not accuse them of things. Let me give you an example: If I wrote to you, and the first thing I said was "The doctrine of the Trinity is rubbish, and there is no way that Christ is God" you would immediately feel got at, and would do everything in your power to show this as false, and my doing this to you would force you further back into a corner, and entrench you more in your beliefs.<<

You seem to have your own 'aggressive manner'. You are more interested in rubbishing me personally than examining my 'beliefs'. Those 'snippets' must have 'got at' you. Why should I worry if people 'rubbish' what I believe, if I have the truth? The truth has nothing to fear. What I’ve found, is that Christadelphian's are indeed in a corner and entrenched in their private belief, not the Bible.

>>You are doing the same to every Christadelphian that read your first letter, and I would imagine you are getting very little response from Christadelphians to help you with your research because of your attitude.<<

I have 121 emails in my Christadelphian Folder.

>>Hear this, I will provide you with any information that I know about the History, the beliefs and doctrines of Christadelphians. I will provide you with material written by Christadelphians that you have never heard of nor come across, and unlike others on this site, who you have abused with your aggressive and downright rude attitude,  I will give you the opportunity to convince me that you are right. However complete your thesis, and get it right, adjust your attitude towards others, and you will get a far better response to your message.<<

Now, now, David calm down. Where are your examples where I have “abused” people with an "aggressive and down right rude attitude"? You have the very attitude you accuse others of. Find one mail where I use personal insult like you. You have 'the opportunity to convince me' too, but 'adjust your attitude' for any 'response' from me.

>>Reply if you like, however if you decide to put this letter on your site, put it on in full, don't do what you accuse others of doing, and publish only bits that you are interested in publishing.<<

The mails are ‘in full’, have a look. Show examples to prove your claim. As for publishing your mail, there's nothing there worth it. Just a few boasts, but I’m sure you are able to explain many things.

>>By the way just a small thing, the "Mr Mansfield" you refer to as "a top Christadelphian authour" shows your research is not complete. The Mr Mansfield that "was" a Christadelphain Authour has been Dead for 15 years. This small fact, along with other seriously flawed accusations, shows to me you need more information than that that you have I look forward to hearing from you, where you are, and how you obtained the information you have. yours. David.<<

But I do have a letter from “Mr Mansfield” and booklets from both G.E and P.H Mansfield (I’ve had dealings with Christadelphian's for years). He was very much alive when writing to me. I also await your list of those "seriously flawed accusations". So far you are quick to accuse, slow to deliver.

>>This email with any attachments is confidential and may be subject to legal privilege.  If it is not intended for you please reply immediately, destroy it and do not copy, disclose or use it in any way.<<

Are you ashamed to be a Christadelphian, want to hide your information from the public? Well, whatever, I look forward to you explaining where I'm wrong about the Christadelphian gospel, your comment on this below -

My concern about Christadelphianism is (1) it focuses on "the Gospel of the Kingdom" [which was preached 'only to the Jews' and rejected by them]. And (2) it ignores "the gospel of the grace of God" [Ac.20:24].  The former was proclaimed before the death and resurrection of Christ; the latter since His resurrection, and its prominent fact is that Christ was raised from the dead after giving His life for the sins of His people.  Hence this gospel could not have been preached while our Lord was on earth. 

It is carefully defined in I Cor.15:1-3  "I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand. how that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures [the OT] and was buried, and rose again the third day, according to the Scriptures."  

Paul said he did not learn this gospel from man, but from the risen Lord [Gal.1:11,12] and "If an angel from heaven preach any other gospel, let him be accursed." Christadelphianism contradicts this gospel and suggests that man is to be saved by his own works - Bible reading, etc.

I should add (to prevent misunderstanding) that the Gospel of the Kingdom will be preached again in the next age, when the Lord begins again to deal with Israel and then it will be preached "for a witness to all nations" [Mt.24:14]. The Gospel of the Kingdom is: "Repent ye, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand." It was preached by John the Baptist [Mt.3:1-2] by Jesus [Mt.4:23] and the Twelve [Mt.10.5-7], but expressly limited to the house of Israel. The renewed offer of the Kingdom (conditioned upon national repentance), made by Peter in Acts 2 and 3 was only to the Jews, and was by them again rejected. In the coming age all "the promises" to Israel will be fulfilled, and the nations also will be blessed through Israel in fulfillment of many prophecies.

