This post is devoted to Christadelphian comments made, firstly in relation to a specific post of mine “The basic problem with sects [241b]” and secondly as a result of a further challenge by myself to their doctrine. ( I think foolishly in hindsight 🙂 ).

I used the above verse because it seems to be one which could be viewed either way as support for one or the other premise. More on that in a minute.

But firstly, I think I am in a no-win situation, because once you re-define the Spirit and the cross, the goal posts have moved so far that we are no longer talking about the same religion of Christianity. By so doing, the new covenant is turned back again into the old. It then becomes a matter of accepting or denying the parameters of either side, and neither are likely to budge on their position.

The initial comment by Belgian Christadelphians was significant because he/she came out with about 380 commandments or laws, virtually saying that one had to go through the bible and extract all the commandments so as to ensure that you were keeping them. This is completely outside of normal Christian thought, as the whole basis of it as we understand it, is that the old has gone, the new has come. (old covenant based on law, new covenant based on Spirit).

To make further comment at this time, I would say that their understanding of the cross/atonement probably simply becomes that of an “elevated” or higher authority type of sacrifice. It seems as though they see it as just a more important type of sacrifice, but still one that relates to the ability or inability to keep the law/s and commandments of old. They use the word “ransom” which I believe is also used by the Jehovah’s witnesses.

Although using the words “gift of grace”, the detail of that grace might reveal that what has happened (in their belief), is that sufficient “grace” has occurred so they can be advantaged enough by it, to be motivated to attempt to keep all the laws they can discover and define, because it seems as though they believe that “love” means to keep the law. Certainly Jesus said words to that effect. “If you love me you will do what I command you” or similar. But this is just an extension of the premise that all obedience and compliance is to, and comes out of, the divine nature, which we are given as a gift, and it is by this that “The law” is inadvertently  or naturally kept in the process of loving. So the title heading does not say that to keep the commandment is to love, but conversely, it says that “love IS the fulfillment of the law, is the end of the law, is the goal of this commandment, because love is the target, being “the divine nature”. [God does not operate to “laws”, He operates from his own self, He is Spirit].

So on the cross, Jesus fulfilled the law FOR us, because we could not do it. We do not now of ourselves have to actively seek to be, or try to be, righteous, in order to GAIN righteousness, because it never worked before, why should it work now? We are GIVEN that righteousness, and then we seek to maintain it. In Jesus fulfilling the law, it becomes obsolete and abolished. Believers accept his death in place of their own, in the sense that unless he had done it, we would be dead with no hope of recovery. But he took sin and death upon himself so we could be free of it. The way we are free of it is to BELIEVE that this is true. This belief is not a structure based on law, but is that which is apprehended by the heart with the aid of the Spirit. But as mentioned above, both what Jesus achieved and what the Spirit IS and does, is part of their doctrinal denial of “orthodox” belief. Anything of worth has to proceed from love. Love is not learned. “We love because he first loved us”. And the “full extent of his love” was him becoming sin for us. [just to suggest some explanation re law, perhaps we could say that the law is abolished for Christians, but is still active for everyone else? even though this is a bit warped it may help?]

OK I had a good go there (might be my last). Now to some of the comments, which are hard to respond to because we are operating under two different “religions” and the parameters are at cross purposes. Links and references will make the Belgian Christadelphian site available so that they are able to put their view, regardless of what happens here in terms of return comments, which they can present. [ – visit    ]

“MA”, you said  “…mankind did not have to do anything to receive the gift of salvation” I think that might be what you are saying I am saying because  I know there are language difficulties, but will have to follow that up.

You are defining “belief” as “an essential work”. Belief is something that takes place in the heart/mind and is not a “work”, but again, you could be meaning something slightly different. You say it is a work to become part of the body of Christ. And, “Though we do believe also non Christians shall be saved and able to enter the kingdom of God, as long as they kept to the mitzva or commandments of God”. This sounds like people who are commandment keepers do not need the sacrifice of Christ, which sounds as if he might as well not have come and died. Isn’t this describing the Jewish religion? And not what the NT says?

