Christadelphians, the Devil and Satan

[Wick Stick]

I love this chapter [Eze 28] —it's beautifully written, and its significance would have been immediately clear to the Hebrew people.

If you are interested, I don't mind stepping, you through it.

I'd be interested in that. Perhaps in a new topic?

I fancy that I know something about this chapter, too. I may be a tough audience

 

[Hiddenthings]

I'd be interested in that. Perhaps in a new topic?

I fancy that I know something about this chapter, too. I may be a tough audience

I'll start a new thread.

How detailed a study do you want?

 

[TrevorHL]

Greetings Talons,

So according to you is it God or is it the snake that is the author of this evil that was offered to mankind ?

God did not create the snake and its abilities to make sin inevitable. Rather he was placing Adam and Eve under trial, and my assessment is that God wanted them to mature and grow in faith and trust of God and his word. We are placed under trial and sin is not inevitable.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[TrevorHL]

Greetings again Matthias,

Do I disagree with the Christadelphian view of the introduction of sin in Genesis 3, and your view that the serpent was real, and when he created it God gave it reasoning ability and the serpent could speak? Yes, I disagree with it. Thank you for inquiring.

I am not sure as to how much Christadelphian literature that you are familiar with or how much you can easily access if you wanted to. You may not be particularly interested. There is a great deal of fairly recent publications, on many subjects, and also a large number of magazines, UK, US, Canada, Australia. For example, I like the four volume expositions of The Psalms, with many different brethren contributing with one or more of the Psalms. There is now a thorough exposition of chapters 1-23 of Isaiah, and there is anticipated two more volumes. John Allfree wrote a number of booklets, but he also did a thorough exposition of Ezekiel 1-39. I like many of John Carter’s expositions, for example Romans, Galatians, Ephesians, Hebrews and some specific articles from when he was editor of the Christadelphian Magazine.

The major foundations of the Christadelphian beliefs were laid by John Thomas in his Herald Magazines of the 1840s, then Elpis Israel about 1850, and then his second Herald series of Magazines from 1851-1859, and then his Three (now published as Five) Volume Exposition of the Apocalypse. Robert Roberts carried on the consolidation of our teaching, covering many subjects, and responding to many slight and large problems. Many of the early Christadelphians had different church backgrounds and may have carried over a few of these ideas.

One area covered relevant to your post is a series of articles by A.Andews called “Sin: its origin, effects, etc.” These articles give a thorough exposition of all aspects of the subject, and the portion in The Christadelphian magazine for September 1876 pages 410-421 gives a thorough exposition of Romans 8:3 and Hebrews 2:14, highlighting the Representative nature of the Atonement, and some rebuttal of the Substitutionary view. The Christadelphian (originally Ambassador) Magazine Volumes 1-24 have now been reprinted, while all the Magazines are available electronically, from 1864-2000 running under Logos Bible Software, and from 2001 to the present as PDFs. A large amount of other literature is also available to run under Logos Bible Software (aka Libronix).

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[Hiddenthings]

Greetings Talons,

God did not create the snake and its abilities to make sin inevitable.

Not inevitable but certainly possible.

 

[Matthias]

Greetings again Matthias,

I am not sure as to how much Christadelphian literature that you are familiar with or how much you can easily access if you wanted to. You may not be particularly interested. There is a great deal of fairly recent publications, on many subjects, and also a large number of magazines, UK, US, Canada, Australia. For example, I like the four volume expositions of The Psalms, with many different brethren contributing with one or more of the Psalms. There is now a thorough exposition of chapters 1-23 of Isaiah, and there is anticipated two more volumes. John Allfree wrote a number of booklets, but he also did a thorough exposition of Ezekiel 1-39. I like many of John Carter’s expositions, for example Romans, Galatians, Ephesians, Hebrews and some specific articles from when he was editor of the Christadelphian Magazine.

The major foundations of the Christadelphian beliefs were laid by John Thomas in his Herald Magazines of the 1840s, then Elpis Israel about 1850, and then his second Herald series of Magazines from 1851-1859, and then his Three (now published as Five) Volume Exposition of the Apocalypse. Robert Roberts carried don the consolidation of our teaching, covering many subjects, and responding to many slight and large problems. Many of the early Christadelphians had different church backgrounds and may have carried over a few of these ideas.

One area covered relevant to your post is a series of articles by A.Andews called “Sin: its origin, effects, etc.” These articles give a thorough exposition of all aspects of the subject, and the portion in The Christadelphian magazine for September 1876 pages 410-421 gives a thorough exposition of Romans 8:3 and Hebrews 2:14, highlighting the Representative nature of the Atonement, and some rebuttal of the Substitutionary view. The Christadelphian (originally Ambassador) Magazine Volumes 1-24 have now been reprinted, while all the Magazines are available electronically, from 1864-2000 running under Logos Bible Software, and from 2001 to the present as PDFs. A large amount of other literature is also available to run under Logos Bible Software (aka Libronix).

Kind regards
Trevor

Thank you for sharing this information with me and with your other readers.

Without checking to see, I have probably half a dozen Christadelphian books in my personal library.

I’m very familiar with Christadelphian history, Trevor. A group that I’m very loosely / tenuously connected with shares historical roots with John Thomas.

Joseph Marsh (Adventist) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[TrevorHL]

Greetings Hiddenthings,

Not inevitable but certainly possible.

Yes, in God's wisdom he placed both trees in the midst of the garden.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[Matthias]

When I retired and returned to my home state, I contacted the Church of God of the Abrahamic Faith (located in Perryville, Kentucky).

