Why I Think The Christadelphians Are Wrong

By Thom Jonas

Pardon the provocative headline. In this article I will show why I believe the Christadelphian religion is founded on falsehood, using several distinct lines of evidence.
"What you may see as an amazing promise of eternal life ...could just as well be a poisonous lie that robs you of the only life you had...and yet most Christadelphians never take the time to seriously investigate it"
Click here to read the rest of the article


  1. None of this is new, but since I am occasionally asked why I don't believe, I decided to put it all together in one (long) article. For many Christadelphians it will no doubt be instantly dismissed as they do not accept my sources nor the foundations of my epistemology. For those that are interested in (just a few of) the reasons why people leave, this article may be informative. Enjoy.

  2. Christadelphians are following the Holy Scriptures and naturally if you do not believe in God nor in the Bible as the Word of God you can claim that Christadelphians are wrong, which is your full right to say so, but that does not make them to be wrong or to be a sect or cult.

    At the rest of the article could not be responded, but it is made clear over there thta you do not seem to have a clear picture of what is a Biblical prophecy and what are thoughts of certain people and which should never be accounted for as prophecies or as true predictions but just as human thoughts (a big difference). If you felt in the trap of being carried away by certain people their thoughts or guesses, that says more about you than about the denomination.

    1. I completely agree with your first point, which is why the title contains the words "I think". I don't expect anyone to believe anything merely because I said so - and you should definitely check out everything I said for yourself. I've tried to be as factual as possible but I am human and may make mistakes. If you find any, please let me know so I can update the article.

      I found your second paragraph rather confusing. The prophecies I mentioned in the article are:
      1. The return of Israel
      2. The destruction of Tyre (Ezek 26), and
      3. The desolation of Egypt (Ezek 29)

      Which of these do you claim is not a prophecy?

      Also, in which of these did I misrepresent the views of Christadelphians?

    2. Marcus, there are two separate questions here:
      1. Is the Bible a reliable source of truth?

      2. If so, is Christadelphian teaching an accurate representation of the Bible?

      It seems to me that Thom has made valid points about both of those questions, though probably focusing more on point 1 (which is fair - if the Bible is not a reliable source of truth, arguing about the correct interpretation of the Bible is shifting deck chairs on the Titanic).

      Thom's interpretation of the various areas seems consistent with the views of the majority of Christadelphians I interacted with (in a different area from him). Christadelphians are already a small enough group - do you conclude that a large percentage of that small group are also astray from truth? Where does it end?

      As for prophecy, Thom is correct in saying that many Christadelphians present their particular interpretations of prophecy (especially Israel) as one of the best evidences for their belief, possibly even outstripping the resurrection (in my experience the most common apologetic from many other denominations). If you wish to say those Christadelphians have overreached or misinterpreted the prophecy, you are welcome to. But to be convincing you then need to replace that proferred evidence with other evidence, otherwise we will have no reason to believe the Bible.

    3. Marcus, what you believe does not make you a cult. CDs are not a cult because they are not fully trinitarian, or because they are pre-millenialists etc etc. Its is how the institution treats its members that makes something a cult. What is expected, how it is enforced, etc. Did you read Navigator's post on the 'Why John Bedson..' thread? He said this :

      'John B. on this site has spent lots of time and effort rubbishing, ridiculing and arguing against the people he disagrees with, and encouraging others to do the same. This is so Christadelphian!'

      Yes its almost as if John B was brought up in some sort of cult!

    4. The first part of Marcus' comment is fine, but it applies to all Christian denominations, they all think they are following the Bible. So what?
      Jacobus makes a good point. It is how you behave with that knowledge that make you a cult. Never mind John Bedson, John Thomas and Robert Roberts, followed by all other Christadeplhians to this day spend huge amounts of time rubbishing every other denomination, and crucially, cutting themselves off, and cutting their offspring off from any non-compliant piece of thinking, couple that with disfellowshipping and shunning, and yes you have a cult.

      I've read Marcus' second paragraph about 20 times. I still cant decide if it is as bad as it reads, or just looks that way to a native English speaker, and the real meaning has been lost in the translation. I hope the latter, because to me it reads that the "prophecy" part of the article is beyond comment because the author doesn't understand what is prophecy and what is not. This "you don't understand because you haven't read your Bible enough" line is very typical Christadelphians though, I used to get it all the time when as a member I challenged anything at all, and usually from the least well educated sister in the meeting!
      The other part looks like a case of victim blaming. You believed a speaker? He was wrong but if you knew your Bible well enough, you would have known that, so your fault!
      Marcus, please clarify your meaning.

  3. "many Christadelphians present their particular interpretations of prophecy..." and if you want confirmation of that, read the differing interpretations of the various prophecies discussed, and which become disagreements between brethren (and sisters), on the letters pages in the CD mag.

  4. You would be lucky to even be able to order it, such is the turmoil that has engulfed their website for months now. Crazy "clever" graphics that don't work, and whole sections effectively 404. No means of even looking at the current article listing, and it has been like it for months.


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.