Why Dr John Thomas Was Wrong

"Here and there throughout American society you meet men filled with an enthusiastic, almost fierce spirituality such as cannot be found in Europe. From time to time strange sects arise which strive to open extraordinary roads to eternal happiness. Forms of religious madness are very common there" - Alexis de Tocqueville


Dr John Thomas
1805-1871
As a child nurtured in the Christadelphian faith from my mother's womb my infant mind was steeped in Christadelphian myth and legend from an early age. My father would tell me the bedtime story of how the founder of Christadelphianism, the brave Dr John Thomas at the age of twenty eight in 1832 was nearly shipwrecked aboard the Marquis of Wellesley ship while en route to America. He made a vow to God that if his life was spared he would devote himself to discovering the truth about religion. God saved the good doctor from his distress and upon reaching New York he set about reading his Bible. He soon discovered The Truth that humans had lost for nineteen hundred years and published his findings in his book "Elpis Israel" in which he also predicted the return of the Jews to Palestine. He later explained every word and phrase of the Biblical book of Revelation in intricate detail in his three volume work "Eureka". Dr Thomas was a man "raised up by God for this great work" I was told and my young, impressionable mind believed every word, not realising that I was being indoctrinated into a religion that made about as much sense as Flat Earth Theory. I read “Elpis Israel”, “Eureka”, “Faith in the Last Days”, “Exposition of Daniel” and “Christendom Astray” when I was eleven and I made up my mind that baptism was a primary goal in my life.

It was twenty years later that my dearly beloved and greatly missed friend, brother John Allfree gave me a very old copy of the five volume work "Horae Apocaliptica" by a writer named Eliot. It is a preterist exposition of the Biblical book of Revelation. The book was published prior to Dr Thomas's work Eureka. In Eureka Dr Thomas frequently heaps fiery scorn and derision on Elliot and his work, so I was interested to read this work that I thought would be junk. Imagine therefore my shock when I discovered that practically 80% of Eureka had been lifted out of Hoare Apocaliptica! Eureka was NOT an original work at all; Dr Thomas had plagiarised Elliot's work mercilessly and passed it off to the Christadelphians as an original.

Further investigation convinced me that much of "Elpis Israel", "Anatolia", "The Exposition of Daniel" and practically everything else that Dr Thomas wrote had been taken from other writer's work but not acknowledged by him. Even most of the doctrinal material and the prediction that the Jews would return to Palestine was NOT original work. He was simply lashing together other people's material and publishing it as his own ideas. The man that I had venerated as someone "raised up by God" to rediscover The Truth was a charlatan as bad as any corrupt American TV evangelist in our own times.

It would take me many hundreds of pages to thoroughly expose Dr Thomas's plagiarism in full and as I have disposed of all my religious books it is now an impossible task for me. But I strongly recommend that others take up the task of repeating the work that I undertook in the early Nineteen Eighties. I would have written it all down then, but I got so far and gave up in disgust that I had been hoodwinked by Dr Thomas for so long. However it would be unfair to leave this subject without at least one illustration of what I mean, so I submit the following as a tiny fraction of the material that is available.

"Anatolia is original throughout" wrote Doctor Thomas in the introduction to that work. Let us test that statement by comparing the following quotations from "Anatolia" with another work published forty years earlier in 1814 by Granville Penn entitled "The Prophecy of Ezekiel concerning Gog":

Dr John Thomas in "Anatolia":
"The question as to what nations are signified by Rosh, Meshekh, and Thuval has long since been determined by the learned. The celebrated Bochart, about the year 1640 observed in his elaborate researches into sacred geography, that ROS, Ros, [the Hebrew word is omitted] is the most ancient form under which history makes mention of the name of RUSSIA; and he contended that Rosh and Meshekh probably denote the nations of Muscovy and Russia. 'It is credible,' says he, 'that from Rosh and Meshekh (that is the Rhossi and Moschi) of whom Ezekiel speaks, descended the Russians and Muscovites, nations of the greatest celebrity in European-Scythia.' We have indeed ample and positive testimony that the Russian nation was called Ros by the Greeks in the earliest period in which we find it mentioned, as Ethnos de oi Ros Schnthichon, peri ton archtoon Towron; that is, the Rosh are a Scythian nation bordering on the northern Taurus! and their own historians say, 'It is related that the Russians (whom the Greeks call Ros, and sometimes Rosos, Rosos) derived their name from Ros, a valiant man who delivered his nation from the yoke of its tyrants.'" p. 65

Granville Penn in "The Prophecy of Ezekiel Concerning Gog":
"If we next enquire what nations are signified by those three proper names we shall find that this question also has been long determined by the learned. The celebrated Bochart, about the year 1640, observed in his elaborate researches into sacred geography that ROS, Ros, is the most ancient form under which history makes mention of the name of RUSSIA; and he contended that the two first of those names properly denote the nations of Russia and Muscovy. 'It is credible,' says he, 'that from Rosh and Mesech (that is the Rhossi and Moschi) of whom Ezekiel speaks, descended the Russians and Muscovites, nations of the greatest celebrity in European-Scythia.' We have indeed ample and positive testimony that the Russian nation was called Ros by the Greeks in the earliest period in which we find it mentioned. Ethnos de oi Ros Schnthichon, peri ton archtoon Towron. 'The Ros are a Scythian nation bordering on the northern Taurus.' This testimony is given by Cedrenus, Zonarus, Leo Grammaticus, and Tzetzes; and their own historians thus report, 'It is related that the Russians (whom the Greeks call Ros, ROS, and sometimes Rosos, Rosos) derived their name from Ros, a valiant man who delivered his nation from the yoke of their tyrants.'" p. 19

John Thomas:
"And thus the three denominations, Rosh, Meshekh, and Thuval, united in the prophecy point out, with equal capacity and conciseness, those widely extended regions, which, at the present day, we denominate collectively THE RUSSIAN EMPIRE." p. 66

Granville Penn:
"And thus the THREE DENOMINATIONS united in the prophecy point out, with equal capacity and conciseness, those widely extended regions, which, at the present day, we denominate collectively THE RUSSIAN EMPIRE." p. 22

John Thomas:
"Since the name of Scythae, or Magog, is to be considered not by itself, but in geographical connection with Galatae, or Gomer, we have only to enquire, whether any geographical affinity is really ascribed by the Greeks to the Scythae and Galatae? and to ascertain to what regions of the earth those names so associated, were applied. If we can discover these two points we ought thereby to have discovered specifically the Magog of the prophecy, which is to be associated with the region, or people, of Gomer." - p. 67

Granville Penn:
"But, since the name of Scythae (i.e. Magog,) is here to be considered, not by itself, but in geographical connection with GALATAE, or GOMER, we have only to enquire, whether any geographical affinity is really ascribed by the Greeks to the Scythae and Galatae? and to ascertain, to what regions of the earth, those names, so associated, were applied. If we can discover these two points, we ought thereby to have discovered specifically the Magogue of the prophecy, which would be able to associate to themselves the region, or people of Gomer." - p. 41.

John Thomas:
"From the Hebrew Scripture we learn that Magog and Gomer were the names of two of the sons of Japhet; and it is to ancient Hebrew authority alone that we can resort to ascertain where, according to the common repute of the Israelites, the nation which descended from those two heads of families, and which long retained the proper names of those heads, were spread and established. Josephus says, 'That Japhet, etc., etc.' [and so on, with a quotation from Josephus, the same as given by G. Penn.] It only therefore remains for us to ascertain which were the nations that the Greeks at the time of Josephus called Scythae, and which they then called Galatae; and to observe whether the geographical affinities of these nations are such as answer to those which are plainly required by the prophecy for Magog and Gomer."