“IM” , “Two Hells [262b]”. I do not teach forever hell and I do not seek to actively promote “trinity” although it may crop up as a means of perspective in various subjects.

“Works” that you have to do to be saved ** (or to continue to be saved) are not the same works that are done as a result of being saved. IE works such as James is describing are simply more “fruits” of belief that should come from love because if they are done for their own sake without love then they are just as dead as the faith James is talking about.

“IM”, you said, “God has no reason at all to bear our sins in something like a body which he has not”?? But it says He himself bore our sins in his body on the cross. And a body thou hast prepared for me? – I can’t understand what you are saying here.

I do not represent any particular denomination. Bagatelle? [ok “making of little value”]. God faking his death???

“IM”, you said “God made it clear that people pay for their sins with their death. The loving and just God shall never demand a second payment”. I’m sorry, but many places in scripture talk about a place of torment, Jesus said so himself. People fear death, not because of the death, but because of the possible judgement that lies beyond. “Through fear of death man is subject to lifelong bondage”. Believers accept the pronounced judgement on sin and are then free of it. Otherwise the vilest murderer could see death as an escape from his due punishment for his many sins and continue to destroy others while on his way to the grave.

“IM”, you said “saying that they [sins] are removed by forgiveness means that the person first has to show some remorse and has to hope or look for forgiveness, which again shall demand some effort on his part, though you claim nobody has to do any work….”

I do not believe that believing you have been forgiven, constitutes “work”. [although this is the “work” he asks for, but he is making a point that it is NOT work.]

“IM”, Christianity makes it plain that what the law is for is to reveal sin (death).

That the answer to this is to accept the judgement of death.

And to accept that another took that sentence upon himself.

My prime interest is in what you think the cross of Christ achieved? It is here where things usually fall apart.

It usually ends up something like Jesus took our sin but he didn’t actually take it and we have to do all these various things in order to comply, to be compliant in order to gain salvation, and in order that our sins are removed.

God has removed all necessity for people to REMAIN IN DEATH because he has made death and sin of no account because he has settled the matter in Jesus. God is only interested in life, not death. *He freely offers forgiveness without qualification or condition – there may be some things which are helpful to man’s apprehension of this truth, but they are not conditions, only helps. People who remain in their death are dead already, and that will be confirmed at judgement, where they will be examined for their life’s results. Being confronted with truth will be painful for them. (That is the “soft” version of “hell”.)

*THE REASON why this is so, is so that man can be completely without excuse for not returning to God. There are completely absolutely no barriers or conditions to accepting the love of God which is in Jesus. Man can no longer “hide behind” his sin.

For the answer to all this nonsense please see

**[ not a Christian position] Csects Ccults Clove Cchristadelphian Claw Cbook



  1. Dear Sir,

    Where do you get it from that we would ever have written as you want your readers to believe that we “came out with about 380 commandments or laws, virtually saying that one had to go through the bible and extract all the commandments so as to ensure that you were keeping them.” As you said “This is completely outside of normal Christian thought, as the whole basis of it as we understand it, is that the old has gone, the new has come. (old covenant based on law, new covenant based on Spirit).” According Christadelphians the sent one form God, so not God Himself like you also want your readers to believe, gave himself as a ransom offering which his heavenly Father, the Only One God Who is One accepted and as such accepted a New Covenant, which made an end to many old laws, but not to all laws, you once again want to get your readers to believe.

    The salvation which comes over us does not allow us to worship more than one God, like you seem to do, or have graven images of the Only One God nor to have pictures of any other god to worship, also a thing many Christians do.
    You might want to have your readers to believe they never again do have to worry about their wrongdoings, because Jesus died for their sins. But that is a very umbiblical teaching.

    The article you are referring to has even no reaction by us. As we never said we have to keep to 380 laws given int he Bible, we would appreciate it to receive an apology and rectification on your site.

    Concerning the Law of God we should still keep to the commandments of God, though you would love not. But when you would steal, lie, swear on the name of God, fornicate, do bestialities, rape people (be it children or adults), kill people, or do other bad things and would not repent about those wrongdoings the Bible tells us we shall miss the entrance of God His Kingdom. Teaching otherwise is doing violence to the words of Jesus and to the Words of God.


