Early influences on Christadelphianism (9) - further conclusions

The Christadelphian community has been plagued with controversy and division since its inception. In an earlier series of posts (What did Christadelphians set out to be?) I looked at some of the early Christadelphian leaders who were forced out of the community.

There is some evidence that George Dowie (disfellowshipped by Roberts in 1864) and Robert Ashcroft (disfellowshipped by Roberts in 1884) in the UK allied themselves with Benjamin Wilson's group - the Brethren of the One Faith - in the US. (I've also wondered about how and why copies of Edward's Turney's Christadelphian Lamp found their way into the archives of the Church of God General Conference at the Atlanta Bible College - perhaps Turney, who had been disfellowshipped by Roberts in 1873, also made contact with believers in the Age to Come movement in the US).

These connections are interesting for a couple of reasons:

• It shows that these men saw themselves as part of a movement which was wider than Christadelphianism, and they had a great deal in common with people in similar groups from which John Thomas had separated. Perhaps their own rejection at the hands of Thomas and Roberts compelled them to look again at the reasons why the leaders of the Age to Come movement in the US had similarly been rejected by Thomas, although this is speculation on my part.

• It suggests that in taking a heavy-handed approach to brethren whose opinions differed to his own Robert Roberts was simply following a pattern which had been set by his mentor John Thomas.

Together, Roberts and Thomas were building a 'denomination'. Roberts tried to organise the denomination into an organisation with rules, a creed and a headquarters in Birmingham (with himself firmly in control). His organising abilities were such that he was successful to some extent, although almost half of all Christadelphians in the UK left his central fellowship in 1884-85 and the community has been splintered ever since.

However, the men from whom Thomas had withdrawn were part of a movement which sought to restore early Christianity. The Christian Connection of Elias Smith and Abner Jones tried to discover and restore the beliefs and practices of the first century church. In doing so they emphasised the Oness of God and the mortality of the soul as key parts of primitive Christianity. Joseph Marsh, who was baptised and ordained in the Christain Connection, contributed a great deal in teaching about the restoration of Israel and the Age to Come and establishing the Age to Come movement. The churches established by Barton Stone, Thomas Campbell and Alexander Campbell became known as the Restoration Movement because they were also endeavouring to restore primitive Christianity. To some extent they were successful and Christadelphianism owes many of its practices, beliefs and traditions to this movement.

Restorationism, the Age to Come movement, Adventism, the One Faith movement ('the Abrahamic Faith') and Christadelphianism were linked together and were part of a broader attempt to restore original Christianity. Each group or movement has been successful to varying extents, but does any one group have 'the whole truth'? I doubt it, and I believe there is still a great deal to be learned and gained from interacting with others whose spiritual journey has taken them down a slightly different path.

Almost every doctrine of Christadelphianism can be found within this movement because Christadelphianism came out of it. John Thomas didn't 'discover' anything new or unique or original. He learned it all from being involved with a community of believers, and not from studying the Bible alone. Surely there is a lesson here. I believe that Christadelphians as individuals and as ecclesias will develop, grow and prosper only to the extent that they see their place within the broader body of Christ and interact with others who have things in common, seeking ways to unite rather than reasons to divide, looking out rather than within, and building rather than tearing down.

Early influences on Christadelphianism (8) - conclusions

When we look at the various people who influenced John Thomas's thinking and with whom he was associated at various times, and the reasons why he separated from them, we see a pattern emerging.

Just to briefly recapitulate:

• For some time Thomas was very friendly with George Storrs, the foremost proponent of conditional immortality (the mortality of the soul) in the US. After disagreeing about the importance of baptism they parted company, and Thomas wrote some critical words about "Mr" Storrs (no longer "brother Storrs").
  

• It appears that John Thomas and Joseph Marsh were close friends for some time. After Thomas was re-baptised he tried to persuade Marsh to do the same. Marsh did not see the need to be re-baptised every time he changed his mind or learned something new, and disagreed with Thomas about this. Thomas persuaded Marsh's church to disfellowship him and later published some very unkind and critical comments about "friend Marsh".

• Although they agreed on most things Thomas parted company with Benjamin Wilson mainly over the issue of whether the dead would be raised mortal or immortal. He subsequently published a series of personal and defamatory attacks on Wilson, including comments about Wilson's financial affairs.

Here is the pattern I see:

1. If Thomas was unable to persuade someone to agree with him he spilt from them, regardless of whatever they already had in common. Peter Hemingray (John Thomas: His Friends and His Faith) draws a similar conclusion. Referring to the split with Storrs he says: "John Thomas heard and was associated with many of the clamoring voices of the American Reformation, of whom George Storrs was one, but in the end he withdrew from them all" (p. 140, my emphasis).

2. After parting company with these men (and sometimes before parting company) John Thomas published highly critical comments about them. The criticisms were not only of their beliefs, but were often personal and defamatory. (In fact, I'm puzzled why Hemingray titled his book John Thomas: His Friends and His Faith - these men would hardly have considered Thomas their "friend" after the way they were treated. John Thomas: His Enemies and His Faith might have made a more accurate title).