Have you had a conversion? I have. Upon believing on the crucified and risen Son of God, who is "the true God and Eternal life" [I Jn.5:20], I received the gift of God, which is everlasting life, and passed "out of death into life," [Jn.5:24].  Since then I work, not in order to be saved, but because I am saved. Only the saved can work, [Eph.2:10; Titus 3:3]. For all others, "this is the work of God, that I ye believe on Him whom He [God] hath sent" [Jn.6:29]. I also read the Scriptures, not in order to get eternal life, but because I have already obtained eternal life and require the spiritual meat and drink suitable for one who has been born anew and from above.

It's impossible for the dead to obtain eternal life by their own efforts, (which are dead works). It is only by "the gift of God" as Jesus declared in Jn 4.10 and elsewhere [Rom.6:23]. This is why I reject annihilation theories. To me "eternal death" means something far more dreadful than extinction, or cessation of existence. John saw "the dead, small and great, stand before God" [Rev.20:12]. Although "dead" they are nevertheless standing before the throne to be judged. These are they who would not receive God's gift of eternal life [Jn.5:40]. They are "dead," and so cannot go into the realms of life and light, but into the "second death," or what our Lord described as the "outer darkness."

I am not surprised if I don't convince you of the error of Christadelphianism. It's very seldom that those who commit themselves to a system of teaching of whatever sort and however wide of the truth, are delivered from it. Particularly those who are involved in the great systems of error flourishing today, all of which, though radically differing among them-selves nevertheless seek to justify their teachings by some method of interpretation of Scripture. The great majority are unfortunate people who are drawn into these systems and have no desire whatever to be convinced of error. They become simply zealous partisans of a cult and would compass sea and land to make one proselyte. However, I pray that you are open to seek the truth.

When I say 'I have eternal life', you will reply that we can only have the promise of life. It depends on conditions we must fulfill. This strikes me as extraordinary coming from those who professes to believe the Scriptures. When I claim that I have eternal life now, it's based on my identification with Christ in His death and resurrection. This is the counterpart to the truth of the identification of the natural man with Adam in his sin and condemnation.  So it's the one who says he has not eternal life that denies the resurrection of Christ [see Rom.6:6-11 8:2, 9-11 Eph. 2:6  Col.3:1 etc].

But apart from this, the Bible teaches in the most dogmatic and unambiguous fashion, that eternal life is the present possession of all who believe on the crucified and risen Son of God.  He who hears and believes "has everlasting life and is passed out of death into life [Jn5:24]. God "hath quickened us together with Christ (by grace ye are saved), and hath raised us up together: [Eph.2:5-6]. "We know that we have passed out of death into life" [I Jn.3:14]. "He that hath the Son hath life and he that believes not this testimony of God concerning His Son hath made Him a liar" [I Jn.5:10-12]. The very purpose of the Apostle John in writing this epistle to those "that believe on the name of the Son of God" was that they "might know" that they "have eternal life". If you believe on His name and do not know this, you have read the Scriptures to no purpose and if these passages do not mean just what they say, then words are absolutely worthless for the purpose of imparting information.

I will conclude by making this point. Note that the Scriptures carefully distinguish between Eternal Life and Immortality. Your teachers have confounded (and with little excuse for doing so) two things that are utterly unlike. They are not synonymous. The word "immortal" [like its opposite, "mortal"] is applied in Scripture to the body.  I am at present occupying a mortal body and don't have yet immortality. At Christ's Coming I shall be clothed with incorruption and shall put on immortality; for I shall receive a body like Christ's [I Cor.15:51-55 2 Cor.5:1-4 Phil.3:21]. Yet I have eternal life NOW. "The Spirit is Life," and He indwells believers now, occupying their mortal bodies. "The Spirit is life" [Rom.8.10], "His Spirit that dwelleth in you".  Here we find the Spirit of Life indwelling the "mortal bodies" of believers.  If then, you have not eternal life, it is because you do not belong to Christ, for "if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of His"

Many religious people are trying to work for salvation by good works. They are keeping a list of conditions and make Christianity into a religion. True Christianity is not a religion. Religion attempts to reach up to God, Christianity is God reaching down to man. Religion is man's ultimate search for God, Christianity is God's search for man. True Christianity is a relationship, a focus on One Person. In all sects, cults and heresies their leaders point a way to God, but in true Christianity Jesus points to Himself as God.  I pray you come to know the Saviour.

Regards.
Mark

Index
Home