Posted on 09/05/2025 9:34:43 AM PDT by ProtectOurFreedom
While on a 6 mile walk between villages in the Cotswolds, England today, I spotted this sign on a back street in Bourton-on-the-Water, Gloucestershire, England.
”Christadelphians”? What in the world? So I looked it up when we got back to our cottage and this is what I learned.
The Christadelphians, a non-Trinitarian Christian denomination, were founded in the mid-19th century by John Thomas, a British doctor who emigrated to the United States. The name means "brothers and sisters in Christ," derived from Greek. They base their beliefs solely on the Bible, rejecting the Trinity and the immortality of the soul, and aim to replicate the practices of the first-century Christian church. Key practices include believer’s baptism, anticipation of Jesus' second coming, and the establishment of God’s kingdom on earth. Ecclesias, their autonomous congregations, lack central leadership or paid clergy, with worship centered on simple services like the memorial service commemorating Jesus’ death and resurrection.
By the late 19th century, Christadelphians had grown in England, including the Cotswolds, a rural region in South West England known for its limestone villages. Influenced by John Thomas’ 1849 lecture tours, the movement found traction among non-Trinitarian groups. Around 1900, small ecclesias likely existed in towns like Cirencester or Chipping Campden, meeting in modest venues for Bible study and prayer. The 1898 schism led to the Central Fellowship (Amended Christadelphians) becoming dominant in England, a group that included those with sufficient gospel knowledge in their resurrection beliefs. With an estimated 20,000 members and 300 ecclesias UK-wide by the early 20th century, their presence in the Cotswolds reflected a minority committed to biblical literalism and pacifism, distinct from the region’s Anglican traditions.
A Christadelphian Meeting Room in Bourton-on-the-Water, Gloucestershire, bears a stone sign dated 1904, indicating a dedicated space for the local ecclesia. Located 50 miles south of Birmingham, a hub of Christadelphian activity, this modest stone building reflects the movement’s growth and the Central Fellowship’s influence post-1898 schism. It likely served for Bible study, prayer, and the memorial service, supported possibly by nearby ecclesias. The structure’s simplicity aligns with their avoidance of ornate architecture, marking a significant community effort in a small market town.
As of September 5, 2025, the Christadelphians have not died out. With approximately 50,000 members across 120 countries, and around 20,000 in the UK historically, they remain active. In the UK, they maintain about 300 ecclesias, including potential continued use or legacy of sites like the Bourton-on-the-Water meeting room. Their online presence, including publications like The Christadelphian magazine, and focus on autonomous community activities sustain their small but enduring global presence.
It was NOT a cry of despair. It was, instead, a reference to Psalm 22. Remember--back then there no chapters and verses. They referenced Scripture, usually, by the first line in the passage they wanted to talk about.
Psalm 22:
My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?
Why are You so far from helping Me,
And from the words of My groaning?
O My God, I cry in the daytime, but You do not hear;
And in the night season, and am not silent.
But You are holy,
Enthroned in the praises of Israel.
Our fathers trusted in You;
They trusted, and You delivered them.
They cried to You, and were delivered;
They trusted in You, and were not ashamed.
He was expressing His faith in the plan.
That’s some weird stuff, right?
Metmom's reference to Psalm 22 makes sense, as Jesus the scholar knew it and was suffering not only from the crucifixion but the realization of being inescapably centered in that prophecy in that very moment of time. When pondering how one being can save billions with their finite sacrifice I submit that His was infinite, with that real-life Twilight Zone mental torture being just one aspect. Morbid, I know - but it seems part of His ordeal was to spare us of horrors no decent person should know. Too metaphysical for me. It's like worrying too much about the future: get obsessed doing that and the Present (and what you could have done otherwise) will have passed you by.
The answer to the missing socks conundrum is, of course, 42. That's the bottom line because Willie Mays said so.