    • Hi. I understand there are language difficulties, but in the first sentence of this post, I referenced your comments that you made on the [241b] post. There you will plainly see that you wrote about the 380 + commandments.


      • You mentioning “virtually saying that one had to go through the bible and extract all the commandments so as to ensure that you were keeping them” There at post 241b we did not at all write we still should keep to all or even most of the 385 commandments we can find in Scripture.

        We wrote “I only gave some quotes from Scriptures about some commandments but do know there are many more given in Scriptures. .Please look at the 385 commandments given by God (in the Old Testament of the Bible) and also look at the commandments given by Christ (in the New Testament).”

        We sincerely do hope you once shall come to see we still have to keep to certain commandements. Luckily you shal be oneof the few trinitarian Christians who shall not preach in their church that people have to become baptised, have to live properly, have to pray, have to meet and come to a service (e.g.Sunday service), have to keep Sabbath or Sunday, may not many wives, not making them afraid with hell or other gloomy or bad things. You not minding them many partners, having abortions, even not thinking they would not be able to enter the Kingdom of God when they do bestialities. This is a very strange teaching!

        According to what we can find in the Bible there are many things we still have to keep to, and as such a lot of things we may not do and lots of things we have to do, to be able to come in the Kingdom of God.

        Though we leave you in your wisdom, finding no such works have to be done like being told in many of the apostles their writings about what Jesus did and said (the gospels) and many warnings in their letters (epistles) (Paul’s letters to the Romans and James, for example)?


      • Dear Sir, there may be language problems but several of the Bibles we do have in many languages do talk about the ransom Jesus paid and him offering himself as a “Lamb of God” as “payment for sins”.

        You may not like the noun ransom because several real Christians use it, like the JW, Christadelphians, Church of God, Nazarene Friends, Messianics, a.o. also because with the saying that Jesus is God you clearly know God can not die so Jesus according to your trinitarian teaching would have faked his death and being God Himself already everything belongs to Him and is it impossible to pay Himself.

        Though many Bible translations translate “ran’-sum, kopher; lutron; ga’al” in English as “ransom”, with the idea as payment for salvation or redemption.

        If you prefer other words than certain bibles use, you are welcome but should understand they should and/or would mean exactly the same; Jesus giving cover for sins by his bloodshed. God as a Spirit has no flesh, bones nor blood so can as an eternal spiritual Being not die nor shed blood, but Jesus, the son of God (according to the Bible, which you do not want to accept) did give his life for us.By his death we could be redeemed and liberation of the curse of death came to us. (Remember also how after his resurrection Jesus showed his wounds to his disciples to proof he is not a ghost, like his Father, God being an eternal Spirit (i.e. not having a beginning = no birth; end not having an end = no death).

        In the O. T., except in #Ex 21:30, the word is kopher, lit. ‘a covering,’ a cognate word to kaphar, often translated ‘atonement.’ None “can by any means redeem his brother, nor give to God a ransom for him.” #Ps 49:7. But God could say, “Deliver him from going down to the pit: I have found a ransom.” #Job 33:24. The word occurs also in #Ex 30:12 Job 36:18 Pr 6:35 13:8 21:18 Isa 43:3. In the N.T. it is λυτρον, or αντιλυτρον, from ‘to loose, set free.’ Christ gave Himself, His life, a ransom for many: the precious blood of Christ witnesses that every claim of God against the believer has been answered. #Mt 20:28 Mr 10:45 1Ti 2:6.

        The price or payment made for our redemption, as when it is said that the Son of man “gave his life a ransom for many” #Mt 20:28 comp. #Ac 20:28 Ro 3:23,24 1Co 6:19,20 Ga 3:13 4:4,5 Eph 1:7 Col 1:14 #1Ti 2:6 Ti 2:14 1Pe 1:18,19 In all these passages the same idea is expressed). This word is derived from the Fr. rancon; Lat. redemptio. The debt is represented not as cancelled but as fully paid. The slave or captive is not liberated by a mere gratuitous favour, but a ransom price has been paid, in consideration of which he is set free. The original owner receives back his alienated and lost possession because he has bought it back “with a price.” This price or ransom (Gr. lutron) is always said to be Christ, his blood, his death. He secures our redemption by the payment of a ransom.