Granville Penn:"We know from the Hebrew Scriptures that these are the names of two sons of Japhet! and it is to ancient Hebrew authority alone that we can resort, to learn where, according to the common repute of the Hebrew people, the nations which descended from those two heads of families, and which long retained the proper names of those heads, were spread and established. Josephus is the earliest Hebrew authority of weight and learning, to which we can address ourselves; and he distinctly informs us, 'That Japhet, etc., etc. [The quotation following being ANATOLIA] Scythae and which they styled Galatae; and to observe whether the geographical affinities of these nations are such as answer to those which are plainly required by the prophecy of Magog and Gomer."

Does that look as if "Anatolia" is "original throughout" as Dr Thomas claimed? I leave you to judge for yourself. Much of the "Anatolia" material was also lifted from "Dissertations on the Prophecies" by Bishop Thomas Newton. For example the paraphrase of Daniel 11 found in Anatolia is very similar to a paraphrase of the same chapter in Newton's work.

Christadelphian brother Alan Eyre has published two excellent books exposing the lie that Dr Thomas "rediscovered The Truth" about Bible teaching. For example in the preface to "The Protestors" one time editor of the Christadelphian magazine brother FT Pearce wrote:
"It is a matter of great encouragement to us, whose religious views are regarded as unorthodox by our contemporaries, to find that in a number of cases where major doctrines are concerned, these early believers had come to the same conclusions as ourselves." In his Introduction to the same work brother Alan wrote: "The writer, once naively and unquestioningly accepting a popular view that Dr. John Thomas "discovered", as if from a void, the totality of Bible truth as believed by Christadelphians, was amazed to discover source after source which showed that this was at least a serious misrepresentation"....... "The nineteenth century, however, was one in which few intellectual debts were acknowledged."

So not only do we find that the founder of Christadelphianism stole his ideas about prophetic interpretation from previous writers, but it is evident that his "rediscovery of The Truth" is "at least a serious misrepresentation" as brother Eyre diplomatically words it.

It is simply not true that Dr Thomas arrived in America in 1832 and fulfilled his pledge to God made on the sinking Marquis of Wellesley and rediscovered The Truth by studying his Bible. What actually happened was that he arrived as a young man twenty eight years of age and threw himself with vigour into the American "Restorationism" movement. Wikipedia explains it thus:

"In the United States, Restorationism, sometimes called Christian primitivism, refers to the belief held by various religious movements that pristine or original Christianity should be restored, while usually claiming to be the source of that restoration. Such groups teach that this is necessary because Catholic, Orthodox and Protestant Christians introduced defects into Christian faith and practice, or have lost a vital element of genuine Christianity. Specifically, restorationism applies to the Restoration Movement and numerous other movements that originated in the eastern United States and Canada and grew rapidly in the early and mid 19th century."

Soon after his arrival in America Dr Thomas joined the Stone-Campbell Restoration Movement which was one of the most prominent of dozens of different sects all competing to "rediscover The Truth" at that time. They advocated a total return to the faith of the apostolic churches, as found in the New Testament. They took no denominational title, calling themselves only by Scripture names, such as "Disciples", "Brethren", (now you know why you Christadelphians call each other "brethren and sisters) and "Christians". Mr. Thomas Campbell and his son Alexander were prominent advocates of this restoration of apostolic ways. Another leading member of that group was Mr. Walter Scott, whose acquaintance Dr. Thomas made soon after his arrival, the result being that he was baptized by Mr. Scott in 1837. Dr Thomas wrote to Alexander Campbell of his baptism:
"I am a Christian, and glory in the name, and am jealous of the honours and privileges and immunities attached to it; so much so that I am not content to share them with the innumerable pretenders to the title in the Protestant and Papal sections of the kingdom of anti-Christ. Bro. W. Scott can testify that I believed the Gospel, and obeyed it before witnesses".

During the course of the next ten years Dr Thomas continued to mix with a wide variety of different sects within the American Restorationism movement including the Millerites who later split and became the Jehovah's Witnesses. Please understand that these different sects believed in a very wide variety of different religious doctrines including all of the doctrines that Dr Thomas later formulated into the Christadelphian religion and they also rejected all of the doctrines that Dr Thomas rejected. You can truly make the Bible prove whatever you want it to prove and those people did exactly that. Every Christian belief and unbelief was promoted at one time or another by one or more of the groups, but not of course all at the same time in one sect. The different sects all competed and fought with each other like cat and dogs and castigated each other in the most virulent of language. Each claimed to hold "The Truth" and accused the others of apostasy and heresy.

After a decade of this madness Dr Thomas selected from this mêlée the beliefs and unbeliefs that suited his particular slant on the scriptures and baptised himself for a second time, saying of his previous baptism and beliefs:
"We confess that the whole matter was a mistake, and as such make this public abjuration thereof. ...... Having been immersed into an erroneous system....... I abjure the whole transaction in which I once firmly thought I had once believed the one only true Gospel of Christ".

This was sixteen years after the shipwreck incident. The man that the Christadelphians claim was raised up by God to rediscover the Truth had spent all that time going around in circles trying to discover the Truth. He had only "discovered" the Truth by stitching together different bits and pieces of the American Restorationism movement into something that suited his frame of mind. One hundred and forty years later brother Alan Eyre called it a "serious misrepresentation" to claim that he had rediscovered the Truth and the editor of The Christadelphian magazine agreed with him!

Do you really think that a God who created the entire Universe would let the rediscovery of the Gospel happen in such a crazy mixed up and deceitful way? Where were the angels and the power of the Holy Spirit in all this? Would it not have been helpful for them to have put a bit of effort into reviving the Truth instead of sitting back and watching Dr Thomas run around the American Restorationism movement like a headless chicken getting baptised and re-baptised as he constantly changed his mind about what he believed? How does all this compare to the conversion of Saul/Paul, or the work of John the Baptist or the calling of Peter? It does not compare at all! In my opinion Dr John Thomas the founder of the Christadelphians was a fraud and a liar like any of the current day American TV evangelists who are either inside or outside of jail. To quote the words of Dr Thomas himself: "Pride and ambition were the leading characteristics of my early manhood". - I could not agree more!

But wait - there is more. Soon after Dr Thomas had decided to start his own religion he and his daughter dumped his sick wife Ellen (who was suffering from tuberculosis) in Richmond, Virginia and sailed off to Britain in 1848. He then applied for fellowship at the Church of the Disciples in London which was one of approximately a hundred churches affiliated to the Stone-Campbell Restoration Movement in Britain. In other words he joined the very church that he had rejected a few months previously and did not tell them that he had baptised himself into a different religion. He did this because he wanted to tour Britain poaching their members to join his new faith.

Dr Thomas wrote of this: "Having made his arrangements accordingly, I arrived in London, June 28th, 1848; and in July following I received an invitation to visit Nottingham, and to deliver a course of lectures upon the times, in connection with the prophetic word. The interest created during his short stay was great and encouraging, and became the occasion of invitation to visit other towns and cities also. During this tour I visited Derby, Belper, Lincoln, Edinburgh, Glasgow, and Paisley, and addressed thousands of the people. who heard me gladly". - No mention of the fact that he was masquerading as a member of the Church of the Disciples in order to convert their members to Christadelphianism. In his defence Dr Thomas claimed that he had only rejected many of the doctrines of the Church of the Disciples and not the Church itself. This was doublespeak to hide the fact that he was blatantly lying to them.