3. Thomas almost always actively preached amongst the congregations associated with his former "friends" and tried to convince their supporters to withdraw fellowship from them and join his emerging denomination. This was so obvious to Thomas's contemporaries that one of them wrote:

"The doctor [Thomas] is very hard on the Adventists, Millerism, and Storrism. I fear he is ungrateful. For had it not been for the Advent movement, I do not believe that this day he would have a corporal's guard of followers. A broken-down ex-Campbellite, he goes north to take advantage of the movement, and is now building on other men's foundations, and all the while exposing its rottenness! Such at least is my opinion of his course."

(Nathaniel Field, Thomasism, Number III,
Expositor and Advocate, Vol 29 No 24, May 15, 1859, 665)

In an editorial addition to this article Marsh wrote of Thomas's "manifest ingratitude to those who raised him from obscurity to his present notoriety among us".

Hemingray, a defender of John Thomas, substantiates this conclusion with a comment that

"before 1843 almost all his followers had been from the ranks of the Campbellites: after this time, they increasingly came from the Millerites" (p. 111).

By "Millerites" he is referring to the Adventists and the Age to Come movement (including the supporters of Storrs and Marsh).

Preaching amongst the churches from which he had "withdrawn" caused a great deal of resentment, for understandable reasons.

Was Thomas right to withdraw from people with whom he disagreed? Some would say that in doing so he was establishing the importance of "doctrinal purity". But how far does one need to go before the faith is "pure"? While Christadelphians would generally agree that withdrawing from Storrs over a matter as 'fundamental' as baptism was the right thing to do, it becomes questionable whether Marsh's refusal to be re-baptised was in the same category. By the time we get to the withdrawal from Wilson over mortal/immortal emergence it becomes even more questionable. In fact, to this day Christadelphians in North America are divided on that one and the question is still not settled.

Pragmatically, it might have been better if Thomas had stayed in contact and on friendly relations with the people from whom he split. Given time he may have convinced Storrs of the need for baptism. If he'd worked with Marsh, rather than against him, they may have found agreement on re-baptism. If he stayed with Wilson who knows what their combined talents and energies might have achieved. By sticking with his 'friends' Thomas may have eventually persuaded them of the rightness of his views, or he may have learned from them and grown in knowledge. Instead, he helped to divide and fragment a movement which was growing and impacting the broader church and impaired its effectiveness.

Early influences on Christadelphianism (5) - Age to Come Adventism

Several people contributed to the development of Christadelphian theology. It is often claimed that John Thomas "discovered" the Truth and revived apostolic Christianity. However, almost all the "distinctive" doctrines of Christadelphianism were being taught and believed in the US and Britain even before John Thomas began to take an interest in these subjects. This list gives a brief overview of some of the most prominent writers and teachers of these ideas, but is hardly exhaustive.

• George Storrs (1796-1879) - taught 'Conditional Immortality', that is, that the soul ceases to exist at death and that resurrection, not heaven-going, is the hope taught in the New Testament. Storrs taught that the wicked will be punished with everlasting destruction, not eternal hell-fire. Storrs was prominent in the Adventist movement which gave rise to the Advent Christian Church and the Sevent Day Adventist church. (He also influenced Charles Russell who founded the Bible Students, out of which came the Jehovah's Witnesses). He was probably the most influential preacher in America in teaching the mortality of the soul. John Thomas knew him and Storrs published articles by Thomas in his magazine The Bible Examiner. The relationship appears to have been friendly for some time, until Thomas severely criticised Storrs for not being baptised (1853). He stopped referring to him as "brother Storrs" and he became a "Mr". They parted company.

• Elias Smith (1769-1846) - founded the Christian Connection together with Abner Jones. Smith was non-trinitarian and rejected the immortality of the soul and the popular views of hell. John Thomas belonged at one time to a church in Philadelphia (1833-34) founded by Elias Smith. In 1837 Alexander Campbell wrote in his magazine that John Thomas's views on the mortality of the soul had come from Elias Smith, although Thomas claimed that he had developed these ideas before reading Smith's works. However, it was while he was a member of the church in Philadelphia founded by Smith (1834) that Thomas wrote 34 questions to his father (a Congregational minister) indicating he was developing new ideas on the Kingdom of God and the nature of the soul.

• Joseph Marsh (1802 - 1863) - I wrote about Marsh in an earlier post. He had been connected with Elias Smith and lated edited the magazine founded by Smith. As well as being non-trinitarian and believing in the mortality of the soul, Marsh also taught the restoration of Israel, the second coming and the Kingdom of God on earth. His book "The Age to Come" was so influential that he is sometimes attributed as the founder of the Age to Come Movement. John Thomas knew him, and had stayed in his home, although the relationship ended on a very sour note when Thomas persuaded Marsh's church to disfellowship him.

• Benjamin Wilson (1817 - 1900) - referred to in a previous post, held and taught almost all the same "distinctive" doctrines as John Thomas, although disagreeing on whether the dead would be raised mortal or immortal. Thomas considered the difference important enough to part company with him.
  

