As events continue to unfold in the middle east, SECT doctrine seems to be given a “shot in the arm” by the accuracy of their prophetic interpretation. There is no doubt that events appear to be shaping up in line with their long time held beliefs in this regard.

Be that as it may, it remains for events themselves to tell their story, whether shortly to be revealed, or even more mayhem and chaos to be unleashed on the human race before His coming. [or the antichrist].

Looking at SECT content on the web regarding the atonement and other subjects, shows them to be seriously astray on the most important “doctrine” of all. While their various groups may vary greatly in local beliefs, and some are growing stronger in the more conventional aspects of conventional Christianity, the hard core groups remain lost in fantasy.

Firstly it has to be presented that xxxxxx, like other sects, has had a history of causing marriage breakdown and fractured family relationships. This is because of the most common of the aspects of their existence that they hold in common with  other sects, those being the exclusivity that comes from holding a set of doctrines to be the be all and end all, known as “the truth”. Anyone stepping outside of these doctrinal ideas is ostracized, just like Jehovahs witnesses, exclusive Brethren, World wide church of God, and others.

This is pure legalism, and the suffering caused to families over the years has been immense. Furthermore, it is difficult to repair the damage done by these organisations, because of the brain washing involved.

Like other groups, the intensity of their faith rests, like the Pharisees, on their perceived literal correctness of their scriptural interpretation. It is difficult to understand how these groups can believe, for example, how the animal sacrifices of old are to be set up again once Christ returns. This is part of the error that believes in a literal return to Jerusalem and rebuilding the temple and these apparently spiritual superior ones then teaching the rest of us mortals the true religion. [which shows a complete lack of understanding of associated end time events].

But the worst of it is as it always has been, the error involved in what the atonement was and how it removes sin.

Arguments about this are peppered with words like “representation”, “substitution” and others. Of course, there is also variation in the popular camp about aspects of the atonement. But the core issue traditionally has always been that Christ, through bearing the result of sin, the “punishment” for sin, has by taking it upon himself, thereby relieved us of our obligation to it.

It is because of this, that the popular idea of “substitution” has, for the most part held sway. This is because it embodies these ideas of himself being the sacrifice that takes away sin. As is plainly written in scripture for all to see.

The problem is, that while various ideas and theories are projected with logical seeming explanations, and words and terms assigned to them, that they (xxxxxx and others) miss the whole point of it, which is that God Himself has suffered the result of sin’s onslaught on His creation. And we see this onslaught being taken by His Son, and therefore by Himself, because of the love bond between them. What the Son suffered, the Father also suffered.

When they disconnect this aspect from their atonement explanations, they destroy the power of the cross totally. The key point being that God himself, through His son, has borne the brunt of the failure of His creation to realise it’s fulfillment. That it is LOVE (which God Himself IS) that pays the cost of the errors of the world. This is called “forgiveness”, and is WHAT THE CROSS IS.

It is God’s personal love and forgiveness that calls for man to be recognised by the cross, and recognised, by being His very nature, to have been put into place on the cross in such a way as having ALREADY ACHIEVED THAT FORGIVENESS by which men may recognise His nature, who He is.

It is by this revelation, (the cross), that men can recognise the loving forgiving nature of God and RELY ON IT.

xxxxxx in general do not believe this, though in recent times some may have gained ground in this direction. As with all legalistic systems, they project the idea of salvation by compliance to laws and precepts, rather than resting on God’s absolute love in having ALREADY DEALT WITH THE PROBLEM. Only recognition that the problem has already been dealt with will remove man from the power of sin in all respects.

Although there are ongoing aspects of growing into the maturity of the faith, the issue of sin and its consequences has already been decided. IT IS DENYING THIS THAT CONTINUES TO HOLD PEOPLE IN THE POWER OF SIN, no matter how much they may be dressed in apparently appropriate religious clothing.

The atonement says that God’s forgiveness is already there, because HIS LOVE always is,  and men are to accept it (HIM) as a living certainty which (who) can “save them from their sins”, because it already has, they only have to believe and rely on it (HIM).

When you alter this, you destroy the power of the cross to destroy sin.

[the following link gives a traditional view of xxxxxx ] [rightly or wrongly]

[ ]

[The following link may be helpful ]

6 thoughts on “SECT ERROR [236d]

  1. It is not by not believing that Jesus is God that we would reject Jesus dying for the sins of all. We just accept that Jesus died for our sins, whilst God can not die, but that God accepted Jesus his ransom offer. By that Lamb of god grace is given to all in the world, but that does not mean we do not have to do anything to enter the Kingdom of God. (Please look at and listen to the many parables of Jesus concerning the entrance in the Kingdom of God.)


    • The problem lies with the atonement doctrine that denies the very purpose and accomplishment of God. That he removed any excuse man might have in not returning to him, by removing the inevitability of death by taking the consequences of sin upon himself, thus freeing man from the obligation to sin and death. When man imposes conditions on this thing that God has freely accomplished, he returns the obligation back on man who does not have the resources to deal with it. I have spoken elsewhere of the pressure this puts on those who do not accept the simple premise that God has dealt with sin and death on man’s behalf, in the body of Jesus, so as to demonstrate the absolute forgiveness that God not only is willing to give, but has already given. Not believing this, coupled with the denial of the Holy Spirit (read Thomas and Roberts) as the living presence of Christ in the believer (“The Comforter”), leaves people without this comfort and assurance. Of the dozen or so Christadelphian couples that I am aware of on a personal basis, MOST of them have suffered marriage breakdown. Doctrinally there perhaps appears to be some differences between your group and the majority of Christadelphia?


  2. Pingback: Do Christadelphians belong to Protestants – Belgian Ecclesia Brussel – Leuven

  3. *I speak of these matters from personal experience. Although there is some latitude given for adventurous thinking, anything that goes against the basic tenants is not welcome and the ones who indulge in such discussion are usually sidelined. There are other legalistic aspects involved as well.


  4. Pingback: Do Christadelphians belong to Protestantism – Belgian Ecclesia Brussel – Leuven

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s