One of the Disciples wrote in a magazine at the time:

“We have heard through the medium of some of the Second Advent proclaimers that Mr. John Thomas, M.D., from Richmond, Virginia, is on his way to England, if he has not already landed. We feel justified in stating to the brethren, and to our readers, that Mr. Thomas, in his magazine, some time ago, publicly abjured all connection with the Churches of the Reformation in the United States, more especially with brother Campbell and his associates. He not only renounced what he had learned from them, but also what he taught whilst among them, as being altogether erroneous. He has also been re-baptised, or baptised for the first time, into what he calls the hope of Israel; so that he has discovered not only that the baptism of all others of our brethren is faulty, but that his own also which he received some years ago from the hands of brother Walter Scott, and for which he has pleaded so strenuously, has no foundation in truth.”

For a fuller account of how Dr Thomas attempted to trick his way back into the Disciples Church in London see "Dr Thomas his life and work" by Robert Roberts Chapter 31.

This action caused a row with the elders of the Church of the Disciples who later threw Dr Thomas out of their fellowship but not before he had caused numerous splits amongst their own churches. These splinter groups formed much of the core of the new Christadelphian religion being formed by Dr Thomas and Robert Roberts. One of the elders of the Church of the disciples later commented about this subterfuge: "Thus we were deceived by the founder of Christadelphianism, in order to aid its introduction into churches in this country". Brother Robert Roberts who was aware of all this, wrote of Dr Thomas in his biography: "The part of friends has been rather to hide than expose infirmity. Gratitude threw the ample fold of protection over what may have been deemed the faults of an otherwise great and noble and extraordinary character." In other words he covered up the lies of Dr Thomas. One wonders what else was concealed by Robert Roberts.

Contrary to Christadelphian myth, Dr Thomas continued to evolve his new religion after the publication of Elpis Israel. That book was primarily devoted to the exposition of Bible prophecy and much of the detail relating to doctrine was skipped over. The changing views of its founder caused many splinters and splits within the new group. For example when Dr Thomas stated that the saints would be raised in mortal bodies at the resurrection, a breakaway group that he called "The Dowieties" formed in Britain and another group in America whom he named "Benjamites" - presumably after the leaders of the groups. They started a magazine called "The Gospel Banner" and in Sep 1867 they complained in their magazine about the nasty-minded manner in which Dr Thomas reviled them. To give you a flavour of the unpleasant character of the founder of the Christadelphians, here are some of his words that they quoted:

"We have a great many speculators in the faith on this side of the Atlantic, who profess to be the Ecclesia, mere theorists, who are a sort of amalgam, made up of a little Storrism, a little Adventism, a little Campbellism, and a hodge-podge of traditions, of which water, pork, alcohol, tobacco, salt, leaven, raisins, and the everlasting nigger, are the prolific head-centers." ... "They would rather be notorious for abomination than not notorious at all." ... "The Benjamin Mark Paper is a truly blood-thirsty and diabolical sheet." ... "His own selfishness has been the god of his idolatry; and to gratify this such a man will slander, lie, steal, or play the hypocrite, if it will only pay." ... "They have thought that their new paper might be their old, dirty, and blood-thirsty banner, new revised ... for editing at other people's risk, little Ben has discovered, pays better than printing on his own hook." ... These dishonest, mean-spirited traitors to good faith sought excuse and justification in the devil's law of incorporation." ... "I have put you in possession of these details that the real friends in Britain may know by what sort of natural brute beasts I am assisted." ... "I have hitherto taken no notice of him, nor his confederate, the ex-theatrical candle snuffer, being too much occupied with the Apocalypse." ... "We Christadelphians in America are a distinct generation from the so-called Benjamites - we are strong in the faith and unspoiled by accursed crotchets, which, when blended with it, make it ineffectual and generative of knaves and hypocrites."

This sort of disgusting language is sprinkled liberally throughout Dr Thomas's works, causing in the year 2000 the then editor of the Christadelphian magazine to write this note in a new edition of Elpis Israel: "At the time when it was written, frank speech expressed in robust language was indulged in without offence, and in this matter the book reflects its age. The forthrightness of the writer is seen in the vigour of his words and modern readers must make some allowance for this".

I can think of no better way to persuade Christadelphians to leave their religion, or to dissuade others from joining than by encouraging them to read the book in its entirety. It is bad tempered rambling nonsense from start to finish. Dr Thomas even claims that the Earth was inhabited by a race of alien angels before Adam and other rubbish that would cause modern day Christadelphians to cringe if they ever read it.

Let us continue to consider the writings of Doctor Thomas in this quotation from "Elpis Israel":

"The Judgment upon Ireland has been sitting since 1786. That crisis was the beginning of a retribution of seventy-five years. This period is called 'THE END' ......... After 1864 Ireland and the rest of the world will enter upon a new era, in which peace, righteousness, and blessedness will reign in the midst of the nations."

Not only did Christ not return in 1864 but Sinn Féin and later the IRA wrought terrorism and havoc in Ireland and the British mainland for over a hundred years after 1864.

Or this from Dr Thomas:

"My conviction is that the judgment upon Babylon will be announced as about to set; and that the ancient of days and the saints will meet in the air and among the clouds, in the common A.D. 1866, or 1290 years from A.D. 606."

This from Dr Thomas in "Anatolia":

"My conviction is that the judgment upon Babylon will be announced as about to set; and that the ancient of days and the saints will meet in the air and among the clouds, in the common A.D. 1866, or 1290 years from A.D. 606." ............... "But in a few years, that is, about 1866, when the 1335 years terminate, he will 'arise to his inheritance' in the Kingdom of God". ............. "How highly important is this exhortation now, seeing that in about a dozen years the resurrection will have transpired, and no further invitation to inherit it be presented to the world. The glory that shall follow is great for the approved (the Christadelphians). The world is theirs, when all nations come and do homage before the Prince of Israel, because His judgments are made manifest. But before they can have 'power over the nations,' they must bind the strong that rule them. This is their mission at the end of the 1335 years: 'To execute vengeance upon the nations, and punishment upon the peoples; to bind their kings with chains, and their nobles with fetters of iron; to execute upon them the judgment written; this honour have all his saints.' From A.D. 1866 to A.D. 1911, a period of over forty years, they will be engaged in this work and in the organizing the world upon new and better principles."

Not only did Dr Thomas erroneously and repeatedly state that Christ would return in 1866 but he also said that "the approved" (Christadelphians) would execute vengeance on the nations for forty years up until 1911.

Elsewhere Dr Thomas elaborates in detail how his immortal immoral Christadelphians will steal and plunder from the mortal population of the world:

"The estates of all the misers of this present evil world will be turned to righteous and beneficent account by and bye, in the hands of Jesus and His brethren. Only when that time comes they won't have to wait the death of the misers. They will take possession, and turn the owners adrift, in most cases into the grave." ... "All the earth will learn at the cost of much blood and treasure......"

This from Dr Thomas writing in "Elpis Israel":

"The sword only, can prepare the way for this. Mankind must be made to lick the dust like a serpent, before they will consent to change their creeds for eternal truth. Judgment will bring them to reason"............. "Nothing but violence in the beginning, in order to punish and crush the tyrants, can prepare the way for the amelioration of society. This is the order, as I shall show, which God has ordained as preliminary to the setting up of His kingdom."

This from Robert Roberts the first editor of the Christadelphian magazine and close friend of Dr Thomas:

"He (Christ) will enter into conflict with the world, drive Gentile power from every throne, and establish His kingdom under the whole heaven. Christadelphian operations will then be transferred from the arena of debate to that of military coercion."