        Greek lutron, antilutron. {#1Ti 2:6 } A price paid for freeing a captive. Anti implies vicarious, equivalent substitution, “a ransom for many.” {#Mt 20:28 Eph 1:7 1Pe 1:18-19 } Man was the slave of Satan, sold under sin. He was unable to ransom himself, because absolute obedience is due to God; therefore no act of ours can satisfy for the least offense. #Le 25:48 allowed one sold captive to be redeemed by one of his brethren.

        The Son of God is the sent one of God who received authority of God to speak in His name and to do acts in His name. As a man of flesh and blood in order that as our elder brother he could redeem us or for redemption. {#Heb 2:14-15 }

        “14 Since then the children are sharers in flesh and blood, he also himself in like manner partook of the same; that through death he might bring to nought him that had the power of death, that is, the devil; 15 and might deliver all them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage. 16 For verily not to angels doth he give help, but he giveth help to the seed of Abraham. 17 Wherefore it behooved him in all things to be made like unto his brethren, that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people. 18 For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succor them that are tempted.” (Hebrews 2:14-18 ASV) (Remember also that God can not be tempted, but Jesus was more than once.)

        For clarity we do not have any bible translation we would say is the only members may be use, we give soma translations of some other much liked English bibles (where to your surprise you might also find “ransom” if you read well, like from the many bibles we have at our disposal the main known ones mention “ransom” like the ACV, ABP, ABPG, ABUNT, Af53, Af78, AKJ, AKJVR, AlbNT, Amh62, Amh87, ANT, ArB, ARV2008, ASV, ASVRev, ASV2014, ADSV2015, AUV, AUVNT, Anders, ANT, AS, ASV, AV, AVOrig, AVRLE, BasicB, BBA, Beng, BFC, Boek, BSV, Byz, ByzA, ByzCl, Can, Cat.B, CeNt, CGV, CJB, ComplApB, CTB, CTNT, CTOC+NC, Dar, Diaglot, DiaNT, DRB, DRPGospels, DSV, ELB, EMT, , ERV,.Geneva, EvidB, FAA, FBF, GSNT, GWV, HRB, HNT, HNV, HSV, IAV, IGNT, ISV, JB2000, Jer, JMNT, Jonge, Julia, KJ21, KJBNV, KJVBRG, KJBRV, KJ2000, KJ2001,KJV1611, KJBPCE, KJV, KJVCNT, KJVTVM, KnoxNT, LEB, Lei, LeiNT2004, LHB, LtiNT, LITV, LitV-TSP, Lo, LSB2013, LSG, LU, Lu2004, Lut, Lut 1545, Mace, Mar, MGM, MGJ, MKJV, MNT, Mur, NAB, NAS,NAS95, NB, NBG1951, NBV, NegH, NEV, NHEB, NHEB16, NHBEJ, NHEBM, NHEBYZE, NIV, NLB, Noyes, NRSV, NuNT, NWT, NWV,, Ost, Palm, Pes, Phon, PiscaNT, ReMur, RHB2.9, RHB3.3, RHB33HD, RHD33LTHD, RNT,RNV, RSV,RV, Ryr, RWeb, , Schla, STV, SVD, SVV, SynodNT, TelosNT, theDiscB., the RefB, the Scrip 198, the Scrip2005, theScrip2009, ThomHawNT1795, TLV, RomCatB, Tisch, TOB, TR, TRC(1),TRC (CLas),Translit, UKJV, UTV, ULU, VisNT,, Voorh.NT4, Voorh.1877, VW, WEB, WEBA, Webster, Webster (ContV), Weiz, WEL, WH, WHC, WhistonNT1745, Wil, WmsNT, WoY, WPNT, WV78, WV95, ZB1931)

        You can see lot more bibles (and I did not check all the available translations at our house or congregation) and as such also lots more of congregations using and saying “ransom”, though you may not like it. (so what Bible version you consider better than those who gave “ransom”?)