The Christadelphians may not be mistaken; technically. Even among the various Protestant churches I've attended there's debate whether one is transported/judged/transformed immediately or if you're in a stasis awaiting the events of Armageddon and the Final Judgement (en masse at one predetermined time in the future). When they say death is a state of unconsciousness I think they might be confusing death with being a voluntary member of the Democrat Party. Being unconscious yet still able to vote - it's a miracle!
You know some people refuse to be organ donors in the belief that we're supposed to keep all our parts together or risk damnation. How they account for the body's constant cell sloughing/regeneration, let alone teeth and hair loss, I've no idea. I think if God is God the Creator and Source of All Life details like that, alterations from accidents and illnesses or even cremation pose no obstacle to Him - especially considering it's not the body that goes on, but the soul.
It seems like a Jeff Foxworthy joke: "If your god can't put you back together due to lost parts, instructions or an expired warranty; you might have a deity problem."
Glad for what may help. I was hastily addressing both the meaning of the cry as well as the means of discerning such.
Did you forget about the Arian heresy in the fourth century? They denied the Trinity. The Reformation was HARDLY the impetus for "myriad interpretations", anti-trinitarianism or other heresies. Satan started at the beginning to pervert the truth.
Boatbums “Did you forget about the Arian heresy in the fourth century? They denied the Trinity. The Reformation was HARDLY the impetus for “myriad interpretations”, anti-trinitarianism or other heresies. Satan started at the beginning to pervert the truth.”
Very good points, boatbums.
The thing is, well there are two points:
1. First, about the Arians
Yes, Arians were unequivocally anti-Trinitarian, though the term “Trinity” itself was still being formalized during their time. Arianism, named after the Alexandrian presbyter Arius (c. 256–336 AD), emerged in the early 4th century as a theological challenge to emerging orthodox views of Christ’s divinity. Arius taught that Jesus Christ (the Son) was not co-eternal or co-equal with God the Father but was instead a created being—divine in a subordinate sense, but not of the same essence (homoousios). He famously argued “there was a time when the Son was not,” implying the Son had a beginning and was begotten by the Father as an act of creation, not as an eternal generation within the Godhead.
I am always tickled by the story that Santa Claus b*!ch slapped Arius at the Council. Yes, St. Nicholas actually did that.
Your, boatbums, reference to the “Arian heresy in the fourth century” is spot-on: It was a major anti-Trinitarian movement that nearly split the early church, influencing barbarian kingdoms (e.g., Visigoths) for centuries after. However, it’s worth noting that Arianism wasn’t a complete rejection of Christ’s divinity (as in modern Unitarianism) but a subordinationist view that still affirmed Jesus as divine—yet not in the Trinitarian sense. This nuance doesn’t change its classification as anti-Trinitarian, as it opposed the co-equality essential to the doctrine.
2. Then, regarding the linkage to Sola scriptura that I posited, which came 1,200 years later.
My point—that sola scriptura unleashed a wave of individual Bible interpretations, resulting in “myriad interpretations” and specifically anti-Trinitarian groups like “the brethren” during Luther’s lifetime—is largely correct, though it requires some historical clarification.
Heresies like Arianism did predate the Reformation, so you are right that the Reformation wasn’t the “impetus” for anti-Trinitarianism’s invention (Satan, or human error, indeed sowed discord early, as Galatians 1:6–9 warns of “another gospel”).
However, sola scriptura—a cornerstone of Luther’s reforms—did act as a catalyst for RE-EMERGING and proliferating such views in the 16th century, contributing to Protestant denominational diversity. It empowered laypeople and radicals to challenge established doctrines without a centralized authority (like the Catholic magisterium), leading to fragmentation. This wasn’t just theoretical; it manifested in real movements during and shortly after Luther’s life.
Luther himself was staunchly Trinitarian.
But the Radical Reformation—groups influenced by sola scriptura but pushing further toward individual interpretation—produced anti-Trinitarian offshoots almost immediately.
the Polish Brethren (also called Arians or Minor Reformed Church of Poland), a Unitarian-like group that emerged in the 1540s–1550s, explicitly rejecting the Trinity as unbiblical and influenced by Renaissance humanism and biblical literalism. They were formalizing during Luther’s final years (he died in 1546), drawing from earlier radicals.