More detail of this Christadelphian instigated genocide is given by Robert Roberts in Christendom Astray lecture 15:

"God Himself will operate in visible judgment upon the nations of the earth.......... a divine manifestation in the person of the Son of Man accompanied by sweeping judgments of fire and sword which will destroy large masses of mankind.......... The vengeance in relation to mankind will be destruction to the majority, and discipline to the remnant. Multitudes will perish by war and pestilence; multitudes more will fall victims to the fire which will descend............... The earth's population will be greatly thinned; its reprobate elements expurgated, leaving a residue composed of the meek and submissive, and well–disposed of mankind, who will constitute the willing subjects of Messiah's kingdom........ The saints co–operate with Christ in executing the judgments written. ...........It will be their privilege "to execute vengeance upon the heathen, and punishments upon the people.......Thus it is obvious that in the closing judgment–scenes of this dispensation, the saints will be associated with the Lord Jesus in destroying the political, ecclesiastical, and social systems.............. This is a work of devastation ................ will involve much destruction of life, ....... Widespread will be the desolations produced; bloody and scathing the judgments ministered at the hands of Jesus and the saints. (Christadelphians)"

The corruption of the various American TV evangelists who are currently languishing in US jails is eclipsed by the evil that the founders of Christadelphianism proposed to unleash on the World. They were planning to kill and maim millions, perhaps billions of humanity in a forty year Holy Spirit empowered orgy of death and violence ending in 1911. The one hundred million deaths in the two World wars and the work of Hitler and Stalin seem tame by comparison with what Dr Thomas and Robert Roberts were planning. In their paranoia they imagined that the result of this great work would be to "Leave a residue composed of the meek and submissive, and well–disposed of mankind, who will constitute the willing subjects of Messiah's kingdom". - What planet were they on? Did they really think that such a plan would succeed? A reign of terror more horrific than The Great Terror of the French revolution, worse than the purges of Stalinist Russia, more brutal that Hitler's Final Solution, more awful than the Killing Fields of Cambodia during the Khmer Rouge reign of death? What would the relatives of those who were killed think about Christ's Christadelphian Kingdom? They would NEVER forgive the Christadelphians and their leaders for inflicting such pain and suffering on the world.

Little wonder that the nations were predicted to rise up at the end of the millennium in one final act of rebellion against Christ. It would be the equivalent of the Jews in the Warsaw Ghetto rising up against their Nazi tormentors and murderers in a last but futile gesture of defiance and desperation against their evil rulers.

But of course none of this will ever happen. Dr Thomas was 100% wrong about Christ returning in 1886. He was wrong about Ireland, he was wrong about the Christadelphian forty year reign of terror, he was wrong about the Kingdom and he was wrong about everything else. I again urge you to read Elpis Israel. Practically everything that the doctor predicted in that book did NOT come true. Moreover it is obvious that the events that he foretold that did happen were merely the result of coincidence. Even Christadelphians who read the book and see the endless detail about events in the Nineteenth Century, which Dr Thomas called "The Last Days", must surely realise that the Bible could not possibly have been so obsessed with Nineteenth Century history and then completely miss out all of the next century without a word!

The modern day TV evangelist tricksters daily predict that we are in the "End Times" and that the return of Christ is imminent. They have no more idea what is going on than Doctor John Thomas. They are continuing the long tradition of American Revisionists and snake oil salesmen of which the founder of the Christadelphians was but a minor participant. We are continuing the long tradition of the naive and gullible who buy the books, purchase the snake oil, submit to baptism and put money on the collection plates. We think that we are so smart being able to throw Bible verses around to prove our case and to defend our position. Everyone else in all of the other denominations thinks exactly the same way. We think that they are mistaken while they think that we are mistaken. No one has the brains to realise that this all proves only one thing - that we are ALL mistaken.

It must be obvious that this man that the Christadelphians claim was raised up by God to rediscover the Truth was clueless when it came to interpreting Bible prophecy correctly. But again I ask - what did God think that he was doing as he watched all this insanity unfold? Was it too much to ask that he use the Holy Spirit to nudge Dr Thomas in the right direction so that his chosen people would not be led completely up the garden path by erroneous teaching?

And as we now know how brainless, paranoid and psychopathic Dr Thomas and Robert Roberts were when it came to expounding Bible prophecy, what assurance can we have that their writings about other Biblical matters were any more correct than their mistaken ramblings about Bible prophecy? What is the difference? The difference is that we can prove by the passage of time that Dr Thomas was unable to expound Bible prophecy but we can't prove that he was mistaken about the doctrinal matters. We have to hope that he was as accurate about expounding the Gospel as he was inaccurate about expounding Bible prophecy.

But what guarantee do we have that Dr Thomas selected exactly the right mix of the many thousands of different beliefs and unbeliefs doing the rounds of the Nineteenth Century American Restorationism movement in order to rediscover the Truth? You really can make the Bible prove whatever you want it to prove and then dig your heels in and defend your position. But the same can be done with thousands of other beliefs about the Bible, many of them completely contradictory to each other. Don't kid yourself that you are smart enough to spot the genuine article amongst the thousands of flaws. And what if all those beliefs are flaws? What if there is no genuine article? Do you have the nerve to shout "A plague on all your houses" to the different peddlers of Christianity and to turn around and walk away?

That’s exactly what I did and it was the best decision of my entire life. Leaving the Christadelphians meant leaving a tyranny of lies, deception and fraud. If you are a Christadelphian and you genuinely seek “The Truth” I recommend that your first step to discovering truth is to write a letter of resignation to the Arranging Brethren of your Ecclesia. Free your mind from Christadelphian subterfuge and seek genuine truth wherever it may be found.

46 comments:

  1. Dr. John Thomas said...

    a hodge-podge of traditions, of which water, pork, alcohol, tobacco, salt, leaven, raisins, and the everlasting nigger, are the prolific head-centers.

    That wouldn't go over well today. And too, maybe CDs should take the time to read Deut. 18:20-22 on what to do with John Thomas and Robert Roberts about their false prophecies.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Neither of them ever claimed to be prophets. Their works should always be seen as human writings in their time and age.

      Delete
  2. "....a hodge-podge of traditions, of which water, pork, alcohol, tobacco, salt, leaven, raisins, and the everlasting nigger, are the prolific head-centers.'

    - I never did understand what he was talking about there. Do you know
    ?

    Yes, I do. He was talking about the hodge podge of health doctrines held by the COGGC and the COG-7th day churches. The COGs were against slavery - therefore, the good doctor must have been for slavery - else, why mention black people in such a derogatory way?

    I would bet there were no black Christadelphians in his day. More than likely he thought along the same lines as the Mormons and some others of that time - that saved black people would still be servants to white people in the kingdom. Thus, "the eternal nigger".

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He referred to all of them as hodge-podge; and the language was from America, not Britain from whence he came. Can you not see he is disagreeing with this belief in his words? Am I missing this?

      Delete
  3. I take my understanding from the Bible, not the doctor (provocative comment to start off with, I know - and wouldn't have met with much acceptance by RR). I have always heard that he got many of his ideas from other people (particularly on historic interpretations of prophecy) though I was a little surprised by how much of what you quoted seemed the same word for word. I certainly know people who view him as the one great person who led us from apostasy to light. Maybe they would be more concerned by this than me.