        “just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many.”” (Matthew 20:28 NAS)

        “”For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many.”” (Mark 10:45 NAS)

        “who gave Himself as a ransom for all, the testimony [borne] at the proper time.” (1 Timothy 2:6 NAS)

        “And for this reason He is the mediator of a new covenant, in order that since a death has taken place for the redemption of the transgressions that were [committed] under the first covenant, those who have been called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance.” (Hebrews 9:15 NAS)

        “just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.”” (Matthew 20:28 NIV)

        “For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.”” (Mark 10:45 NIV)

        “who gave himself as a ransom for all men—the testimony given in its proper time.” (1 Timothy 2:6 NIV)

        “For this reason Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance—now that he has died as a ransom to set them free from the sins committed under the first covenant.” (Hebrews 9:15 NIV) [[crossroman says, please see my note at the very bottom of these posts]]


  2. Sir, in case you prefer “libation” instead of “ransom” for “plengoffer” or “losgeld” (“ransom”) we are happy to use that for you as well. But Jesus offered his body, gave his life as the price for our sins, which you perhaps might not believe, but according to us that is one of the core beliefs of our Christian faith. Naturally when you believe Jesus is God and know that god cannot die such offering as a “Lamb of God” is impossible, and therefore you would depreciate or deny such a thing.

    We do find it very strange that you as a Christian do not want to hear what is written in the Bible, that Jesus is the sent one from God, that Jesus is the only begotten beloved son of God, that Jesus is the way to God, that Jesus is the mediator to God and that Jesus gave his life as a ransom for mankind.

    “even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.” (Matthew 20:28 ASV)

    “For the Son of man also came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.” (Mark 10:45 ASV)

    “who gave himself a ransom for all; the testimony [to be borne] in its own times;” (1 Timothy 2:6 ASV)

    “And for this cause he is the mediator of a new covenant, that a death having taken place for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first covenant, they that have been called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance.” (Hebrews 9:15 ASV)

    And in case the JW would use that word, what should be the harm in that and should have other Christians not enabling them to use that word?


  3. Hi. On the basis of your failure to admit to the 380 commandments, I will wait until you do, before making further comment. (I will not ask for an apology for inferring that I am a liar (or all the other things you are falsely acccusing me of).


    • Today 2017 March 30 we gave you a reply on the matter of the many commandments which are clearly given in the Bible and of which we talked in response to a posting on this site but not on a posting on Mr. Ampe his site “Messiah for all” to which you replied referring to this posting and our sayings which you seemed to have twisted.(at: Messianic prophesies 1 Adversary – Root of the first prophecy)


  4. Sorry, but I think it is plain that you at the very least inferred that these commandments were to be “kept”. This amounts to keeping the law as far as I am concerned. It is evident you will continue to deliberately misunderstand what I have written – possibly the English language is something of a barrier for you, but your tone and attitude plainly exhibit your inability to understand anything beyond your own indoctrination. You have falsely accused me of all manner of things which simply demonstrates the truth of that which I wrote from the beginning. I will leave you in peace with your religion. Thank you for your interaction, I will not bother you again. [since posting this, they have posted again as above “March 30, 2017 AT 12:16 PM – so they have had their right of reply] [IT IS (NOW) FINISHED]. No further comments will be received on this subject. [what I DO find strange is that they are talking about satan and the devil, when they don’t believe in them, and also that they defend JW’s use of “ransom”, again which applies to devil/satan.]


  5. 2018. [241b] (comments section) clearly show the 385 commandments in question, which they afterwards admitted to, but there could be some mixup between them and “Mr. Ampe”, although the 385 commandments comment is definitely attached to their logo. As “Christadelphians” , I find their language uncharacteristic, and in fact, the whole interaction with them is rather strange. I mentioned in a later post (or in this one) how the goal posts had moved, and the reality is that they cannot deny that the basis for Christadelphianism and the origin of their accepted doctrine, comes from the books “Christendom Astray” and “Elpis Israel”. If they have anything further to say, it must be related to these manuscripts, otherwise they should not be calling themselves “Christadelphians”. There is though, language difficulty in the transaction.


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