Church of God of the Abrahamic Faith (CGAF)

The leader there was cordial - very much like @TrevorHL - and discussed my interest in possibly attending. (It’s less than a 60 minute drive from where I live.) At the end of our conversation he told me that I wouldn’t be welcome there for two simple reasons - (1) I believe the devil and the demons are real; and (2) I was licensed as a pastor by the church which they separated from 100 years ago - over the issue of the real personality of the devil.

As anyone who cares to read the link to their website can plainly see, they fellowship with the Christadelphians.

 

[Hiddenthings]

(2) I was licensed as a pastor by the church which they separated from 100 years ago - over the issue of the real personality of the devil.

It’s undoubtedly a divisive topic, one that strikes at the very core of key biblical themes. Getting it wrong can have serious consequences for a believer’s understanding and foundation.

 

[Lambano]

It seems to me that if we can determine if Enoch is reliable and literal, then we shall also have the answer to the question about Satan being a fallen angel.

I don't think it even needs to be reliable and/or literal. Instead, I would ask, "Is Enoch representative of what that particular culture believed about supernatural beings?" Writers don't bother to explain what "everybody knows". That is why the "argument from silence" is at best a weak one.

 

[Hiddenthings]

I don't think it even needs to be reliable and/or literal. Instead, I would ask, "Is Enoch representative of what that particular culture believed about supernatural beings?" Writers don't bother to explain what "everybody knows". That is why the "argument from silence" is at best a weak one.

It’s a travesty that this false doctrine relies on extrabiblical sources to support its validity. Relying on a single book, while the other 66 remain silent on its existence and identity, makes the doctrine difficult to support.

 

[Lambano]

It’s a travesty that this false doctrine relies on extrabiblical sources to support its validity. Relying on a single book, while the other 66 remain silent on its existence and identity, makes the doctrine difficult to support.

It's just literature. It's understanding how the culture that wrote that literature thinks in order to understand what the author meant.

 

[Hiddenthings]

It's just literature. It's understanding how the culture that wrote that literature thinks in order to understand what the author meant.

Agree...but if we accepted works like this, would you open the door to all Jewish apocryphal, pseudepigraphal, and mystical literature?

 

[Lambano]

Agree...but if we accepted works like this, would you open the door to all Jewish apocryphal, pseudepigraphal, and mystical literature?

The canonization process might be a bit cumbersome.

 

[Hiddenthings]

@Lambano @Wick Stick

Given the seriousness of the subject and the limited information provided, do you think the doctrine was intentionally left ambiguous for a divine purpose, or is it more likely that Christianity has misunderstood it and allowed inaccurate ideas to shape the interpretation of the text?

I’ve been digging into this topic for quite some time now, and so far, I haven’t seen any convincing arguments coming from this forum.

 

[Lambano]

@Lambano @Wick Stick

Given the seriousness of the subject and the limited information provided, do you think the doctrine was intentionally left ambiguous for a divine purpose, or is it more likely that Christianity has misunderstood it and allowed inaccurate ideas to shape the interpretation of the text?

I’ve been digging into this topic for quite some time now, and so far, I haven’t seen any convincing arguments coming from this forum.

I don't consider the subject serious, and I don't need to convince anybody of anything. This is just another strange animal in a zoo that includes Christadelphians, Jewish Monotheists, Catholics, Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormons, Calvinists, Open Theists, Baptismal Regenerationists, Seventh Day Adventists, Messianic Jews, converted Buddhists, Deconstructionists, Cessationists and non-Cessationists, people with strange spiritual gifts, Dispensationalists, Hyper-Dispensationalists, and anti-Dispensationalists, people with an obsession with The Name, people who think they're prophets, people who think other people are prophets...

What I do take seriously is praying for hurting people.

 

[Hiddenthings]

I don't consider the subject serious, and I don't need to convince anybody of anything. This is just another strange animal in a zoo that includes Christadelphians, Jewish Monotheists, Catholics, Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormons, Calvinists, Open Theists, Baptismal Regenerationists, Seventh Day Adventists, Messianic Jews, converted Buddhists, Deconstructionists, Cessationists and non-Cessationists, people with strange spiritual gifts, people with an obsession with The Name, people who think they're prophets, people who think other people are prophets...

What I do take seriously is praying for hurting people.

Nice list! I agree with your conclusion to a point. If your message is that it doesn’t matter, I believe you’ll eventually realise that it actually does. Holding to such a belief has serious implications, especially for those who devote themselves to fighting against something that isn’t even true. If something is regarded as a “god” in God’s eyes, then it matters, history makes that clear.

Ultimately, Lambano, either I’m misrepresenting the Word of God, or others are. I’m fully convinced that angels cannot sin or fall, and to claim otherwise is to suggest disorder exists in Heaven itself.

If God cannot rule His own house?

 

[Wick Stick]

Agree...but if we accepted works like this, would you open the door to all Jewish apocryphal, pseudepigraphal, and mystical literature?

Not all. Jewish mysticism from after the split of Judaism and Christianity is profoundly anti-Christian.

On the other hand, there shouldn't be a 400-year gap between the OT and NT. The literature from that period deserves to be looked at and evaluated on its merits (or lack thereof).

 

[Wick Stick]

I’m fully convinced that angels cannot sin or fall, and to claim otherwise is to suggest disorder exists in Heaven itself.

If God cannot rule His own house?

I think you need a distinction there between the angels of heaven, and those of the earth. Those "angels" who are earthly men don't seem to be infallible.

 

[Lambano]

I’m fully convinced that angels cannot sin or fall, and to claim otherwise is to suggest disorder exists in Heaven itself.

There are some foundational assumptions there that I would not make.

One assumption that I do make is that God is sovereign over all (the Calvinists got that part right), and if evil supernatural entities do exist, they exist because they play a part in God's overall plan.