    I have actually never read any of the books by Dr Thomas (or should that be Brother John?) The basis of my faith is the Bible. As uninspired pioneers and humans, they were unfortunately badly wrong about some things, and accepted unquestioningly their society's views on things that we would think otherwise on (hopefully rightfully). Also, I think date setting is fairly contrary to Jesus' words that no-one knows the day or the hour, and think it fairly foolish to try. As much as anything else, their example should not lead us to glibly dismiss them, but to see that just as they had faults which they could not see, we probably have faults that we can't so easily see. And they were the ones who started it all... (or something like that - but the state of what is there now is more important than how it was started).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Actually, I read most of them and they are not the inspired Word of Yahweh. They were men (JT_RR) and as many others of their day, they searched a way out of Catholicism to find what the Bible held as Truth. In my humble opinion, they found it. I find all of the schoolmaster of the Law as the foundation from which the N.T. was written, but by inspired men and not plain human ones like Bro. Thomas, Bro. Roberts and sister me.

      Delete
    2. Once again, a comment of mine that I no longer agree with. But, leaving that aside, I'm not quite sure what you mean by "a way out of Catholicism". To the best of my knowledge neither JT nor RR were involved in any way with Catholicism. Instead, JT in particular started with Campbellism and was a part of the wider reforming movement in the US.

      Delete
  4. Among many other things, I have studied cognitive psychology, so I am aware of the biases you speak of.

    Some people do change their religious conclusions and doctrines over their lifetime - surely they at least are not "manipulating" it to support "predetermined doctrine".

    You seem to speak of absolute truth in your post. Is it worth asking what this truth is and why you believe in it?

    Does your conclusion in essence become something like "Since many people deduce many different things from the same Bible, none of them can be correct"? If so, there are lots of other things I could apply that same argument to (the interpretation of the American constitution comes to mind, as does "Science" - since many scientists study the same world and come to different conclusions, shall we deduce that none of the interpretations of science are correct? - I hope not, since a lot of science is actually rather useful in explaining and understanding the word. You might just as well use the old chestnut "I can't be a Christian because I see other Christians who behave badly").

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Good answer. Bre Thomas and Roberts never claimed to be inspired and the talk about how Bro. Thomas found the Truth in the Bible with a "deal with Yahweh" is fabricated from others, not him. You quote him as if he agreed with all he spoke about. He did not. None of Elpis Israel needs to be edited or corrected. The fact that others saw part of the Truth of the Bible is essential to my believing as much as I do. He was wrong in his end time date as have been many others. the Word still says what it says and the Jews did return to Israel as the Word said they would long after Bro. Thomas was dead. I see no need to try and disparage a man for his beliefs if they are Biblically sound, which his were and mine are. I am sorry you have such pain as to feel the need to put up this site but thank you for reminding me why I am a Christadelphian today.

      Delete
    2. Anon 13/9/16,
      So why are you a Christadelphian today?

      Delete
    3. I'm glad someone agrees with my thoughts of six years ago, but I'm not sure I agree with them any more. Yes, I agree that criticising the pioneers can be a bit of a red herring since many hold their beliefs without particular reference to those pioneers. At the same time, being "Biblically sound" misses the starting point: Why should we trust the Bible? Unless it is guaranteed 100% correct, the fact that it hasn't changed is hardly a recommendation. The best expositor of the Bible alive cannot help you if the Bible itself is false. And if a person's beliefs lead to dangerous conclusions, just saying that they reflect the message of the Bible doesn't justify them.

      Incidentally, I'm interested how you can say both "None of Elpis Israel needs to edited or corrected" and "He was wrong in his end time date". Same point as above: Surely if something is wrong it should be either corrected or discarded?

      Delete
    4. Actually, Jesus is the King who will reign when he returns and sits on the throne in Jerusalem as the law goes forth from Zion. I never claimed anything, john, but I sure have a lot of pity for you. Your anger and need to sling at any and every one who disagrees with you is evident in your platitudes. The lion has not yet lay down with the lamb and will not until the kingdom begins and Christ reigns on the throne. I need not explain anything, John. As I could deduce, this site was for anyone to add anything they wanted. You need to conversion; you already know much more than the rest of us poor Christadelphians who are steeped in superstition. I would rather be steeped in Hope than angry in the world, aliens from the commonwealth of Israel.

      Delete
    5. No man knoweth the day or he hour, so Bro. Thomas tried and we look up to see our redemption draws nigh. This is why I am a Christadelphian today. My heart is good with Yahweh and I anxiously await an end to all the violence and hatred in the world today as a peaceful kingdom brings an end to it. I am comforted by the Word of Yahweh and have studied Hebrew and Greek, so I am in good shape. How about you?

      Delete
    6. Not I think addressed to me, but look, I understand the appeal. I would love there to be a future time of perfect peace. I just don't have any reason to believe it's true.

      But I'm curious about a few things. How do you know your heart is "good with Yahweh"? And how does studying Hebrew and Greek leave you in good shape? Are they peaceful languages, or does knowledge of them save you?

      Delete
    7. Fed Up With ReligionSeptember 16, 2016 at 1:15 AM

      Anon, if the man Jesus ever existed and was alive today, there is one thing he would not be.

      A Christadelphian...More likly a Buddhist.

      "To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead"

      Thomas Paine

      Delete
    8. Fed up: As a starting point, it's hard to imagine Jesus being a follower of a Jesus from 2,000 years ago. He was more than a leader than a follower.

      But as a thought experiment, it is an interesting one. The Jesus of the gospels was known for challenging traditions. Which Christadelphian traditions would he challenge?

      Another one (which I have heard in a few Christadelphian talks) is the question of "If he were writing a Revelation style letter to us, what would he say?" If it was "But I have this against you", what would "this" be? Would it be moral/behavioural issues, general enthusiasm issues, or doctrinal/theological issues? Or something else completely? Obviously that's a hard question to answer even if you take the Bible as completely inspired and infallible, but as a race we humans tend to think that people in the past were bad, but we don't make those mistakes. The Jesus of the gospels was ruthless in revealing this, and if such a person were around today I imagine he/she would find plenty of problems to expose.

      Delete
    9. Fed Up With ReligionSeptember 17, 2016 at 2:03 AM

      Jakarta Jack: Most of them I would expect. He would be disgusted with the state of affairs today just as he was back then.

      Your right, that is a difficult question to answer because I know he didn’t exist and that’s kind of my point. There really should be no such thing as a Christadelphian. The whole document is taken out of context...literally. I have been out of Christadelphia for many years, but am fascinated by the psychology and am working to understand the text from its mystical and mythical origins. The fantasy of a literal translation divinely inspired and a conversation on doctrine is almost impossible for me to engage in these days. It hurts my brain and offends my reason.

      His message though is very much eastern. Christians in general have entirely missed the message.

      For example, his reference to the single eye in Matt 6:22. In the remaining of the chapter he tells us to “Take no thought” four times. And when praying to “enter thy closet and shut the door”

      He’s not telling us to pray in a literal closet with the door closed, they are all references to meditation. I don’t know many Christadelphians or Christians that meditate.

      When Jesus said ask, knock, seek and ye shall find. And, ye shall know the truth and the truth will make you free...I don’t think he meant take an oath of ignorance and read the bible as the only authority till you die, that’s essentially their statement of faith is as I read it. Seeking truth is what we’re doing, not Christadelphians.

      He's right, the truth will set you free, but first it will piss you off...

      Delete
    10. Fed Up: I would not have read those passages the same way as you, but it doesn't really matter as we both find plenty of reasons to reject them.

      I was actually arguing on a different forum today with someone who thought objections to the Bible were because those who objected were anachronistically projecting modern views onto an ANE context. The gist of my response was that understanding how the Bible was connected to other ANE texts might be useful in deflecting criticisms of Christianity based on a literal reading, but it doesn't give me any reasons to accept the Bible as a divinely inspired text.