Anabaptists and Rationalists: The Radical Reformation (starting ~1520s) included anti-Trinitarian fringes among Anabaptists (e.g., some Swiss Brethren) who emphasized personal Bible reading. By the 1540s, figures like Bernardino Ochino (exile from Italy) spread Socinian ideas (precursors to Polish Brethren), denying the Trinity as illogical and unbiblical.
These weren’t isolated; the Reformation’s emphasis on the priesthood of all believers (1 Peter 2:9) and Scripture’s perspicuity (clarity) encouraged radicals to reinterpret doctrines like the Trinity, often seeing it as a post-biblical accretion from councils like Nicaea. By Luther’s death, anti-Trinitarianism was bubbling up in Protestant circles, leading to executions and exiles—evidence of the “flood gates” I described.
Defenders of sola scriptura may say it’s not “me and my Bible” but Scripture as the norma normans (ruling norm), informed by creeds and reason—yet in practice, it fostered diversity.
The peril i highlight is real and historical as seen in the polish brethren, the anabaptists, and the unitarians : Without a magisterium, disagreements on key doctrines (e.g., baptism, predestination, Trinity) splintered the movement. Anti-Trinitarianism’s revival exemplifies this; it echoed Arianism but thrived under Protestant freedoms, unlike in the pre-Reformation church where councils suppressed it.
Thank you, Mike, for your kind words and that wonderfully reflective take on Psalm 22—it’s a profound reminder of the depths of Christ’s love, isn’t it? That sense of Him bearing not just the physical agony but the weight of prophecy fulfilled in real time... it does stretch our understanding of sacrifice in ways that feel both humbling and infinite, as you say. And sparing us from such shadows? A mercy we can only glimpse.
Haha, 42 for the socks—classic! And Willie Mays as the ultimate authority? I’ll take that wisdom any day; he knew how to catch the uncatchable.
You’re on the point about those debates among our Protestant brothers and sisters— Scripture invites deep pondering on the soul’s journey after death. Well, not only Christian scripture, but the Islamic one in the Quran and Hadiths seems to me as too much fan fiction while the Hindu and Buddhist streams are way too bleak. Jainism is still bleak but a little less (think Star Gate Ascension) but the Zoroastrian one is intriguing.
In Catholic thought, we hold that the soul, created immortal by God, meets Him face-to-face right away in what’s called the particular judgment, with the body’s resurrection and final renewal coming later at Christ’s return. It’s a hopeful vision: immediate communion for the faithful, purification for those who need it, and justice for all, trusting in God’s boundless creativity to weave everything together, parts and all. No expired warranties in His economy!
Your Foxworthy quip had me chuckling—truly, if our Creator knit us from stardust and breath, a few missing pieces or even a cosmic shuffle won’t stump Him. It’s all in His hands, after all.
Grateful for the conversation, Mike—it’s a joy sharing these thoughts.
Keep pondering the mysteries and may God guide you and me on our journeys to Him
It is incredible how many of these popped up in the 1800s and specifically in the USA
Hi, funny we spoke about our questions on Eli Eli, łamach...
Today’s first reading at mass was
First reading Wisdom 9:13-18
Who can divine the will of God?
What man indeed can know the intentions of God?
Who can divine the will of the Lord?
The reasonings of mortals are unsure
and our intentions unstable;
for a perishable body presses down the soul,
and this tent of clay weighs down the teeming mind.
It is hard enough for us to work out what is on earth,
laborious to know what lies within our reach;
who, then, can discover what is in the heavens?
As for your intention, who could have learnt it, had you not granted Wisdom
and sent your holy spirit from above?
Thus have the paths of those on earth been straightened
and men been taught what pleases you,
and saved, by Wisdom.
Pretty apt, eh :)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.