In a Christadelphian publication on the nature of the atonement, we read the following, which has got to be one of the most heretical things any true Christian will ever read in an article entitled, "Did Christ Have to Offer For Himself First?" by Gilberg V. Growcott
Did he have to offer for himself FIRST for HIS cleaning from the "Diablos," "Sin's Flesh," "the Flesh of Sin," the "Exceeding great sinner Sin," "The Law of Sin and Death," the "Law in the members warring against the law of the mind"--and THEN offer his own accomplished salvation to all who become part of him? DENIAL of this is the very nub and essence of the Strickler error, as the Los Angeles ecclesia saw so clearly when it compiled the Ten Point Statement in 1940, particularly No. 5 of the Points of Truth to be upheld in fellowship-- "It was necessary that Jesus should offer FOR HIMSELF for the PURGING of his own nature, first, from the uncleanness of death, that having by his own blood obtained eternal redemption FOR HIMSELF, he might be able AFTERWARD to save to the uttermost those that come to God by him." . . . This is the emphatic teaching of brethren Thomas and Roberts over and over and over. This is the heart of the Sacrifice of Christ. This is the central issue that distinguishes the Truth from the Apostacy on this subject. This is the heart of the problem with those who cannot clearly see the scriptural picture of the Sacrifice of Christ. (pp. 30-31 of The Purifying of The Heavenly)
This is part-and-parcel of much of Christadelphian theology--that Jesus offered a sacrifice for Himself for the "sin" of being human. To see a previous refutation, see my article, Did Jesus offer a sacrifice for Himself?
I do hope that Christadelphians who read this and other articles on this blog dealing with Christadelphian views on Satan/Demons and Christology will rethink their aberrant beliefs (cf. Gal 1:6-9).