      Delete
    11. Fed Up With ReligionSeptember 18, 2016 at 3:03 PM

      Jakarta Jack: It is useful. If you don’t understand, you won’t understand. The bible plagiarises from many sources, particularly the Old Testament. It really is a multi layered mish mash.

      To expand a little on my references to meditation, In Luke when Jesus is reproving the relgiuos leaders of the time, he states:

      Luke 11:52 Woe unto you lawyers! For ye have taken away the key of knowledge: ye entered not in yourselves, and them that were entering in ye hindered.

      Let’s focus on the words “entering in”. Ancient cultures, particularly the Mystics and Masters of the sects of the day, Jesus was called Master many many times...interesting.... as well as many cultures today, “enter in” regularly. It’s called meditation.

      The “key of knowledge” is associated to “entering in”, that’s a huge statement...explain that from a traditional religious viewpoint? Without bias...

      Meditation is a difficult practice, and generally not well understood in western culture, although gaining attention. For good reason.

      The current religious viewpoint is the most destructive force on the planet. As it was back then. Nothing has changed.

      Religion has always taken away the keys of knowledge... It locks down your mind. It "hinders" people from seeking answers within.

      Delete
    12. Anon, your comment (and comments like it) bothers me, and I get the feeling you are quite oblivious to the way this comes across to others. Your writing suggests a lack of awareness about alternative/opposing views. So let me help you out a little.

      No man knoweth the day or he hour

      I'd be more impressed if you said someone _did_ know, since that's a much more difficult burden of proof to meet. Simply because these words were written in a book, is not a sufficient reason to believe they are true.

      so Bro. Thomas tried and we look up to see our redemption draws nigh. This is why I am a Christadelphian today.

      A reference to Luke 21:25-28?

      "And there will be signs in the sun and moon and stars, and on the earth nations will be in distress, anxious over the roaring of the sea and the surging waves. People will be fainting from fear and from the expectation of what is coming on the world"

      This is pretty vague language - as I'm sure any honest reader would agree. It could also describe almost any time in history since it was first written down (and many critical scholars believe it was actually written ABOUT the time period in which it was first written down). If this language would just as readily apply to other time periods, for example late in the first century CE, how certain should one be that it is somehow specifically referring to our day?

      To go further, what kind of events would you accept as being contrary to this "prediction"? What would falsify it?

      My heart is good with Yahweh and I anxiously await an end to all the violence and hatred in the world today

      We'd all like to see an end to the violence and hatred in the world, but hoping in invisible beings and doing nothing else is not a realistic way to solve the problem. After all, how's that working out for you? Have you considered that the reason such violence exists in the first place, and continues to exist, may be because the god people have been praying to for millennia (and often doing little else), doesn't exist? Maybe the reason the world has problems is because it's actually up to us to solve them... just saying.

      Is there nothing else we can do except give up and hope some magical deity fixes our problems for us? This sounds so "defeatist" to me. As it happens, statistically speaking the world is on average a safer place than it has ever been in human history. Something to think about perhaps.

      as a peaceful kingdom brings an end to it.

      How will it bring an end to it? I thought the "peaceful" part came later, after a bloody war. The Bible just repeats the same barbaric idea that somehow the solution to violence is "more violence" and that that is apparently the only way to bring peace. God's perfect plan to end violence is quite literally to kill everyone who disagrees with him. You know, exactly the same goal as every war ever fought. How original!

      I am comforted by the Word of Yahweh

      What is it that comforts you? Why would you find an ANE religious text comforting?

      Delete
    13. Fed Up With ReligionSeptember 18, 2016 at 6:04 PM

      Well said Steve.

      Generation after generation of people waiting, hoping, praying for something that will never arrive. Mean while the totalitarian tip toe creeps slowly forward...

      I read something funny the other day, thought I'd share:

      “Religious people and donkeys:

      A donkey is a simple creature; it would follow a carrot on a stick, but...
      It is still capable, even with its most basic of intellect of determining when THERE IS NO CARROT!”

      Delete
  5. So you assume a supreme being will think exactly the same as you, and work in exactly the same way as you would work?

    Also, I suspect that any work like the Bible will be twisted by some people to support their own agenda. If it is sufficiently important to the world at large, and they want justification for what they do, why not find it in the Bible? Surely it does not invalidate a book's primary purpose if people seize it and use it for their own ends?

    How do you expect a supreme being would communicate with people?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Anonymous,

    Haven't you ever noticed that everyone's god believes the same things as they do?

    The way the thing works is, a person wants to believe a certain thing and then finds proof texts in the bible to support what they believe. If there are passages that oppose the belief, those passages will be explained away.

    For example, there are around a hundred passages that plainly say that Jesus would return in the same generation and lifetimes of his disciples. Those passages have been explained away for the past nineteen hundred years.

    How would you expect a god to communicate with his people? Through men? Isn't that a little bit convenient for the all the priests (of all kinds) who have existed on this planet?

    That makes a veritable playground for charlatans, doesn't it?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Corky,

    I don't deny people have misused the Bible. That could include John Thomas. Realistically, it could include me as well. Similarly people have misused "spirit voices" and other revelations of God. Similarly people have misused science and pseudo-science. I don't think it's reasonable to conclude that all of these things are false because they have been misused (and yes, I know you draw a distinction between science and religion, and I agree that the modus operandi are different between the two).

    If you don't want God to communicate through humans, how do you want him to communicate? Zapping people the instant they do something wrong?

    ReplyDelete
  8. John,

    So we ask again "What is this "supreme being's" object?" Again, the question comes to me "Are you (or any human) really the best person to understand how a supreme being would think and work"?

    The debate's not about whether God chose John Thomas as the best way to bring truth to an unenlightened world (or at least, it isn't from my side).

    All kinds of interesting verses occur to me at this point, but I see no purpose adding them.

    ReplyDelete
  9. All I'm pointing out is that your judgement about what a supreme being might or might not do is not very reliable.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Hi! Greetings from Brazil!
    I believe in God. I have my own reasons to believe He exists. However, I think it is a waste of time to try to give proofs of His existence to people who do not believe in Him. Belief, in the definition given in the Letter to the Hebrews, is sureness or certainty. In modern languages belief has connotation of guessing. Yes, I also believe it is a waste of time and saliva to try to make someone who believes in God aggree with arguments against his/her belief. Yes again, I have found your posts very funny. You are so right and so wrong! but that's is just my opinion! Ah! My friend and brother Alan Eyre wasn't really a Thomasite. A certain Jim Hunter, however is, and he told me that the works of John Thomas were untouchable. I think John Thomas was for slavery. Robert Roberts was racist. Somewhere in his "Christedom Astray" he says that black people were unable to understand the gospel just because they were black. A sister explained that just like the neo-testamentarian devil and demons, it was the tongue of those days. She said I was been unfair to those men of God saying they were racist. But, I still like John Thomas. I believe that if he were kept alive until today he would have changed his Christology. Phanerosis shows He was changing, He could see Jesus as God manifested in flesh. If he hadn't died he would have progressed to the level of a man named Huberto Rodhen, a Brazilian ex-priest and Bible translator, he would have become an universalist, but that is another story.

