Category Archives: History

2009 CMag letter accepting EC

In December 2009, in response to an article on creation, a brother wrote to and was published in The Christadelphian Magazine saying (among other things), evolution challenges our interpretation of the bible (not the bible), a range of views needs to be accommodated and evolution is not atheism nor unfaithful.  The full letter is reproduced below: Continue reading

Advertisements

Early Christadelphian approaches to the Bible

Our pioneers and earliest commentators believed we should study Scripture using the best scholarship in science, history, archaeology, textual criticism, lexicography, and Bible study, leaving us an excellent example. They used science and scholarship to combat doctrinal error,[1] [2] believing scientific facts always supports the Bible.[3] [4] [5] [6] They accepted the scientific evidence for the age of the earth[7] [8] [9] [10] and pre-Adamic human beings, [11] [12] [13]  despite rejecting evolution.[14] [15] They wrote articles arguing the Genesis flood was not global, [16] that the days of Genesis 1 were not necessarily literal,[17] that the Bible cannot be understood simply through literal interpretation,[18] [19] and that Moses did not write the Pentateuch.[20]  [21] [22] They supported the most modern Bible available (the Revised Version), and promoted Tischendorf’s New Testament, based on Vaticanus, Sinaiticus, and Alexandrinus, which they regarded as ‘the three most ancient original’ manuscripts.[23] Continue reading

Wilfred Lambert on Genesis 1-3

lambert

Bro Wilfred Lambert was an outstanding Assyriologist with a gift for ancient languages.  He translated and published books and papers on various cuneiform tablets and seals.[1]  Bro Lambert also published articles on his understanding of Genesis 1-3.  You can see a number of these articles today at this Endeavour Magazine site.  His work demonstrates that a wider variety of opinions have (and continue) to exist in our community) despite the narrow demands of some. Continue reading

LG Sargent rejected Logos attempts to dictate the understanding of Gen 1

LG Sargent Christadelphian

LG Sargent

LG Sargent in the 1966 Christadelphian Magazine (Vol 103, page 458–460), wrote a scathing letter to The Logos magazine editor following criticism of Sargent’s non literal approach to Genesis 1 (eg leaving the time in Gen 1 as an open question).  Sargent was opposed to evolution, but clearly notes our community (historically at least) took on board the plain observations of science.  He also noted Bro Thomas always accepted the earth had long rotated because of science.  Sargent also restates Walker’s earlier observation that there is no evidence (and should be according to most literalists) of a cataclysmic end to life and a reboot some 6,000 years ago.  50 years later again we have South Australian demands on how Genesis and fellowship statements should be read (see here for a response to the IEAC statement).  See below for the full letter from Sargent. Continue reading

R Roberts in 1869 twice denied a significant change in Adam

 Robert Roberts in 1869 stated very plainly there was no miraculous change in Adam post the fall.  Of course he changed his mind later but never really addressed his exposition of 1 Cor 15.


But there is a misapprehension lurking under the proposition which we are combating. Our friend imagines there was a change in the nature of Adam when he became disobedient. There is no evidence of this whatever, and the presumption and evidence are entirely the contrary way. There was a change in Adam’s relation to his maker, but not in the nature of his organization. What are the facts? He was formed from the dust a “living soul,” or natural body. His mental constitution gave him moral relation to God. He was given a law to observe: the law he disobeyed, and sentence was passed that he (the disobedient living soul) should return to mother earth. Continue reading

Wilfred Lambert stated the human race is more than 7,000 years old

Bro Wilfred Lambert was one of the foremost Assyriologists of his generation.  He wrote quite explicitly about the connection between ancient near eastern ideas (about which he was an expert) and the impossibility of reconciling Gen 1-3 with science.  Some of his specific observations in the following article are:

  • The antiquity of the earth and man is unquestionably longer than biblical literalists can allow
  • Gen 1 and Gen 2-3 are separate events and cannot be read as literal/scientific accounts
  • The solid raqia was a common/borrowed understanding of the sky
  • Humanity is far older than 7,000 years

Bro Wilfred was not disfellowshipped for such ideas (for the record – I take elements of Gen 2-3 more literally than he did) Continue reading