The various individuals and congregations associated with Marsh and Wilson are sometimes referred to collectively as "Age to Come Adventists". Storrs, Miller, Smith and others were influential in the development of Adventism, emphasising the second coming of Christ but rejecting the idea of a future Kingdom of God on earth. Hence, the Adventists who believed in the restoration of Israel and the establishment of the Kingdom on earth in the Age to Come, became known as "Age to Come Adventists". The followers of Marsh generally used the name "Church of God", while Benjamin Wilson preferred "Brethren of the One Faith". Some of the congregations associated with Wilson also used the name "Abrahamic Faith". These groups often associated together, exchanged preachers and magazines, and sometimes shared church buildings. Many of the first Christadelphian ecclesias came from this movement. The Church of God congregations which had been founded by Marsh united with the "One Faith"/"Abrahamic Faith" congregations in 1921 and formed the Church of God General Conference (also known as Church of God of the Abrahamic Faith).

One thing is certain: the core doctrines taught by Thomas were already being taught by other preachers and upheld in many churches, including the Oneness of God, conditional immortality (mortality of the soul), the second coming, the restoration of Israel, and the Age to Come. Even the impersonal nature of the devil, sometimes regarded as 'distinctively Christadelphian', was being taught before Thomas (I may come back to this later).

In a future post in this series I hope to draw some conclusions about why Thomas dissociated himself from so many people with similar beliefs, and what this meant for the development of Christadelphianism.

Early influences on Christadelphianism (4) - Benjamin Wilson

It did not take long for Joseph Marsh to recover from his troubles. Within a few months, Marsh began an evangelistic tour and attended a church conference at which he was appointed evangelist. After the death of Marsh in Michigan in the early 1860s, Benjamin Wilson and his nephew Thomas Wilson became more widely read and accepted among the leading exponents of the Age-to-Come doctrine, which among other things explained that the Jews would one day return to their land and become a nation. This doctrine was advanced long before the Zionist movement became a popular topic. Benjamin Wilson emigrated to the US from England in 1842 and settled in Geneva, Illinois, where he set up a publishing business. He was a skilled Bible scholar and had been trained in Biblical Greek.

After a few years, Wilson did what no man had done to date anywhere in the world. He produced an interlinear translation of the New Testament from the Greek text*. Under each line was a rough translation in English representing as closely as possible the meaning of the Greek language used in the passage. It was revolutionary, and very helpful to Bible scholars. The Age to Come people loved it. Problem was, it was not popular with the orthodox churches because it literally translated passages which had formerly been translated by others to represent orthodox teachings such as trinity, pre-existence and going to heaven.

An Overview of the Leadership and Development of the Age to Come in the United States: 1832-1871 by Jan Stilson, M.A. L. S

A Journal from the Radical Reformation, Vol 10, No. 1, Fall 2001

* The Emphatic Diaglott, published in 1864.

Benjamin Wilson edited and published The Gospel Banner and Millenial Advocate from 1853 to 1869 and his nephew Thomas Wilson edited and published The Herald of the Coming Kingdom and Christian Instructor (the two magazines combined in 1870). Both magazines were popular amongst believers in the Age to Come, and Benjamin Wilson travelled widely preaching and ministering to churches.

John Thomas first met Benjamin Wilson in 1856, although some years earlier they lived for a time in neighbouring cities in Illinois. At the beginning of their association Wilson and Thomas believed similarly. Joseph Marsh and Benjamin Wilson also knew of each other, although they apparently never met. Strangely, the followers of Marsh and Wilson succeeded in uniting their various congregations into the Church of God General Conference denomination in 1921, many years after their deaths.

While Thomas and Wilson had much in common, and got off to a friendly start, they eventually divided over the issue of whether believers would be resurrected mortal or immortal. Thomas insisted that it was necessary to believe in mortal emergence, although it seems that while Wilson and many of his supporters believed in immortal emergence they did not consider it to be a matter of fellowship. Thomas did. They went their separate ways.

Where have I been?

You may have noticed that I haven't posted anything on my blog for over a week. I'd promised to write some more on several threads, as well as some others I'd like to start. However, I've been going through some major restructuring at work and my work-load has increased considerably (hopefully just for the time being). On top of that we have been organising the wedding of our eldest daughter in less than a month from now (and I've discovered just how much work is involved with wedding-planning!)

As well as the other ministry projects we're involved with my time and resources have been stretched to the limit. God does that every now and then I've realised. By stretching us He often develop new strengths in us, or we find that some of our limitations are actually self-imposed.

Anyway, I hope to resume blogging very shortly. I plan to get back into some history with a short series on Early influences on Christadelphianism, with some articles on people such as Benjamin Wilson, author of The Emphatic Diaglott which was once on almost every Christadelphian bookshelf (Jan Stilson from the Church of God General Conference has sent me some microfilmed copies of Wilson's magazine The Gospel Banner which has some excellent material from the period 1858-1868).

I hope to write some more on Jesus' Gospel of the Kingdom under the heading 'I will build my church'. Jesus came preaching the kingdom (and almost never used the word 'church') while Paul built churches (and rarely used the word 'kingdom'). What's that about?