    ReplyDelete
  11. While I agree with much that you have to say (as an Ex-Christadelphian), I think your words would have more impact if you tone down the implication that Christadelphians are "stupid" (thereby stressing your intellectual superiority by default). You do well making your point without all that.
    Thank you for listening :-)

    ReplyDelete
  12. Hello John,
    I believe you contacted me a couple of years ago. You see there is room for belief, but not in a religious environment.
    I went to Sunday school for the duration until preparation class. We learned bible stories, to read the Bible as a matter of duty, and later we learned to believe doctrine. Then we were baptised! Great success for indoctrination!
    In all that time we never had a lesson on ethics. Now I regard that a serious omission since if the bible is about anything, it is about ethics unlike religion which is about doctrine, especially in the christadelphian religion.
    Every person has within them a set of values which are tuned in the school of hard knocks.For instance if a child pinches another it soon gets pinched back and if it hurts he or she soon learns better conduct or recognises that they are doing the wrong thing. This ability to learn from experience is not a set of taught rules or expedients but ethical principles which are enunciated in the proverbs and the character of people like Job and many others.
    The ultimate expression is found in the character and discourses of Jeshua Ha'Notzri commonly known as Jesus of Nazareth who 'learned from the things that he suffered'. He was not concerned with doctrines and challenged those of the religious rulers.
    This ability to choose right from wrong seems to be innate and a specific human characteristic, and those who develop right choices are highlighted in the Jewish histories. This is commendable, and whether one ascribes it to God as godliness is related to arguments for or against the existence of a creator. To deny this is to postulate that ethical principles are acquired characteristics, that is, that morality can be passed on in the genes. If this is the case one would expect the development of two classes of society over time, the totally moral and the other totally immoral.
    Like my argument for a being called God, www.christadelphianism.info/is god
    Not to accept the proposition leads one into impossible arguments such as "Out of nothing everything came into existence".
    The argument for maintaining ethical principles is also on the site "Rules or principles", and whether or not one allows the existence of a god in all of this, it still seems better to do the right thing because it is the right thing to do. I suggest that to do this is, in biblical terms, godliness, or an expression of the proposition that God is.
    I am suggesting that this is an ethical thing and not a belief thing and that religions have got it all wrong in trying to differentiate their beliefs.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Hi John,
    Here is a counterintuitive argument for you. Maybe the universe came into being at the instigation of an all-powerful creator, just as every birth does.
    Just a thought! In England I used to work with a production Engineer who was adamant that God was a spaceman.
    Your statement about Quantum mechanics is a little hard to prove, In my limited understanding Quantum mechanics deals with the mode of existence of a quantum of light, Whether it exists as a particle or as a wave.
    Einstein posed some thought experiments (as he usually did) to question the theory on the basis that it seemed a muddled way for his God to work, that a scientist had to choose between equations. He later agreed with Bohr, while Bohr agreed with Einsteins photon theory.
    It seems to me to be an argument over determining the exact position of a particle and not whether it exists or not. Some of the theories to explain the behaviour postulate that the particle disappeared into a multi parallel universe only to return.
    When I studied mathematics it included manipulations within a framework of many dimensions. We did not quite understand how this could be but the sums worked.
    It seems that quantum mechanics is a similar work in progress, far from finality with ideas like "string theory" and other concepts beyond the comprehension of all but those working in the field.
    On this basis John it seems to me as good a bet to accept my former workmate's view until we have more knowledge.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I just thought I'd add this, not as flippantly as it may appear, to the discussion as a questioning mind seeking the truth for the perusal of those of like mind seeking enlightenment -
    Can an omnipotent being create an object so massive that they cannot move it?

    ReplyDelete
  15. Hi John
    Very interesting blog and comments by all. I feel that you obviously have issues with Christadelphians and probably had a few problems with them in the past.
    I was fortunate to have parents who did not force me to become baptized but various members of the ecclesia tried to put pressure on me which made me dig my heels in and say no - in my own time please. While my peers were becoming baptized at 15/16 I went to other denominations just to see for myself what they believed.
    In the end after 7 years I became baptised basically because of our beliefs.Most Christadelphians realise that Thomas's views on prophecy are not his own but those of Isaac Newton and Joseph Mead which most Christian groups have taken onboard - so Thomas isn't the only one who is guilty of plagarism.This is human nature unfortunately and is rife all the world over especially with the internet. Nothing new under the sun.
    My take on this is simplistic. I am not an intellectual but accept that Christ is my Savoiur and is to return soon. The faith I have I feel is the nearest to the truth (you may disagree)as we can get to.
    Do not forget the words of Paul that we are looking thro' a glass darkly and it will probably be that as we stand before The Master and He says I think your doctrine on the .... is not right are we going to say hold on a minute.
    Surely not, as the Word tells us that education and learning is required.
    Is the Kingdom of God going to be full of Christadelphains ? How boring. Surely not.
    We must realise that all religions however noble have their faults, even Christadelphians with their splinter groups and divisions as well as JW'S and others.
    I daresy some Christadelphians would not share my view but many are critical and have distanced themselves from views expressed by Thomas/Roberts and others.
    Like one of your bloggers I have never read any of the "pioneers works" simply because my Father said there are a few places where he has got it wrong.I feel the doctrines are right but prophecy will always be a contentious issue but but not neccessary for salvation except the final outcome of the restoration of The Kingdom.
    My main criticism of yourself is your apparent anger at the Christadelphians when really the spirit of Christ is to pray for them to see the error of their ways as you see it. Christ did this all the time and so should we.
    We often talk about a new world order in the Kingdom to come - It will be Gods order not that of Thomas , Smith or anybody else , because at the end of the day it is by Gods grace and His grace alone that an entrance into that Kingdom will be permitted whether we are disciple of the Master or not.
    Kind regards
    Dave

    ReplyDelete
  16. Hi John,

    I'm not a CD nor do I belong to any religious group. It seems to me that you've switched from religious beliefs that now seem to you as impossible to believe to an atheist acceptance of Big Bang Theory, Evolution and so it goes. In so doing, I detect the same inclination you speak of -while you were teaching your CD's doctrines- to discard all the gaps in these theories in order to prevail in your defense of the same. You may not see it, but you contradict yourself, and your falling for the default theories aforementioned makes me think that your search for "truth" may be too simplistic, in the sense that you replaced religion with scientific theories. But you aren't alone in this, I still haven't met an atheist with previous religious beliefs who didn't embrace these theories without much understanding of them, just like Christians do with their doctrines.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Christadelphianism made great progress in its restoration of the Gospel of the Kingdom, and in defining God as Jesus did (Mk 12:29), but it then wounded itself with the astonising belief that the biblical Devil is merely human nature. Their view on that point eliminates the whole dimension of supernatural evil from the Bible. The method by which they arrive at this idea is the very opposite of the natural, easy approach to the meaning of words by which they arrrived at other important truths. Christadelphianism is need of reform, correcting the systematic errors which spoiled John Thomas' theology. He also set a date for the Second Coming and this failed! My website is at restorationfellowship.org.

    ReplyDelete
  18. So if I leave the christadelphians and this as you say is my first step in finding "The Truth". What is the next step for all of us deceived and blind with the exception of you of course. Since you are so confident and have "discovered" that the christadelphians believe fairy tails, you must be the authority on what "The Real Truth" is. Please enlighten us poor deceived fools!

    ReplyDelete
  19. So about a billion or so years ago a big explosion happened in the universe and here we all are! That sounds like a fairy tail to me John. A belief based on theories and guesses. You go with that and Good Luck!

