Category Archives: Accommodation & fellowship

Is Christ Divided? Responding to difference

In 1987 articles in a liberal Christadelphian Magazine (The Endeavour), caused quite a stir and calls for dramatic action being circulated to many UK ecclesias.  Overseas groups also contributed to the clamour.  In response a large number of believers signed a joint letter published in the Christadelphian Magazine.  The letter pointed out the BASF was a human document with human limitations, exploring Scripture and questioning isn’t wrong and that ecclesias – not groups or associations of ecclesias – should moderate their member’s activities.  Useful counsel today, although our magazines now and Australian ecclesia groups (like the South Australian IEAC) would likely disagree.  The letter is below:

Continue reading

Acts 17:26 inserting Adam is incorrect

Acts 17:26 appears to give literalists a wonderful platform to insist all humans descended from Adam.  Further investigation demonstrates this interpretation is very wanting.  We don’t mind if you want to believe this, but don’t put words in Paul’s mouth and then use it to divide.  The AACE discussion paper – which will have unity implications – includes this popular but questionable misreading.  Here’s the passage: Continue reading

Purity of Doctrine – Shield Magazine 1973

“PURITY OF DOCTRINE – This has always been at the centre of inter-ecclesial controversy.  The main issue on this point is just how far we go in certain matters, some will always wish to go further than others.  It is therefore essential that all concerned should keep closely to the actual agreement reached and not try to go further.”

Dangerfield, AC (1973) “The Unity Book – Conclusion”  The Australian Christadelphian Shield Magazine, page 110 Vol 76 # 5

“I am committed to peace, but when I speak, they want to make war”  Psalm 120:7  This blog (and related facebook page) started in response to ongoing misrepresentation and hostility towards evolutionary creation.  We remain committed to accommodation.  Have a literal reading of Genesis 1-3.  Claim dinosaurs are a hoax.  Whatever.  But understand that magazines, interecclesial statements and high profile speakers making statements about evolutionary creationists are continuing the profile of the issue.  Plus it provokes responses.  It doesn’t have to be this way.  Evolutionary creationists and accommodationists called for a truce in 2014 to enable calm private discussions.  This was rejected by those who wish to make war.

Fixing up the foundations

Picture2

When you obsess over Adam you might as well go the whole hog and make him foundational.  Inserting Adam into the foundations is an odd choice compared to Jesus the second man, the last adam.  One man is the purpose and pinnacle of creation, the other a dead sinner.  Why don’t we stop seeking division over old man Adam and try unifying around the one foreordained before the foundation of the world.

Literalism can be a poor judgement

Literalists wear their approach to Genesis 1-3 as a badge of honour – often insisting their way is the only way to read the text.  We have no issue with those with firm opinions but generous attitudes to other viewpoints.  After all, all evolutionary Creationists were once YEC or OEC.  However Jesus warned a literal approach to the Scripture could disguise bad judgement.  Caution is warranted. Continue reading