    ReplyDelete
  20. Dear John, maybe when you "were" a Christadelphian you believed that the earth is only created 6000 years ago, and that dinosaurs were on Noah's ark. That is not what is taught, especially from those who actually read or have read anything by the pioneers. So I would like to know how and when you spoke to 99.9 percent of Christadelphians. This is highly improbable seeing that we probably would have spoke before and I would definitely remember you. So your big free press is probably owned by Rupert Murdoch and is just like the Sun newspaper, full of lies. Did John actually speak to a estimated 50,000 people? Well everybody who reads this will have a neuron in their brain go "hold on a minute" I think John is lying, I wonder what else he is lying about?? He probably is not the big "bright brain" he thinks he is. The truth of the matter is this you can beLIEve that out of chaos, given a number of years order will manifest itself. That some single cell organism will then, given time will evolve into man. 13 billion years will go by and this big bright brain, free press way of thinking, you come up with wearing used underpants on my head..... looks like the big brain has evolved back to a single cell in a blink of an eye.

    ReplyDelete
  21. John Bedson, thanks to you and our enlightening conversations, I've had a EUREKA moment. I can feel my brain has gotten brighter already and I even stopped drooling and don't even want to drink that funny koolaid anymore. I think it was making me feel brainwashed anyway. Finally after just recently learning how to spell the word BIBLE you have made me realize I don't need it anymore because your words are a LIGHT TO MY PATHWAY. I've also realized from you that I have the freedom to JUDGE an entire community of thousands of people by only the words and actions of a few. You have KNOCKED ON THE DOOR of my mind and I have opened to you and realized I don't need to feel NAKED AND ASHAMED anymore. I put that used underwear on today for the first time, and will no longer wave it over my head. How silly of me to do such a thing. I have REJECTED all these birdbrain thoughts because now I have a bright brain! You can be sure of this JOHN BEDSON, I will from now on be sure that all these crazy ideas will PERISH from my brand new big bright brain. Wow thats a tongue twister, try saying that ten times fast!

    ReplyDelete
  22. John,

    Why do you treat the Christadelphians like fools? You belittle them and insult them and then expect them to listen to what you have to say.

    You are arrogant and self righteous and your transparent claim that you "so love" the Christadelphians and want to save them from their pitiful ignorance is such a whitewashed hypocritical claim!


    Maybe you need to carry on with your life and let go of all the bitterness. I suppose you blame all your problems on

    1. parents
    2. Those stupid Christadelphians who tricked you!
    3. The Christadelphians
    4. The Christadelphians
    5. The Christadelphians
    6. The Christadelphians
    7. The Christadelphians
    8. The Christadelphians
    9. The Christadelphians
    10. Those stupid Christadelphians who tricked me!

    Mr Spock

    ReplyDelete
  23. John,

    Christadelphians go to university like everyone else. They have degrees and are highly educated. They just don't happen to agree with YOU so that makes them "simple minded folk". John Bedson is the expert who has all the answers for us morons(maybe we should bow down to him).

    Go ahead John, tell us the answers to life and the universe as you try not to fall off that high pedestal you've got yourself on!


    Adam

    ReplyDelete
  24. Hi, I am not a CD but appreciated reading about the plagiarism set out above as have been reading EUREKA and particularly the 'exposition' of Revelation 11. Having read sections of Horae Apocalypticae, I wondered about plagiarism. As noted above, I was struck by the minute detail about the French Revolution in page after page. My marginal note was 'so what?'

    Having studied the Scriptures over a period of 34 years, I found Dr Thomas' interpretation of Rev. 11 to be boggling. I do not see how any open minded person could put such a construction on this chapter. He totally changes the plain meaning of almost every word. "The great city" (verse 8) is obviously Jerusalem (in my AV a translator's note states this) but by convoluted casuistry he transforms this to Rome. "Where also our Lord was crucified" is given the same treatment, as are "The two witnesses" of which we later learn Dr Thomas is mystically a part of. The failed preditcions are glaring and fatally undermine his (or the) thesis.

    I have had contact with not a few CD's over the years and have found them to be largely warm and kindly folk who know more about the Bible than the majority of professing 'mainstream' Christians. Though I have found a reticence to address Bible texts which challenge their position.

    Congrats on a useful blog. Its a pity a note of acrimony is evident in later posts.

    ReplyDelete
  25. I find all this quite interesting, I've only studied bits and pieces of what many people I know refer to as the Second Great Awakening and what Corky referenced as 'Restorationism', but I think it an error to call it 'Christian Primitivism' I don't think it is Christian at all. I find most of the men who established new denominations in early America to be frauds and liars. Personally I can't accept this premise that the truth had been lost for hundreds of years. Historically I can trace my beliefs and doctrines back to the most respected Church Father Athanasius of Alexandria. His teachings straightened out Augustine of Hippo who got most of Athanasius correct, but Augustine and his Calvinist disciples had difficulties with the Promises made to Abraham and the confusion between Israel as a people and Israel as a nation. Augustine created a new foundation for the concept of Election and who it was that God foreknew, but for centuries the historic church had the basics of salvation and Christianity correct. The way I see it this Restorationism or Primitivism was a departure from the truth of Historic Christianity proclaimed throughout the 1st Great Awakening and a modified understanding of Calvinism is being revised throughout the US and the world. Now I'm not a Calvinist, but I'm a Monergist their cousin and feel they are mistaken on a few things, but not enough to be written off as being heretical. Down through the centuries radical Catholic and Protestant leaders and persecuted many Ana-baptistic, Baptized believer churches who would not yield to their leadership, being they were sectarian in nature. I see the same problem with the descendants of the Campbellites Stone-ites, Finney-ites and I guess the modern Christadelphians if they are anything like their JW cousins; all of them and the Mormons say you have to be baptized by them to be in the true Church, when the reality is there is no true church.

    Just think about what I posted on Facebook before I started reading Christadelphian material less than 40 hours ago. Go to Larry Joyce Jenkins on face book and read what I wrote under the fallen Planned Parenthood sign. I tried posing it but I had too many characters, so I'll try this shorter version.

    Every religion started by men is bound to fail and fall apart.

    ReplyDelete
  26. In history scientific writings also have been twisted around many times.

    The Bible you are able to read also very rational and without emotional binding.

    ReplyDelete
  27. If you understand baptism, you are immersed into Christ, not a religion.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Perhaps, but caveat emptor applies. If you want to join with people of a particular religion they may have very different ideas about what baptism means and what is a valid baptism.

      Delete
  28. Fed Up With ReligionSeptember 13, 2016 at 1:01 PM

    Baptism has nothing to do with actual water. The bible talks about a batisim of fire, does that mean you should set yourself alight? I guess it does if you take the bible literally...

    In greek mythology, water is the second stage of consiosness achived via meditation.

    1)Earth-2)Water-3)Air-4)Fire-5)Eather or Christ consiosness.

    An example of this is summarised in the allagorical story of the mythical Jesus walking on water with Peter.

    The New Testament is a Greek document written in the times of Plato, Pythagorus, Aristotle etc.

    If you look at it without taking the aforementioned into account, you miss the whole message and start dunking your head in water. Modern baptisim is a pagan ritual, along with eating the flesh of Christ and drinking his blood...I mean come on...really??

    Its not that hard to put the peices together is it?

    The writters of the bible would be scratching their heads in bemusment if they were alive today. Your first clue the bible is Mythical is the talking snake. The second clue is the talking donkey. The third clue is the talking bush, i could go on and on, being swallowed by a fish...Eve being made by spare ribs.

    THEY EVEN PUT UNICORNS IN IT!! Just incase you were still stupid enough to take it literally, but oh no, we are..

    Haha. Wake up people, please.

    ReplyDelete

Please do not comment as 'Anonymous'. Rather, choose 'Name/URL' and use a fake name. The URL can be left blank. This makes it easier to see who is replying to whom.